KSP2 Hype Train Thread

[GoldForest]

23 minutes ago, Gargamel said:

Sorry GF, I gotta say something here as a professional machinist.  
 

It is very common, by sight and or touch, to be able to differentiate different sizes/placements of things by as little as .0005” (.0127mm).    I do this everyday.    I look at a part, I see something on the piece, I touch it, yup there’s a half a thousandths step there, and THEN I go grab a measuring device to see what the exact measurement is to make adjustments.     
 

It really is situational though.   If you’re lining up construction lumber, you’ll be hard pressed to not call a 1/32” step even and deal with it.   But freshly machined steel, yeah .0127mm bumps stand out like a sore thumb.    It’s not unreasonable to expect a rocket ship to have fit tolerances of +/- .075mm.  
 

But all that said, having submil tolerances for the parts in game is absurd.    We don’t need tolerances.    It’s a fictional world.   If something is said to be 3m across, then it’s exactly 3.0000000000m across.  And all other mating pieces are the same size, so they’ll fit perfectly every time.     

 

Well, you're a professional that has probably been doing that for a long time and knows what you're looking for. 

But again, I was talking about movement. Not size. Most people can't discern sub-millimeter movements without special equipment. I mean, taking an object and moving it 0.25 of a millimeter is very very hard to see.  On top of that, I don't think the offset tool combined with a mouse on the lowest DPI setting can do sub-millimeter movements. 

Edit: I think Sub-millimeter precision is just a buzzword at this point anyway tbh. I mean, no one who plays KSP can get RIGHT on the target. I've never seen "0 meters away" when a craft lands. It's usually meters away with some instances being centimeters away. Not even Mechjeb on the tightest tolerances can do sub-mil, I think. 

Edit 2: Also, they said we CAN do it, but I doubt anyone will ever be able to land sub-mil away from their landing spot. If they do, it was a stroke of luck. 

Edit 3: Also, @Gargamel I'm not your girlfriend.  _{(This is a joke)}

Edited January 26, 2023 by GoldForest

[Gargamel]

@GoldForest oh don’t get me wrong, I agree with your argument 100%.   I just didn’t think your counter example was completely accurate.    
 

I just measured a piece of notebook paper, its .003” (.0762mm) thick.    You can easily feel and see the edge of the paper on a table top.    But would I notice movement of the paper relative to the plane of the table?   Ehhhh…. Maybe?   Depends on shadows and such.    
 

Do we need or want such level of detailed modeled on the game for the fit of parts?  Absolutely not.   Waste of resources.    
 

Do we need this level of accuracy when calculating orbits?    Absolutely yes. 
 

 

edit 1:  @GoldForest ahhhhh I thought we had something.   

Edited January 26, 2023 by Gargamel

[Vl3d]

3 hours ago, i dont know how to forum said:

I doubt they'll be available at EA launch, given they're likely tied to orbital colonies.

And what makes you think that's the EA Release build? Maybe they have OABs activated.

[GoldForest]

2 minutes ago, Gargamel said:

@GoldForest oh don’t get me wrong, I agree with your argument 100%.   I just didn’t think your counter example was completely accurate.    
 

I just measured a piece of notebook paper, its .003” (.0762mm) thick.    You can easily feel and see the edge of the paper on a table top.    But would I notice movement of the paper relative to the plane of the table?   Ehhhh…. Maybe?   Depends on shadows and such.    
 

Do we need or want such level of detailed modeled on the game for the fit of parts?  Absolutely not.   Waste of resources.    
 

Do we need this level of accuracy when calculating orbits?    Absolutely yes. 

I could have probably used a better example, yeah, but couldn't think of one. 

I mean, it's nice to have submil orbit calculations, yes, but you're not going to be able to use it. Like I said, submil moving a rocket in space or landing on a planet/moon will be dang near impossible for users. Even with automation on the tightest tolerances you won't see submil accuracy. 

[i dont know how to forum]

7 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

And what makes you think that's the EA Release build? Maybe they have OABs activated.

Whether they're enabled in the dev build used for this particular screenshot or not is irrelevant. This particular shot was likely achieved simply by cheating the craft into Duna orbit, but more importantly, it's been confirmed that everything currently being shown will be buildable at EA launch, so the question of getting craft like this into orbit is still a valid one.

