Search the Community

I think there's more than one thing that's going on. Modern approach is to use velocity constraints with Baumgarte stabilization for drifts. Baumgarte does work a bit like a spring coefficient, but the velocity constraint already has damping built in. So with a sensible choice of coefficients, any perturbations should naturally decay, rather than lead to more oscillation for any single joint. Unfortunately, systems of joints can still misbehave. The worst case is usually a light object sandwiched between two heavy objects. Unfortunately, I just described every single stage separator and decoupler, which immediately becomes a problem in KSP if you don't add additional joints to stabilize it (such as multi-joint connectors, autostruts, etc.) A very good read on the topic is Erin Catto's GDC presentation from 2009, Modeling and Solving Constraints. Every modern physics engine I've seen goes back to this talk. At a minimum, Havok and Chaos do, as well as Crystal's and Blizzard's internal engine implementations because Erin Catto worked there and was instrumental in making sure these engines worked. Now, not every engine uses impulse exchange as their iteration method, but all iterative solvers are going to behave similarly. I think Erin really likes impulse exchange mostly due to its logical simplicity compared to pure linear algebra methods. Crucially, the PhysX version that ships with Unity predates the industry's switch to this as the main method. So their constraints handling might be a little different, and I haven't looked at the code for that specifically. Though, it might be interesting to try and dig up the source for a relevant PhysX engine and to make sure. In general, even the older physics engines had to solve the same fundamental problem of enforcing constraints. And even if you start with position constraint (rather than velocity constraint) and work your way from there, you are still building a damped harmonic oscillator, but your coefficients might be less "magical" and require more careful tuning. So we're still dealing with what's ultimately a damped harmonic oscillator for each individual joint, but what can still fall into some sort of a bad feedback loop between multiple joints. And we know that mass ratios are a problem for the PhysX joints as well, so whatever the solver is iterating over, it's not that far different. So that's one part of it. Even with a good solver, there are bad configurations that you need to learn to avoid, and for something like KSP that means either merging some rigid bodies together (e.g., if you made decoupler and whatever it's permanently attached to into a single rigid body) or doing what KSP1 does and adding additional joints in a way that avoids the unstable configurations. The second part is, I think, what muddled the situation for KSP2. And here we're back to logical connection vs actual joints. I have seen a number of times when a ship spawns in (either at the launch site or from a save) with some parts detached. And it's one thing to just watch some part of your ship drift away, and another is if it's some internal part with collisions that ends up doing a ragdoll-spaz inside the ship. I don't know how many of the KSP2 physics explosions are due to bad joint configurations and how many are due to a part getting loose and spazzing out. I've definitely seen both, but I wouldn't be able to identify each particular case. And I think that might have been why Intercept kept having these issues creep back up, because there are several different bugs they're trying to fix that can be reported as one bug: rapid disassembly without any obvious cause. All of this is kind of self-inflicted, but I do sympathize. Again, it's a hard problem, and unless you happened to have worked on these exact problems before, it takes time to catch up on all the terminology and required reading.

talk wike you are thwee ill go first: mommy said i cant eat the wrapper! waaa

Sounds like management wants to keep the product page up and just not have to talk about it again. It got full funding for as long as it was going to. It just isn't worth it anymore compared to other places to put money. So unless the cost of carrying financing drops to nearly zero again, I'd say they've put their money where their mouth is by firing the developers. They just want it to stay on the books to pad the portfolio for investors.

THE SECRET SPACE PROGRAM - YEAR 4, DAY !̶̨̛̤̰͈̥̫̯͎̻̘͕̭͎̣̠̠̯̩̦̫̣̦̤̼̯̿̏̈͛̐̉̈́̀̈̾̓̈́̊̃̈́̒̚̚̕͠*̶̬̺̜͎̳̠̦̗͕̝̠̖̭̝̟̝̠̻̭͉͛̂̈́́͒̽́̀̈́͌̑̂͝ͅ@̸̢̧̢̨̻̟̱̖̤̠͉̠̪̮̭̝̯͚̝̠̺̗̤̪̠̔͋͐́̔̈̒͋͂̾̍͂̋̔̎͒̎͘ͅ^̴̨̧̧̛͕̦̱̜̩̗͎̲̰͔̤͎̪͔̪̭̬̤̈́̾͆̾̑̃̔͠$̶̢̛̭͉̳̭̤̹͔̝͔͌͐͗̿̈́̽́̔͐̑̿͊́̓̍͆̈́͗́̐̄͜͝͠͠͠͝͝͝@̶̦͇̮̠͍̬͙̻͕̞̭̠̅̾̀̍͜ MISSION OBJECTIVE: Send crew to the Secret Space Station CREW: [NO DATA AVAILABLE] It's ya boy [REDACTED] back with another update at Kerbin's most secret of space programs. The Dessert Launch Center (DLC) has had some extreme overhauls recently, including the construction of a much more streamlined VAB. Instead of rocket parts being built is separate buildings and then assembled on the launchpad, it can all be built and assembled right there, and then rolled out. Also, the launch control center is no longer a small tower, but now a full fledged center for launch control. And new barracks have been constructed, which I must say are pretty snazzy, especially for a crumby government facility. Now, onto the important part. This mission will be sending a new crew to Triple-S (as most of us on base call the space station), where they will continue to monitor the Mun and signals coming from it. A recent burst of energy has been detected from the surface, higher than anything we've seen. Almost like something has just come through the portal. Rumors have also spread that they'll be working on an unmanned lander mission that will investigate the structure further, but truthfully we have no idea. Sure, shipments have arrived at base, but these could just be for any old satellite launch too. I don't have clearance to enter the VAB, and those who do are ordered not to talk about what's happening inside. Hmm... The new crew who I still don't know the names of make their way to orbit. "Proceeding with orbital insertion burn." - Unknown Commander "Burning for Triple-S." - Unknown Pilot Now we sit and listen. For any little sound movement or smell coming from the Mun. We finally have eyes up there again, and I will do as much as I can to tel you what those eyes see. What secrets do you continue to hide?

