Search the Community

rn I’ve been eating a weird amount in a short amount of time. Just a bit ago I had pizza, a Coke (slurp slurp) then thinly sliced Parmesan (yum yum), and then chips. jeez...

Rules: 1. You have to use a planets name from the Kerbal Universe to make a sentence. 2. You cannot repeat the same sentence but, you can repeat the same planet. 3. As usual stay within the forum rules 4. I post per user So I'll start: This is the most easiest forum game. EVE-n a baby kerbal could play it!

there are a lot of choices in the tech tree the more you go, and it can be overwhelming. I wanted to see what you guys thought! Me personally, I go for either the cheapest, or I think ahead and go for the science.

So, just wondering.... I've never built a solar system or made a mod, but would it be possible to make large bodies collide? I am just seeing the possibilities with interstellar in the base game of an occurrence where a solar system or rogue planet comes into the Kerbolar system and perhaps worlds collide. I realize I am asking a bit (maybe more than a bit) much. But even then nuclear explosions will be base game as well (praying for mushroom clouds....) so would it at least be possible to have asteroid impacts (on impact replace the asteroid with a comparable resized nuclear explosion)? Maybe even world ender ones like the one that killed the dinosaurs. Then we could have "save kerbin" missions

Congrats! Long live KSP! So, what would you like to see in KSP 3?

This is the chart I'm referencing. It is beautiful but I don't understand how it works. Where does it tell me how much delta V I need to get into Kerbin orbit, and then how much to go from there to Mun, and then to capture Mun orbit, and then back to Kerbin etc?

Alright Good People, I'm very sorry but have to come clean now. I am so incredibly thankful to SQUAD for giving us the opportunity to even if sometimes faulty, give us the opportunity to simulate some of our nerdiest dreams. Those dreams that we only dear to shear with our computers or consoles lol. Ksp allows me to peer with people that understand what Delta V is with out they looking at me as if I just insulted their mother. True is that I studied Law and I did so at a place some people say is the best place in the world to do so. With out dropping the H - bomb as I like to call it. Ksp made me not only change studies but also school, luckily both in same city. Judging from your opinions and answers you all are smart to the last hair in your bodies and make me feel at home among fellow nerds. When it comes to de delay. I could not give a blank, I did not even know about it until I read it was delayed lol. But I guess since we all were so satisfied playing the game as it was, we won't have have a problem continuing doing so until this new stuff comes out right? Actually I agree with those who say not to ruin what we already have that is working just to put new stuff out. I guess other game developers don't have to keep true to the laws of physics in space, they can from time to time be a female dog. Please forgive my trolling nature, but the rumor was that this is the nerdiest forum on the world wide web and I'm not disappointed. Keep orbiting and may the delta V be with you always. Would it not bee cool if MIT had a ksp tournament where everyone could participate? Someone up to it? With real life prizes and stuff?

Lets talk about Eve landers here, with docking or no, i believe that some of you are having a hard time, feel free to ask questions, or answering questions related to Eve landers

Is it me or does this update feel "Incomplete".There are parts that got an overhaul but other parts that are meant to go with that didnt get the overhaul and now crafts seem like a mess. Heres what i mean: The MK 1 chute looks completly out of place with the pod. Aswell the hammer and flea engine.... (Sarcasam alert) Oh squad i absolutly love how you took 2 unique engine models and made a new one for the hammer and said Lets cut the hammer in half!...Yeah that`s the flee engine we whanted!.....Really squad?The flee engine is literaly the hammer cut in half!. Really this update is really boring and a bit pointless.No one asked for a part revamp.The closet thing in saw that some asked for a part revamp was I that asked for a revamp on the kerbals suit(Which I like how they turned out).But people have been asking for ages for multiplayer....Better graphics....Updates on the console version......new stuff to explore.....more planets.....new game mechanics....you named it.

Now I do like to host races on Kerbin, but everytime I set up a challenge people use quicksave while racing. Why would you do that ? I came to understand that quicksaving can save you from bugs, that's totally fine by me. But why cheat (yes, I call it cheating) in a challenge ? What is worst is that I can't prevent people from quicksaving, there is no way to check if they did or not. Let me know what you think and let's be civil about it.

In a sense, it's a continuation of my "landing legs settings" question. There are many "tall-and-lanky using landing legs" landers, such as this guy (not mine). However, they are able to land easily (I think) without the bouncing and falling over syndrome during my test. So why are they able to do it, while my attempt failed until I gone with this?

This where people can discuss their problems with KSP or the bugs they found.

