Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '�������������������������������������������������TALK:PC90���'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP2 Dev Updates
    • KSP2 Discussion
    • KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission Ideas
    • The KSP2 Spacecraft Exchange
    • Mission Reports
    • KSP2 Prelaunch Archive
  • Kerbal Space Program 2 Gameplay & Technical Support
    • KSP2 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • KSP2 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • KSP2 Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
  • Kerbal Space Program 2 Mods
    • KSP2 Mod Discussions
    • KSP2 Mod Releases
    • KSP2 Mod Development
  • Kerbal Space Program 1
    • KSP1 The Daily Kerbal
    • KSP1 Discussion
    • KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas
    • KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP1 Mission Reports
    • KSP1 Gameplay and Technical Support
    • KSP1 Mods
    • KSP1 Expansions
  • Community
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
    • KSP Fan Works
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Categories

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


About me


Location


Interests

  1. Problem with lots of weird alien communication methods is that most outside of visual one who sign language is the low bandwidth, not an huge issue for animals who just say a few things to say but not something you can build an society out of. Sign language has the downside of being line of sight and you have to watch the speaker not that you are doing. But it would work and work better if better field of view or more eyes. And you would need hands or something similar to make tools so if you can not speak you use some sort of sign language, you probably has loads of sounds too but they would be more like our body language but more to call attention or shout warnings, I want to talk to you / ask a question or watch out. But decoding an alien language without direct interaction would be much much harder than decoding hieroglyphs without the rosetta stone who I assume we done by now but an alien language is an much harder nut to crack. Also decoding signals might be an problem today everything is encrypted often multiple times like an https is probably again is encrypted
  2. Issue with this is that they have to have radio or they could not hear the satellites. Radio is just 125 year old, much less in practice as in able to communicate with an satellite even if pretty powerful. Assuming we do this in 200 years. The alien will be less than 300 year behind us or ahead, so ahead is much much more likely and we are likely to could talk directly to them, but sending an probe with data would make sense. If not they could not get anything from the satellite and you have to land, if they are doing agriculture you should probably be able to spot that from orbit. Send down an lander. If they don't have fields with crops they would be hard to spot. Named this image first contact, an cat like alien trying to eat an small rover. We did not know of them before she spotted the rover and went to investigate.
  3. Y3 D325-Y4 D169 - Jool Explorer So, hot on the heels of the departure of Draco, we have another historical event taking place: The arrival of Jool Explorer at the Jool System! If you recall, Jool Explorer was launched all the way back in the middle of Year 1, almost two and a half years ago! Heck, that was all the way back when Jerry here was an intern! Ha ha! What's that, Jerry? You're still an intern? Oh. Well. Talk to KR about that. In any case, as Jool Explorer is approaching its goal, this is a good time to review its mission objectives: Minimum Objectives (If we don't accomplish at least this much, we'll wind up sitting in front of a Kongressional hearing.) One flyby of Jool One flyby of Laythe Primary Objectives (These are the objectives that the probe has been designed to achieve.) Two flybys of Jool Two flybys of each of Jool's large moons: Laythe, Vall, and Tylo Deploy one atmospheric probe on Jool and one on Laythe Secondary Objectives (Once the Primary Objectives have been completed, if the probe has any capability left, we will attempt to accomplish these additional objectives.) Flybys of Jool's minor moons: Bop and Pol Additional flybys of Jool and its large moons. So, this morning, Jool Explorer crossed over into Jool's SOI. Our first task is to adjust its trajectory coming in to the Jool system. The folks over in Orbital Dynamics have worked up a plan for us that will let us use a gravity assist at Laythe to capture Jool Explorer into the system rather than burning fuel, which will help extend the life of our propellant load. If you're unfamiliar with the concept of gravity assists...well, go ask the guys in Orbital Dynamics. There's a reason I'm in management. This maneuver will also check off our first minimum objective with a flyby of Laythe. So Jool Explorer burns at the very edge of the Jool system to set up its capture maneuver. However, as we all know, the Jool system is huge. It's going to be almost sixty days before the Laythe flyby. So, back to work, everyone. We'll get back to this in a couple months. ---------- Well, here we are back with Jool Explorer on Day 384. The Science team has been hard at work over the last several weeks getting preliminary readings from the experiments on board Jool Explorer, and they've already been releasing some stunning photography. Today is the day we discover if our burn two months ago was good. Jool Explorer is rapidly approaching Laythe. And, so far, it appears that we are right down the middle of the slot. Science has all of their instruments and cameras ready to go for our first flyby. We'll be passing about 140 kilometers away from the surface. And we have our first successful flyby! Flight just got back and let me know that their numbers indicate that Jool Explorer has successfully captured into an elliptical orbit around Jool. Excellent work! So now Orbital Dynamics is getting to work on plotting the next burn, which should be at JEs first apoapsis in a couple of days. ---------- Day 387 now, and Jool Explorer is getting set to burn at its Jool apoapsis. This burn will set us up for releasing our first atmospheric probe into the atmosphere of Jool. The burn was successful, so Jool Explorer is now on a sub-orbital trajectory for Jool. We'll get back to it in a couple of days for the probe separation and burn. ---------- And now we're back on Day 389. Jool Explorer is about an hour away from entry to Jool's atmosphere, which we obviously would like to avoid. So, first up, we trigger the separation of the Jool Atmospheric Probe. Then Jool Explorer