Not at all; and I highly doubt they mention anything in regards to plans for KSP2 specifically on the earnings call; other than the potential for more clarity on the closures and the reduction in costs related to it. KSP2 was already dropped from their quarterly reports last year where it was previously still noted as having an expected console launch... checks date... Oh, it was already supposed to have launched on console. In this call, they talk numbers not specific details of future plans; and any forward looking statements they do make are going to be focused on positive outlooks, such as expected revenues from GTA6.

I cannot stress how HARD I bounced off the game. I KNOW it's not the game for me. I didn't return it (like I did Stellaris, another game everybody loves but I knew INSTANTLY I'd never enjoy after about 15 minutes) but still, it's far better off pimping in my uninstalled games list, than it is getting sweared at incessantly as I think of the dozens of other things I'd rather be doing than hands-on learning a billion undocumented ways I'm not supposed to fly my ship. Maybe it's better now. Steam says I last played it in 2018. I'm not really all that willing to find out. Steam also says I put 7.5 hours into it, which frankly shocks me. You talk about docking protocols. I never even made it to a space station.

I am going to start my comment with a question for the CMs and then I will go into my further suggestions My question to the CM comes from the conversations that @Nerdy_Mike was having in the discord, he was talking about the roadmap and how development will follow it and all milestones will be fulfilled. This is obviously great news long term as we will get all that was promised on that front. I also remember many instances where CMs have talked about the ideas of polls and wanting to them but not knowing how to go about doing them correctly. I think some polls that will work are ones about which things should come first, meaning that the "losing" side of the poll will still know they will get the content they voted for. Anyways, my question is would KSP2 ever consider making a poll for if Recourses should come before Interstellar? I ask this because there has been a good amount of people talk about their concerns about not having resources when colonies drop and then having to wait until after interstellar for this feature. @Dakota and @Nerdy_Mike, I would love an answer to this question so I know whether to keep voicing my concerns about this subject or if I should use my time more wisely on commenting on other aspects of the game. I understand that there are reasons that would make these decisions out of your control or if this just plain is impossible with the current development process. I would love clarification on this. Alrighty, now that that is out of the way, I'll give my ideas towards communications: (Note) I think the major thing that is frustrating the community is that we just don't know what is going at all, this both goes for colonies and the next patch. I understand there are powers that be that keep you from giving information about colonies very often, so I'm going to focus on communications patch-to-patch 1. I think a good idea could be a "next patch bugs squashed counter" (the name needs some work ) somewhere on the forums that updates each week. You wouldn't even need to put in a bunch of details about the bugs, just a range based on the current "dev-version" of the game that is being focused on to give an idea of progress in development to the community. You could put a disclaimer that the number can fluctuate upwards and downwards because of different "dev-versions" of the game being considered the focused version, or because some changes broke something and now you are fixing those things while keeping what the original change fixed (this is what I imagine is happening right now and why its taken a while longer for this patch). Anyways I think this would be good because then the community would have a constant feeling of progress as the weeks go on. 2. I think more engagement in the individual forums would be nice, not just when we ask but kinda closer to how the interactions on discord are. It would be nice to see everyday at least one thought given on a thread somewhere about something. It wouldn't always have to be serious stuff either, right now I am realizing a lot of the community gets a bit upset at the "joking" and more "fun-oriented" posts being made right now but that is more because they don't have much communications and want quality/qualitative posts when they happen. After getting over the hump, and when seeing CM posts are much more common, then the forums will feel more like a conversation with CMs than complaints to them constantly. Really just like once a day would be enough, even if half are joke/fun posts. 3. I think that suggestions or things that CMs cant talk about should not be met with radio silence, but instead with a "heard*" or a "there is no information we are able to give right now*". This would give us more communication and make it feel like we aren't just talking into the void hoping that something sticks. (the * would be to indicate that these communications are not a direct "this will be in the game" or a "this will not be in the game"). Anyways these are my thoughts on improvements to the current communications (as far as patch to patch goes). All of these suggestions/criticisms come from a place of respect and excitement for what is to come next both in the game and in the community.

