Hannu2

Certainly not. Such claimed improvements are advertisement tricks in very special conditions.

I have not had much stability problems even I use mods (most of them popular high quality mods). There is memory leak which eventually crash the game but it is predictable if I watch the memory consumption. Using OpenGL gives couple of hours of playtime for me. I have never experienced for example corruption of savefile. But there are much reports of severe problems. It seems that there are some bugs which show themselves only in some computers. It is just luck that I and you have such systems which never activate these bugs. I hope that migration to Unity 5 fixes such things, and there are good reasons to expect that, but only time will show how many patches are needed before quality is acceptable.

No thanks. I have used thousands of euros to buy high quality camera objectives in real life to minimize such errors. So I do not want that they are artificially added anywhere. I think also that there are so much work in basic gameplay things that devs should not use their time to futile eye candy in this phase of developing. Lens flares would be a graphics enhancement mod. Crosses on stars are not lens flares. They are diffraction spikes caused by secondary mirror mount of reflector. In my opinion also astronomical photos look better without them and other imaging errors.

My kids need a computer and I think that maybe I give my computer (i7 3770K) to them and buy a new one for myself. But I will wait for Intel's Broadwell E processors and also that I have enough money to buy what I want to (also a 4K display suitable for photo processing). KSP will not certainly need 6 cores but it would be nice for PovRay rendering and my own hobby programming projects.

If we know nearby points from outside and inside and trajectories of planet and craft, determining the time of the accurate SOI change needs only very basic equation solving techniques. It is certainly possible to do. Prediction over longer time periods during mapping can be little more difficult due to several mimima but it is also very doable and also computationally cheap in one dimensional problem like this. We can do many assumptions based on known things about solar system. In my opinion such inaccuracies are totally intolerable in spaceflight game but unfortunately Squad have different opinion. It is true, that fixing errors does not benefit in mathless eyeballing playstyle which most players probably use and Squas has made much work to make it possible. But KSP should be also able to use for more engineering like playstyle. Even if Squad does not do it, they should make the game moddable to accurate gaming. I do not criticize patched conics model as a choice for game (here), but I criticize the fact that results of KSP's own trajectory predictions are different than actual trajectories it calculates. And these are not minor errors which can be compensated by burning couple of m/s. It is common (especially around Jool) that map view can not predict clear encounter with moons before couple of hours before encounter. Such an error typically ruins that mission completely in my style of play and it is very annoying. If there was even a simulation mode which would show positions of crafts and planets as a function of time (for example I could change time by rolling mousewheel) I could detect these encounters by myself and avoid them.

Orbit predictions, calculations and SOI detections are buggy. Unfortunately, they have been fundamentally programmed by using stupid algorithms (not suitable for this kind of purpose) and it is practically impossible to fix them without rewriting huge parts of code. So, they will stay buggy and we have to learn to live with it. Therefore it is necessary to make multiple checks and reserve dv for corrections. It is best to plan first correction immediately (couple of hours) after leaving Kerbin's SOI. Typically it is on first half on orbit and magnitude is 0-20 m/s (from Kerbin to Duna) if ejection was reasonable accurate. In first correction PE is roughly adjusted to somewhere near wanted value (0-1000 km for low orbit, 2000-4000 km for Ike encounter). Next correction is planned immediately after executing first. It is 40-70 days before Duna encounter. Then it is time to adjust periapsis altitude and timing of the encounter so that you avoid Ike (or encounter it at optimal position if mission profile is such). Time is adjusted by varying prograde and radial components of velocity about 1 m/s per step so that PE stays at given altitude. It is good idea to check everything just before executing the second correction. Then execute the maneuver and check everything again. Then it is time to warp on SOI change and make last fine adjustments when craft enters to Duna's SOI. There are several mods which give precise maneuver controls. Using one of them is very recommended if you try to achieve efficient interplanetary trips. Squad's stock numberless eyeballing maneuvering needs much extra dv. I do not use parachutes in Duna. It gives more risks, restrictions and problems than avoid costs. Powered landing from low orbit needs less than 1500 m/s dv which is quite practical to have.

Yes, there are some elements which are rare on Earth's crust and their limited availability and high price limits industrial applications. For example platinum group metals, which are used as catalysts in chemical and automotive industry and lanthanoid metals which have several uses in electric and optical industry (maybe powerful permanent magnets are the most important use). Most of these heavy elements in Earth have fallen to core soon after formation on the planet. There are much higher concentrations and practically unlimited amount of these elements in metal asteroids. It would need a huge investment before we can utilize these resources from space but unlimited supply and lower prices would finally give significant benefits and profits. It is not current yet but mining companies will certainly get interested in space mining when there will be significant reduction in launch prices (for example because re-usable stages) and commercial heavy launchers. I predict that severe development of mining machines may begin after couple of decades and first commercial mines begin to product after 50-100 years. I do not believe that human astronauts will get significant role as a workforce in that process and especially there will not be need for permanently manned colonies on asteroids.