immediately turns and burns to increase its periapsis above Jool's atmosphere. This would not be the time for an engine failure. <nervous laugh> But, thank goodness, that burn was successful. Now we can turn our attention back to the atmospheric probe. This is an important milestone of the mission, so obviously we hope that the periapsis was set to the correct height to ensure proper entry. <glances nervously over at the Orbital Dynamics folks sweating in the corner> The probe enters the atmosphere and is almost immediately enveloped in plasma, entering radio blackout. It's a long five minutes. But eventually, radio contact is restored. The probe survived atmospheric entry! It immediately begins radioing back data from its instruments. When it reaches about 200 kilometers below entry, its parachute deploys. It continues to sink deeper into the Joolian atmosphere, sending back pressure, temperature, and spectrographic data as it goes. However, although the probe is tough, it is not indestructible, and the Joolian atmosphere is unforgiving. Finally, after sinking an amazing 500 kilometers into Jool's clouds, the probe stops transmitting. That was an incredible outcome, and I'm sure the Science team will be parsing through that data stream for a long time. Meanwhile, Jool Explorer's instruments have not been idle, and they have recorded their data from their first flyby of Jool, meeting our second minimum mission objective. So, we have met the minimum mission requirements! Now JE is headed back up to its apoapsis above Jool, and OD will be plotting our next move. ---------- Back at periapsis on Day 393, and Jool Explorer is burning prograde this time to set up another flyby of Laythe. This is a pretty major burn, but it will set us up for the release of the Laythe Atmospheric Probe, which is a major milestone of the mission. So the fuel expenditure is justified. See you back in five days for the flyby. ---------- Back now on Day 398. Jool Explorer is approaching Laythe once again, this time on a suborbital trajectory. An hour away from entry, the atmospheric probe is released. Jool Explorer immediately burns to raise its Laythe periapsis...and its Jool periapsis? Or so the OD guys tell me. I don't get it either. I just keep pressing the "I Believe" button. In any case, Jool Explorer is safe now and recording data from its second Laythe flyby. Meanwhile the atmospheric probe is burning its way through Laythe's atmosphere and we're all holding our breath. The probe hurtles tantalizingly over a couple of major land masses... ...deploys its parachute... ...and settles into the ocean. That's fine. The probe floats. We'll probably get better data from Laythe's liquid water than we would from dry land anyway. In any case, another successful probe deployment, and a second Laythe flyby checked off of our primary mission objectives. Jool Explorer passes out of Laythe's SOI and then sweeps down to its Jool periapsis. The probe's orbit is very low now. The good news is that this gets us a very close flyby of Jool, which marks our second flyby of Jool itself and makes the Science team very happy. However, the low orbit will make it very difficult to perform flybys of the other Joolian moons. We could just burn to raise our orbit, but the Orbital Dynamics wiz kids have a better plan. They want to use another Laythe flyby to raise the probe's orbit with a gravity assist. So, here we are now, just a couple of hours out of Laythe's SOI, and we're burning at Jool periapsis to set up another Laythe flyby. I guess we'll see how that turns out in a couple of days. ---------- Well, Day 400 now, and Jool Explorer is swinging by Laythe again. After the flyby, Flight confirms that the gravity assist has raised Jool Explorer's orbit by a considerable amount. And Science has collected their data from Jool Explorer's third Laythe flyby. So now JE is back on its way to Jool apoapsis and we're setting our sights on the rest of the moons. ---------- Four days later now, Day 404, and we're back at Jool apoapsis. Orbital Dynamics has another burn scheduled that should set Jool Explorer up for its first Tylo flyby. Exciting! ---------- In other news: As Jool Explorer is coasting down Jool's gravity well, Draco reaches its mid-course correction burn on Day 406. The crew of Draco have been following the progress of Jool Explorer with great interest. (Because, let's face it, they don't have much else to do.) As they look out their windows and see Jool as a sparkling green gem in the sky, the Kerbol System doesn't seem so large after all.... ---------- Three days later, Jool Explorer is approaching Tylo for the first time. The probe swings by in a close pass and collects its data. It then exits Tylo's SOI and carries on. The next day, 410, Jool Explorer is back at Jool apoapsis. Orbital Dynamics assures me that a small burn here will set it up for another flyby of Tylo in a week or so. ---------- Day 419. We're back for our second Tylo flyby. This, unfortunately, is a more distant flyby. Science is disappointed. But OD assures me that there is a method to their madness. After Jool Explorer has exited Tylo's SOI, the probe burns again. And this burn sets it up for its first flyby of Vall next week. As an aside: Once this burn was completed, Flight sent me a notice letting me know that Jool Explorer has reached 50% of its initial fuel load. Good to know. ---------- It's Day 425 now, and we're excited that we're passing through our first Vall flyby! Science has all of their data, so Jool Explorer is just going to keep coasting for now. ---------- It's Year 4 Day 4 now. Happy New Year, everybody, hope you all had a good holiday. Jool Explorer is approaching Jool periapsis, and OD has a burn planned that will bring it back for its second flyby of Vall. That went well, Flight tells me everything is in order. It's a long haul back to Vall, but we'll see you back in a couple of weeks. ---------- Okay, Day 24, and Jool Explorer is flying by Vall for the second time. So, for everyone who hasn't been keeping score, this means that Jool Explorer has successfully deployed both atmospheric probes, and completed two flybys of Jool and all three of its major moons. This means that Jool Explorer has successfully completed its primary mission objectives! Since we still have almost 50% of our fuel load remaining, we've given the go ahead to start into the secondary mission objectives. Orbital Dynamics should be getting us some flight path options for those any day now. Right? <Orbital Dynamics guys look startled for a second, then run back to their offices.