BagelRabbit

I'm getting HTTP 403 errors now. Have I tried to download too many times? (Overall download-link-click count: 214, plus or minus 3)

"KSP couldn't be downloaded. Retry?" link click count: 79

At 96% of the way into the download, the download failed. Now it won't let me start again. I'm quite literally crying right now. WHY?! WHAT HAVE I DONE WRONG?!

It's out! Of course, now the problem is that I'll have to play the thing for several days before restarting efforts on the drawing.

Heh. I was the Guy who Made the Dragon for a while, before the Destroyer made his model of Toothless. Here's the link, Here's a picture: ...and here's a video of the craft in flight (sorry for the length and overall "meh" quality). I'll post pictures of the Doge and the Bagel Rabbit later, but here's a video of them for now: So, yeah. I was working on a dragonfly but no dice... yet. I might continue work on the craft in 0.24 if the save file isn't wrecked.

The Line 132 error seems to be gone, for me. Downloading at the current time (33 min remaining due to crazy drastic server load.)

I think, at this point, it might be faster to register for Steam and purchase the game there. I would, if I didn't have to pay a lot for it at this point (got KSP for $15 with version 0.14.)

A note to Line 132: Dear Line 132, Get your act in gear! Why the heck are you trying to end the file?! Nobody wants that! Are you just trying to get attention?! No one wants that, either. Please let us download KSP, before we lose our ever-loving minds. Sincerely, The Forum

I haven't, yet... I want to support Squad and Squad only with my purchase of KSP. Wow, though. This is insane.

Parse error: syntax error, unexpected end of file in /host/www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/htdocs/lib/multiplayDwn.php on line 132 "[CENSORED]!" F5. Parse error: syntax error, unexpected end of file in /host/www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/htdocs/lib/multiplayDwn.php on line 132 "[CENSORED]!" F5.

Here's what I'm willing to do to support this project: I have a GoPro that I'm willing to donate to the project, though if I do so, I expect it back. I'm more than willing to strap my rocket onto the balloon, though that would likely mean a rework with the overall balloon payload. Maybe it would be better to do after the first launch. (Also, you can't use hydrogen balloons when launching rockets off of them, for obvious reasons, so we would need to switch to helium. Again, maybe a better option after a smaller-scale successful flight.) If no one else is willing, I'm okay with flying my Shapeways model of Jeb. I'll probably give him a little coat of epoxy on the back and work on a mounting sled, to boot. I'm willing to make videos for the cause and to donate a small amount to the Kickstarter. (Buying all of the gear needed for the little rocket has left me all but broke at the current time.) I should note that the rocket in question is pretty light (~27 oz.) but would still be a significant chunk of payload to haul up. Also, the only way I've currently worked out to have a good launch involves dowels, metal rods, and absolute loads of string. Again, maybe better for a later launch.

Don't give in to the hype! Just keep your blood pressure at reasonable levels and everything will be just fine. Hakuna matata! Hakuna matata!

Hi! I talked with a mod and this thread is now unlocked. Just be sure to not speculate on 0.24. Also, if you have images, only post one or two at a time. KSP's servers are compromised enough right now. Have fun!

It's going to come out when it comes out. The reason you can't find a date is because the devs of KSP don't release the date until it's already out. Unfortunately, this query doesn't exactly meet the rules, so I'm going to have to send in the mods.

I am most certainly up for it. I've got almost everything I need for it, from a GoPro to a nearby certified helium dealer. I'm actually in the midst of working on a project to launch a Kerbal off of a weather-balloon launch platform. The rocket is expected to reach about 30,000 feet above the balloon, if everything goes well. Unfortunately, the rocket needs to stay as low-mass as possible, so I'm not actually launching the Shapeways model of Jeb on the rocket, but instead this little guy: (sorry for the potato quality) At 0.2 ounces, PicoJeb can not only fit in the body tube, but also not mess up the mass of the rocket too much! A win-win for all. (I'll still mount Shapeways Jeb on the balloon, he just won't get launched on a rocket.) Before you dismiss this as a pipe dream, I'm going to (if all goes well) launch the rocket for a ground test... in about two weeks, at NARAM 56. If the rocket survives the boost (50 g's at 950 mph to ~10,500'), I'll be happy. If it can be retrieved, I'll be ecstatic. If it's intact... JOY! I'll post some of the build progress as the days pass. Oh! Here's a recent rocket launch (just to show that I can, indeed, build these things). This rocket isn't built for speed or altitude, but it has a GoPro on it. And Jeb.

