Meecrob

As long as the rocket is at an angle greater than 0* to the horizon, and its firing its engines, the upward thrust on the tail end combined with gravity will rotate the nose of the rocket towards the horizon.

Especially if they are not using hydrogen. I don't want to be a downer on SLS, and the shuttle, but I can't imagine dealing with hydrogen leaks in space. Edit: I meant to also say "with recent hydrogen leaks with SLS" That took time to deal with on the pad. I don't know what they would do in space. Obviously hydrogen has its advantages, but I suspect orbital refuelling was in the past considered too much of a cash sink to engineer it. Also certain senators, but I'm just joking on that last one

You and me both! I remember back like 2014-ish thinking " SpaceX is gonna have some serious competition soon!" Edit: I mean that as in we all wanna see awesome rockets...I'm not trying to crap on Blue Origin...I just wanna see what they come up with.

That makes way more sense than what I was thinking! So my follow up then is has anyone seen different tank sizes for the refueller? Or is it probably gonna be a standard Starship, just with recoverability removed?

If Zach Golden is on the right track, it seems SpaceX removed too many features from the launch mount and are currently adding them back in (the best part is no part). If you like deep dives, I highly recommend his youtube channel.... search CSI_Starbase. Edit, I forgot to mention the recent structural tests/modifications...I'm not sure anyone has an exact idea, but clearly there is concern over the structure...nothing major it seems...just added weight to a prototype that is already overweight....I doubt it will affect the production versions of Starship Edit again, anyone have any news on the heatshield-less starships? What are people thinking? Expendable Starlink launchers or HLS? Logically, I'd say Starlink launchers, but NASA might have written in a timeframe into the HLS contract.

To add, I mean they literally said they are making the game accessible to modders, and this is early access. I imagine a bunch of devs thinking "but..but...you guys mod it anyways and we told you this isn't the final product" Full disclosure, I have a bunch of issues with KSP2 I'm worried about, but this is pretty lame. If anyone thinks there won't be mods for fuel types, I dunno what to say.

One thing that I have not seen mentioned so far (I hope I am not repeating) is that the large baseline power output and waste heat from a fusion reactor can be used to improve our industrial processes. For example, the Hydrogen Reduction process of making steel would become commercially viable allowing us to make steel without fossil fuels. This isn't simply about dollars per kilowatt/hour, or cost of construction/maintenance/decomissioning, its about a step change to new green technologies. You cannot run a steelmill on wind/solar, and you cannot make steel without producing CO2 and remain economically competitive by burning LNG/oil/coal. Wind and solar definitely have their places, but for us to actually make a difference in our total emissions, we have to do more than change the source of electricity production; we have to rethink our applications of it.

"Yo Dawg! I heard you like the Moon, so I'm gonna ride a real rocket to the real moon to look at fake ones on a screen" The more I hear about this, the less it seems like a plan to get people interested in the non sciency/nerdy part of space exploration, and more a plan to get views.

I agree. Its not like its the early days of the Cold War with LeMay at the helm of SAC, insisting there be nuclear strike capability aloft 24/7. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say its for validating modern computer hardware performance in the radiation environment of space. "As human society only becomes more dependent on digital technology, it's worth asking how big a risk cosmic rays pose to our way of life. Not least because, with the continuing miniaturisation of microchip technology, the charge required to corrupt data is getting smaller all the time, meaning it is actually getting easier for cosmic rays to have this effect." https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20221011-how-space-weather-causes-computer-errors

"Alright everyone, our 'Make the Russkies Paranoid Device' is a total success!"

Ok, hold on. We are on the cusp of returning humans to the moon, and they are trying to show off their RGB settings? I'm officially old, I guess, if thats what gets the kids into rocketry these days.

Zach from CSI Starbase put out a good video on the detonation suppression system at Boca Chica, as well as a quick overview and contrast of it with the system being installed at the Cape.

Fracking is an endgame stopgap, not an unlimited new source...especially since we are...as the name suggests...hydraulically fracturing the Earth's crust. Honestly, who thought that was a good idea? Maybe if the US didn't screw up its real estate market in 2008, they wouldn't have had to deal with the oil price hike and thus come up with what is basically a cartoon supervillain's idea of oil extraction. "Lets break the planet to prove it to some Saudis!"

I get what you are saying. What I am saying is that Take Two is asking for ROI before making sure the product is good...evidenced by the launcher and no bugfixes other than tutorials. Tutorials are to onboard new players..who haven't encountered the bugs yet. It seems to me that if you force something, it does not come out the best. Edit: as I said before, it sounds like deadline pressure to me...and the deadline is up to take two...who just had a loss this quarter...

I finally agree with you! They didn't make the DLC's for fun...evidence is the bugs in them...sounds like deadline pressure to me. "Give us some ROI, or we will reduce budget." Signed, -totally not Take Two

It's no excuse...terms for KSP1 free DLC was paraphrased to "buy original KSP before this date and you get all DLC." OP clearly did NOT. As I said, go to a car dealership and ask them for a free new car because you bought one of theirs in the past...record the laughter as you exit the place so I can laugh too.

I'm not sure if I misunderstand, or if I'm just getting old...but why would anyone think that because they bought previous products from a company they are entitled to future versions of it. Go try that at a car dealership, or the grocery store or something. Pay money, play the game. You don't get free stuff because you bought stuff before. I don't understand where this idea comes from!

Wait...so we are more than 3 months out from an EA release and you want the devs to start work on FIVE spinoffs? Like do you want KSP2 to not come out at all?

I'm not sure you can "shut down" a single player game that uses local files. Like does Take Two bust into my house and format my hard drive?

I'm thinking they are going to keep the first release as close to KSP 1 as possible so that when we give feedback, they have a "control" to compare it to.

$50 USD? I get that Private Division is antsy for some ROI, but you guys might wanna really emphasize what is gonna be included, because on the surface, this looks like KSP1 v0.21. I mean you guys are promoting multiple launch pads so you can launch with your friends in multiplayer...but thats not being added til later...so why tell us? Focus on why KSP2 is worth $50 at its CURRENT state, please. Edit: Please don't tell me part of my $50 goes into being an unpaid EA user who gets to give feedback.

You are a little defensive and it appears you think I took offense to what you said? I'm not American. I'm just watching from the sidelines. You said in China there already is a nickname, I'm just making a joke based on the well known fact that China has a habit of stealing designs...so clearly China likes the fatties! Edit: CCP has a habit of stealing designs...please understand I am not making a joke about the citizens of China. Anyways I'd die a happy man if at least the USN named the F-35C the Hippo...since the Super Hornet is named the Rhino...to keep with the "non-svelte" theme.

So you are saying that the industrial espionage branch of the CCP is a chubby chaser?

You heard it here first, folks! {snip] All you aeronautical engineers bow down to some guy on the internet. Clearly spaceplanes are stupid, that's why the USSR made one too?

Precisely. The first humans were launched into space on missiles designed to bring nuclear armageddon. I'm simply trying to say that my armchair quarterback take on spaceplanes can turn out vastly different than the evidence we have today...just like how when someone was asked to design a missile to nuke Moscow, they didn't think it was gonna orbit John Glenn.