> ---------- Day 27. Jool Explorer is back at Jool apoapsis today. And Orbital Dynamics has given us a flight path that is...ambitious. The plan is this: Jool Explorer is going to make a minor burn at apoapsis today that will put it on a course to flyby Vall. It will get a gravity assist from Vall that will put it on a course to flyby Tylo. It will get yet another gravity assist from Tylo that will put it on a course to flyby Bop. I am pounding that "I Believe" button today. So Jool Explorer makes its burn. ---------- Day 28, we have our third flyby of Vall... ---------- Three days later, we have our third close flyby of Jool... ---------- Four days after that, on Day 35, we fly by Tylo for a third time... And after we exit Tylo SOI...well, I'll be damned. We will need a course correction burn, but not a major one. I guess that worked. Good job, folks. ---------- Now on Day 40 we have our course correction burn for Bop. We're right on target. Things move even slower here in the outer reaches of the Jool system. See you all back in two weeks. ---------- It's Day 54 and... Heerree'ss Bop! Science is very excited, although all it appears to be is a captured asteroid. Jool manages to look small from out here. So our next target in the extended mission is Pol. Unfortunately, there are no large moons out here to provide gravity assists. So we will just have to burn for it. Orbital Dynamics is working on a plan for that. ---------- So, did I mention that things move slowly out here? It is now Day 131, two and a half months since we left Bop, and we have finally reached the burn for Pol. Now we have to wait more than two weeks for the flyby. All for just another captured asteroid. <yawn> And Flight has just informed me that this burn brings Jool Explorer below 25% of its initial fuel load. ---------- So, it's Day 148 and we're getting the first pictures and data back from the Pol flyby... ...aanndd...that is not just another captured asteroid. I will be very curious to see what Science has to say about that one. ---------- So, after the Pol flyby we have some hard decisions to make concerning Jool Explorer. The probe has accomplished all of its primary mission objectives, and all of its secondary objectives. It has roughly 22% of its initial fuel load remaining. It is in the outer limits of the Jool system, with no gravity assist targets available, so any destination we pick for it will require a large expenditure of fuel. And there is a possibility that if the probe is allowed to orbit uncontrolled in the Jool system it may crash into Laythe, possibly contaminating its surface with the radioactive contents of the probe's radiothermal generators. So KSP management have decided that the probe should use its remaining fuel to achieve a controlled disposal in the atmosphere of Jool. Day 155, a week after the Pol flyby, Jool Explorer performs its final burn. ---------- Two weeks later, Day 169. Jool Explorer is a couple of hours out from entry now. Still sending back data. The probe is hurtling towards Jool's atmosphere at over 9,000 meters per second. This is the closest it has ever come to Jool, still getting good data on the planet. And as the probe enters the outer limits of the atmosphere...end of transmission. What a mission! Atmospheric probes deployed on Jool and Laythe! Four flybys of Jool, three flybys of Laythe, Tylo, and Vall, and flybys of Bop and Pol! A staggering amount of data! We'll be turning our attention to Draco and Duna here in just another week, but after this it will be hard not to be imagining what a kerballed Jool mission would look like. Eh?
  4. You can count me as a hard skeptic on this. I've seen a number of analyses of the 'go-fast', 'gimbal' and 'flir' videos and I remain unconvinced there's any actual hard evidence there. The recent testimony is really bizarre and interesting. Still, without like actual instrument data to back this stuff up I can't help but feel unconvinced. Anyone else been following this? https://thehill.com/homenews/4118340-ufo-hearing-live-updates-lawmakers-former-officials-strange-sightings/
  5. yea but we want a bona-fide space-big-rig. we can talk about space trains later.
  6. That was from the DeepMind paper of the same name at the top of the image, Levels of AGI (Nov 2023). https://arxiv.org/html/2311.02462v2 Here's the table caption: Table 1: A leveled, matrixed approach toward classifying systems on the path to AGI based on depth (performance) and breadth (generality) of capabilities. Example systems in each cell are approximations based on current descriptions in the literature or experiences interacting with deployed systems. Unambiguous classification of AI systems will require a standardized benchmark of tasks, as we discuss in the Testing for AGI section. Note that general systems that broadly perform at a level N may be able to perform a narrow subset of tasks at higher levels. The "Competent AGI" level, which has not been achieved by any public systems at the time of writing, best corresponds to many prior conceptions of AGI, and may precipitate rapid social change once achieved. They also have a set of levels for autonomy vs required human interaction. Regarding Siri... I have a feeling that nearly all of us on this forum at all live in a bubble. Think about the people you most commonly interact within the real world. What percentile of cognitive ability do you think they are? I'd wager people interested in a game about spaceflight and orbital mechanics are probably smarter than average. I hear about people selected at random from the population from my wife (well, not quite random, they have to be in a situation where they need a surgeon—very few trauma, or anything where it would select for being a dope, though). She sees several thousand people a year (~20/day?). I'll say something at dinner about something X, that I think people should do ideally, and she'll give me that "Do you live under a rock?" look (often verbalized in exactly those words, lol), then tell me people are too dumb to pick X. As lousy as Siri is, I'd not be surprised at this point if it was better than 50% of people—look at the % of kids within different grade levels who perform at grade level. (National Center for Educational Statistics) Level 2 is apparently an "8th grade" reading level, so 52.6% are not terribly literate. Honestly "reading levels" is pretty odd, I always considered reading a binary skill, you can't read, then you can—they are functionally sorting by cognitive ability I think, not "reading level," as the levels talk about reading and understand more and more complex ideas. Reading itself doesn't change in difficulty, words are words, and if you don't recognize one, you look it up (at any "reading level"). So yeah, it would not surprise me if Siri is better than ≥50% in whatever narrow task they were looking at (grammar?).