It's the problem with Google, it will trimm the results to your profile. This is a list from mine (using the very same link I used above): Jovem Nerd Estúdio de Kerbal Space Program 2 será encerrado após demissões 2 weeks ago UOL Kerbal Space Program 2 Is Getting Review-Bombed After Take-Two Shut Down Its Developer Dec 22, 2023 IGN Kerbal Space Program 2 Is Getting Review-Bombed After Take-Two Shut Down Its Developer 2 weeks ago UOL Kerbal Space Program 2 Is Getting Review-Bombed After Take-Two Shut Down Its Developer 2 weeks ago Game Developer Update: Take-Two confirms Kerbal Space Program 2 is safe despite Seattle layoffs 2 weeks ago PC Gamer Kerbal Space Program fans react with anger over Intercept Games closure, and you know what that means: Review ... 2 weeks ago Epic Games Our guide to exploring deep space with Kerbal Space Program 2's For Science! Update Feb 6, 2024 Space.com Kerbal Space Program game director and ULA CEO talk STEM collaboration and companies' futures (exclusive) Feb 23, 2024 Olhar Digital Jogue como Elon Musk! Kerbal Space Program está por menos de R$ 20 no Steam Jun 9, 2023 Terra Jogamos: Kerbal Space Program 2 é mais acolhedor que antecessor Feb 24, 2023 <some others I'm omiiting> Yahoo Finance Canada Take-Two is shutting down the studios behind Rollerdrome and Kerbal Space Program 2 2 weeks ago TechTudo Kerbal Space Program 2: veja gameplay, história e requisitos mínimos do jogo Feb 25, 2023 And so goes on. You see, your initial statement: It's a heck of an overstament at best, or just don't hold itself at worst. For the best or for the worst, KSP in on the media.

Marginally? What exactly makes KSP1 only marginally better than KSP2? I agree that KSP1 has its flaws and problems. But if you think that the buggy dumpster fire that KSP2 was at launch, or continues to be today, is only marginally worse than KSP1, then nothing anybody says here will make any sense to you. I mean, of course it doesn't make sense to me. It is like how a Flat Earther sounds when trying to explain their beliefs. Right. But they do those "man on the street" things on the late night talk shows all the time, and they ask people general questions. "What's the capital of the US" and "How many ounces in a pound" and "Show me where Maine is on this map". And you know what? Most of the people that they show - not that they ask, but that they show on TV - can't answer the questions correctly. By your own definition, that makes basic US geography and simple weight conversion mathematics niche areas of interest. Again, bad analogies. I'm not on about asking "do you know what color the 0.625m stack separator is in KSP?" or some ridiculous trivia like that. I am on about asking people if they are even AWARE of this game's existence - caps for emphasis . It might shock you to know a game hardly anyone is aware of outside a specific industry is basically a niche, even if you may find it possibly shaking to think that a core aspect of your life is inconsequential to most people. A lot of people heavily invested in niches seemingly tend to go through some kind of denial, exhibit A ; ). Frankly, I have never heard anything said about this game unless I went out of my way to look for it so I'm leaning towards niche.

Marginally? What exactly makes KSP1 only marginally better than KSP2? I agree that KSP1 has its flaws and problems. But if you think that the buggy dumpster fire that KSP2 was at launch, or continues to be today, is only marginally worse than KSP1, then nothing anybody says here will make any sense to you. Right. But they do those "man on the street" things on the late night talk shows all the time, and they ask people general questions. "What's the capital of the US" and "How many ounces in a pound" and "Show me where Maine is on this map". And you know what? Most of the people that they show - not that they ask, but that they show on TV - can't answer the questions correctly. By your own definition, that makes basic US geography and simple weight conversion mathematics niche areas of interest.

Because the quantity has so far surpassed what niche was intended to encompass that it obtained international recognition in the gaming / development industry & soared to vaulted heights that still maintain It as one of the top 500 games being played on steam DESPITE more than 2/3 of people pole not using the launcher and 15 years past its launch date? No one has excused anything for the game. Many here will talk at length about shortcoming and various hard limits the game has. But most require some form of supportive argument to engage. Tired rhetoric & diatribes fall to engage people for long. A couple Stata posts or detailed examples of a social impact to support their frame with a "your wrong the game sucks" will only continue the discourse for so long before the majority feel your stance has been sufficiently invalidated.

