JoeSchmuckatelli

I'm coming to grips with the fact that KSP2 won't be what I expected. What I think we are getting is something quite different. Based on what I've read (and read between the lines) - the game in its final form will be something like a crossover between KSP and Satisfactory. It seems like 1.0 will offer us the basics of KSP-like flight features - where we can have spaceplanes flying around the atmospheres, and rockets visiting the various CBs. That's obvious. But Science won't be a core feature. Instead, the entire game direction seems to be focused on the Colony Building, Resource Extraction and Supply Route mini-game. So - here's what I foresee: Science won't be 'contracts' like we had in KSP. It also won't offer a major change to gameplay or even a real purpose for the player. Instead, Science is merely a required feature for players to identify Resource Nodes on the various CBs and unlock extraction methods. Eventually, with Colonies we get to start building places that can take advantage of those resources... but they won't be able to until the Resource Management part of the game is implemented. 1.0 will look like this: Players do KSP things with a limited part list and science tools to get out to the local CBs and discover some resources that can help them get farther, faster. Player builds some on-site science outposts and maybe a small colony on one of the moons (or a fairly easy-to-get-to planet) to unlock extraction of the resource. As part of this, Player builds a Colony Building dedicated to turning the extracted resource into fuel. Player builds and drives a rover to one of the Resource Nodes and sets up extraction buildings (prefabbed?) or builds a dedicated mining 'ship'. The building or ship/rover starts extraction and storage of the Resource. Player builds a different rover to transport the resources to the Colony. Think 'truck'. Player manually drives the route from ISRE to the appropriate Colony building to offload and back again to the extraction site, setting / recording the route. Once established, the player can automate the route. Player makes sure the Colony Fuel Conversion building is able to transfer fuel to the launch site and any ships there are able to take on resources / fuel and leave the Colony. Player builds a rocket at the Colony VAB to ship the fuel somewhere. Either back to Kerbin (early) or to an orbital Colony VAB (Mid-Late). This is where ship / part sizes start to matter. Player initially likely only has small to medium parts which will be a limiting factor. Player flies the route from the ISRE/U Colony to the destination (KSC/Orbital Colony-VAB) and drops off the fuel and returns. Again, recording the route allows the player to automate the route for constant fuel transfer. This likely has to be done with each 'class' or 'size' of ship/parts the player unlocks; meaning only small amounts of fuel/resources will transfer initially... and then with each unlock the Player can continuously upgrade their resource extraction and fuel routes until they are producing enough to build really big ships. Repeat for the farther worlds within the Kerbolar system. Eventually the player has a fully functional multi-world Colony and ISRU system feeding a fuel-based transfer economy that allows them to build a REALLY BIG ORBITAL VAB - and their first Interstellar Ship. The Player then gets to visit the other systems. Rinse, Repeat. If I'm correct about this... it will be a cool game. Not what I was expecting - but it could work out really well.

Science was the rework I hoped to see done well. Based on some stuff I've gleaned from reading between the lines of Nate's post, Science will not be what we are hoping to see as a core feature. Instead, I suspect the gameplay direction they went with is something similar to Satisfactory (lite) - where you have to fly to a new Celestial Body, use Science equipment to scan for and locate nodes, then you land and start construction of a Colony and begin Resource Extraction and shipping of the exotic fuels to space based VABs to get to the next far off destination (read: unlock engines, parts and tech).

I still think the people saying you can't see anything are incorrect. Dark sky viewing places on earth (if you traveled around to the appropriate N and S Hemisphere locations) allow folks to see 51 different galaxies. Not necessarily with great detail - but you can see them. Given that, I'm saying that the human eye could resolve the visible light in interstellar space, generally. Maybe - just maybe - there is a void like the Great Repeller where you can't see much - but I doubt it.

Up next: IAU declassified anything non-spherical as a 'moon' despite it's orbiting of a planet. Dwarf Moon and Moonitessimal are potential names.

I had a hope, way back when, that Science would be interesting. That part of the game would incorporate the data discovered by the player into an ever expanding trove of knowledge about the various CBs of the Kerbolar System. It seems, however, than just making a better, modern version of KSP - they want to do something new and interesting with Colonies and resource management - so I'm going to have to hold judgment on the direction of the game until I see what they have in store for us then. (Meaning, I don't have high expectations for Science - given that it's not their focus-feature - but I'd like to see Colonies be a whack at the fence)

I run into those every few years - and it never fails to amaze. I swear that my grandfather still had one of those radiation chemistry sets in a closet I rooted around in back in the 70s.