  7. All this talk about fakes and fake fakes makes me just think we are living in a Philip K. Dick novel.
  8. While I was walking through the National Museum of the United States Air Force last Saturday, I was reminded of all the KSP replicas of those same aircraft. Some of them looked like they can be done with pure stock parts and no DLCs, while others (mostly the older ones) need mods that come with more parts. So, I started this thread for everyone to showcase their replicas of the aircraft that the four large hangars (plus the Missile Gallery) have on display. The guidelines for this showcase thread are simple: You are free to use any and all parts necessary, including ones that come in DLCs and mods. Vehicle has to be functional. Which means pictures/video of the craft in action. Similar performance stats are a plus. EXCEPTION: if the craft in question could not move on its own (as in it needed to be attached to a larger assembly to go anywhere) then the functionality requirement may be waived. e.g. the Apollo 15 command module. You'll only need one picture of your best replica (or half-assed; it shouldn't make a difference in that case), since it's useless unless attached to the rest of the spacecraft. If you want to make the rest of the rocket assembly, fine. Only the capsule made it to the museum, and that's what I need. Vehicle has to look as close as possible to whatever real-life craft you're trying to copy. Therefore, it is highly recommended that you have photographs to reference. Build something not yet claimed on the checklist (link below) first. EXCEPTION: for craft that appear more than once in the museum (such as the Superfortress and the Twin Mustang), you may only sign off on one of your craft's variants. Leave the rest of them for others to claim. e.g. I only do one Twin Mustang; the one in the Korean War section in Hangar 2. I'll leave it to someone else to get the other Twin Mustang in Hangar 3 and claim it on the log. If you want to show something that's already been showcased on this thread, fine - but you don't get credit for it. I don't care if you built the craft 7 minutes or 7 years ago, so long as it's yours. If you have an old stash of aircraft replicas that you're willing to showcase (and can work), great. Weaponry (e.g. guns, bombs, missiles) not necessary, although I won't object to them either. If the original aircraft was manned, so is your replica. If the original aircraft was unmanned, so is your replica. I won't object to a probe core for your manned aircraft if it doesn't deviate too much from the aesthetic, so long as you include the appropriate crew module/s. You don't need to match the passenger/crew capacity of your original aircraft, so long as your replica comes close to looking like its real-life counterpart AND it's functional. e.g. if you use one or more Mk. 3 Passenger Modules for an Air Force One variant, as long as your aircraft makes a convincing replica I don't mind you exceeding or falling behind its real-life counterpart's passenger capacity. Those things weren't designed for carrying a lot of people anyway; just provide comfort for the president and his staff. (SIDE NOTE) Whoever builds the Douglas VC-54C "Skymaster," I'm not requiring you to install an elevator in the back to load polio-stricken passengers in and out. If you do and the plane still flies smoothly, even better. The one housed in the museum was designed specifically to transport then-president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who needed a wheelchair. Craft files a plus. Below is the link for the replica checklist: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tA9IGsSCQIuTFjw9eNHYcgv8JboCxKiAy9ep5-nflR0/edit?usp=sharing Here are the instructions on how to use it: Pick an aircraft that has not already been built Like I said earlier, if you want to build something that's already been done here, don't steal credit from the original kerbalnaut. And for duplicates, you can only claim one of the type. Once you're done, write: Column D: Your KSP Forum name Column E: The link to the specific forum post showcasing your replica/s It is acceptable to put more than one craft in the same post. Just leave a link for everyone to find it. Column F: Whatever DLCs you used to make the replica If this doesn't apply to that specific craft, leave it blank Column G: Whatever (parts) mods you used to make the replica If this doesn't apply to that specific craft, leave it blank Column H: (IF YOU WANT TO) Additional notes that other readers may find interesting Please don't modify someone else's notes. If you want to debate/talk to someone about their craft, don't do it on the spreadsheet. Source for my list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_at_the_National_Museum_of_the_United_States_Air_Force Click here to see this thread's replicas assembled on KerbalX As a prize, if you make at least one replica from each of the four hangars (not counting the air park or missile silo since they're too small; specific hangar category (e.g. Early Years vs WWII, Experimental vs Space) doesn't matter), you'll earn this sweet badge: I made it myself. It's a representation of all four hangars by using a combination of the following four logos: U.S. Army Air Corps, whose planes dominate Hangar One. Classic U.S. Air Force, which became mainstream at the time period Hangar Two covers. Modern U.S. Air Force, which has a lot of planes in Hangar Three still in service. NASA, since the space gallery is in Hangar Four. Entries from the Missile Gallery can be used as "wild cards." They're ultra-rare, so get them while they last. Depending on what hangars you lack, it can be used as either a Hangar Three or Hangar Four entry. To make things fair for everyone, only one Missile Silo entry per person All Four Hangars Badge Recipients @Mars-Bound Hokie (Me, the OP) @swjr-swis I'll start us off with my favorite, the SR-71 Blackbird. The SR-71 Blackbird on display in the SPH Picture taken February 2020. Ted Kerman enjoying himself flying at high altitudes at a speed higher than the aircraft's real-life counterpart. There you have it, folks. Have fun, and I can't wait to see what you got. Build a plane from each of the four hangars, and you get the badge.
  9. I kinda miss him/her, as well as the others that i used to talk 2 years ago in here... at least they're focusing on better stuff. I assume[or at least will within a few hours] that @TwoCalories will reply next
  10. Jeb is happy mission has pretty much been an total success from the astronauts view. Enter Eve orbit then picked up Bill who sneak onboard the probe carrier and has 150 days in an rover seat was happy to get into the hitchhiker module and change underwear, he brought 5 K science. Here is the probe carrier at day 9. Designed to be very narrow as designed before medium fairings was unlocked. Just pushed the lander out a bit to let the Gilly lander drop off early. First mistake, should have gone 1+6 medium tanks and two nuclear engines, then 6 rovers rather than 2 landers. we had the technology. Gilly lander worked well. Look closely at the left lander and you can see Bill. It was an luck that Bill went on an intentional unmanned mission as he could transmit more science home earlier. Here he is on the Gilly lander who has no landing legs, an docking port would be more fitting. He reported one problem outside of old underwear. You can crash into space around Gilly, Bill has an theory that gravity is so weak it create the opposite of an event horizon. Jeb think Bill has smelled his dirty underwear for to long. He also had problems finding the Oblique Impact Site, Jeb yes that huge crater is so hard to find. At the same time a probe landed on Eve The rover seat is so an kerbal can collect atmospheric samples in low eve orbit. But the orbital module has no batteries just 5 charge from the small probe and I did not want to risk 6 K science getting 2.2 early. Landed at Eve Environmental science let you transmit 1000, material science data is 1200, missed olympus, shallows and sea who is also land biomes all giving 2200. 6600 Science missed + the 600 atmospheric from Olympus. and the extra returned from Olympus. Not to talk about the discoverables. I say its plausible to uncover the big sperical tanks and fairings to cover them before reaching Duna. Collecting Bill And 6 K science Here is the Eve manned ship. An last note after picking up the science we docked with the now empty probe carrier to get some more hydrogen, getting the 11 k science home asap is obviously an priority. It had 5 K dV, grabbed half of it, wanted to use the probe carrier to aid in mapping Eve. As carrier was empty it should still have decent with dV but it showed as 0 dV for quite some time until it showed 3 k who make more sense.