I am going to ask that you stop acting like the majority of this commentary is somehow without merit. When the points you attempt to make are so eloquently rebutted, you shift the goal post to "its just game" I do not think that "its just an X,Y,Z" is as acceptable excuse for the very last point that @PCDWolf made. It is not about patience. The majority of the rebuttal addressed that very issue and the last year we have been actively attempting to gain insight on the direction this game plans to take. They have been tight lipped because the community was promised for years that this game would have a certain goal. KSP PLUS. It was immediately apparent that a different direction was chosen and we clamored for something of substance regarding this. The stuff that does come out is pure PR content and nothing of merit with regard to game direction. The only thing worth a dang at all on the future of this game was completely compiled by @The Space Peacock... with much of it dated. How much of these old conversations and ideas are going to stay? You are not understanding how long it took for took to get them to even consider certain important things seriously... Like Wobble Font UI TimeWarp Constraints Things that are not "official' bugs are often ignored when we question specifics or insight in decisions. Official Bugs (Up Until Recently) has been difficult to navigate with key word searches not always resulting in success. This compounds with many redundant postings and ignored issues NO ONE can say that this game was playtesting in an organic manner. EA is not for Alpha State drops.. not traditionally. This leaves us guessing as to why and what.. with the track record our imaginations see "the best prediction for the future is the past" WE want this game to succeed. But we also want that success to be within some realm of what we enjoyed about the first game... People would talk about other things than how crappy "radio silence is" if we were given something to talk about.

I mean, KSP was basically a hackathon project by beginners in the industry, who managed to make a successful game despite all odds and sometimes despite of themselves. It's full of problems, but I think you're being too harsh on it. I get that you're annoyed that people want to pretend that there were no flaws, and HarvesteR and the rest of the team were game development savants who got it right on the first try. And I mean, even HarvesteR doesn't believe that, clearly. But you're still overcorrecting. You core statements are not wrong, but the way you're delivering them is antagonizing. You know that classic, "Soylent Green is people!" scene? It can be like that sometimes. And HarvesteR did say something that's very much true about how KSP1 happened. He essentially said that the fact that they didn't know what they were doing has got them to try things that others would have discarded, but ended up working for the game. And that's sort of the value of an indy and hackathon projects. But on the technical side, yeah, KSP is one giant technical debt. Even some of the things they correctly stumbled into and talk about as learning experience, I could have told them on day one, because it's a fairly typical problem. And that's the bottom line. A game can be a technical and design disaster, and still be good, because it did things other games didn't. You really have to recognize both aspects of it if you want to try to replicate the success while cleaning out the debt, because it can be very hard to tell one from the other. The rocket wobble of KSP was clearly just a side effect of using Unity's joint system. But would completely, perfectly rigid rockets feel like playing KSP? I think the question alone can start a fierce debate between the fans and developers alike. And that's kind of where we are with the whole project.

BFR. Big Fat Rocket. But replacing Fat... Also, Cobalt has said that they may do the big Nova for KSP2... though... lets not talk about that. Also also, iirc, Cobalt did express that he liked my version of the C-8. Perhaps we could bully, eh I mean persuade him to do my C-8 has the official BDB C-8. Though, my C-8 is basically just the c-8 from the c-8 wikipedia page.

Floor 4875: Your cubicle at your office 60km away from your house. Your coworkers include various forum members and moderators, cartoon dogs, B1 battle droids, portal Cores, and an Automaton trooper wearing a business suit. You go to your bosses office to talk about planning the floor’s monthly corporate party. asee your boss, a young blue Australian cartoon dog, loudly fire one of your coworkers, and you decide to go back at a different time.

No, we are just the cash cow to slaughter. The high Lords are not required to talk to the rabble, they already milked us and are now free to do with our money what ever they please.

I did a little sleuthing, and it's (I believe) the oldest parts in all of the mods. I may be interested in sprucing it up, though CardZ has first dibs if he is inclined, we'll talk about it. The Vostok in general is a sizing nightmare, unique because it so tightly integrates with the upper stage, and as it winds up at 1.44m ingame if you take the scaling flat. You will certainly end up with a few weird parts. But that's a problem after I release the Proton (maybe, idk what I'll do next). The Blok-E of course matches Card's new soyuz upper stage diameter 1.625m in game. The capsule would probably end up about 1.5m