I appreciate you posting - because I'd never heard of "Eyes" before, either.

My thought exactly. How... did... we... miss... THAT?!?

New to me, too. I'm guessing the main benefits are fuel efficiency in certain RPM ranges (Marine) and noise mitigation, drones. But, apparently they do fly

This is probably an @mikegarrisonquestion: I've been reading about toroidal propellers being used in drones and marine applications. Trying to see if there were any advances in applying these to aircraft (traditional planes, not merely drones) - and I'm not finding much. Is this because of an inability to change pitch of the propeller effectively with the toroidal shape, or are they simply too new?

Fun Fact: Salt & Vinegar potato chips are like crack. Thanks, Canada. https://www.tastingtable.com/944459/the-reason-some-salt-and-vinegar-chip-brands-are-more-acidic/

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/936219170/scientists-discover-outer-space-isnt-pitch-black-after-all

Ah yes - the classics.

Huh? Why? In other news - too cool not to share: Revolutionary change to propeller tech improves efficiency and reduces noise https://newatlas.com/aircraft/toroidal-quiet-propellers/

That does not seem correct. You might not see it as a galaxy shape but light does travel through the intergalactic voids - so they probably look like stars. (just spitballing here - but even if a galaxy were far enough away that it's apparent diameter was tiny you should see it. Only way I can see not perceiving it would be if the redshift had taken it down below human visible spectra)

The article is a good read... But listen to the audio (Sound recording of the stratosphere) https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/11/world/stratosphere-sounds-scn/index.html

We can see other galaxies from Earth. They used to call them nebula https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question15.html https://www.pbs.org/seeinginthedark/astronomy-topics/andromeda-galaxy.html

Had I made the observation before Webb, I'd be forced to agree... But some of what I read (acknowledged: conflicting studies and articles) suggests that I may not be. The early universe is apparently stranger than expected

Ocean surface heat is at record-breaking levels. Temperatures began climbing in mid-March and skyrocketed over the course of several weeks, leaving scientists scrambling to figure out exactly why. Temperatures have fallen since their peak in April – as they naturally do in the spring – but they are still higher than they have ever been on record for this time of year. ... One major driver of the heat is believed to be an approaching – and potentially strong – El Niño, a natural climate fluctuation associated with warming in the central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, which has a global heating effect. The world has just emerged from a 3-year La Niña, El Niño’s cooler counterpart, which has helped mask the full impact of global warming. Since La Niña ended in March, ocean temperatures seem to be on a rebound, scientists say. “It’s a little bit like we’ve had the freezer door open for a while and it’s helped to cool the planet,” Johnson said. But even while that freezer has been open, background temperatures have continued to rise. Now the freezer is closed, everything is hotter than before. Ocean temperatures are off the charts right now, and scientists are alarmed | CNN

Interestingly, there are TWO 'crisis' at the moment. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/story/is-cosmology-broken-atacama-telescope/amp

Google 'age of the universe' and you get about '13 billion years old' Webb has spotted galaxies 13 billion light years away. Expansionists see expansion in every direction they look. Also, Galaxies as far as we have eyes to see. 13 billion light year away galaxies. Our star alone is estimated to be 4 billion years old. ... So, why are the estimates persistent about 13 billion years? If a fully formed galaxy is 13 billion years away - isn't it absurd to think that all of its stars are brand new? (Shouldn't we at least estimate the age to be some average of Star lifespan - perhaps granting a guesstimate of 17 billion years?) Why not guess we are in a bubble of time - only able to resolve stars 13 billion years away in all directions - and that the universe may be wider and older than we can see? (Why presume 13 billion years of visible redshift = age of everything?)

I suspect the jury is still out on that. We ran a lot of scenarios up thread - and it's cargo capacity, while impressive for space, is kind of negligible for military operations. IIRC, it could carry the equivalent of three 40' shipping containers to a safe rear area.

At work so I can't watch it. Was the talk about problems with physics or the Crisis in Cosmology (Webb is seeing complex structures at a presumed age where many expected immature systems)? I've seen nothing credible that Webb is challenging physics, but several recent papers claiming our understanding of the early universe needs work.

Grin!