RealKerbal3x

Boeing will certainly be one of them, because they're NASA's pet company.

Won't the propellant tanks have slosh baffles, or is that not an issue?

Well, technically it's $59.99. Look through the first post in this thread, it's there somewhere.

The point of KSP2 is to fix many of the underlying problems with KSP, which mostly lie in its years of new features tacked onto old code. I'd guess that the codebase of KSP2 is going to be so different to the original game that what you suggest wouldn't be an update, it would just be an entirely new game. And it would be so expensive for SQUAD/Private Division to do that you would probably have to pay $60 for it. So doing that isn't really worth it, and as you said it won't happen - you might as well just buy KSP2

I have no doubt that a Kerbal could survive an explosion of that magnitude. It's happened many times before, not a scratch in most cases.

Why would you need to do that? Heisenberg is meant to go in the WBI folder. Just remember not to put the Hooligan Labs mod in there too, or it probably won't work.

@kerbiloid Falcon 9 wasn't designed from the beginning to be human-rated. Later, when they received the contract from NASA to fly crew, modifications had to be made, but they weren't so big that an entirely new vehicle had to be developed. That would have been an order of magnitude more expensive. Plus, SpaceX was being funded by NASA, so they didn't really have to pay as much to human rate F9. Sure, human-rated launch vehicles have to undergo more stringent tests, but only when they actually fly crew. Basically what I'm saying is that human-rated launch vehicles aren't arbitrarily more expensive to launch just because they have that certification. The cost is in developing the vehicle to be human-rated, and not flying it - unless it is actually flying crew on a certain mission.

I never want to hold pop again...

Totally successful, good job SpaceX!

Kind of, the video froze for a bit but didn't cut out.

Stuck the landing!

Stream is live! They're playing Cities in Flight

LOD would certainly be a good idea, but given that KSP has never been coded particularly efficiently (new features just being 'bolted on' to the original codebase) I'm not sure if it would be that easy, or improve performance all that much for that matter. Also, sorry for being nitpicky, but KSP 2 is being developed by a completely different team to KSP 1. SQUAD will continue to develop the original game alongside the new one, so they won't 'move on fully' to KSP 2. Think of it as less a sequel and more a continuation.

Air intakes wouldn't really produce any appreciable thrust - they're designed to accelerate very light air through a jet engine, not the other way around. Adding intakes would just add a bunch of extra mass for little to no extra thrust. Plus, what are you going to do with all this air you've sucked into your reusable booster? You can't vent it, because that would probably have the opposite effect to sucking it in in the first place; and you can't use it as oxidiser (at least not with conventional rocket engines) because rocket motors need purified liquid oxygen, and air has a bunch of other gases in it. You might be able to use a nuclear reactor to superheat air harvested by these intakes and use that as reaction mass, but I'm not sure how much thrust that would produce.

Name it in memory of one of your fallen Kerbals.

It was just meant to be a generic engine until it was revamped actually.

This is a pretty good idea, +1 Also, I really, really need to rewatch some of kurtjmac's old KSP videos. They introduced me to the game!

This was a static fire for the upcoming Starlink mission, not DM-2.

Yes, occasionally I bump my head on doorways. TUBM has realised that quarantine hasn't really changed their routine that much.

Nope. TUBM wishes the forum had a dark theme.

I've only ever forgotten parachutes once, back on my first mission to the Mun in 1.3.1. However, I regularly forget other things, including but not limited to: batteries solar panels reaction wheels RCS removing Jeb from the pod before launch

I'm pretty sure Tanble Kerman could pilot a spacecraft accurately enough to land on top of whatever anime character that is and squash it.

False, though I'm so tiny compared to the universe that I could easily not exist and it wouldn't matter much. TUBM is a Trekkie.

Where did you get that from? We don't know whether the flaps have been redesigned, only that SN4 won't get them.

Seems like Elon has moved away from all-up testing and onto super-fast iteration. It's probably a better way to go.