I watched 2012 for the first time. I found it to be a pretty entertaining movie, which asks some interesting questions about morality when comes to saving the world, albeit perhaps not so original ones. It was refreshing to watch in 2024 when all the movies seem to be about relatively normal life, while the end of the world talk comes from IRL stuff (barring superhero movies which require a perennial doomsday to defeat). I can’t decide between the oligarch calling an Antonov aircraft Russian or the Chinese Mi-26s airlifting giraffes and other animals as the most funny part. Interesting to note, while the Chinese do not possess Mi-26s, they do operate a number of Sikorsky S-70s, which are partially depicted by way of Blackhawks with PLA insignia also used by the Chinese in the film. Given the neutrino “mutation” nonsense in the beginning, I was thoroughly surprised that the arks ended up being ships instead of spaceships. Considering the shipbuilding giant it is today I’d say the premise of building a massive ark for 100,000 people isn’t too far fetched, although doing it in the Himalayas and in total secrecy might be. I also found it funny that Japan, Russia, and China got stuck on the same boat together. I’m a Japanese person who has an interest in the Russian (well, Soviet) and Chinese militaries. I have seen a loosely similar concept explored in Japan Sinks: 2020, in which many Japanese refugees end up in Russia, Japan Sinks: 2023, in which a good portion of the Japanese population is evacuated to China, and I myself considered exploring the concept with the idea to conduct an amateur study of what kind of resources would be needed to relocate the entire population of Japan to new-built cities in the Russian Far East in the event of either a fantasy Japan sinks scenario or a climate disaster which renders Japanese summers unlivable. The latter is an idea I did not pursue. I also considered looking at the cost of moving the entire country into balloons on Venus, but I didn’t look at it either. My Mars city calculations over in the S&S section have now dissuaded me from taking a look at any such situation in a capitalist context. But I digress. As far as apocalyptic stories or movies go, I like this one in that it has a relatively happy ending. I feel that “man just tears itself apart” type stories are too rooted in Hobbes’ view of man’s “true” nature without civilization, which was never meant to be an actual sociological or anthropological take on humanity and was simply a philosophical argument. The truth is that we are very kind animals. It’s wrong to think that every man and woman would become a murderer the moment the kings and their courts were toppled; I think this idea focuses too much on the way law is used to restrain people and not enough on how morals do too. Yes, we can be violent. But if we were not primarily an altruistic species, I don’t think we would have gotten this far at all. “Men” (I use men in the sense of man vs. savage) created civilization, not the other way around. IMO, of course. Oh, and by the way, I now really feel like Moonfall was just an attempt to emulate what 2012 did but in an over the top way. I think 2012 works because the social phenomena of belief in that doomsday was popular. The idea of the Moon being an alien ark and it crashing in to Earth? At best a few dark web conspiracy lunatics know about it, at worst Roland just made it up himself and hoped people would be interested.

Does anyone know if Kerbal space program one enhanced edition for the PlayStation or other consoles is still getting support or updates? I just picked it up for the PlayStation and really enjoy the game but unfortunately things I see on YouTube videos I am incapable of doing. I was just wondering if we're going to get the same updates at some point. Forums from other locations people talk about the fact that there doesn't seem to be any support for the game and sometimes the last post is as far back as 2022. So I was just wondering I really enjoy the game but I'm wondering if I spent my money in vain due to the fact that I'm not kidding any more support for the game.

30:37 ... I have messaged Nate Simpson cre creative director of ksp2 30:45 and I said look I know you're obviously going to be under some massive corporate NDA so you can't really talk but can you 30:51 tell me anything and all he was able to say was I'm very much looking forward to talking when I can thanks for 30:57 understanding ...

Worth listening to, interestingly Matt reached out to Nate to ask if he could say anything and he more or less just said what the others have been saying; "Can't talk now, maybe later".

When assign blame you have to look at those in key roles.. that why certain individuals have a tendency to shoulder a disproportionate amount of the burden for failure. Nate was the face of this product, for better or worse. I believe he genuinely thought this game would succeed bc the community would be impressed with his awesome vision, so much so that we would be willing to excuse ... certain deficiencies for extended periods of time. When everyone wanted something substantive be the foundation of all those "oooo... purdy!" It kind of fell apart a little. I understand the need for visual aide and demonstrative presentations, but you must find balance. When you hear people say things that are not accurate... they absolutely are going to get some blame for their misinformed position. If they say innacurate things without any clarification to those inconsistencies.. it seems willful. Regardless if that's the case.. the perception starts to shift to one of being intentionally misled. "Fully Funded" - massive lay off "Playable at Launch" "Actual Play Footage" These are what started to turn me off of Nate. Enthusiasm without Substance. I try not to watch any videos with him in it because of this bias. Regardless of what's really going on.. I can see some deceptive marketing material as anything but disingenuous now & view him a smarmy Narcissist. I can't help it.. I wanna be a better person with less judgement in my heart. But loading a bunch of visual content on a liquid poor foundation of code while the community that built the franchise was highly intelligent professional and gifted youths.. I had a step dad who was shaddy as he'll. He was a handyman that took jobs and never completed them.. boy he could talk a great game. I dispised his behavior growing up.. ans seem to now see him when I look at Nate. Sorry can't help it... Community Managers however were not to blame. A thankless job that was impossible to do, bc the proper tools (info) was not provided or allowed to be released.

