GoldForest

Squad has said it's 1:00PM EST, so yes, it's 12:00PM CST Source:

Not a problem.

Here are all the time zones for when it drops.US Pacific 10:00 AM Thursday May 30th, 10:00US Mountain 11:00 AM Thursday May 30th, 11:00US Central 12:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 12:00US Eastern 1:00PM Thursday May 30th, 13:00BR Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 2:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 14:00UTC 5:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 17:00GB London, UK 6:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 18:00DE Berlin, Germany 7:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 19:00RU Moscow, Russian Federation 8:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 20:00AE Dubai, UAE 9:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 21:00IN Mumbai, India 10:30 PM Thursday May 30th, 22:30SG Singapore, Singapore 1:00 AM Friday May 31st, 01:00CN Beijing, China 1:00 AM Friday May 31st, 01:00JP Tokyo, Japan 2:00 AM Friday May 31st, 02:00AU Sydney, Australia 3:00 AM Friday May 31st, 03:00NZ Auckland, New Zealand 5:00 AM Friday May 31st, 05:00Source: https://everytimezone.com/?t=5cef1d00,3fc Countdown Timer: https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20190530T17&p0=%3A&font=cursive&csz=1

Look at my post, fourth posts up.

The DLC Drops at NOON (12:00PM) CST Here are all the time zones for when it drops. US Pacific 10:00 AM Thursday May 30th, 10:00US Mountain 11:00 AM Thursday May 30th, 11:00US Central 12:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 12:00US Eastern 1:00PM Thursday May 30th, 13:00BR Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 2:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 14:00UTC 5:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 17:00GB London, UK 6:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 18:00DE Berlin, Germany 7:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 19:00RU Moscow, Russian Federation 8:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 20:00AE Dubai, UAE 9:00 PM Thursday May 30th, 21:00IN Mumbai, India 10:30 PM Thursday May 30th, 22:30SG Singapore, Singapore 1:00 AM Friday May 31st, 01:00CN Beijing, China 1:00 AM Friday May 31st, 01:00JP Tokyo, Japan 2:00 AM Friday May 31st, 02:00AU Sydney, Australia 3:00 AM Friday May 31st, 03:00NZ Auckland, New Zealand 5:00 AM Friday May 31st, 05:00 Source: https://everytimezone.com/?t=5cef1d00,3fc Countdown Timer: https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20190530T17&p0=%3A&font=cursive&csz=1

There are only three times on Kerbin. Rocket Time Explosion Time Snack Time. Go Time is whenever you're flying a rocket, flying a plane, or doing science. Explosion Time is well... when everything starts exploding. Snack Time is whenever you're not flying a rocket or exploding. Kerbals have no concept of seconds, hours, or days. So to answer your question, when the DLC drops... It's... *Sunglasses* Go time.

@SQUAD Thank you for honoring the MERs and Curiosity in the new update. I am an avid admirer of the rovers and it made me quite upset to learn that Opportunity didn't survive the Martian 2018 sandstorm. So thank you again for honoring their memories and legacy. For those that don't know, there are three robotic rover arms in three sizes. OP-E - Oppy - Opportunity - Possible power failure with batteries, sandstorm more than likely covered the panels too, meaning no power at all SPRT - Spirit - Opportunity's Twin - Got stuck in a sand in a ditch CRSY - Curiosity - Still going strong Although, I find it funny how CRSY is the smallest rover arm, when Curiosity is the biggest rover to date. Same goes for OP-E. Small rover IRL, big rover arm in game. Well, I guess that's the joke huh? Big things from a little package? Anyway, I just wanted to thank all you guys for what you did. It means a lot, and I probably speak for quite a few people who also admired the rovers.

THe rotors and servos are too weak to be used as propeller parts. This has led to some speculation that official propeller parts are coming. You can use the rotors and servos as propeller like contraptions, but if you go watch ShadowZone's review, he states that they are too weak to be used as propellars. He barely got a single engine off the ground, had to had two propellers to make it actually flyable. TL:DR: Yes and No. Too weak. But I think I have a solution, free pivot the rotor and add jet engines to spin the rotor.