  11. talk wike you are thwee ill go first: mommy said i cant eat the wrapper! waaa
  12. Since we're celebrating, here's a few of my favorite community contributions over the past year; I think I've watched jeremybrett1933's LET'S ROCK video probably every day since it's been out. Just gets me HYPED Datau03's recreation of the classic Build Fly Dream trailer is fantastic Inspired by KSP1's Final Frontier double F mod, Wayfarer's Wings by KSP2 Modder leonardfactory adds an accolade system so you can track the achievements of all your Kerbals. Incredible work. Diana Gearhead's engineering of airships has been truly impressive, especially considering we couldn't figure it out and she wouldn't tell Nate how they worked for MONTHS. Bradley Whistance's returning to content creation to cover KSP2 was really exciting. If you haven't seen his videos, check em out. @Socraticat's Halloween Pumpkin was the talk of the office the week they shared it. They blew our own office pumpkin carvings out of the water. Madishmike's Titanic definitely wins my Boat of the Year award. The amount of detail they managed to fit in is just incredible. I genuinely could not stop laughing the day this hit the top of /r/KSP. ---- There's A LOT more that I just couldn't get to in this post, but I did make a series of Community Highlights posts here on the forums all last year. Definitely check out those. And if you have a favorite piece of KSP2 content/moment from the past year, share it below! Thanks for playing our game and thanks for making this community a joy to work with. Here's to more greatness in 2024!
  13. There was another Starship debate over on a Discord server today, as seems to happen every couple days like clockwork, and I came away from it with somewhat of a new perspective on the Starship program. Many of the criticisms of Starship ultimately come down to the idea that it is too ambitious, that SpaceX has bitten off more than they can chew here. Well, that and taking off the cuff remarks by Elon (for example 1m per flight, 1000 passengers in p2p) as gospel and using them to show why the program is obviously stupid and the whole thing is a scam. But the first one is more interesting and what I thought about a lot today. Ignore HLS for a second, I'll talk about that later. I think a lot of people would have liked to see SpaceX originally take (or pivot to) a more conservative approach to a next generation launch vehicle as a stepping stone to a fully and rapidly reusable launch vehicle rather than skipping straight to something with Starship levels of ambition. Like, for example, a fully reusable but not rapidly reusable vehicle, or a very large partially reusable vehicle. But why? The obvious answer is that it allows them to create something that blows Falcon out of the water for considerably less effort than Starship would take. ...But why? They have the market completely cornered. Nobody can compete with Falcon, even discounting Starlink. Everyone except possibly Blue Origin and Relativity is stuck trying to create a rocket marginally competitive with what Falcon 9 was a few years ago. Serious competition is at least 10 years away. SpaceX doesn't need to do a thing to completely dominate the space industry for the foreseeable future. They can sit on their hands, maybe make Falcon block 6 if Relativity is looking threatening enough in a few years time. Basically do what ULA did. What could they do with a Falconlike SHLV that they could not do with Falcon? Large stations if anyone was interested, maybe small scale medium-high cost Moon missions, being the de facto Artemis launch vehicle. But not much that is commercially viable. Not many people are going to pay 120 million for 100 tons to orbit. There would be a market, but as we are seeing with Falcon Heavy, not a huge market. SpaceX does not want to launch a handful people to the Moon for tens of billions of dollars. They don't want to sit on their hands and accumulate wealth. They do not want to keep making minor improvements to Falcon 9 forever. Whether or not you agree with this goal, SpaceX wants to create a self sustaining city on Mars, or at least, create some of the prerequisite technologies required for that to happen. It is not a financial goal. It is an emotional goal. SpaceX is fundamentally an emotionally motivated company, and while finances can't be ignored, they are a means to an end. If money was the primary goal, Elon would have created sensible businesses with the PayPal money. instead, SpaceX was created out of spite for the Russians and frustration with the state of the industry. Since then, they have plastered windows on things with no business having windows on them (Cargo Dragon, I4 dome, doubling down on Starship having a huge window), dragged the space industry, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century, with many of the major advancements financed on their own dime, made Dragon 2, their spacesuits, the crew access arm, the launch tower, and much more look stylish and cool (depends on taste), arguably at the expense of a small amount of functionality, and strapped a meme payload to what was at the time the most capable operational rocket in the world. I rewatched the IAC 2016 talk today, and while almost all of the details have changed, the core architecture has remained the same. That talk laid it out clear, this core architecture was designed with Mars in mind. In order to create a self sustaining city on Mars under reasonable economic conditions, a rapidly and fully reusable vehicle must be mass produced, and it must use propellants practical to produce on Mars, and orbital refilling must be utilized. While an incremental approach to developing such a system does have some merits, if there is a proper time to dive in headfirst into the onslaught of engineering challenges associated with such a ridiculously lofty goal, it is while they are a decade ahead of everyone else. In order to succeed, everything known about rocket building needs to be challenged. Anything short of a high performance mass producible rapidly and fully reusable rocket is not an acceptable stopping point, and SpaceX has made that clear with how often they threw out things that weren't working. They tested every assumption about rocket development made to date, knowing full well most of them would be reinforced, but a few would give way to unexplored potential. They threw out carbon fiber after investing a ton of money into the hardware to