[Deddly]

1 hour ago, Vl3d said:

what makes you think that's the EA Release build

The have confirmed  while chatting in Discord that everything they are showing now will be available in early access. 

1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

it's nice to have submil orbit calculations, yes, but you're not going to be able to use it.

I think we will absolutely be needing submilimetre precision when planning interstellar manoeuvres. 

[Missingno200]

1 minute ago, Deddly said:

The have confirmed  while chatting in Discord that everything they are showing now will be available in early access. 

Everything, eh?

_{Well, you guys can have fun having a whinge about no anti-aliasing, this is my game!}

[GoldForest]

7 minutes ago, Deddly said:

The have confirmed  while chatting in Discord that everything they are showing now will be available in early access. 

Yes, confirmed all parts will be in game. 

I don't think it's been confirmed that the game builds they are showing are the 'release' build. I think that's what the discussion is about. Release build vs Dev Build. Well. Release dev build vs non-release dev build. You get my point.

8 minutes ago, Deddly said:

I think we will absolutely be needing submilimetre precision when planning interstellar manoeuvres. 

Not really, since course corrections will be needed. You're not going to go from Kerbin to Deb Deb perfectly. You will need to adjust course at certain points. 

[Vl3d]

25 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Not really, since course corrections will be needed. You're not going to go from Kerbin to Deb Deb perfectly. You will need to adjust course at certain points. 

Course corrections for continuous acceleration  brachistochrone trajectories at 0.2 c?

Edited January 26, 2023 by Vl3d

[GoldForest]

Just now, Vl3d said:

Course corrections for continuous acceleration  brachistochrone trajectories?

Not during the continuous burn. I think talking more like during the coasting phase using the RCS thrusters to fine tune your trajectory. 

[Gargamel]

11 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Not during the continuous burn. I think talking more like during the coasting phase using the RCS thrusters to fine tune your trajectory. 

Even then, why not an RCS nudge during a burn?   It wouldn’t be a simple thing to calculate on the fly, preplanned nodes would be far easier, but a skilled pilot could make adjustments during a burn.  

[GoldForest]

1 minute ago, Gargamel said:

Even then, why not an RCS nudge during a burn?   It wouldn’t be a simple thing to calculate on the fly, preplanned nodes would be far easier, but a skilled pilot could make adjustments during a burn.  

I guess you could RCS nudge during a burn, but course correcting at the beginning of the journey will be very difficult. The closer to your target, the better you can judge what adjustments need to be made. Also, the finer you can make them. Doing them so far away from the target, your adjustments would have to be very well spot on. 

[magnemoe]

10 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah everyone thinks that and I think you're all wrong haha. The core of the vessel is 3.75m, the gold tanks are 5, the top of the adapter is back to 3.75, and the engine is 2.5.

Looks like you are correct, I based this on that the engine was an 5 pack of LV-N, but the designers said they would not use engine packs like mammoth or twin boars. 

Edited January 26, 2023 by magnemoe

[GoldForest]

5 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Looks like you are correct, I based this on that the engine was an 5 pack of LV-N, but the designers said they would not use engine packs like mammoth or twin boars. 

Things could have changed. The cluster is not 5 separate engines, but one giant model. You can tell because there's metal straps or scaffolding that are holding the engines together. 

Of course, that could just be really good greebling using the strut parts. 

It also doesn't help that the engine is literally like 100 pixels by 40 pixels making any details washed out. 

Also, I think we'll get more pictures tomorrow or Friday, if this pattern I've noticed keeps up. Said pattern being new images every 2 to 3 days.

Airplane flying around KSC - 1/20

Duna Transport - 1/23

Rocket on launchpad - 1/25

??? - 1/27 or 1/28

Edited January 26, 2023 by GoldForest

[magnemoe]

7 hours ago, Minmus Taster said:

How are you even supposed to launch something like this?  Should be easy on a Mun colony but a single launch for something so large might not even be possible given the build limitations they have in place now. And it's been said that everything they're showing right now is going to be buildable in early access so this isn't from unreleased content. Also doesn't look like it's been assembled in orbit so how does such a large vehicle get built?

Has launched larger stuff, granted then the core of the booster tended to be part of the craft and it gotten refilled. This ship is also two parts, its an docking port below the solar panels. 

[Bej Kerman]

7 hours ago, i dont know how to forum said:

7 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

What happened to orbital VABs?

