Whirligig Girl

They've said there will be no limitation on top-level buildings. (Although, you'll still want to use launch clamps on the Launchpad!)

\Don't worry, Probes of different Tech levels have different pilot skills, so you won't be without SAS for long!

I think this technically counts even though it's a full mod: Ven's Stock Part Revamp. It MUST be stock.

But that's still not a screenshot from 0.90

Extended planned features list. - - - Updated - - - ... and for good measure, linked this in the OP. Also, I will be linking the overview of each Squadcasted, assuming ObsessedWithKSP makes one each week leading up to release.

I voted the later option, though I may be a bit biased.

I think you're forgetting the EXTRA EXPERIENCE, which includes a transporter between the Plane and the Train.

The train's sentient, but only by Railway Series rules. She can't drive herself, only feel like she's doing the work and apply work into her machine. I still have to drive her.

No, all I'm asking for is a star and a binary set of planets. Not the Kerbolar system. If I wanted to make a whole solar system, then for the planets I'd just have them in normal orbits. And at any rate, I'm more concerned with this spacecraft.

Well I don't want 1 planet, 1 moon, and 1 asteroid. And I don't want to feel the gravity of two moons. I only want to deal with 2 sources of gravity at a time. This is not about solving the actual problem, it's about making a restricted 3-body on-rails and off-rails simulation. It's a challenge, like building a ternary computer or even a simple robot that unplugs itself. And what happens in the N-body solution here when you go up to very high timewarps? 1,000,000x timewarp? KSP can handle it. (As long as you don't change SOIs) I think the key of this is finding the recursion time of a system. The recursion time of a restricted 2-body system is the time it takes to complete one orbit. But for a 3-body system, the recursion time will obviously be much longer, but eventually (As long as an orbit is stable) there will be a recursion.

What do you mean "doesn't scale"? And this doesn't look like it could actually accellerate time without errors accumulating. Anyway, finding an alternate solution is not the point, the point is whether restricted 3-body on rails would work.

They're not abandoning the game after 1.0. KSP just exits early access then. They're not in it soley to make money, they're in it to make a good game. And they haven't harvested all of the money yet either. Sales are continuing to progress higher and higher for profits every day, more people are buying KSP. Heck, they even put KSP on sale practically every other week! You have to remember that this game is something a person and his co-workers are making, and has put years of continuous effort into. They're working extremely hard to get this update out, and have been working hard on updates since 2011. They're not even saying that it's complete. They're just saying that it will have all of the things in it that it needs to have to be the Kerbal Space Program, in it's most basic form. Beta is game balance and improving/rebuilding features so that they are no longer placeholders. It's making it totally stable. 1.0 will be when the game is a complete game, not when the development is complete. They will continue to develop KSP long after 1.0.

Yeah, sorry. The buildings are finished, aside from some of the exploded models, according to the latest devnotes.

It's a british locomotive, so I'm called a driver, not an engineer. *whacks rdwulfe with the coal shovel*. I'm also the fireman. - - - Updated - - - Yep, that's where it came from! Actually, Munroe got it from that Hofstadter guy, so give rep to him.

KSP uses the "Patched Conics" system for orbital mechanics. What this means is that you patch together "Spheres of Influence" (roughly equivalent to real-world Hill Spheres) to simulate only the gravity of the most prevalent gravity source. All trajectories are just conic sections patched together into ellipses. This system is also called "Restricted Two-Body" because you use the Parent Body (Planet) with gravity and the Satellite (Spacecraft) without gravity. The advantage of this system is that the position and velocity of the spacecraft is a function of time. This means you can run time forwards (or backwards!) freely, and it will always be accurate. Compare to N-Body simulations which can not warp on rails, so timewarp introduces a whole lot of lag/inaccuracies. The question is, can you simulate the two most gravitationally significant bodies at one time, whilst still being able to maintain an on-rails system where location is a function of time. Why would anyone want this? Perhaps a space simulation game would want to simulate, say, Duna and Ike together. (Or Pluto and Charon). The two are actually a binary system, so the gravity of Ike would significantly affect spacecraft orbiting Duna, especially during a transfer orbit flight. And a quick bit about how planets would be simulated under this model: It's the same deal as the restricted 3-body system except all bodies have gravity. Ike and Duna both move together, and around the sun. You would not need a barycenter SOI. (Except perhaps as a boundary SOI, for when Kerbol's gravity is actually more influential than Ike's gravity. Only simulating Duna's gravity without factoring in Ike is like the difference between weighing a bowling ball versus a canonball. They have to have their gravity affect the craft at all times when inside Duna's Hill Sphere. So you probably need a sort of barycenter artificially determined area of influence to transition from Duna+Kerbol to Duna+Ike. To be clear, I'm using Duna and Ike as an example, not as an idea for a mod. +Rep and also sheer amazement if one of you advanced coder-type persons can manage to build a prototype of this. Just a star and two binary-orbit planets and a spacecraft which can change it's velocity, and it can transfer to on-rails warp. I know that if it's possible, some of you programmer-type people are skilled enough to do it. Think of it as a challenge. Not a contest or a prize, but a challenge.