1. I do not know much about martian geology and I think that nobody knows. There must be much basic investigation before we know what are best position for cities or mines. 2. First things are soil materials for building and concrete manufacturing. After that iron and aluminium. 3. Difficult to say. Probably somewhat like cities on Earth because they are practical forms and people are used to it. 4. 1000 years before it can be called as a city. Maybe then it can be a self sufficient community with agriculture (on areas around city), mining, industry, services, administration and tens of thousands of people.

First problem is that hydrolox engines have relatively low thrust. Therefore they are useless as strap-on boosters. They must have very high thrust at cost of ISP. I think that gas balloon is too weak to be useful in this purpose. Parachutes are stronger but not enough in booster recovery.

I do not know exact number but you can assume it to be infinite for every practical purposes. Anything which hit to ice at several km/s will be destroyed in millisecond. Galileo Probe entered to Jupiter's atmosphere. It may be thick and nasty atmosphere, but it is surely softer than ice at -150 C. G value of icebraking would be several orders of magnitude higher in spite of any imaginable air bag contraption. 8000 kg of fuel sounds great. What the heck they are going to land on Europa? Have they hired Whackjob to plan real probes?

My 1.0.5 is now playable with OpenGL. When 1.1 will come and all necessary mods will be updated I will certainly try 64 bit version with graphical enhancement mods, which I can not use now. If it is more unstable than 1.0.5 now I will try 32 bit without graphical mods. If 64 bit with graphical mods will be better or equal than 32 bit is now I am very happy.

It is clear that self-sufficient space colony takes hundreds or thousands of years to develop. It is never economically sane project, because generations which invest money to it get never any profit. It has to be rationalized by other means. However, it is probable that colony is needed to backup after several millions of years. It is certainly self sufficient and mankind has probably expanded to whole solar system before that.

Titan. Thick atmosphere and liquid circulation on surface are unique and create rich and interesting details.

I think that there are extremely low number of scenarios which would turn Earth worse than any other celestial body. Maybe a huge collision which melts whole crust. "Normal" asteroids, geologic catastrophes, climate changes etc. can not change Earth worse than Mars. If we can build colony to Mars we can make isolated caves and artificial food production in Earth with much less cost. But it will be some kind of curiosity and technical ambition which will motivate to build space colonies. There have been huge building projects without straight profit thorough history. I think and hope that current extreme capitalism where income of next quarter year is only thing that matters for powerful people and possibility to buy loads of cheap, practically useless and fashionable stuff and entertainment is only thing that matters for common people is just short period of mankind's history and after couple of generations humans have again more noble and ambitious objectives, like colonization of solar system.

Technically yes, but politically I do not think so, because problem is that Nasa (or US government) does not want to pay missions even for smaller version.

In such situation I think that there will not be permanent space colonies before medicine gives solutions to human restrictions.

Electrolysis of water takes about 300 kJ/mole. It gives 0.5 moles or 16 g oxygen gas. It can burn 0.25 moles (4 g) of methane which gives 0.004 kg * 55.5 MJ/kg = 220 kJ. External energy is clearly needed and only possibility in Titan is a nuclear reactor. Of course it is not technical restriction and in any case many political attitudes must change thoroughly before mankind will be able to establish any space colonies or even manned temporary visits to planets. Pressure on Titan is 1.6 atm. I thought habitat pressurized to 1 bar but of course it would be possible and practical to pressurize habitats to little over ambient pressure to ensure that leaking gas flows from inside to out. As far as I know 1.7-2.0 atm is not a problem to humans if oxygen partial pressure is suitable. However, leaks of oxygen containing air can be dangerous in hydrocarbon atmosphere. But probably they are not largest challenges in colonization of Titan. As far as I know every proposed fusion technology need massive structures. Typically they need also some exotic metals and complex structures which can not be manufactured without advanced industrial infrastructure. Maybe we have ultralight space fusion devices in 30th century but I think that then middle class people goes to Mars cities as tourists. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium, the most important fertilizer elements, are relatively common all over solar system. They will not limit agriculture in space colonies.

I know but where is the advantage over Mars which have also plenty of water? Titan have harsher conditions (temperature, pressure, toxicity), lack of solar energy (nuclear energy is only option on Titan) etc. problems but I can not see any real advantages over Mars. I am sure that boring bureaucrats would even prohibit flying with muscle powered gliding suits by astronauts.