I doubt they'll be available at EA launch, given they're likely tied to orbital colonies.

The devs will have builds of the game with orbital VABs, so I don't see why they wouldn't use them to deploy the vessel in the screenshots.

[tstein]

15 hours ago, Kerbart said:

A great theory, with only one tiny shortcoming: the complementary color of red is cyan. In RYB models it's indeed green, but that's a subjective model and not the RGB model (based on actual behavior of light) employed in computer graphics.

NO RGB is not how LIGHT works,  Light has no   combinatory  triple component.  Light is a continuous  wavelength spectrum.   Our EYES  work in RGB,  do not mix both things. (also have  14 years  in Computer graphics industry including image manipulation  and  optical sensors software development

Also  do you know  where it was  corrected? Because several  programs have different  setups. The  feature   request we  always received was   "we want to be able to work in RYB mode" because that is  what artists are used to think about. Several softwares support it nowadays (although it is a pita to implement with good performance  for the transformations and not linear anymore)

 

 

[GoldForest]

Just now, Bej Kerman said:

The devs will have builds of the game with orbital VABs, so I don't see why they wouldn't use them to deploy the vessel in the screenshots.

I feel they are using the build that will be released at EA launch. 

It makes sense for them to use it, so they don't have to worry about what they can and cannot show. 

It also makes sense to use the launch build to show off the stuff since EA is less than 30 days away. 

Their focus would be solely on the launch build at this point, I would think.

It's more than likely they used a cheat to orbit or launched some quick and dirty rockets. 

[tstein]

17 hours ago, MechBFP said:

That is fine, but unless your physics delta is extremely small and/or your calculations are extremely trivial, the inaccuracies will overwhelm that precision instantly for a game that actually runs at playable frame rates.

Hence the seconds per frame comment.

aa but that is not precision.. that is granularity.. and  remember the marketing department probably took a sentence from an engineer int he team and the engineer probably expected the marketign to  know  exactly what precision means.

[The Aziz]

I don't think in beta stage there are any builds that have some crucial gameplay elements that others don't. By the looks of it, everything is in place, and builds can differ in details and polish (like, for example, the infamous here antialiasing or some atmospheric effects). 

Also, how is launching a ship with a spherical tank such a problem? Set up a 5m launch vehicle, attach a huge fairings on the top, tada. Who needs orbital assembly for that? Aside from the obvious attachments where docking ports are (middle of the spacecraft and planes, they probably were connected in orbit), everything is launchable from the surface.

Edited January 26, 2023 by The Aziz

[Hutsul228]

7 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

I don't think in beta stage there are any builds that have some crucial gameplay elements that others don't. By the looks of it, everything is in place, and builds can differ in details and polish (like, for example, the infamous here antialiasing or some atmospheric effects). 

Also, how is launching a ship with a spherical tank such a problem? Set up a 5m launch vehicle, attach a huge fairings on the top, tada. Who needs orbital assembly for that? Aside from the obvious attachments where docking ports are (middle of the spacecraft and planes, they probably were connected in orbit), everything is launchable from the surface.

You don't even need fairing.  Tank is spherical, aerodynamic enough. It's kerbal space program,  not Aladdin space program and rocket is not "Bearded death "

[Vl3d]

7 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

everything is launchable from the surface

Yeah, it's a joke.. because aero forces, realistic materials strength and weight are Kerbal. On a Saturn V if you even gimballed the engines too much the whole rocket would fall apart.

I've always disliked this cartoony stuff, it's just bad physics.

[GoldForest]

4 minutes ago, Vl3d said:

Yeah, it's a joke.. because aero forces, realistic materials strength and weight are Kerbal. On a Saturn V if you even gimballed the engines too much the whole rocket would fall apart.

I've always disliked this cartoony stuff, it's just bad physics.

That's not bad physics, just Kerbal physics. 

And it seems we'll be able to do that in KSP 2. Especially if they're sticking with the 1/10th scale, but 2.5/10th scale power for engines and parts. Which I believe they are. 

[Vl3d]

You might want to watch this:

 

[The Aziz]

24 minutes ago, Hutsul228 said:

You don't even need fairing.  Tank is spherical, aerodynamic enough. It's kerbal space program,  not Aladdin space program and rocket is not "Bearded death "

There's still that not very aerodynamic truss in front of it. Or engine cluster on the other side.