All Activity

oh man this really stages my inters

Now, that i have discovered, that Mr. Dilsby has returned... my mind is blown a way

Before it even happens? Where have you been for the last 15 months? Heck, for the last 6 years? They can't hit any of the promises or timelines they have given us. Why should we expect this to be any different? And you basically proved my point. We got promised bi-weekly and it didn't happen. We got promised monthly, and they are already late. Hard to wait for something to happen when they've proven it won't.

Abydos 130504242024

Pizza oven made pepperoni sentient mutations with mushroom brains and peanuts, caramelized onions and garlic salmon ——— 125604242024

/////////////////////VEHICLE_UPDATE\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Foreword: On my Minmus mission 2 vehicles from the K.G.01 - 02 vehicles package proved to need a update. The MLKOs were struck by a bug that apparently damages RCS thrusters around fairings and engine plates: The SSTO Space Plane also needed a bit of tweaking after v.0.2.1 - the fact that the plane had not been flown post For Science! meant that I was quite sure its flight characterstics would be off. Since the Multi Fuel Glider needed a complete redesign to work. For the details - look bellow: MLKO: old MLKO and New (version 3) side by side for a comparison view. I have come to dislike the 4 by 4 RCS thrusters - I only use them on tiny crafts where I cannot use the point RCS thrusters. The fact that you cannot control which thruster is firering at what time is annoying to me. But I also find that the point thrusters in general bugs out much less. I got two chances to test out the re-entry characteristics of the capsule. One time with the 1st version, where I decided to de-orbit the craft once I learned half the RCS thrusters didnt work - The updated version I accidently got to test because of a brain fart with a rendezvous that got into the atmosphere of Kerbin. Video of the uncontrolled re-entry of the capsule. The parachute was primed at separation (which is why they deploy as soon as the heat is gone) Even though I did not think it to be truly necessary with a probe core (The M.T.Ds could connect the MLKOs to the H.T.Ds) I decided I would add a medium sized probe core. It would give the craft a bit more EC and RCWs as well as removing the step of having to dock the MTDs. It also provided a anchor point for the RCS thrusters pointing retrograde - meaning I could avoid the bug that plagued the build: two images showing one MLKOv2 (left) and two MLKOv1 (Right) - notice the difference in the gap between the H.T.D and MLKO is extended. The accidental de-orbit of the v2 version showed another weak spot - namely the Clamp-o-tron at the front of the vehicle - had it been a shielded clamp-o-tron.. I could probably have saved the vehicle. Although I could probably have saved it regardless as I could cheese the heat mechanics by flipping the vehicle and alternating between roasting the engine plate and the clamp-o-tron. But the last change between the MLKOv2 and the MLKOv3 was that I gave it a shielded port (now that they are no longer bugged I have started to use them again) - and I gave it a decoupler between the capsule and the heat shield. With 3 parachutes it still falls with 11 m/s - and I figured I could reduce that number by dumping the heat shield. (they are quite heavy after all) Crew SSTO Space Plane: Space plane v.2 (front) and v.1 (back) at display at KSC As mentioned the space plane needed some minor tweaks. I dont know if RCW has been boosted in energy consumption, if the MK2 cockpit has been nerfed in EC or if the small OX-STAT solar panels has been nerfed. In any case - the vehicle had gone from having enough EC last time I flew it - to having a way to small battery package and power generation. I decided to add two bigger solar panels and a small battery. The RCW also seemed too weak - at least it annoyed me. I added 2 small RCW and reduced the Monopropellant to counter the weight gain somewhat. Lastly on re-entry I had trouble keeping control of the plane in the thicker parts of the atmosphere. Even though the problem was that the nose only wanted to point prograde (the reversed problem of the Multi Fuel Glider that wanted to present its rear on re-entry) I still added the "body flaps" I recall them having a weird balancing effect on the glider - even when not deployed. The changes came to look like this: The two RCW are the silver part on the two wing mounted engines - the little white extension on the back engine is the battery. Conclusion: The vehicles are now up to date with the current build of KSP2. If you want to read more about the mission, you can find the info here:

Wild Wind IV successfully orbits Windswept.

The name's NexusHelium, and I compose music for fun. I recently created a smooth, jazzy theme for KSP, and I wanted to share it here. It was originally meant to be a theme that would play on the home screen of the KSP 2 wiki that's being made but it also stands by itself as it's own project. I would like to know though whether this should actually be used for the KSP 2 wiki Click for jazzy tunes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_ShSJmlc5Q I also have some other songs as part of an unofficial soundtrack for the KSP 2 interstellar update so here's just my channel as a whole: https://www.youtube.com/@nexushelium Hopefully you enjoy!

