Rdivine

None of those mods provide this feature.

Suggestion: Add an option for dynamic planetary brightness. The option causes planets to become dimmer or brighter with distance. For example:

This is an artifact that i've encountered in SVE. It only appears after the camera is above 100km. Is this a bug with scatterer mentioned under "known issues"?

So there's this phenomenon called "Time Dilation", where i roughly recall, means that you will observe time to speed up for others when gravity increases. This means that when you fall into a large gravitational well, you will observe the rest of the universe to move more quickly. Using this concept, that means that when you fall into the event horizon of a black hole, you will observe the rest of the universe to speed up, right? I have a thought: When you enter a black hole, you will observe the universe to speed up. If the gravitational well is deep enough, you can see the movement of stars sped up by millions of times, you will see civilizations rise and fall, stars explode and stellar systems form, galaxies collide. The very last moment before you enter the singularity, all of time would have passed (since g approaches infinite). To keep the story going, lets just assume that you're wearing a suit that's resistant to heat, fire, and any other elements that would destroy it (spaghettification included). Black holes are known to dissipate by hawking radiation, but they take a very, very long time. However, since "all of time" would have passed once you reach the centre of the black hole, would enough time have passed such that before you reach the centre, the black hole would have dissipated away (And you emerge from the other side a googol years later) ?

Update: Anomaly was not caused by the rocket itself. Either payload/ground support issues.

Yup it was... Edit: My apologies, it was LC-40. I can't remember things. Another great source is https://www.reddit.com/live/xix3m9uqd06g

It's rather crucial to know if the rocket did actually explode, or was it just ground support equipment. This way, we can know who to assign blame on we can know if the rocket has any flaws, or not.

Would the strongback be able to withstand a strong explosion from the rocket itself?

I know it's a bit late to ask this, but how fast was the stage flipped right after MECO? The boostback burn started pretty quickly.

Are we forgetting about Ted as well?

Making a falcon 9 rocket that is partially reusable and successfully landing it on a barge on an ocean.

I've edited point 2 to include LOX. I guess its a necessity.

So i have this ambition that we can send homemade rockets to orbit. I've seen some pretty cool videos on homemade rockets reaching the Karman line. What do we need to make a rocket that's orbit-capable? By that i mean it has enough delta-V to reach an altitude of above 100km and orbit the earth once. These are some of the considerations i would think separates "homemade" from "professional". I'm researching if a homemade rocket is truly possible, or not. 1. The rocket should not use any highly-pressurized fuel, or hard-to-attain fuels such as liquid hydrogen. Kerosene and LOX should be easy to get, so is solid fuel. 2. Fuel should be storable between temperatures of 10C and 70C, and in a pressure not exceeding 100 bar. This excludes oxidizer/LOX. 3. The rocket should not contain any expensive, rare metals(such as niobium). 4. Rocket core should be not bigger than 10m in height, or 1.5m in diameter. Rocket can have multiple strap-on cores, asparagus is fine. Also, the rocket built should be made with materials accessible to the common man. Milled machine parts and metal are fine, just not space-grade. Simplicity is also another factor, the rocket should have as little parts/moving parts as possible. My initial idea of a homemade rocket that can reach orbit is one that burns kerosene and LOX, with 4 small engines. It is about 8 metres high, and 1 meter in diameter. During initial ascent, an elastic rope will grab on one side of the rocket, tilting it slightly. It will snap after about 2~3m of extension. 4 fixed fins at the bottom of the rocket will put it in spin stabalization. The stage will burn for about 57 seconds, after which it will separate, revealing a second stage about 1m in length, and 80cm in diameter. The second stage will use monopropellant and an extended rocket nozzle to "reach" orbit. Crunching the numbers, however, it was terribly inefficient and could barely reach a decent suborbital trajectory. With no payload in mind, how would you design yours?

Perhaps a simple way is to "stretch" the particles in the prograde direction so it looks sort of connected, without making new particles.

What do you think i was hinting at? Magic boulder---red glow---orbiting duna.

Is this a potential hint that squad gave that everyone missed out? Patch notes: "* Dramatically improve resolution of asteroid textures, while simultaneously improving their shader performance by 400%. New shader can have very subtle desaturated brown/red hues sometimes." hmmmm...

My boostback script is working, but doesn't adjust it's burn to a specific latlng. Neither does my landing burn. Is it possible if you could share your method on landing on the exact latlng?

Exactly. Zero-G airplanes may cost less than blue origin's giant flying... rocket. Consumers may prefer a cheaper option rather than a minute flight on the tip of a giant flying... rocket. Plus, once SpaceX's dragon v2 goes into operation, there may be a very slim chance that they may offer commercial flights as well (once the accessibility to space increases).