A Station is, by definition, something that is stationary (the world or object reference frame is not moving). But a space station is constantly moving relative to everything except the contents of the station. Sure, it doesn't accellerate, it stays in roughly the exact same orbit, but it's still moving at a rather alarming rate. Perhaps a name such as "Orbion" A portmanteau of Orbit and Station. Or maybe just accept that "Station" is a holdover term. Yeah, probably just do that. Technically, they're called Orbital Laboratories, but even official names of the most prominent of orbital laboratories refer to the "International Space Station"

Situation: Astronaut kills, like, seven innocent people before going to space. He seems just fine and dandy, nothing suspicious. Then they find that he's murdered the seven people. He doesn't have any intentions of killing his cremates or anything, but just in case the crew restrains him. They have a telecommunications court trial. Jury finds him guilty. Sentence: DEATH. This is good (as long as you are okay with the death penalty), because all they'd do is lob him out the airlock. Suddenly there's more food, more air, and less mass to drag around the mission! Yay! First death in space!

If you don't like the flat planetary bodies, try Jumbo 32. The terrain arguably looks better than both Stock and 6.4x

This is essentially my response to THIS, and the ideas in this thread are somewhat based upon the reddit post. As we all know, the science system is somewhat flawed. I've never really found it extremely tedious (because I care more about going to more places than gaining science), but it's not that fun. It's often something I overlook when building crafts later in career mode (Because I have enough parts it starts to feel like sandbox mode in my head). So here's a bold idea for a rework to the science system. And it makes science actually be science. First off, atmosphere science needs to be situation-specific. No cold goo at re-entry. Different speeds at each altitude yields different results. The current Science currency is replaced with Knowledge. Knowledge is gained from Crew Reports, EVA Reports, Mystery Goo, and perhaps Camera Pictures. Knowledge gain is automatically changed to Reputation as it is released to the public and they see the awesome pictures/results/cool-stuff that KSP has discovered. How does it interact with the Tech Tree? Well, the Tech Tree is now split into Seven different separate trees. Command, Propulsion, Control, Structural, Aerodynamic, Utility, and Scientific. To advance in any technology, you have to actually do sciencey things to parts in these categories. Researching each category is done differently, but one thing is constant: All categories except for the scientific category can be somewhat researched whenever a part fails (explodes). IRL, when a part fails in a certain situation, it gives valuable information as to how to improve it. Part tests can also give plenty of research into those subjects. For instance, launching rockets will research propulsion, and flying at high altitudes with a basic jet will add research into aerodynamics. You can also simply divert Funding directly into R&D for ground testing. And remember, Knowledge is directly connecting to Funds. What about experiments? In the Scientific Category in the Tech Tree, there's several separate paths which represent the different types of experiments. Knowledge isn't the only thing gained from some experiments. Using Barometers, Thermometers, Gravioli-Detectors, and Seismic Accellerometers will fill out the in-game planet info tab. Materials Science and Goo research and things of that nature will help to develop structural parts, and help to develop MORE science experiments. Sample studies are unlocked in the tech tree, including Atmosphere Sample, Surface Sample, Liquid Sample, and Rock Samples. These help develop exploration-type tech, such as rovers. Finally, Crew and EVA reports can help to develop Command type systems. And what about Reputation? Shouldn't it be meaningful? Well, negative reputation causes a slow decrease in funding over time. (Don't timewarp too much!) Positive reputation causes a slow gain in funding that tapers off at a certain point. Not doing new missions or doing cool new things will also eventually lower reputation. (Staying in LKO for decades (or in Kerbal Timescale, months/years), not doing anything and just timewarping for months to Eeloo or Jool. Not doing missions will only make reputation go as low as 0, not negative. Note I'm not suggesting an implementation exactly like this, but something like it. What do you guys think? Would this be more fun?

That makes no sense. What makes even less sense is how the HypeTrain actually moves. It runs on metatracks that exist everywhere in the universe, as long as that's where you're going. It runs along the ground. But it's really a metaground of the Hypeworld. It's so meta, even this acronym. And yes, it can fly. Sorta. I guess, just think of a Polar Express TARDIS, if that helps. The Tracks are like the Time Vortex of the TARDIS, allowing you to move in Space and Time; but the tracks may be pretty weird.

Squadcast. I'm not making this stuff up. It may be illogical in real life, but not from a gameplay standpoint.

Lol. is it too stressfull?

I don't think any of them have seen a real rocket launch aside from perhaps a few pictures of the Saturn V in elementary school. Still standing by for the word on how the troubleshooting went.

I asked eveyone available if they wanted to see the launch of the "Biggest Rocket Launch in 4 Years" (Technically true, the LES top is higher than a payload fairing), and i just want to sugarcoat it as much as possible. And no one cared. No one wanted to see it. Do people just not like space exploration that much anymore? Also, if it weren't for that damn boat we'd have launched by now. We didn't get wind problems until after the countdown timer would have progressed to engine lighting. Just 30 minutes left in the launch window. We need to pick up the countdown timer in at most 25 minutes to launch in time.

On 40 minutes left in the launch window.