produce 9 and 12 meter tanks. They threw out the Florida starship site (for now at least). They made a water tower fly, and then threw out the next six prototypes for not being good enough. They built or partially built 26 starships and 3 boosters before getting something that might get to orbit, each of which had major changes from the previous, and then threw B4/S20 out practically on the eve of flight. They tried a new launch pad, and when that didn't work, they threw it out and tried something else. They tried a new form of staging, and when that didn't work, they threw it out and tried hot staging. They tried hydrolox Raptor, and it didn't work, they threw it out. Large scale ITS Raptor, thrown out. Raptor 1, 1.5, etcetera, thrown out. Raptor 2, on its way out because Raptor 3. There's even been talk of a different engine altogether. They have produced hundreds of Raptors by now and they haven't even gotten to orbit, that's more than the total production of most other rocket engines. ITS re entry configuration, thrown out. Two strakes, thrown out. Tripod with two flaps and a rudder, thrown out. Body flaps, modified numerous times. Initial tiles, thrown out. Bare metal, thrown out. Transpiration cooling, thrown out. Back to tiles because that might actually be the best option, several iterations, throwing them out until they are good enough. Can't land on the launch mount? Can't crane a ship from a landing pad to the launch pad fast enough to colonize Mars? Throw it out, try landing directly in the crane. They are pushing the envelope in all directions trying to find anything that will get them closer to their goal and they can and will throw out any design, no matter how firmly entrenched, if it falls short of their goals. They have created the largest satellite constellation ever (okay, if you're gonna be that guy, project West Ford was indeed way bigger) just to finance the rate at which they throw stuff away. Even that satellite constellation is designed to be thrown away and replaced every five years. This whole time, also pioneering the early stages of mass production necessary to make the city on Mars a reality. But this city can't be built alone. A rocket such as what Starship aims to be is a prerequisite for a Mars colony, but not sufficient on its own. So every so often, SpaceX will put Starship out there to get people thinking about what such a revolutionary rocket could do in fields it isn't even optimized for. A Moon base, gigantic space stations, crewed missions to the moons of Jupiter, probes ejected from Earth at insane speeds with refueled expendable upper stages, and even point to point. Some of these are more realistic than others. If enough people start thinking about what this could do, some of them will start trying to make it a reality, and some of them might just end up producing Mars hardware in a few decades time. Then, SpaceX decided to go "Hey, NASA, Starship can also be used as a Moon lander!" And in a move that was unexpected to most external observers, and may have even been unexpected internally, NASA, strapped for cash and with the only other status quo choices being "expensive consortium led by a company with no orbital experience" and "oopsie daisy, negative mass moment", saw a chance for an incredibly radical future, and went "Okay. You have four years. Show us what you can do." Of course, this is where it all went a little sideways. You can fiddle around with your revolutionary side project all you want when your only limiting factor is how long it takes other space companies to catch up with you. There are no customers to complain when it takes twice as long as planned, or keeps blowing up over and over and over again. While HLS has been great for emphasizing Starship's legitimacy and getting even more people thinking about it, now SpaceX can't just keep throwing stuff out ad nauseum, it actually has to deliver results in a reasonable timeframe. Granted, some of this is the government's fault, selecting a lander in 2021 and expecting a landing in 2024 was never a realistic goal no matter who is doing the design. But now, a program with the single constraint of "Get lots of stuff to Mars, toss away everything that can't do that" has to be made to support the most important human spaceflight mission in decades in relatively short order. It must be safe and with a relatively frozen design, and the tankers must be produced and rapidly launched with not much more tweaking. I don't know yet whether the added cash and legitimacy is outbalanced by the conflicting requirements. These conflicting requirements seem to be where a lot of the conflict is coming from. Since HLS, Starship is both a vehicle that needs to be chaotic in the near term in order to be revolutionary in the long term, and stable in the near term in order to get us back to the Moon. I don't know if they will make it to Mars, much less build a city, but if anyone can do it in the next hundred years, it is probably going to be them, and they are not going to stop trying to reach that goal until they go bankrupt or the CEO dies and doesn't get replaced with a like minded person. That was a lot more than I intended to write. TLDR: SpaceX is emotionally/ideologically motivated. Their ultimate goal is to colonize Mars. If their goal is to make money and remain competitive, they already have that, no reason for something Starship level. Something in between Falcon and Starship also does not make sense if their goal is merely to remain competitive. Starship makes sense viewed through the Mars lens, its other applications are byproducts. I suspect long term an optimized Lunar architecture will look a lot different. SpaceX will not design themselves into something that cannot be evolved into a rocket capable of creating a city on Mars. This means a lot of throwing out stuff that doesn't work, pushing boundaries, and lots of failures. Starship won the HLS contract, which is not a contract you want to have rapid iteration, boundary pushing, and frequent failures on. The two conflicting aspirations for what Starship is supposed to be are causing some amount of conflict and debate. In the time it took me to write that, the news that the ship firing today was a single engine maneuvering burn test arrived. This is completely unrelated to the above wall of text, but given how small LEO maneuvers will be (I'd guess this is simulating a de-orbit burn), that static fire might have actually been full mission duration.
