HarvesteR

That's new to me. Actually it's supposed to be italian, but there have been a few errors in translation along the way Cheers

He is actually. I mentioned him on the credits for the vector tool, because it started out as something he made for his Orbiter addons. He gave me permission to modify it for KSP, so I added the KSP syntax format for it. But he's not directly related to KSP development. We actually live in different countries Cheers

Mine didn't... now I feel I missed out on something during my college education. Cheers

Hehe, I wouldn't go as far as saying Rocket Robin inspired KSP, because the idea for KSP existed before I found out about it... But it did influence the early design of the game considerably. About the shuttle, definitely. Cheers

I've been HarvesteR for quite a long time now... I would guess around 6 years... When I was younger I played lead guitar in a heavy metal band. It was originally called Bad Harvest (later changed to Vanquish but that's another story). So from that I became TheHarvesteR. As time went on I eventually ditched the 'The' bit and it was just HarvesteR. (I still use TheHarvesteR when HarvesteR isn't available). Cheers

See? That's how the Kerbals get most of their equipment Awesome engine! I want it for my house! (I'd have to move out myself, but it might just be worth it ) Cheers

Yeah, right now there is no buoyancy simulation for the water... It is certainly possible though, we might include this later on, and if performance allows, waves as well. Cheers

What do you mean by solid? As in collision detection? If I remember correctly, I think the water didn't even have a collider back then... you just went through it. Cheers

Yeah, that was the intention... but it took up a lot of space for unnecessary stuff, and it wasn't at all flexible... When we went to add more stuff, the best solution was to start over... The only things that survived were the VS gauge, it's LED, and the altimeter. Cheers

Nice challenge! I often find myself trying to do this too I usually do a deorbit burn and then jettison the last engine just before entering the atmosphere. Your only input then is the timing to deploy the chutes. My personal best was the plain west of the launchpad terrain, about a klick or two away... Zeroignite's run is a LOT closer! Cheers

The kerbals are really 3D. They're not animated textures, because later on we do plan on adding modding support for them. They exist in the game world, and are then rendered to texture. That texture then is overlaid on the UI. I hate animating by hand, so the Kerbals are animated by code alone, based on their current emotional state (they thrash around more when they're panicking), and the state of the flight. Cheers

Nice part this one! It will probably go very well with the new Strut Connectors. Cheers

Indeed. Rocket Robin really was a point of reference when KSP was in it's early stages. So much so, in fact, that KSP was actually 2D back then. The game itself was 3D, but movement was restricted to the XY plane (a la Little Big Planet). You couldn't go forward or backward. Also, the Flight UI was a vertical column, much like the one in Rocket Robin. Later we felt that this 2D imposition wasn't working, and we did away with the restriction. It was just a matter of changing the controls a bit, and removing the Z-axis lock, and the game was fully 3D. The interface we revised later, because that column was taking up way too much space, and showing very little information. Also, notice that there is no icon stack. Instead, there was a single tab to represent each stage. Notice also how different the terrain was. This was before the procedural terrain engine was created, so the area around the launchpad was just a default Unity terrain, and the planet was just a great big sphere. Actually, it was ridiculously smaller than it is now. IIRC, the planet was about 20km in radius (as opposed to 600km now). There was also no atmospheric scattering system. The sky was just a solid color that changed from teal to black according to altitude. Here's a screenshot of KSP v0.3: Cheers

Yeah, it's a business like any other, but I've always had the feeling that gamers everywhere (like me) were thirsty for something new again. When games were first getting started, insane ideas were the name of the game... sadly, it seems that overtime the big gaming companies lost their nerve, and the mainstream gaming industry seems to be going into a standstill... all we see is more iterations of the same 'tried-and-true' concepts, with some graphical improvements here and there, but we're still playing the same games from 15 years ago. All my favorite games now are either Indies, simulators, or games that are about 10 years old or more now... I remember a time when I walked into a game store, and I was forced to pick out but a few of the many great games, since I couldn't afford them all... now, it's a rare day when a game draws my attention... I think I buy around 1 or 2 games a year now... Back then it used to be dozens (and I had less cash). Maybe I've grown picky as I got older, but I have a strong feeling that it was the games themselves that have gotten less interesting. Cheers

This actually is our first game project. Squad started out as an interactive marketing company. I was hired as part of the in-house development team, and we developed software and hardware for interactive installations. Some of those were almost games. Now, the company wants to get out of marketing (thankfully), and they were very enthusiastic about KSP when I pitched the idea to them. They gave me the go-ahead, and 7 months later, well, here we are But yeah, I'm still in a daze here, no one expected that our first project would be received like this! Cheers and Thanks! :thumbup:

Winglets do add deflection lift force. It's a force perpendicular to the velocity direction, that is affected by the angle of attack of the winglet. This lift force is applied to the center of mass of the winglet. The liftCoeff parameter determines how much force will actually be applied. The model itself has almost no influence over the winglet dynamics, except for the position of the center of mass. The winglet's angle of attack will also influence how much drag is produced. The lifting force will also start to decline as the winglet enters a stall AoA. Now, what winglets don't do yet is simulate airfoil lift. They are about as effective as a 2x4 as a source of lift. They are meant mostly for stabilization. Later the idea is to add a Wing module, that will actually simulate airfoil lift, and will have control surfaces as well. Cheers

Hmm, beard, check. I guess that makes me the evil one then Cheers

Had this one up for about 6 or 7 months now (since KSP started). I had to trim it down to fit the screen, the original image was huge. It's from NASA's image gallery, Discovery is up front, with Endeavour on Launch Pad 39B ready in case of a rescue mission being needed. If I'm not mistaken, this was the Return to Flight mission. Cheers

It seems I've failed to properly introduce myself in this forum. Here goes: My name is Felipe Falanghe, a.k.a. 'HarvesteR', and I'm the lead developer for the Kerbal Space Program. I'm 26 years old, born in Brazil, now living in Mexico City, and still a little dazed that I get to put this project into practice, which has been a pet project of mine since who knows how long. Anyhow, Hi! Cheers

Wow, I remember MilkShape, I had my first modelling experiences with it, making meshes for The Sims Good to know it still works! I myself use 3Ds Max here, but there are some team members who prefer Maya. As long as it can export to OBJ or DAE, anything goes What usually DOESN'T work are NURBS-based modelling programs, like Rhino. They don't deal with the mesh directly, so there's always some trouble when they have to export to a mesh format. Cheers

This is mostly the reason why fuel tanks don't attach sideways yet. The fuel crossfeed feature still has a big limitation. It doesn't search 'upward', it searches parentward, that is, it will ask the parts it's attached to for fuel, and that will ask it's own parent part and so on. So if you connect a fuel tank sideways to a radial decoupler, the decoupler is the tank's parent, and it will go that way for fuel. If there are any other fuel tanks stacked above the tank, they will be ignored since they're actually children of the first tank. This has yet to be corrected. Once it is, there's no reason to keep fuel tanks from attaching sideways. Cheers

Nice and clean desktop there! cool! Is that the Cyborg Keyboard? Cheers

We are. Cheers

I'm looking into that... sometimes the ship does seem to stick to the launchpad. I couldn't find what's causing it yet... Cheers

My personal best to achieve orbit with minimal parts: Parachute (optional) Pod ----- Decoupler ----- Fuel Fuel Fuel Fuel Liquid Engine ----- 3x radial decouplers 3x SRBs So it's a 1.5 stage thing, with only the pod to provide control and stability. But the design is rather stable, and it can achieve low orbit with about 1/3 of the last tank to spare. Cheers