MISSION_UPDATE - Tour de Minmus - Johndin and Podcal looking on the ancient relic found in the mysterious crater on Minmus. While Poduki relays their findings to KSC FOREWORD: Before we start - I would like to say that this post became a lot longer than I anticipated. I would very much like some honest feedback on weather I should dial it down a notch and be less detailed. Or cut it into more edible pieces. or if its just all good and fun. Before we start - I would like to thank all who indulge in my increasingly longer forum posts. Any way.. Funny story! A mistake was made by my internet provider and I was without internet this weekend! It was an odd experience.. I mean I grew up without internet.. but I realized how much of my home is setup to use internet.. I hear my radio through my Sonos and see TV through my Chromecast. At least when I was a child we had antenna tv and FM radio. It actually made my wife and I talk about getting a low tech FM radio - Just incase the political climate deteriorate even further in Europe.. and we need to be able to get news from the government. But before we go all doom and gloom... let's keep on topic... Without internet, the only game I could play was KSP - the others required internet in varying degree. So I managed to get the rover the last stretch to the mysterious crater in record time. Before being offgrid for an weekend, I was only driving the rover, half attentive, while listening to Audio Books or Podcasts with my wife. This weekend, the journey was done with plenty of whiskey in the glass and vinyls on the record player. You may be thinking, why plenty of whiskey? is Rovers that bad? well no... whiskey is a nice drink of course.. but also yes.. let's talk about Rovers.. and how much I dislike the Rover Game Mechanics. MISSION TASKS: A. Test the Rovers functionality and maneuverability - Success B. Drive an expedition to explore the North of Minmus - Success C. Drive the Rover back to Base Camp One C. Recover Rover via Dropship and return it to base- Success D. Return Dropship to ICV Explorer - Success LESSONS LEARNED; LESSONS IDENTIFIED: Section A: The Rover has left the Sheet Ice of the frozen lake and drive in the Snowdrifts that cover most of the little moon. Let's talk about rovers: I... HATE the way rovers drive in this game. It is not that I expected it to be Snow Runners, with the game simulating every minute physics detail of sand, snow and mud.. But man It would be nice if rovers at least drove like a car... and not a shopping trolley... It would be so nice if the wheels had just an inch of traction.. Speaking of traction.. What does the traction slider even do? It seems very backwards. If I turn traction up, the engines cannot turn the wheels, it feels like the engines are terrible underpowered (are they that weak?). But if you keep the tracktion down, you'll be wheel spinning like mad.. but unlike in our world, were the vehicle would dig it self down.. In the solar system of Kerbol the vehicle will gain momentum... a lot of momentum. I found I could get my rover to ~10 m/s on rough terrain (the only limiting factor being that it's hard to gain speed when the wheels dont have a lot of contact with the ground from all the jumps) and I never reached the limit on the flats of the Sheet Ice lakes.. the rover hit a small bump and tumbled. The science junior on the front broke off. - It was a bloody miracle the antenna didn't break off or the vehicle exploded.. So Johndin had to pick up sample and take readings by hand after that. The rest of the journey was done with the antenna folded down... and then only folded up to send situation reports to Kerbin, or the ICV when it passed by. After realizing this was how it was going to be - the only thing left to do was to strap in hit the speeder and tune the radio in on: And Start drift.. I mean driving. I found that the only reliable way to turn was to create a custom made Action Group for turning the Reaction Wheels ON - do the course correction and then press another custom made Action Group turning OFF all reaction wheels (to avoid the rover doing flips from the torque power when pressing forward). Because of course the "Only online when SAS is on" is bugged. The rest of the lessons learned Lessons identified I've put in spoiler sections for those interested to keep a bloated post more streamlined: 1. Axle configuration and angle of climb: 3. Thrusters: 4. Lights: 5. Power and Recharging: Section B: The rover - stopped in the snowdrifts - to enable Johndin to take samples and readings - While a cresended Kerbin is setting in the horizon. The Expedition to the Northern parts of Minmus was divided into 5 legs: Leg 1: Contained the initial testing of the Rover on the Sheet Ice Flats of (what I have Identified to be?) The Greater Flats that Base Camp One was established on. After that it took a sharp turn North East to get to new terrain that was found to be snowdrifts. This was done in the hopes that the reason the rover drove like a elephant on ice skates was because of the sheet ice - and not game mechanics.. Unfortunately I was to be disappointed. The rest of the leg consisted of the traversal of the Sheet Ice by night - Heading North West. Leg 2 + 3: Would be traversal of the hardest terrain the Rover forced. It was the heavy cratered mountains North of The Greater Flats. Leg 4: Would be the traversal of the less demanding rolling hils on the path North West - Dont let the map fool you - it looks way more smooth than it is. I thought it would be quickly traversed at high speeds. But the low gravity and rolling hills meant that as soon as the rover exceeded 10 m/s - it would spend the same time in the air (between jumps) as it did on ground. Making it impossible to really pick up more momentum. Leg 4 ended shortly before the destination. (My kids wanted to see what was in the crater, and were sleeping at the time) Leg 5: would be the last short stretch to the edge of the crater with the mysterious lightsource. (My daughter was so impressed by the monument that she had to call my wife so she could see it) Bellow a Map showing the approximated route with legs marked: From Right to Left: Leg 1, Leg 2, Leg 3, Leg 4 and Leg 5 Bellow in the spoiler section you can see a detailed walkthrough of the Journey: The Minmus Monument: Here, at the end of the journey I was presented with a choice - Call the mission done and drive home. Or, in the true spirit of the great kerbalnaut Jebidiah, drive down the cliff side and study the monument up close - though with the chance of not being able to get up again... or worse.. crash and burn The Rover had shown itself to be quite tough - It had survived landings with up to 20m/s - And no way in hell I was going to drive the rover all the way back again. No... going down would be a great excuse for a pick up via Dropshop and be flown back to Base Camp One, Johndin argued. So down the slope it was. Geronimo! - the