  14. i don't need to re-read what i saw happen, i was there when the "show went down" (insert circus music). just hearing suggestions and talk about it on discord is nothing really official on post on it.. Discord talk at the end of the day from even the gods of intercept games for ksp 2 is as much value as me saying I'm a developer due to giving feedback that "might help" due to playing like 1,000 hours. my input doesn't really matter its more so the entire community, I'm like a broken record with mods that i would like to see as vanilla but i can see why it isn't in base game, things like K2D2, Flightplan, Alarmclock, Trim Control, Kerbal Headlights.. l know that alarm clock has been screamed top of the lungs, and now its even a mod. The community shows what the game is missing, and it doesn't hurt to talk to modders and ask to put mods into base game.. like alarm clock. and kerbal headlights.. etc.
  15. Including Iridium Next, New Horizons, Haven-1 and soon many more! (Check roadmap for what is coming) Join me on Discord! (DEV talk only) Tundra Exploration pics: Tundra Technologies pics: Planned features Roadmap Known issues "No tank type named 'RR_CryoMLOX' exists" means you have RR but not CRP, or you have RR, CRP, and WBI classic stock, and the WBI feature isn't working right. Make sure you have RR 1.16! Required Mods Kerbal Reusability Expansion (For the F9 legs and grid fins) B9 Part Switch (For part switching) Module manager (For all your module manager needs) Recommended Mods FreeIVA (So you can fly around inside Rodan and Gaira-1 parts! Modular Launch Pads (For those awesome towers) Waterfall (For those amazing plumes) Smokescreen (Realplume NOT required!) Flight Manager for Reusable Stages (For landing your F9 first stage) Omega482's Stockalike Structures NTR (For your Ghidorah landing needs) Basic DeltaV - Basic Orbit by DMagic (For better understanding of how much fuel you have to land all your crafts safely back) Tundra's Space Center (To launch from LC-40!) Near Future Solar (For the Solar Panel plugin if you want full 180 degree tracking) Not supported Mods Atmospheric autopilot FAR (Version 7.0 looks to perform a lot better) Beta versions on GitHub A very special thanks to @Beale, @CobaltWolf and @Nertea for the help and advise they gave me to make something awesome. And @DiscoSlelge for creating those awesome patches! And a massive thanks to @ValiZockt, @Rock3tman_, @Nessus_, @JadeOfMaar, @Starwaster, @neistridlar, @SofieBrink and @Infinite Monkeys for the help they gave me making this mod perfect! Changelog: Any of the configs are distributed under CC-NC-SA-4.0 License. All Textures/models/plugins are distributed under All Right Reserved License. SootyShaderLoader is based on the custom shader importer by shadowmage and modyfied by DMagic with custom modules and settings.
  16. 1. You’re already making up technology so why not make up whether something works or not? 2. The challenges would be that the technology you envision is fantastical and might not even be feasible. The time travel machine especially is just pure fantasy, even if forward time travel might be possible there is no small machine that could produce it. 3. To quote Ant-Man, “Don’t talk to your past self, don’t bet on sporting events.”
  17. Scaling the wings is a first step towards doing it for other parts, so it's possible. We already have a capacity to use Space Shuttle/Rover parts in landers, jets, etc. We don't know what the colony parts are yet. It stands to reason it'd be a different mechanic to the VAB. There's been plenty of talk about an orbital VAB, but nothing about a colony designer, so it stands to reason the Colonies will be... less about creativity than spaceships. At least, unless we hear something big and new. Still, that doesn't include mods, or the creative use of panels/struts/beams. We've seen everything from the Batwing to a Christmas Tree. And when we get to the interstellar level, who knows what that'll scale up to?
  18. I'm not sure if this already exists, but welp. Any interested parties can talk about SETI and alien life, etc. here. I tried running the Wow! signal (6EQUJ5) through a Caesar cipher decoder. Well, that was a waste of time. I just realized this. The string 6EQUJ5, commonly misinterpreted as a message encoded in the radio signal, represents in fact the signal's intensity variation over time, expressed in the particular measuring system adopted for the experiment. The signal itself appeared to be an unmodulated continuous wave, although any modulation with a period of less than 10 seconds or longer than 72 seconds would not have been detectable. Oof. I guess I'll keep klutzing with the Wow! signal.
  19. you can recolour using part variants, there are a couple of posts on the forum on that talk about that. in the past you could assign a different texture in the model section, I've not been able to get that to work sinds 1.7 texture replacer might be able to do this for you I just edit the textures in place ..... dds2png (xnconvert) then photoshop and then back.
  20. Annnnnd, less than 2 months after that, I decided against it. I talked it over with others to get their perspective, and decided to flip majors to engineering science last spring. Luckily, a handful of classes do overlap with engineering technology, like calculus and English 1. I also recently decided to transfer, and last month, I was accepted into a state school for Mechanical Engineering (Aerospace concentration). Right now, I'm in Calc 3, Physics 2, and a couple others at my community college, and it's going well so far. Other parts of my thoughts and plans haven't changed. I was still exposed to some interesting stuff in engineering technology, and I do plan to get a Master's (not necessarily the accelerated track, I'll have to talk it over with my advisor next month). I am wondering about opinions about taking extra courses not required for your undergraduate or graduate though. I went through the course catalog, and there are some electives that aren't a part of the normal curriculum, like mechanical vibrations, and combustion. I was also looking at a few classes in a non-degree program at a more expensive nearby college which offers aerospace courses my college doesn't offer like gas dynamics and orbital mechanics. Maybe I can go for a double major in Mechanical and Aerospace?
