Jonfliesgoats

Cool! I was beggin for some flight test data earlier. I will post the request in the spacecraft exchange.

I think the OPs idea is to have some incentive to recover crews more accurately. Right now, you're good if you can get them anywhere on Kerbin alive. Aside from relatively small changes in cost due to distance, there is not much motivation to get accurate with recoveries after you already have spent money on multiple stage rockets.

If you can build and fly a working ornithopter in KSP, you are the cooler than a penguin eating pizza.

I suppose this would require some way to transfer funds and whatever results between players.

What about just not having access to that Kerbal for a while? Say the Kerbal's status is changed to "recovering" for some amount of time after a distant landing? Cut scenes may get a little tedious after a while.

I have more time to gab on the forums than actually play, unfortunately. Still with the new Xbox patch, I have surface bases on Mun and Minmus, two space tugs, A terminal lander for crew transport at both Mun and minmus, a crew transport module for lower cost crew movements around Kerbin. I still find that craft, especially rovers, mysteriously dematerialize from time to time. Other bugs, like the inability to use B to access part UIs are becoming more noticeable. Initially, the save rollback bug rendered the game almost unplayable in career mode.

Kerbal X has a LB design called the Dreamcatcher that is absolutely tiny. I like its aesthetics too. Haven't flown it yet. https://kerbalx.com/EJ_SA/BRC-Dream-Catcher

I stand corrected. Roscosmos needs to pick up the phone (email).

Oort Cloud bodies way beyond Jool would be neat!

Rings, Enceledus, Weather, active volcanism. Also, along with Pamzer's idea, more geology to explore and research. Strata, fissures, geysers, lava tubes and other stuff would be so neat!

Great ideas!

Roscosmosmjustnannounced a new series of PDE rockets. Mwhat would be a great thing to release with a Russian translation pack for KSP.

My poor math shows that a 10 ton cylinder of 2.5 meter parts reentering from circular LKO at a 1 degree FPA should experience maximum g around 20km. Maximum RATE of heating should occur around 14100m. Parts with similar thermal properties to space shuttle tiles should see maximum temperatures near 1800K. Parts with lower emissivities will see higher temps.

Hello, I would like to request some flight test data from whoever is willing to fly a 2.5m cylinder to a circular orbit and back. I would like to check my math and determine the baseline emissivity (radiant heat dissipation constant) of parts in KSP. I have lasted an informal protocol for the test below. Reenter a ten ton cylinder of a vehicle made of 2.5m parts. Heat shields are okay, but please do not reenter using nose cones, fairings, etc. Probe cores and SAS capability throughout reentry required. Screen captures may be useful for getting this data. Please share your results here and we can review the data together. Thank you in advance. LKO Orbit: 1.) Record some orbit dimensions, orbital velocity, etc. Periapsis: Velocity at Periapsis: 2.) Display leading edge part temperature in de-bug menu. Leave this open for recording De-orbit burn: 1.) Record vessel mass post deorbit burn. The closer to 10tons the better. Mass: 2.) Set SAS to prograde or retrograde so the vessel CG (CoM) is best for aerodynamic stability. 70KM, each 5km after: 1.) Record: Flight path angle (prograde) above or below horizon: Velocity: Acceleration: Temperature of leading part: Postflight: Record Following for Max Deceleration: Altitude of highest aerodynamic deceleration Maximum aerodynamic deceleration Leading part temperature at maximum deceleration Velocity at maximum deceleration Flight path angle at maximum deceleration Record Following for Max Temperature: Altitude of highest part temperature Maximum part temperature Velocity at max temperature Flight path angle at max temperature Quote Edit

Hello, I would like to request some flight test data from whoever is willing to fly a 2.5m cylinder to a circular orbit and back. I would like to check my math and determine the baseline emissivity (radiant heat dissipation constant) of parts in KSP. I have lasted an informal protocol for the test below. Reenter a ten ton cylinder of a vehicle made of 2.5m parts. Heat shields are okay, but please do not reenter using nose cones, fairings, etc. Probe cores and SAS capability throughout reentry required. Screen captures may be useful for getting this data. Please share your results here and we can review the data together. Thank you in advance. LKO Orbit: 1.) Record some orbit dimensions, orbital velocity, etc. Periapsis: Velocity at Periapsis: 2.) Display leading edge part temperature in de-bug menu. Leave this open for recording De-orbit burn: 1.) Record vessel mass post deorbit burn. The closer to 10tons the better. Mass: 2.) Set SAS to prograde or retrograde so the vessel CG (CoM) is best for aerodynamic stability. 70KM, each 5km after: 1.) Record: Flight path angle (prograde) above or below horizon: Velocity: Acceleration: Temperature of leading part: Postflight: Record Following for Max Deceleration: Altitude of highest aerodynamic deceleration Maximum aerodynamic deceleration Leading part temperature at maximum deceleration Velocity at maximum deceleration Flight path angle at maximum deceleration Record Following for Max Temperature: Altitude of highest part temperature Maximum part temperature Velocity at max temperature Flight path angle at max temperature

I wish I could pay Kerbal currency for other players to conduct some flight tests for me.

I am not knocking it. I think it's really cool that you have a submarine flying underwater. There is a lot of science to be done down there, or there should be. I think it would be cool to have the ability to explore buried oceans on any of our ice moons around Jool like Europa or Enceledus IRL.

Add more Russian-like stuff, please! I'm an American with relevant experience. There is definitely a bias against Russian aerospace services and products amongst many of us. It is easy for those of us who commit serious portions of our lives to flying, testing and developing Western aerospace products to view things in the east as underdeveloped, clumsy and buffoonish. This is an artifact from Cold War and Yeltsin era thinking. This also allows us to feel more confident in our programs and ourselves and, crucially, muster more support for our various space projects from our respective citizens. To be fair similar bias exists among Russian aerospace circles. They view Western programs as automation-dependent, over engineered and risk averse. Just like the West, these biases hinder Russian aerospace development. Russian jet engines are unnecessarily unreliable for this day and age, for example. An example of our respective biases can be found in comments saying the Russian space program is no longer exploring. Well, to be fair, we can't do much exploring with ISS without getting human payloads to Orbit and, for now, that's the domain of the Russians. Also, our great lifters use many Russian or Russian-designed motors for their first stages. Russians fly in space. They should have Russo-Kerbals that eat green pirogis in space or something. There is a lot we can learn from the failures and successes of all camps.

Something that plots vessel acceleration over time or part temperature over time and presents this data in a graph would be cool.

How do jet engines run underwater? I would like to see electric propellers or other oxidizer systems for non-rocket engines. cool image, btw! It reminds me of an old TinTin book I read as a kid "Red Sea Sharks".

Buoyancy in different liquids may hard to do but it could be worthwhile. I think exploring Titan's lakes or Laythe's oceans would be pretty cool.

Thanks!

Does anyone have a good estimate for emissivity of various parts?

Can we get drag values for parts in console KSP? No debug menu is available to me, but I would love to be able to get some data for trajectory planning.