rover going down the slope. While it is true the rover had survived traversing a chasm with the thrusters - and subsequently bounced in the rolling hills for several km going 20 m/s (it's hard to break when your wheels hardly touch the ground). Going down the cliff side quickly accelerated the rover to 40-50 m/s. and worse still, it was aiming directly for the statue. While I was positive that I could survive these speeds on uneven terrain as long as I kept the wheels leveled with the ground.. I was sure the suspension would not "tank" slamming into the statue at the center of the monument. In a last ditch maneuver Johndin, (who had pitched the idea of going down), managed to pull hard on the controls, pitch the rover up and break the rover with the thrusters. - a daring move! Having redeemed himself, he was given the honour of planting the flag.. and take another sample. KSC was still just visible over the ridge.. and the call for a taxi was relayed to ICV Explorer. While waiting for the dropship to arrive. Johndin, Podcal and Poduki had ample time to study the ancient ruin. Who was it depicting? How was it build? By Whom was it build.. answers I will likely only get once I've exhausted the sandbox experience - and try the campaign. Section C: Dropship arriving at The Minmus Monument - ready to pick up the Rover Crew. I had a feeling that by diverting the remaining fuel from the 3 Dropship to 1 - I would be able to complete the taxi mission. I was correct. It was strange to zoom past the terrain I had just spend the better of 4 evening to cross in meer minutes. Playing with audio on for once, I found that the Minmus Orbit Theme is really awesome - it made the tour back to Base Camp One felt like a final victory lap. I was to make one important Lesson Identified though: When correcting inclination - eyeball it - maneuver nodes are unreliable, as seen from the example bellow: The maneuver nodes are weird around extreme inclination burns - If I told the node just to burn Normal it would say that my craft would leave Minmus SOI before reaching the northern hemisphere. I had to adjust by also pulling on the retrograde node for the maneuver to stay in orbit. In the end the maneuver node did not work - and I ended up just burning Normal and eyeballing it. (without leaving the Minmus SOI) The result was this: Notice how much much further apart the two vehicles would be before the burn was complete. As well as the wrong fuel bars from image 1 to 2 (which had a quick load between them) For detailed walkthrough of the pick up - see spoiler section bellow: Plotting the course to Base Camp One: the next leg - getting the rover back to Base Camp One was a simple maneuver that did not require a lot of Δv - since there was no need for a expensive correction inclination burn. And the correct direction could be picked from the start, The maneuver wasn't even required to be orbital and a sub-orbital path was charted: The rest was just a final victory lap, were the achievement could be marveled at. - a few course correction had to be done as I forgot to take the rotation of Minmus into account. The last thing to do was to pluck the rover back into base for a refuel - I was a bit nervous about this since the rover tilted the base when I tested this feature on the runway of KSC - the alignment was slightly off. My fix to this was to give all the base elements landing legs - not only because I anticipated it would be nice on uneven terrain, but also because I thought it would fix the tipping issue spoiler alert - it did: As you can see it worked fine - but for a moment I had real fears that docking the rover to the base would cause it all to do flips in the low gravity. My fears were unjustified - The rover was refueled. Although not to full, as I didn't want to empty the G.P.U - the G.P.U was dropped only half full because of weight synergy between the base modules and the dropships performance window (around ~10t cargo each) - but I expect that I need to either downgrade the rover fuel levels (which is fine) or upgrade the fuel amount for the generator (which is harder to pull off). there are many things to consider for future base missions. In the spoiler section below you will find a detailed walkthrough of the tour. Section D: The dropship tacking off after waiting for ICV - Explorer to get into an optimal position for rendezvous. I thought i was smart and waited for the ICV - Explorer to get around Minmus, so I didn't have to play catch up - I did not wait enough though. After doing the initial sub orbital burn to get the right AP for a intercept orbit set, I realized that I was going to get ahead of the target... New plan had to be made. I had 2 options: A. Make a inclination correction burn and set an orbit 10km higher than target - wait for it to catch up and perform rendezvous maneuver. B. extend the AP and to meet target on the other side of the planet - making use of the approx 30° difference in path and correct inclination and make the path orbital at target. Option A. was the safest - but would use more Δv - something that was a bit on the low side (in hindsight it would not have been an issue) - option B used less fuel - but would need to perform both circulisation and inclination correction at the same time (this would also not be an issue due to the low orbit speeds around Minmus) I decided upon B and in the end the relatively speed to target was only 50 m/s opun arrival- an easy correction. the dropship safely docked back at ICV - Explorer. The Δv between the dropships are all but spend now - which means It will be hard to perform another pick up of the rover in the future. Although that being said - the Crew Shuttles have enough Δv to land and take off on the Mun from a 10km orbit. and the two that landed the crew at Base Camp One only spend 1/3 of their Δv - having 921 left - so Δv could be taken from the Crew Shuttle still docked to the ICV - as it only need enough to perform an emergency landing in case of catastrophic event. Now the only thing left - was to dock the dropship back at the mothership and call it the day.For detailed walkthrough see spoiler section bellow: Moving Forward: Where as I have done the long stretch from a bit south of the Minmus Equator - to the northern hemisphere. I only came across 2 different biomes. And can I truly call the expedition a success when so many more biomes are left to be explored? So much Science can be done? The Δv of the Dropships may be spend - I may have done enough Rover Driving on Minmus for 1 life - But.. there are two perfectly well functioning Crew Shuttles at Base Camp One - with ~920 Δv on them each. Maybe a few further excursions to the other flats - the south pole etc. can be done to gather more science with them? Am I done with Minmus, or should I explore further before closing down the Minmus Base for now and fly the Kerbals home. I need to ponder on this. Stay Tuned for More!