So I've been thinking about some ideas for Breaking Ground and maybe some solutions for ideas. Let's get into it. If you would, when contributing, please leave your idea, a short description of your idea, and when Breaking Ground comes out, please come back and edit your post to say if your idea worked. Problem 1: -Rotors/Servos too slow to be used as propellers. [evidence = watch ShadowZone's review] Possible solution: -Put the tiny jet engines on the rotor and set the rotor to free spinning/free pivot mode. -Crossfeed seems to work from what I've seen his ShadowZone's video, or at least I saw no fuel lines. Anyway, the jets would be completely perpendicular with the aircraft, meaning no jet thrust would be propelling you. If this works, it would spin the rotor fast enough, possibly, for props to become actually viable. I would suggest going for a 3 bladed prop with 2/3 jets spinning it. You could even pull a trick with making a radial engine possibly. Worked: Yes, it works, but the rotor osculates with the jet engines on. I did a test. One rotor with just the motor, one rotor with jet engines, and one rotor with both jet engines are the rotor. The rigs: Rotors: EM-64 Heavy Rotor All 3 rotors have 3 Elevon 1s set to about 45 degrees roughly. 2 rotors have 3 J-20 jet engines set perpendicular to the rotor. All 3 rotors have Aerodynamic Nose Cones. Test results: Rotor with only motor: Average: ~299RPM Max: ~299.1 Rotor with only jets: Average: ~337RPM Max: ~340 Rotor with both jets and motors: Average:~387RPM Max: ~394 Conclusion: Jet powered rotors with the assistance of the motor do work, but are unstable as they osculate pretty badly. Use with caution. Problem 2: -Some of the parts seem weak [evidence = watch ShadowZone's review] Possible solution: -Put multiple of the same part then attach the parts using struts. If struts are immune to the stretching glitch that fuel lines seem to have that is. If the Struts hold and don't stretch, I think they could be able to aid the first robotic part. Worked: TBD Problem 3: -Rotors provide torque, meaning for a artificial gravity ring, you would need two Possible Solution: -Instead of two gravity rings, make one and add two more rotors in front and back of the ring, spinning the opposite direction to counter the torque rotation Worked: No, not for me at least, couldn't figure out how to get the rotors to cancel each other out. Actual Solution: Stick two rotors on the gravity ring center piece, one on each side, and then place Girders going from the part in front of the forward rotor, to the part behind the rear rotor. Now attach struts to the girders and the station parts, make sure not to attach it to any of the gravity ring parts. This cancels out any torque caused by the rotors since it can't spin the station parts now. Important Note: You do need TWO gravity rings in order to cancel out the torque completely, one spinning in each direction. Important Note 2: Set the RPM limit to 10 for a comfortable speed. Don't leave it at max at all, it will be too much and not even the counter rotations will stop the torque as the rings are heavier than the station and the torque wants to spin the lighter object. Wouldn't hurt to take a few reaction wheels. Side note: Time warp STOPS the rotation dead in its tracks, but it will restart again. Build advice: -Make sure that the small rotating disk is touching the GRC and not the big spinning disk. -Build your gravity rings like this: -Make sure no struts are touching the rotor or the gravity ring center. Struts won't let the rings spin at all. M - Motor set to clockwise GRC - Gravity Ring Center M - Motor set to counter clockwise Spacer part (Fuel tank, crew compartment, etc) M - Motor set to counter clockwise GRC - Gravity Ring Center M - Motor set to clock wise Craft File for anybody who would like to study my design and learn how it works: https://www.dropbox.com/s/78322rrpgykejh3/Artificial Gravity Ring Tester.craft?dl=0 Picture of the internals: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1756796840 Made a tutorial video on how to make a gravity ring station (Not the same one as the craft file above): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdJxUUbcWSE&feature=youtu.be Idea 1: F-14 Tomcat Idea 2: The drill ship from the movie The Core Idea 3: Reverse thrust on a leer jet style plane using the tiny jets and rotors/servos. Idea 4: B-36 Peacekeeper - 6 turnin 4 burnin Idea 5: Thunderbird 3 Idea 6: Any and all rovers Idea 7: Restackable rockets - Think SpaceX Starship and Star Booster.

During a loading screen? Where I cant pause when I have to walk away?