There are carbon dioxide and water in Mars. It is possible to product methane and oxygen. I do not see situation on Venus or Titan significantly better. Titan have hydrocarbons but lack oxidizers and Venus's atmosphere have nothing ready to burn.There can not be significant concentrations of fuel and oxidizer on any planet. Such atmosphere would burn until either compound would be exhausted. There are high pressure atmosphere of toxic gases in Venus (carbon dioxide, sulfuric compounds) and Titan (large variety of organic molecules). It is much more difficult to prevent gases leak in atmosphere of habitats than to keep overpressure compared to atmosphere.

Every real "probe core" have protection measures against such problems. If they detect that there will be emergency situation, for example battery charge becomes too low, they interrupt all scientific observations, turn off all devices but necessary avionics and communication equipment, rotate itself to an attitude where solar panels get power and communications to Earths is possible and enter into safe mode until mission control resets them and begin to investigate situation. I think that it should be default function on KSP cores too. It would be relatively easy to program (except attitude changes if ship is not active). Game could halt possible timewarp and show a message in such situation. But I think that SQUAD has another opinion. It is possible and relatively easy to use safety battery or "cheat" by editing save file.

As somebody wrote, we do not know if metallic hydrogen is metastable state in normal temperatures and pressures. If it is not, which is very probable, it can not be stored without ridiculous pressure which can only exist deep in giant planets. Releasing the pressure would convert metallic hydrogen back to normal gaseous form. Even if hydrogen have such metastable state we do not know how stable it is. What is needed to prevent spontaneous conversion from metallic to molecular state. You want to be sure that such a chain reaction can not begin before burning chamber, for example in high speed turbopump. We do not even know if metastable metallic hydrogen (if it even exists) is solid or fluid stuff under normal conditions. We do not know how to fabricate macroscopic amounts of metallic hydrogen. Actually, according to Wikipedia's references, scientists do not even have agreement how reliably whole metallic state have been confirmed. High pressure hydrogen needs probably to be investigated decades before we can answer to questions about its suitability to practical energy storage.

There are many reasons why Mars is the most habitable and practical and I think that if there will be space colonies first ones will be on Mars. 1. Travels Mars is second easiest to travel. It takes couple of months and we know that humans can stand so long microgravity with tolerable damages. Venus is easier but I do not see any real use or interest in very risky and impractical floating colonies middle of nothing. Outer planets need years or decades to travel, if we do not invent very revolutionary propulsion devices. There are some nuclear propulsions but there are no signs that political ban against them will be removed. Their development would also need decades of time and billions of Dollars after decision before they would get man rating for interplanetary purposes. 2. Surface conditions Conditions on Mars are extremely hostile but all other places are even much more hostile. Soil and rocks are hard and give possibilities to make caves (or use natural caves) to protect cosmic radiation. Water ice bodies in outer solar system may be too soft (at least those with significant gravity). Temperatures need less insulation and warming. Atmosphere gives little protection against radiation and micrometeorites and there are not highly radiative areas like around gas planets. Gravity is probable enough for humans. Soil is toxic on Mars but probably places with interesting organic materials on surface are much more toxic. Low pressure prevents leaks of atmospheric gases into buildings (unlike Titan). 3. Street credibility Humans have dreamed about traveling to Mars or Martians. Mars is probably easier to sell to taxpayers, than any other celestial body. I do not believe in any private manned Mars projects in foreseeable future. Asteroids are certainly more interesting in economic sense. However, they do not have gravity and probably there are very advanced automation AI after couple of decades when mining becomes current (at the earliest). I think that there is no need for continuous human presence for mining or refining operations. If colonies will be based it is only for governmental propaganda reasons.

Commercial water pumps use typically 3000 rpm electric motors (or 3600 rpm in countries with 60 Hz electrics). Typical car turbo works at about 100000 rpm. You should have a high speed gear. It does certainly not fit in hobby budget. However, it is possible to use a turbo charger to make a simple gas turbine. You need burning chamber in which you feed air from compressor side of turbo and suitable fuel, for example gasoline or gaseous propane. Burned gases is used to run turbo. It is useless but gives fun, smoke and noise. Larger truck turbo is even better (as always when you play with fire, the larger the better). Google gives many hobby turbine projects.

You can not use stock turbo to pump liquid. Liquid's density is hundreds of times larger and viscosity too. Pump would be very inefficient and would not work practically. Water would give extra problems because corrosion. Materials of turbos can not stand water. It would go to bearings and whole turbo would fail.

Do you mean some kind of rolegame stuff? I think that Kerbals controls manned crafts (by using MechJeb and SAS functions) and some kind of advanced computer controls unmanned crafts like real probes.