Dientus
-
Posts
538 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Dientus
-
-
1 hour ago, dudnees said:
Some extreme orbital low-flying on the Mun.
Video:
The two main parts: setting up the precision orbit and designing the "goalposts" were equally difficult.
Great fun though!
That is just wayy to Kerbally awesome!!
-
I was just curious. How would you determine which axis the 'conic drag' should glide along? Would it be tied to camera view in some way? How would you go from large changes to small, so that you don't accidentally drag it out across the system?
-
Interesting, go on the premise that the cost of the vehicle you are building takes into account designtime and first time die/factory creation as well as first run engine and/or tank production?
This way once the initial cost of Kerbolinger 1 is made, subsequent designs are cheaper to launch as a whole. Plus reuse of main rocket elements could potentially be cheaper as well for a completely different probe.
I like it, if done right, this would be especially helpful when the money starts drying up!
-
Everybody is already given a lot of great suggestions!
One thing do you have any particular people in mind as far as getting their interest into ksp?
In other words, do you know their interests, likes, dislikes? See if there is some aspect of KSP that would appeal to them. Would it be the design phase? Would it be testing your designs and flying them? Airplanes? Vehicles?
As an example if you like designing rockets and they like historical recreation... You could design famous past space missions and then they could fly them.
-
I think I see... as a compromise between over simplified and over complicated while trying to stay true to realism within reason. I think that may not be too bad. I think I could get behind that.
Depending on how others feel, level of depth could be a simple choice option as well... maybe a choice between "realistic" and "kerbalistic" to try to appeal to more types of players who may not want in depth placement of satellites or stations?
-
13 minutes ago, K^2 said:
Likewise, an accelerometer fed into the play rate input of the KAL-1000 can be used as an integrating accelerometer. Infamously, a pair of gyros and a single integrating gyro accelerometer comprised the guidance of the V2 rockets, so you can do quite a bit with this.
Xactly! Yes these sensors very much on the wish list! Of course, we start moving into rudimentary autopilot if we can read and make our crafts react to sensors like these.
I like the thought of building radar stations on a planetary body to make sensors more accurate to a given location. But for sake of gameplay over tedium, I would imagine one per stellar body of sufficient size would suffice?
-
I can see Bill Kerbal slamming down a half-pint followed by a smelling salts chaser!
-
It's really hard to pin an absolute favorite first for me, because every first was almost as exciting as the last. From getting to orbit, to Minmus, and later to Jool and Eeloo.
But one that is most memorable for me, I think is my first trip to Duna. Similar to @STORMPILOTkerbalkind and others, I was stuck in the Kerbal, Mün, Minmas trap for what was possibly months. It was thanks to brave Timney Kerbals' sacrifice that I finally understood transfer windows.. (sniff)...
-
Super-fabu-listic-turb-alyene hype!!!!
Cmon ride the train (choo choo) here I am!
-
That was my thought, not that I'm more than a hobbyist mind you, but if it's at that level it does seem easy to implement into existing framework. (No not an echo I promise!)
Of course first thing in my mind is what kind or how many sensors? New ones like altimeters or gyroscopes? (Which I personally would love) or just the science sensors we have now like barometer or temperature?
I see in my minds eye a failsafe to be sure a probe extends landing gear, or maybe at Pe, record and transmit science. Things like that.
-
I wouldn't be against it, but is this similar to this thread?
Or where you thinking of something different?
-
I can't believe I have only visited this gem once long ago. I never even surveyed it!
Thanx to the "Notice Pol Society" and the promise of ore, I am setting up initial Jool incursion via Pol this time around!
Jeb! Fire up the Moar ... EVERYTHING!
-
To unexpectedly experience the "wobble of flipping death" but manage to shut off SAS and wrestle it into a successful orbit without aborting.
-
Nice! I like that satellite design, I will have to try that style of solar panel layout!
I like to design lift vehicles seperate from probes, station parts, etc. as well. It helps me especially in career mode where I can spend time designing my craft with all the details I feel I need, then check the tonnage against my presaved sub assemblies abilities, slap em together and run the fairings.
-
4 hours ago, Daedalus3000 said:
This has happened to me too, I just tend to change the deploy force to 300+. The main culprit for this though has been clamshell fairings. The confetti rarely breaks my craft.
Thats my solution as well, confetti and increased deploy force and it hasn't happened since.
-
@JcoolTheShipbuilder
You, my fellow Kerbanaut, are as cool as your ships. -
I have had mixed emotions ever since the initial pushback of ksp2 release... This internal struggle of "I want this awesome game now" and of "I want this awesome game to be the best it can be"... And then it was pushed again....
But alas...