  21. It's light, but it takes up a lot of space. You try docking Phoenix to a ship with a bunch of other vehicles. Same goes for the rovers. They are not incredibly huge, but they all have wheels stuck on long trusses for stability, and that take up lots of space. Basically, every vehicle I'm carrying around has a very large base for wheels, or large wings. Most are also long. And let's not even talk about Garibarge. Part 2: Launching Flying Christmas Tree 2 With all the landers in place, Flying Christmas Tree 2 may be the most majestic ship I ever launched. Or the most silly. Probably both. 2.1) Launching Flying Christmas Tree 2 with Tamarromobile 2.2) Launching Not Albatross 2.3 Launching Garibarge 2.4) Launching Phoenix 2.5) Launching Leaping Mantis, and refueling
  22. [Reshare - Consolidating (my) Agencies of Kerbin and their Craft into One Place] Tier 0 (No Tech) Agency: United Rocket Director: Kuku Kerman Craft : KSP Builds - Kerbicus_S1 Kerbal News Right Then: Your Premier Source for Cosmic Chronicles! United Rocket boldly Launches their Newest design - Kerbicus S-1 Sub Orbital Jumper In a twist that's got Kerbin's space enthusiasts buzzing louder than a swarm of startled space bees, eccentric tech guru Kuku Kermin has launched United Rocket, a brand new venture poised to shake up the interstellar scene. And who's leading the charge? None other than ace pilot Kip Kerman, famed daredevil extraordinaire! and one time partner of Jebidiah Kerman himself! The launch of United Rocket comes hot on the heels of a manifesto Kuku wrote in college detailing dissatisfaction with the tactics of certain agencies leveraging "discounted" orbital packages to curry favor with green authority figures. Seizing an opportunity, Kuku Kermin rallied support from anonymous hedge funds and blasted off into the unknown by privately incorporating United Rocket. Rumours inside the agency talk of initial names trying to capture the imagination of Kerbins Everywhere. Space K was apparently tossed around before the board decided United would be a good word choice to foster the perception of global solidarity. But it's not just business maneuvering that's making headlines – it's the personal drama unfolding between Kip Kerman and his former partner Jebidiah. Following a three-year coma that saw him lose both Val and his stake in their business, Kip is back and ready to reclaim his place in the stars. Jeb, for his part, has been open to interviews, but a lack of available interpreters has left reporters scratching their helmets in confusion. Seen Here Maneuvering the craft through the clouds is famed daredevil United Rocket's game plan? To test their craft extensively before offering them for commercial use, all while allowing eager enthusiasts to own their very own United Rocket rocket. Their maiden vessel, the Kerbicus_S1 Sub Orbital Jumper, made its debut to a live broadcast, much to the delight of hopeful Kerbals everywhere. And despite the absence of a fireworks show, the vessel took off without a hitch, proving that even amateur rocket enthusiasts can soar through the clouds. However, reports suggest that Jeb is less than thrilled about the Kerbicus, especially since it's primarily constructed from parts he was forced to relinquish in a settlement agreement with Kip. Yet, Kip remains undeterred, boldly declaring, "The Kerbicus is so easy to fly I bet Jeb could manage!" as the spokesperson for United Rocket. There you have it, dear readers: the space race just got a whole lot spicier, with United Rocket firing up its engines and Kip Kerman at the helm. Buckle up and hold onto your helmets, because it looks like we're in for a wild ride through the cosmos! Stay tuned to Kerbal News Right Then for all the latest updates, gossip, and gravity-defying antics. Until next time, keep reaching for the stars and never forget to laugh along the way!
  23. Well I didn't read the bug reports before playing this mission, so it was an obvious solution to me for a Jool-5 capable probe. Too bad this propulsion technology is not ready yet in this game. I've been reading the KERB updates, and they talk about acceleration under time warp bugs, but without specifically pointing the Dawn engine Thank you for the link. From my uninformed point of view, there seem to be multiple unrelated bugs affecting ion engines and time warp. I will read the full thread when I'll have the time, and maybe I'll share my save. It might help the devs and the QA dep.
  24. There was an issue with attaching exhaust prefabs in v1.6.10.0, which should be fixed in v1.6.10.1 (in case that was the problem), though it seems there's still some issues there that we're looking at. I'm not sure about the muzzle flash effects, but examining the KSP.log file would be the first step. BDA+ usually gives errors or warnings if there's something missing. I don't think that's possible, no. There was some talk at one point about making custom turrets, but I don't think it ever got beyond just talking about it due to how complicated it very quickly becomes trying to handle the weird designs people invariably make. Check the KSP.log file or in-game messages for errors or exceptions. Enabling "Debug Spawning" in BDA's debug settings will add more details to the log, which may help. If it's completely failing to spawn, then there's most likely an issue with the craft file (missing parts or the file is otherwise corrupted). I'm not sure what could cause a spawned craft to end up sticking into the ground, but likely the log would give some indication as to why.
  25. Oh gosh, don't get that train started. It's not as bad in Australia, but it's probably still possible Anyway, was listening to a Podcast where Adam Rozencwajc was the interviewee, and it cleared up this one problem that I didn't know how to solve for a long time. For those who don't know, Adam is part of a company called Goehring&Rozencwajc, which is an independent Natural Resources analysis company (I believe that is the role, at least). Recently, Adam went on a podcast with Peak Prosperity and talked about Oil. The key takeaway I took was how the IEA, either willingly or otherwise, has lied about their forecasts on Oil and Energy consumption. Their reasoning is as follows; - If technological advancements in the efficiency of energy use, then the overall usage of energy will decrease. However, this contradicts Jevon's paradox (According to Wikipedia, governments seem to have an implied history of ignoring this paradox), which is where resource use becomes more efficient, more is used, not less. Jevon's Paradox, then, is quite literally the EXACT opposite of what the IEA is saying. This answers my personal question of "Why does Peak Energy Demand just not make sense". After all, More people with more money = Buying more things, which requires energy. I don't know I'm so shocked, after all, governments and governmental agencies lie all the time. Maybe it has to do with the sheer and utter importance of energy in the modern economy. But I don't know. I'm repeating what was said elsewhere. I'm not qualified to talk about this.
×
×
  • Create New...