We've all done it, we're loading up a vessel on the runway and we get called away so we leave the game. When we come back, our plane is either in the field off the runway, down near the end, or worse, in the water, sometimes with broken parts. So my suggestion, add a button that lets you deploy the brakes in the hanger, or change the default to brakes are deployed upon loading. And I know you can just undeploy the wheels in the hanger and the plane would sit still, but I've had stuff break a few times when making the plane stand up from the ground. Also, there's a chance the kraken could strike and make the plane bounce 25 feet into the air before falling on it's side and destroying a wing.

I would like to request a simple light-weight plugin that allows you to set authority limiter based on speed. We've all had that problem of having too much authority when going too fast. Either the plane breaks apart or does back-flips till the cows come home. And yes, I know you can manually change authority, but we all forget to do it sometimes, and automation is convenient. Well, what I'm suggesting is a plugin that will change the authority limiter on control surfaces for you based on speed (Or if some could do it to where it automatically detects how the physics work and change the control surfaces to keep the plane balanced, that would be good too). For Example: If speed is equal to or less than 200 m/s, then set authority limiter to 100% If speed is greater than 200 m/s but less than 300 m/s, then set limiter to 75% If speed is greater than 300 m/s but less than 400 m/s, then set limiter to 50% So on and so forth. I would do it myself, but I have no coding abilities whatsoever.

I agree. I don't think a simple on and off switch for the lights would be too demanding, and if anything, it would actually HELP with loads by turning off the lights. As for more stock lights, yes. I think there should be many more lights. Including, but not limited to: A tiny light about the size of the Linear RCS thruster New Launch Stabilizers with adjust flood lights Mountable flood light arrays Inline light modules And maybe some gimic lights. Such as a disco ball, a neon sign, and a neon strip (pimp my space shuttle anyone?)

I'm suggesting this as a Stock implementation. I realize there is a mod, but I've been finding myself playing pure-stock a lot lately, and a lot of people do go stock only KSP runs, so I figured I throw on Squad's Suggestion desk.

I was playing around with KSP and just realized, we have no way to see what our crafts would look like in the dark except to launch them, time warp to dark, then if we don't like it, go back into the VAB/SPH, edit, rinse and repeat. So my suggestion for this topic: Add a lights out or night mode in the VAB and SPH, to allow us to see what our crafts would look like in the dead of night. Further more, maybe add a slider to control how bright or dark the lights out/night mode is.

I fully understand that a system like this would restrict part limits even further, so I was thinking maybe making it an optional thing in the menu settings, or one further, the save file settings, so that it doesn't effect all saves, just the one where you enabled, what I'm going to call, 'Physical Thrust'. Or another thing could be an Engine check box, allowing for more controllability of Physical Thrust. I think this would be the most likely answer. As @Aeroboi said, some people make uber space planes with 50+ Rapiers, so having the ability to make only about 4 to 8 of those physical thrust and have the rest be non-physical thrust would be beneficial. I know the rapier has thrust vectoring, but it's miniscule compared to say the Panther. If you could put a control surface behind the rapier engine and have it redirect the thrust, it would give the space craft a lot more maneuverability. The same could be said about rockets, though, I don't know why you would use flap thrust vectoring on a rocket engine. Maybe if you were making a stealth rocket and the engine was hidden away inside.

Right now, thrust is pretty simplistic. You engage thrust, it pushes your craft forward. If any part of your craft blocks said thrust, it negates all thrust and stops it from working. So, my suggestion is this: Thrust is physical Reason I'm suggesting this is for the problem of blocked thrust due to a wing or control surface or part. We've all been there. Built a plane and placed a part behind the jet engine, go to launch, turn on the engines, full thrust... and... you go no where because the thrust is blocked. So what I suggest is to make thrust act more like physical particles than a static invisible force. This would allow control surfaces and wings to be placed behind the engine inside the jet stream. It would also allow control surfaces to act like thrust vectors, pushing the thrust in any direction. I can also see this being useful for hidden engine builds like replica B-2, in which the engines are hidden inside the wings and there's exhaust ports for the thrust to come out. Since the wings wouldn't block the thrust, and instead direct it, it wouldn't have any problems.