Hi everyone! 0.24 might take a little while to come out, and I'm sure you want something to do whilst waiting. Because I'm sure many will be glued to their monitors all day today. So... Please use this thread to post your favorite KSP designs, videos, screenshots, fanart, writing, or anything else that can keep peoples' minds off the upcoming 0.24 release! (Please don't refresh so often, either. KSP almost certainly isn't coming out right now.) Here, I'll start with some of my good ol' KSP videos... I look forwards to what y'all have in your inventories! (And I look forwards to the drop in blood pressure that this thread will hopefully bring.) Enjoy!

CubeSats, rather. You know what I meant. (sigh) I am still fairly sure that every single other point that I have made is correct or nearly so. I am trying my best to have a scientific discussion with several variables involved, and you're focusing on a sub-variable that is not even very relevant (Replace GSO with GTO and you have what I meant). Is this really so difficult?

I remember the 0.23 waiting room. Believe it or not, it's where I got my first +Rep. It also crashed the forum a lot. Ah, the memories! *sniffles, pretends to have dust in eye*

You're correct (I wasn't sure what GTO meant). Everything else I said still applies though. (I'm pretty sure that NASA doesn't have plans to release satellites in GTO either.)

Hi Rakaydos! About your first point: Geosynchronous orbit would be a great place to release a CubeSat and have it reach exotic destinations. However, I don't think that any CubeSats have been released at that altitude, and I'm not sure if NASA has any plans to do so. The additional Earth flyby would require even greater precision for a craft that already is trying for pinpoint accuracy. I should remind the forum that CubeSats, in general, either have no guidance system, or a system far less precise than this mission would require. I do, however, think that you could decrease the Delta-V budget significantly by starting out in GSO. Good catch. Your third point leaves a bit to be desired. The Apollo craft were essentially a way for America to reinforce its technological superiority over the USSR. As you said, it was a publicity stunt from the start, and a successful one at that. But while America had several good reason to go to the Moon (President Kennedy stating that the budget would be massively increased to allow for the missions; proving that America was capable of beating the Soviets at the "space race;" etc.), what good reasons do KSP players have to go to Phobos? Sure, the flight might promote KSP or even civilian science in general, but NASA doesn't really have any need for that. After the Apollo days, NASA drastically increased the number of scientific experiments that it did after Apollo, and it (arguably) hasn't done a "publicity stunt" style mission since*. So why does anyone think that they'll make the first major exception of this rule in 44 years... for our little ragtag bunch of engineers? If I was a NASA official with little knowledge of KSP, I wouldn't allow a CubeSat to be launched primarily as a publicity stunt, no matter how lofty the goals of its designers. *While you might think that CubeSats fall under the "publicity stunt" category, they're generally considered by NASA to be a cheaper, more widely available way to do scientific experiments in space. That is the reason that they were created, and that is the direction that NASA hopes to take them in.

Poking a couple of holes in this. You think you can get to Mars with 1,500 m/s of Delta-V? Come on man, this ain't KSP. To leave the Earth's SOI via trans-lunar injection takes over 3 km/s of Delta-V, more if you're using an ion drive (most of the time you're burning your ion engines at less than peak efficiency, because of the increased burn time associated with lower thrust.) Then you have to pack enough fuel to get to Mars (likely several km/s more), circularize and land on Phobos. I'm looking at a minimum of 6-7 km/s of Delta-V here. Let me just point out that a CubeSat is not designed to survive three years. It is not even designed to survive three years inside of Earth's Van Allen belts. You would probably have to build the electronics from scratch for them to survive the journey. Biological specimens? Fuggedaboutit. Sensitive scientific equipment? Probably not. I find it funny that many Forum members want to go to Phobos, but that they have made almost no decisions on the scientific equipment that they will bring. Come on, guys! NASA won't accept just going to Phobos for the heck of it! Mr Shifty did a good job of this. Here's what I think of the entire project. I put this on the main page, but pasting it here too... I've "bolded" the things that haven't been said yet (I think) for quick reference. Okay, I'm sure no one will read this small diatribe, but: KSP is absolutely a wonderful game. It depicts real-life spacecraft mechanics incredibly well, from specific impulse to orbital mechanics. However. Expecting to have the KSP team create and deploy a CubeSat is simply impossible. I'm currently working on a project to independently fly a rocket to 160,000 feet with a safe recovery. This project is widely frowned upon by many as being nearly impossible, in spite of the extensive simulations. The build is currently in progress, though I likely won't attempt the launch until next year. I know what I'm talking about when I talk rockets, because I make them in real life. The excited participants in this thread have no idea what they're getting themselves into, and I'm pretty sure they will, eventually, be disappointed. One of the main goals in this thread is to get a CubeSat to Phobos. Mind you, the propulsion method that would most likely be used, tiny xenon thrusters, are still heavily under development and aren't planned to fly for years. It would be impossible to communicate with the probe during the trip or, perhaps, even after arriving at Mars; it would be very nearly impossible to carry any traditional science instruments on the CubeSat. A rocket would have to be launched in almost precisely the correct orbital inclination to make this plan feasible. No CubeSat has survived for long enough to get to Mars. The technological hurdles that would have to be overcome are enormous, and would likely require a research and development budget far, far higher than the satellite itself would cost. This would make a crowd-funding campaign likely to not succeed, and private backers almost certainly wouldn't be willing to fund the multimillion-dollar cost. NASA would likely be lukewarm with its support at best. It mostly, perhaps unfortunately, supports semi-professional teams aiming to do limited science in low Earth orbit. All CubeSats launched have carried extremely limited payloads. Some carry enough fuel to deorbit, others carry no fuel at all. NASA would likely be unwilling to support any project as ambitious as this one, let alone a project (and don't get me wrong here) mainly controlled by people who are in their teens and not professional aerospace engineers. They would correctly suspect that the people would be incapable of getting a craft working. Sorry to burst the bubble of anyone involved. I want this to work just as much as anyone else, I just don't see it happening.