That was one of the proposals, yes. Ah, yes, I found the IRL Helldiver pod.

When watching Mars Guy's vids he will overlay a person in the images to indicate scale and I always think Dragonfly's rotors look less than 1m also. I just figure it's the imperial conditioning in my brain making meters suffer perceptual distortion

A person far braver than I am.

@Andrew1233 I didn't say you have to go supersonic like the concord: just that you go too slow. Airlinerd cruise at 250-270 m/s at those altitudes, you're going about 100 m/s - that is way too slow. My comments about hypersonics only meant to imply that I can't give you any rules of thumb off the top of my head for wingloading or TWR for those sort of planes. As for the altitude: kerbin's atmosphere is about 80% to scale. 8500m on kerbin has the same pressure as about 35'000 feet on Earth. Regarding rotors, I said subsonic, not transonic, but yes, you can almost go supersonic with rotors: And that was a tilt-rotor VTOL carrying a 36 ton rockonax 64 fuel tank as payload

Also... first of all: Every month and once during a month are basically the same things. And second: Just wait for them to release the next KERB and I am positive that they will begin to uphold that promise. They made this decision for a reason and it wasn't a bad one. So, until the next KERB release, please just be patient and trust the process for a little more. Don't judge or criticize something before it even happens.

Why do you compare it to ksp1? There are plenty of games that have good economies. Snowballing is an effect that happens and the solutions are limited. Contracts and parts in KSP are not balanced. That doesn't mean it cannot be done right. The solution to a broken system like we have in KSP1 is not to remove it. Most games have money because it works.

KSP 1 was not bad, and no one I have ever met or seen has ever said that it was bad to justify KSP 2. In my opinion, KSP had a far less enjoyable experience in a lot of areas compared to the sequel but that's my opinion. It's not an argument. The only argument that involves KSP that I have seen was one that I personally agree with as well. And that is the fact that KSP during early access was bad, or at least not the greatest. And if one guy joined by a team of people could create one of the best games of all time in ten years, then KSP 2 can undoubtedly achieve the same or even more in the same amount of time. And they are on a fantastic track to do so, so saying the first game is bad is not a cope, it's not even really an argument. It's just not true, and basically everyone that enjoyed the first game stands by that fact. Some people, including me, just look back on the first one's history and know that the sequel still has some time and deserves more than to be abandoned or looked at in disgust. But that's not fact. I cannot confirm the game's future, but that is the argument I uphold and stand by the strongest in regards to this game.

I thought 119k was getting up there.

As you have "never used mechjeb before this week" the guide does a good job over covering the many different features of mechjeb2. Since mechjeb is not part of a stock experience, very little of that will translate into understanding what the various fields & readouts pertain to across many sub windows. Also you can create custom UI windows with tailored info. This is what some people have recommended in the past when trying to get MJ to work specifically with RO. https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-1/wiki/TroubleshootingMechJebPVG Hope it helps.

Yeah, the end result was that the generated drag cubes had a much smaller front or rear face than they should have, resulting in the front and/or rear drag cube faces of connected parts not getting occluded, which added a considerable amount of drag, especially at transonic speeds. That thing could not glide to save its life. With the fixed drag cubes, drag went down by between 1/3 and 1/2, depending on the AoA, the L/D ratio went up significantly, and it can actually glide now! LOL Anytime, m8!

The only people giving it a pass are the people you have made up in your mind. No one is going to give it a pass if the game leaves Early Access like that.

Floor 4760: A fishtank with MIDI-chlorians.

Naboo is actually Mongolia.

Hi, Without sharing any videos or screenshots (I could share if needed), I have a problem with my first orbital attempt in RO. It seems my first stage shuts down prematurely. I can figure out why this is happening -- it's because the calculated apoapsis matches the orbit altitude target I entered in MechJeb (170 km in my case). I don't want that to happen; is there a way to force a stage to use all of its fuel? Second, just before the engine shuts off, the engine gimbals, and so after the engine shuts off, my ship is put into a tumble about one of its short axes. This is very annoying. What can I do to solve these problems? I want to use all of my fuel and I don't want the ship to tumble after the engine turns off. Thanks, Ben

Calling 911 for inspiration.

Squaring the circle is cheating.