I just feel that we need more plane parts in general, and all of these are just my suggestions and ideas to Squad. I feel there is a place for bigger plane parts. I respect your input, and have thought about it, but I still feel like bigger engines, fuel tanks, passenger section, cockpits, etc would be beneficial. Bigger engines do exist. The GE9X is pretty huge in its own right, being about the size of a 737's fuselage, so bigger engines wouldn't be fictional. And the rapier isn't fictional either. It's based off the Skylon engines which are a hybrid rocket/ramjet engine As for the Mk4 mod, I feel it's too extreme a leap for stock.

For the Mk3 Drone core, eh, maybe not a whole new part. Just cover the windows of the Mk3 cockpit in a new model and remove the interior. Make it an alt model for the MK3 cockpit Mk1 Drone core, I would agree, but the 1.25m probe core works fine. It looks ugly, but imo it works fine.

Well, the higher you go, the poorer the performance of the engine. The Goliath has a sweet spot of around 11-15km imo. I feel that a 3m engine would provide better performance, enough that it would be able to easily operate at 15 - 20km, or even higher. Of course, the same could be said about the Goliath getting a buff. Increase the thurst, and it would be able to work pretty well at higher altitude. Hmmm, and I just had another idea. Instead of giving us Mk3 rounded parts, add a Mk4 part family. Now, 5m plane parts are a little big I would think, but instead of going 5m, go 4m. 4.375m to be exact. I feel like this would be a good size for jumbo planes in KSP. And I know I haven't made a case for a 3m engine, but I'm going to go ahead and say add the 3m engine to the 4m airplane parts. 2.5 engines to 4.375 fuselage and wings would be a little small imo. So I am now adovocating for a 3m engine to go with the mk4 parts. And actually, there would be two mark 4 parts, or mark 4 + mark 5): mark 4 rounded (Or MK4A) and mark 4 blended body(Think NASA's SSTO, the X-33 SSTO. Or the NASA VentureStar) (Would be known as MK4B or MK5) Mark 4A part list ideas: Mark 4A Rounded Cockpit Mark 4A Passenger section Mark 4A Liquid Fuel only MK4A LFO tank MK4A Mono MK4A Large wings (Bigger FAT-445's) MK4A Large Tail MK4A Double height passenger section MK4A Double height cockpit MK4A Double height Tail MK4A Cargo bay MK4A Double height Cargo bay MK4A Wheels Mark 4B/Mark 5 part list: MK4B/5 Cockpit MK4B/5 Probe core MK4B/5 Passenger Fuselage (Will be more like a larger Mk3 passenger section) (All tank parts come in two types. Straight or angled. This is to give the triangle appearance of the X-33. Straight vs angled would be done via in game model switching) MK4B/5 LF tank MK4B/5 LFO tank MK4B/5 Mono tank MK4B/5 Wings MK4B/5 Tail MK4B/5 Linear Aerospike Engine MK4B/5 Cargo bay (Only comes in straight sections, no angled sections) MK4B/5 Wheels MK4B/5 Nose/ Nose Cone MK4B/5 Sized RCS Thrusters

Yes, I would like the Stargazer L-1011. And it wouldn't be restrictive as the part could just be another model for the Mk3 part. Also, on the 4 Goliaths, I found that people actually hide Goliaths inside each other to make it more atheistically pleasing. So while you see 4, there could be 8 or even 12 engines on the plane. 1) Well, engines IRL are getting bigger, more fuel efficient, and put out more thrust. And I feel like Spaceplanes are going to get a major update anyway, at least in terms of aesthetics, to fit the new art style, so it only make sense they should put some quality of life updates in as well. I'll take a higher output Goliath if they want to update the thrust, but I feel a 3m engine would also be a good fit for the game. 2) I agree, I just mostly want the engine though. Which would go well with the mk2 parts I feel. But, yeah, if they're going to add engines, might as well go for fuel and passengers as well. 3) 80 Wings? My gosh. Save the FPS much? Lol But yeah, bigger wings I feel are needed. Less part count, not more 4) Agreed! 5) Agreed! 6) Well, reason I asked for that is because flying a plane going in a straight line at 1400m/s tends to see the heat bar start to fill up slowly. I want my KR-71 to hit Mach 5 without blowing up. So either heat shielding for the plane parts, or new parts with like, 3000 Kelvin heat endurance please. Ooooh…. New idea, new parts painted black instead of white! 7) That's why I said resistant to aerodynamics, so the wind doesn't break it. Wind is part of aerodynamics. I would settle for cockpits getting antenna modules, or an inline part, maybe like a probe core reused as an antenna. 8) Thanks! Though, I would like to add on to the Goliath, make a model that cuts off everything in front of the reverser, that way we can have a L-1011 style engine.