Okay, I'm sure no one will read this small diatribe, but: KSP is absolutely a wonderful game. It depicts real-life spacecraft mechanics incredibly well, from specific impulse to orbital mechanics. However. Expecting to have the KSP team create and deploy a CubeSat is simply impossible. I'm currently working on a project to independently fly a rocket to 160,000 feet with a safe recovery. This project is widely frowned upon by many as being nearly impossible, in spite of the extensive simulations. The build is currently in progress, though I likely won't attempt the launch until next year. I know what I'm talking about when I talk rockets, because I make them in real life. The excited participants in this thread have no idea what they're getting themselves into, and I'm pretty sure they will be disappointed. One of the main goals in this thread is to get a CubeSat to Phobos. Mind you, the propulsion method that would most likely be used, tiny xenon thrusters, are still heavily under development and aren't planned to fly for years. It would be impossible to communicate with the probe during the trip or, perhaps, even after arriving at Mars; it would be very nearly impossible to carry any traditional science instruments on the CubeSat. A rocket would have to be launched in almost precisely the correct orbital inclination to make this plan feasible. No CubeSat has survived for long enough to get to Mars. The technological hurdles that would have to be overcome are enormous, and would likely require a research and development budget far, far higher than the satellite itself would cost. This would make a crowd-funding campaign likely to not succeed, and private backers almost certainly wouldn't be willing to fund the multimillion-dollar cost. NASA would likely be lukewarm with its support at best. It mostly, perhaps unfortunately, supports semi-professional teams aiming to do limited science in low Earth orbit. All CubeSats launched have carried extremely limited payloads. Some carry enough fuel to deorbit, others carry no fuel at all. NASA would likely be unwilling to support any project as ambitious as this one, let alone a project (and don't get me wrong here) mainly controlled by people who are in their teens and not professional aerospace engineers. They would correctly suspect that the people would be incapable of getting a craft working. Don't even get me started on constructing a launch vehicle. If you honestly think that you can ask NASA for parts, then assemble an orbit-capable rocket from them... I'm not going to finish this statement, as I want to state facts and not be too mean. I really admire the creativity of the people on the KSP forums, I really do. I just don't see this project working, and I see a lot of disappointed people who had their hopes too high. I know that this post will soon be buried in the crowds, so I'll stop talking now.

I still don't think that it's time for a progress picture, but here's one anyway. The general scene is laid out, and I'm just beginning refining the lines and shading. Please pardon the bizarre overexposure, the image looks a bit nicer than this in person. More later. Sorry for the absolutely miniscule amount of work I've put into this so far, I've been ridiculously busy IRL. Refreshing KSP every five minutes to see whether 0.24 is out isn't helping either. It will get done!!

That looks rather painful. I'm sorry for your craft. I'd be happy to draw the debris though, just give me a second to add your request to the list. I'm actually fine with people posting promotional ads here, as I'm one of the biggest fans of the KSP art community. I only ask that you start a thread for your artwork, instead of posting it on my thread. It would be a little awkward to have two or three people posting artwork on this thread. Working on SelectHalfling0's artwork now, though not far enough along to give a progress picture. I kinda like it so far though.

Was it this type of craft? If so, that's me. (Or maybe someone else came up with this as well, and I was just a co-discoverer.)