This is a thread where we discuss and talk about... you guessed it-Easter Eggs! First and Foremost, the Orange Circle on Bop. I have not gone there myself, but I've seen pics of it. What do you think? My guess is that the corpse of the Elder Kraken is interfering with Bop, due to being buried in the rock of Bop.

hi I don't understand those joints. First, I do have this situation: root -> ... something -> truss -> FL-R10 RCS Fuel Tank (0.1 t) -> Extendatron Basic (0.2 t) -> Extendatron Stackable (0.15 t) -> something -> massive heavy tank The Extendatrons are horizontaly attached. Now, the first joint is massively bended and unstable, while the second one is strong like hell (but both use the same force/spring/whatever values). Fine... this can be explained with the "lower mass == weaker". But: is it just the relation of those masses or is it the absolute mass as well that's influencing the strength?? ... and what I don't understand: why is the rigidBody.mass 1 for both parts? and... which mass is now the relevant one? how can I find it? (I need it, if I want to set the new "massScale" correctly) And... massScale... does it help, to set massScale and connectedMassScale to let's say 10 ? or is just the relation between those masses interesting? ... do further child/parent objects of the 2 connected object also have an influence on the joint? Would be nice if we could answer some questions about joints, now that we got a new Unity version.

Building an Eve biome hopper. Horizontal take off with wings, twin Vector engines. put the nose in the air and you can get an Ap of 120/140 km, and come down a quarter of a planet away, on Kerbin, I figure that means about a sixth of Eve. Its an Intercontinental Ballistic Airplane. My question is about lower- slower flight. What is my best strategy for flying an overpowered plane that goes through fuel so quickly? Short bursts of full throttle followed by long periods of gliding? Or a small amount of continuous thrust? Subsonic and low? or climb to 7 km and bust the sound barrier? - and then glide? but for how long? down to Mach 1, or down to stall speed? So many options!

They label themselves a hard sci-fi, non-open-world starfighter sim a la Star Citizen. Their dev team profiles have notable names on them. They namedrop big things. But am I the only one who fails to see a connection between rather ordinary starfighter sim gameplay that goes on on the screen, and the hard sci-fi fluff they push on the side? Visible lasers, extremely close-range dogfighting, some of the ships noticeably lack radiators, one of the ships has pronounced atmospheric features... hell, it seems there aren’t any SC-style gimballed weapon moints!

Wishing to make a little novella set a few thousand years in the future where interstellar travel is comon. In the hopes of using time dilation as a plot device, I want to make some ships capable of travelling at close to c with a constant 1g acceleration, while staying within the realm of possibility. I was hoping you guys could help to make sure that the propulsion concepts i was planning to use were still scientifically accurate, for the most part. To solve the "where did you get all that antimatter?" hole, I know that the collision of two specific kinds of white dwarves can generate lots of antimatter. Since fusion reactors somewhat replicate the conditions inside a star, it seems feasible that a very powerful, unstable fusion reactor could produce antimatter. So what if the reactor destroys itself in the process! You have antimatter! Let's just assume it's a very expensie fuel source. The only somewhat cheaty thing i plan to do is give humanity thermocouples that are close to 100% efficient. I'd prefer not to have to deal with hundreds of kilometres of radiators. Now on to the ideas: Antimatter- So i know that typical matter-antimatter collisions produce exhaust velocities of about 0.33c. Too low for me. I also know that pure electron-positron annihilation produces velocities closer to 0.56c, which is what i need. Is there any possible way to magnetically store electrons on their own, or to supercharge normal matter with hundreds of electrons apiece and store that? (don't mind if the magnetic storage takes crazy amounts of energy (thermocouples!) or if some of the fuel decays over the two-year transfer time due to quantum tunneling). Also, what are the actual equations that are used to determine the destructive capabilities of antimatter? Bussard Ramjet- I know that these supposedly have a "terminal velocity" of 0.2c, but this assumption seems to imply that the hydrogen is sped up to roughly the same speed as the ship before being fused. I was planning to use a series of magnetic wireframe nozzles a couple hundred kilometres across placed a few light minutes at maximum in front of the ship to ionize the incoming hydrogen (using beamed power from the ship) and nudge it into the ship's reactor. These nozzles could also use the ionized hydrogen to propel themselves at the same pace as the rest of the ship. Light Sails- Probably incapable of near-lightspeed travel, but maybe a cheap way to transport cargo at reasonable speeds. A ship could use an engine to get close to a star, and then unfurl a solar sail at perihelion. A quick calculation based on the amount of power the earth gets tells me that a circular 100km sail placed 6.4 million km from the sun (the closest we can get a spacecraft with our current technology i believe) would be hit with about 3.0*10^16 watts of energy (give or take an order of magnitude). Is this reasonable? Black Holes- Could a black hole be used as a gravitational slingshot to get ships close to the speed of light? Thanks for reading this.