I suggested a bigger Goliath for the reason you said, reduce part count. I realize that you can hide multiple Goliaths inside each other to get more thrust, but this has some problems. Part count for one. And if one of those goliaths happens to break off due to stress or some other reason, it takes out all the other engines and your wing, effectively killing your plane. As for how many I use, 2 to 8, depending on the size of the plane I'm building. I like to build non-space planes. And real life engines get bigger and bigger while using the same fuel and even producing more thrust. But you talking about the rapiers does give me another idea. 2.5m rapier engine. I agree, it would be just cosmetic, but I would still like it. I think we would just like a rework of all the wings. Some parts don't like up with the others like the strake. And some of the hitboxes are really wonky. Well, LF only tanks yes, but I was thinking more fore the passenger side of things. Instead of a mk2 in a lifting wing body, a mk2 rounded passenger part, essentially a scaled up mk1 passenger part. As for the mk3 parts, LF Only, rounded passenger fuselage, rounded cargobay, etc. For Pegasus, I just want to simulate irl Pegasus XL launches. Different landing legs for different cosmetic styles. Plus, I think we can all agree the wheels need to be overhauled. Yes, but still, anything above 1400 m/s started to overheat and explode. Heat shielding or higher temps adjustments are needed to combat this. Or give us special high speed parts. I would be happy with that. It's just purely cosmetics, but I've thought about it and the different models could add more or less thrust vectoring. The F-22 and the X-31 nozzles can go pretty far, farther than the in game thrust vectoring already, which would mean tighter maneuverability.

Here's a few ideas I had for new spaceplane parts, as well as a few suggestions for the current ones. And I know some of these suggestions are inside of mods, but I would like them in the base game for stock builds. New parts: A bigger Goliath - 3m Goliath anyone? But seriously, bigger engine, more thrust, for those heavy payloads... or just to get a tiny payload moving ridiculously fast. A bucket reverser 1.25 meter engine - Buckets are kool. A 1.8 meter engine - not as small as the J-20, but not as big as the J-90. A middle road jet engine. 1.8 meter aircraft parts Bigger FAT-445 Aeroplane Main Wings - Two new sizes actually. One wing is better than 50 wings glued together after all. Size 2 rounded fuselages Size 3 rounded fuselages - Or parts to make the mark 3 parts round. Pegasus XL styled Fuselage - Basically, a place to hold rockets and a place to tail fins to stick up inside of the fuselage New landing legs in many different styles - Including but not limited to, F-16 style, where they go 90 degrees (About) from the fuselage, C-17 style, Hidden inside a hump that attacks to the Fuselage, and WW2 fighter style, wheels that go up side ways instead of forwards or backwards. Aircraft heat shielding - For when you're going 1400+ M/S and things are getting a little toasty. Basically what I'm picturing is little body conformed wing like structures that you can click on to the aircraft's nose and belly, or anywhere else really. Aircraft antenna - Resistant to both heat and air speed. Edit parts: J-90 Goliath Pylon removable option - An option to remove the pylon from the engine so that when it's inline with the body like a tri-jet config, it looks cleaner. Engine Nacelle Pylon option - Option to add a pylon on to the part Shock Cone Intake animation - An animation that moves the cone foreword or backwards depending on if above or below Mach 1. Plus manual option to move cone forward or backwards. J-404 Model switching - New models that mimic some other jet engine nozzles, such as the F-22, the F-15, the Su-37, and the X-31

No, I do not. I'm not the mod author. And the author hasn't been on KSP in over a month. As for doing it myself, I have no modding experience really.

I haven't seen or I'm just not seeing, what I'm looking for with KK. That's not the kind I'm looking for. I'm looking more for like a super long runway that curves upwards towards space. Like in the picture. Edit: A super long runway that can support horizontally launching a rocket btw. Edit 2: Something like this Old mod