Yes, Nate also said that this parallel workflow was speeding up subsequent releases versus the cadence of bugfixes... and that didn't happen, with 2 proposed bugfix releases before colonies having failed to even show up let alone have a date for the first one 4 months down the road. That's what I mean with "don't exist": They weren't there, even if under "muh parallel development" they were supposed to start working on stuff as soon as FS! left the dock. Once again, all they could show from colonies was static assets on editor scenes., same kind of hot air they were showing before release saying they had a full game. Allegedly, and that being considered only as a way to have some compassion to their work. Even if this is something they've actively denied and the people working on whatever was scrapped was... themselves still under the same leadership. Sure you could talk licenses, but it's useless if we don't know how much really was lost, that's a magnitude order more conjecture than whether KSP2 is currently dead. This + things like using the same middleware, and hitting the same walls as the prequel with the fuel flow calculations were heavily worrying.

KSP 1.12.x Kerbal Atomics [1.3.3] Last Updated January 22, 2022 This part pack is designed to provide some new nuclear thermal rockets for your spaceship-building pleasure. There are eight new engines, one in the 3.75m size class, four in the 2.5m size class, two in the 1.25m size class and one in the 0.625m size class. They are fuelled with LiquidHydrogen, and in some cases can use Oxidizer to boost their thrust at the cost of specific impulse. Liquid Hydrogen is less dense than liquid fuel, so for the same Delta-V, you will need more tank volume. To store your liquid hydrogen fuels, I've provided ModuleManager/B9PartSwitch configs that allow you to change the contents of stock tanks between LF/O, LH2/O, LF, O and LH2. These should work with most mod tanks, but no promises. However, Liquid Hydrogen is very temperamental and without the proper storage it will slowly evaporate ("boil off"). Therefore, I provide special cryogenic tanks bundled with the mod, that use a small amount of Electric Charge to stop the evaporation. This mod is designed to synergize well with Cryogenic Engines, and with the various Near Future Technologies mods I make. It is also fully integrated into the Community Tech Tree. Full Screenshot Gallery Frequently Asked Questions Q: RealFuels support? A: Talk to RealFuels people, not my issue. Q: Oxidizer isn't LOX, it's something else! A: You are completely free to do whatever you like and change it Q: How do I stop the engines from using LH2 and use LF instead? A: Install the NTRsUseLF patch in the Extras folder. Q: Why can't I refuel the Emancipator? A: It's a cheaty engine. It has a disadvantage. If you want to refuel it, you need to download NF Electrical and install the high complexity reactor integration patch. Licensing All code and cfgs are distributed under the MIT License All art assets (textures, models, animations) are distributed under an All Rights Reserved License. All bundled mods are distributed under their own licenses. Download Mirrors Primary (SpaceDock) Secondary (CurseForge) Tertiary (GitHub) Issue Tracking and Source If you appreciate this project, please consider contributing to my caffeine addiction! I really appreciate it, and also helps justify this time sink to my wife , which results directly in more models.