Inspired by the multiple successful landings of the first stage of Falcon 9 of SpaceX, i've decided to make my own rocket. I've split the landing into 2 parts ; Boostback and Final Descent. Here is the boostback script: And here's the landing script: I have had SOME success with it. The landing script almost always work perfectly, in all variants of terrain height. Here's a view of me, manually guiding the rocket back to the pad. The throttle and guidance is all controlled by kOS. Touchdown speed is between 0m/s to 3m/s. Throttle stays above 80%. So i have 2 very important questions. 1. How do i refine the landing using a graphical method? I know that displacement is the area under the velocity/time graph, but how do i account for decreasing fuel and drag? How do i graph a velocity/displacement graph, accounting for all the factors? 2. How do i guide the vessel to a specific location? What guidance concept would i use? I have no clue how to start on getting the vessel to a specific location, let's say a barge on the ocean. I would appreciate any help or advice given to me

Why dont they build detachable chute modules and attach it on the side of the rocket? As it opens the chute, the ASDS will steer itself under the rocket instead. Problem solved. (Just kidding, its a kerbal idea).

1."It also serves no goal whatsoever since any aerodynamic surface, airbrake or any aerodynamic part creates more then enough drag to meet the results required in the game even under FAR." Keep in mind that Grid fins also provide aerodynamic control. Well, we now have fairings, and we occasionally put stuff inside them. Some of the stuff may enter, let's say, Laythe's atmosphere. We need something compact enough to store inside that provides aerodynamic stability and can be stowed inside at the same time, and that's where grid fins come in. That is the goal of grid fins. Grid fins provide a stowable aerodynamic control surface. 2."We have airbrakes! They can be used for the same purpose as grid fins." Airbrakes cannot replace grid fins because, well, you can't control them! 3."In KSP I don't think someone would mod this because if you were to actually accurately model this you would have a single part with dozens of aerodynamics surfaces that would need alot of aerodynamic calculations to be done just on 2, 4 or more parts." You dont have to model dozens of aerodynamic surfaces. Just average out the drag and the lift and you only need to model 1 surface. It will be indistinguishable from actually modelling all the surfaces.

Hi, i'm looking for stand-alone grid fin mods, without all those clunky capsules that come with it

1. "Merely being useful does not mean it is required." - Science Archives are not required for KSP to function, but it's useful. Map View is not required for KSP to function, but it's useful. It is irrelevant to say that only required features should be stock, because that's akin to telling SQUAD that they are wasting their time on update 1.2. As i reiterate, it is nice to have the function as " Grid fins make sense in providing a flight control surface that can be stowed and/or provide drag to a vessel to keep it in the correct orientation. " 2. "You don't need them, they aren't necessary to the game, although they enhance the game." -Again, we are looking for improvements to the game. User friendliness isn't necessary, but it's nice to have it. Just look at point 1. 3. "The fact that there are some parts in the stock (game) which you don't consider essential is not a reason to include other parts which you do considder essential." - I did not, at any point of my posts did i imply/state that i consider the aerodynamic parts to be "not essential". - Your statement is based on the presumption that i think Grid Fins can replace the "non-essential" aerodynamic parts. You are wrong. My view is that the current aerodynamic parts cannot serve as a substitute/replace the function of Grid Fins. ( In that no winglets can be stowed and also provide drag and control.) As i pointed out in my previous post, Grid Fins are not essential, but makes the game nicer to play, and it being in stock allows for beginners/ new ksp players to use it as well. 4. "Look at how many mods people have stated "this should be stock"." -I wholeheartedly agree with you that many people have stated "this should be stock" about many mods. However, is there a mod for grid fins? My previous post included "EDIT: A quick search with CKAN and curse.com showed that there are no v1.1 mods that provide grid fins. LazTek's SpaceX pack has them, but they are in 0.90. There are no mods that have this function right now. " If you can find a post, feel free to correct me and tell me at the same time, because i'd love to use it. 5. "No offense, but you are just another person saying the same thing" -No offense taken, but i'm not "saying the same thing". Look at point 4. No mods that serve this function exist right now. Here's why you should not suggest "mods that do this already exist" or "mods can replace this". "Mods are not part of the stock game, the game that most new players play. Mods are simply community creations." "Mods are not hardwired into the game. They take time to update. They may have problems with other mods."

It seems awfully late for a static fire. The mission patch didn't even come up yet. I wonder what issue they had this time...