NovaSilisko

The actual parts still exist, so it shouldn't present any issues. The only thing that might be problematic is if the parts use different modules. Still, all the old stuff still exists, so your ships will be flyable right away, but you can also just swap out any problem parts for identical, updated versions.

Unless your weather balloon is carrying a large rocket that is not going to happen.

Oh, thought you had meant the company itself. He did found Tesla, as well as SolarCity and Paypal(but he left ages ago, before ebay bought it), but what's wrong with that?

Uh... SpaceX was founded purely for the purposes of space travel...

Would be nice if we could see the actual papers and results of this study, this article doesn't seem to give much information. Not watched the video yet but I'm guessing it's effectively a longer version of what the article is saying. I'll be keeping an eye on this with a healthy dose of skepticism. Profound statements are ubiquitous, profound evidence tends to not be as such...

Reworded first post a bit, the game asks if you want to delete your incompatible saves but doesn't specify that this will delete your crafts as well.

They're also gonna start fitting the F9v1.1 first stages with landing legs and guidance systems, to conduct tests with every Falcon mission. Then once they have both that and the grasshopper to suitable levels of readiness, they'll combine the knowledge gained through both and try flying first stages back to the launch site. Exciting stuff.

Your saves won't survive the update, BUT your saved craft files very likely will! If the game finds incompatible saves in the folder, it will ask if you wish to delete them - but doing so will eliminate any crafts inside. So, be sure to back the ships up if you want to keep them - you can find them in KSP/saves/(name of save)/Ships/ Just copy the SPH and VAB folders somewhere else then put them back into any new save made with .21. (Please please please note that as always, something unexpected might happen beforehand and break stuff, but just backing up the craft files can't hurt)

Ehmm... those are NTRs, not ion engines.

Well, remember, we were able to communicate with Galileo using its measly low-gain antenna even out to Jupiter, so it doesn't take much to transmit at that distance, it just will be slow. It also doesn't necessarily need to be a cubesat by the time it's reached the level of being ready to fly out to jupiter.

Main thing with the ion engine, it's not intended for anything larger than a few tons. It's generally a probe-only thing. If it wouldn't break some things I'd shrink it down further, and lower its mass. Same thrust (or maybe a little less), but less mass for just the engine and tank. Bigger electric propulsion could be some sort of VASIMIR-inspired engine with massive amounts of heat that needs coolant and huge amounts of electricity, but has an enormous ISP of something like 200,000. Eventually the jets will have some much-needed TLC given to them, and with that a balance pass, so we can once and for all iron out the kinks in those parts (ex. one change I think would be making it so engines can choke on air if they're fed with too much, or directly limiting engine thrust based on air density)

Speaking of, the Saturn V had a manual override IIRC. Some of the astronauts have said they probably wouldn't have aborted if a guidance failure had occurred, they'd much rather have flown that beast to orbit themselves.

Any real-world electric propulsion system makes the kerbal ion engine look like a ferrari. Many ion engines operate in the range of millinewtons, so 20 from something that small is pretty damn good.

If the end goal is to get to mars, then we need to focus on doing exactly that. Otherwise, politics can strongly interfere if the project takes longer than one election cycle... While it's true that going to the moon would help advance some of the tech needed for mars, it's also adding lots of time and money to the requirements, both of which are scarce.

The refit modules already function based around units of "equipment" stored inside, no reason it has to hold all the equipment required for a workshop.

They are 1 meter tall. Not sure if that includes helmet though!

I don't see why not. The refit modules can already work unmanned if their minimum crew value is set to 0, so mostly it just needs a model. That would be cool for the larger tanks.

I think it's just an oversight in the thrust blocking thing. Right now, things like the mainsail have thrust damage enabled - the same block of code which also handles disabling any thrust it produces if it happens to be blocked. Some of the smaller engines have it disabled since they're generally too small to cause any damage to parts (like the ion engine), so the actual thrust-being-blocked parts and causing-damage parts need to be separated.

Thinking about it, methods are popping into my head to create a plugin that would go well with this mod... Doing it as parts is highly inefficient, and I think it could be done quite independently of that system.

Sorry for lack of progress, been working on some other parts for yet another mod (I think I have project ADD or something)

I've got an idea for a tiny lunar flyby spacecraft weighing about 4 kg. 1 kg for the payload, 3 kg for the rocket booster. Communications would be handled by a long copper strip acting as a whip antenna, shaped into an arc and wound up tightly into a drum - like a tape measure. After disconnection from the booster, the antenna would pop out and be held stiff by the arced shape of the metal. Meanwhile, the nosecone of the craft would pop off to reveal a small camera assembly, controlled via joystick back on earth. My rough offhand calculations say that with 220s ISP, 3 kg of fuel and 1 kg of payload/structure, you can send that 1 kg of payload on a translunar trajectory. Guidance could likely be a simple PID controller controlling thrust vanes like on Copenhagen's rockets. It doesn't need to be terribly precise, it doesn't need to land or anything, just get close to the moon. It could very well be as simple as "wait until in position, make sure rocket pointing forward, press button, fire motor, enter translunar trajectory". Cubesats aren't an option by the way, at least not official ones. They forbid you from using hazardous materials and I think rocket engines would qualify for that.

I think this would be a great project for learning how to model - the stuff required is pretty simple, you just need cylinders for the segments, a nose cone, and a nozzle.

The only issue I see here is that I think if you just make solid fuel able to flow, you can use fuel lines to redirect it, which is inaccurate to say the least.

You know, if you guys get into orbital flight someday, I can think of a number of lightweight payloads and harebrained "I bet I could build a lunar spacecraft out of some pipe and paperclips" ideas... Though mostly it's just a matter of "do you like KSP enough to give the developers free orbital launch vouchers"