This struggle has become no more! For the love of all that is Kerbal!!!
I now...
want...
on...
The hype-traaiiiinnnn !!!!!!
Curse you Intercept!!!!!! Aaahhhhhh!!!!!
-
4 hours ago, jimmymcgoochie said:
With all the interstellar tech in KSP2, there's no point in throwing a primitive probe at another star system using a gravity assist trajectory when you could wait a couple of decades, build a probe with some extremely high delta-V propulsion and then send that in a fraction of the time.
For me, I would do it for the sheer challange. Even tho SSTO's may be more costly and time consuming to deliver payloads, I still do it for the joy, challenge, and learning curve.
I'm thinking that the reason to do it, science. I enjoy stepping stone progression i.e. you can't progress technology without prototypes and experimentation.
If that isn't your cup of tea, you can skip all that slow 40,000 year craft experiment stuff in sandbox mode.
-
Missed that one. Makes sense too.
Guess I need to rewatch and reread all the official ksp2 info
-
Thinking about early game and the learning curve, it would be nice to experience and replicate what humans did during our reach for the stars. If this game mechanic is used, contracts like launching straight into the air to achieve orbit, learning you can't do that so switch to inclination of craft in flight, and launching rockets from planes, learning that landing the missions that return into the ocean is safest both for craft and Kerbalkind.
One thing I couldn't help but wonder, if ksp2 was going to get detailed enough to take into account substandard or incorrect materials used in the learning process that results in failures? On one hand it could be interesting, but I would see such a system getting tedious quickly.
-
I'm thinking this would be a mod, like the RSS mod for ksp1. And with a genuine ringed planet planned for ksp2, I imagine Saturn will look and feel 100x better in ksp2.
-
KSP1 minimum requirements:
OS: Windows 7 64-bit | Windows 10 64-bit.
Processor: Core 2 Duo 2.0 Ghz | Core i5.
Memory: 4GB RAM | 8GB RAM.
Graphics: DX10 (SM 4.0) 512MB VRAM | DX10 (SM 4.0) 1GB VRAM.
Storage: 3 GB HD space | 4 GB HD space
I am assuming that KSP2 will be much more than that. This is a guess:
OS: Windows 8 64-bit | Windows 10 64-bit.
Processor: Core 2 Duo 4.0 Ghz | Core i7.
Memory: 8GB RAM | 12GB RAM.
Graphics: DX10 (SM 4.0) 1GB VRAM
Storage: 10 GB HD space | 14 GB HD space.
Could even be SSD required, but this is purely guessing.
-
2 hours ago, Kernel Kraken said:
Why would we need nuke mods when we already have them? Just put it on the end of a conventional missile and stage just before impact. I just hope we get different FX for surface, high-atmosphere, and space-based detonations.
From what I saw and heard, ksp2 was treating each explosion "like a snowflake". That each would be different and based on whether it is in an atmosphere or not, as well as the type of fuel. It is said to be complex enough that each exploding piece takes into account its neighboring piece, and what it is, does it have fuel, etc.
But still, I do not know if uncontrolled nuclear fusion will be a thing or not.
Gonna have to fire up the 2 stage ICBM drawings for ksp2 now! As Kerbals, it is our job, nay, our DUTY to find out!
-
7 hours ago, Jacke said:
Ah, no. Old tech rocket guidance was as good as it had to be and was excellent for many vehicles. Lack of guidance wasn't the thing limiting use of air-launched rockets to orbit.
What really limits it, as others have said, is the small amount of performance improvement from carrying a rocket to altitude. Needing an aircraft to carry it to altitude limits the size of the launch vehicle. And an air-launched rocket has to handle both the loads of being carried and under thrust. It also has to handle the transition from air-drop to engine-start to stabilize to pull-up to climb trajectory, which is complex (see how much design work is done on air-launched missiles just to handle that). if there are any serious faults after air-drop, like starting the rocket engine/motor (liquel fuel/solid fuel), the launch vehicle and its payload will be lost as opposed to a launch scrub.
To elaborate, I was staying in context of early game. Old rocket guidance systems were no where near as accurate as modern systems. Using only gyroscopes, accelerometers, and sometimes analog computers, the failure rate was higher, the accuracy rate was lower, and it was known that those systems would never work for deep space.
All I meant was couple that with the fact it was more expensive when a failure did occur as well as what you stated perfectly, the gains are minimal for to great a risk. There was little to gain from early plane/rocket launches other than science.
Of course we didn't realize it at the time un til we tried it. That's why I would like to see contracts of that in early game.
Special Request!
in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
Posted
You thinking mobile as in rover style? Or mobile as in entire base has rockets?