Search the Community

I don't know if this question's already been asked. If it has, please direct me to the answer. Thank you. And if this is not the right place to ask this question, please take me to whatever is. That being said, would we be able to use our craft files from KSP - or, for that matter, craft we downloaded from KerbalX - in KSP2? Sure, none of my craft are designed to go interstellar , but I figured I can start gathering money and science points quickly by using my already-proven-successful spacecraft to explore Kerbin and then the rest of the Kerbol system immediately afterwards. I already have a solid starter plane in my hangar, for instance, so the mid-air and surface surveys should be a snap. Some planets can be easily reached by my SSTOs as well, so there's a huge money-saver right there. At the very least, I can take my first steps into space exploration (again) without having to endure the headaches and test runs associated with starting from scratch. God knows how much we all hate those. When I do go interstellar, I may end up taking some parts of the old design (e.g. relay antenna, ore survey satellite, mobile base, plane) and slap it on the new spacecraft. After all, if I already have a working end-item, then all I would really need is a way to get said end-item to the target. If nothing else, at least KerbalX would still have some use for both games after KSP2 comes out. It could also host the new interstellar bases, spacecraft, et cetera. I hope we can, or else we're all doomed to severe migraines in the first steps alone. Also, on a related note, would MechJeb be compatible with KSP2 - and would it work in the same way as it did in KSP (embedded in command module)?

Social media was updated to reflect this. Any thoughts?

It would be so cool if there were rouge planets that where all different and orbited themselves so they would stay in place NAME IDEAS: (sorry if there all bad I am not the best at names) Twier Maybe pink and blue (maybe ice) Noover Maybe green Lipe (Idk what color it would be) IDK what else so yeah

I have an idea for the new engine in KSP2, that can be added as sort of near future technologies and be in the same position in relation to the other engines as the spike engine from KSP Here are articles about this https://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/feature/nasa-validates-revolutionary-propulsion-design-for-deep-space-missions https://newatlas.com/space/rotating-detonation-engine-ucf-hydrogen-oxygen/ https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/70511 It differs from another engines by less fuel consumption and more isp, but there is balance problem. It can be more expensive, but I'm not sure that in Progression mode will be money. In other way it weigh more and has lower thrust beacuse of its combustion chamber, detalied in last article conclusion. If spike engine had prototypes and was added in KSP1 (in 1 variation, let's add more of them), why not to add RDRE, becuse it also has many very promising prototypes and one of them from JAXA flew in space. Maybe it will be routine engine in near future, but won't be in KSP2. In this case I hope it will be added in KSP3, if it won't be added in KSP2 ;)

The rings and centrifuges that create artificial gravity on ships are very important parts for colonization ships, so I want to write some suggestions Variety of parts: In the gameplay demos, we only highlighted the rings. I don't know how many kerbals require one ring, but maybe the number of artificial gravity spots depends on the number of kerbals. Why not add rings of different diameters Also why not add other centrifuges besides rings for variety, different number of kerbals and with different characteristics. These could be discs, dwelling blocks on either side of the beam, and so on. That way you'd have an easier time choosing the right part just for your ship Physics: We all know that a centrifuge will have a kinetic momentum as it rotates. But since the system is closed and the total kinetic momentum must be conserved, the rest of the ship will rotate in the opposite direction, which will be uncomfortable. In addition to the centrifuge, it will be necessary to put more parts to compensate its rotation But the first thing that comes to mind is the gyroscopic effect https://pressbooks.online.ucf.edu/osuniversityphysics/chapter/11-3-precession-of-a-gyroscope/ If you have compensated the centrifuge as I described above, this effect will not appear. But this effect is very important I suggest that all these effects will be different because of different angular momentums of different centrifuges. So angular momentumsof disks, beams, rings will be different I wish that all these points were taken into account in the KSP2 and the physics would be more realistic and truthful

I understand that other discussions about relativity (generally special relativity) being added to the game for more realism in high speed interstellar travel, that being the addition of time delays between different spacecraft moving at higher speeds, or even more recently about a relativistic doppler effect. I can understand from a game development standpoint they seem like they would be quite difficult to add to the game, however, there are other aspects of special relativity that could be added that I think could be quite interesting. For example, as I previously mentioned, relativistic doppler effect (i.e. redshift/blueshift) could make stars in the front of the spacecraft's moving direction appear more blue and those behind appear redder. There is also a really interesting aspect of high speed travel in relativistic aberration, in that the angle of stars in the sky appear to converge at higher speeds, effectively changing the view of the sky. Think of approaching hyperspace in Star Wars, where the stars seem to stretch out as they go forwards, only in reality the stars would appear closer together in the direction you are moving and further apart behind you. I think that this could be a really interesting consideration to add to the game, and one that seems a lot less challenging than having different 'clocks' on each spacecraft. These effects would only be noticeable at the really high speeds, and perhaps not necessary to add to the game depending on the gameplay of interstellar travel, but still an interesting suggestion I think. I realise that someone else could have also mentioned this previously, but it occurred to me recently how interesting it would be to see in this game.

In KSP you encountered with problem of rover placement on lander. It is quite difficult to secure the rover with a decoupler because they are designed for tanks not rovers. And there is problem with different heights of rover on lander and surface. To not to suffer making skycrane without ropes or add gyrodines to to roll over rover in case of an unfortunate fall from the platform I suggest just to add ramps Because width between wheels can be different, it is obvious to make ramps kinda procedural part. It also must secure rover before landing and this function can be resuable or not. Of course ramps must be folding, as for example on astrobotic griffin lander or another same type rover landers

Concern about the level of surface detail on celestial bodies in KSP 2 Today, I watched a KSP 2 gameplay video with beta footage of a ship landing on Vall. Below is a screenshot from this video, which was posted on Kerbal Space Program's official Twitter page: When I first watched this video, I thought the footage was from KSP 1. Vall is a jagged ice world, yet the terrain showcased in the video is surprisingly smooth and flat. Considering that boring celestial body surfaces are one of KSP 1's biggest gameplay problems, the lack of terrain detail here is extremely concerning. Other KSP 2 screenshots and gameplay videos demonstrate the same issue. Consider this image, which was taken directly from Intercept's KSP 2 website: No surface scatters are visible--just smooth, procedural hills. The sand and rocks the Kerbal is standing on appear to be merely 2D textures with normal mapping. Here's Bop: Bop's surface looks better than the other moons because of the terrain scatters, which are spread across the ground in random, uneven clumps. These rocks are simple and samey in appearance. KSP 2's celestial body surfaces are certainly improvements over KSP 1; however, I don't believe they can be described as having "unprecedented detail" and "variety" at this point in time.

We already know that KSP 2 will be built using a newer version of Unity but have we got any information on the new technologies the game might use that weren't in KSP 1? I'm talking things like HDR, ray tracing, DLSS/FSR, VRR, etc. The only thing I've noticed myself is that they seem to use HDR Color picker in Unity in this dev diary. Does this mean the game would have some meaningful HDR support?

1. Grid fins. They would be a great addition and help enhance aerodynamics. 2. more heat shields. This would be great for atmospheric re-entry in sph ships, like the heat shield used by the space shuttles. 3. Bulding and customizing your facility. It would be awsome if you could choose where to place your buildings and customize them. 4. Custom flags. I think it would be great for ksp 2 to be able to upload a custom flag, this would go great with the new color customization that is planned for ksp2. 5. Make manuver nodes easier to understand. This one is self explanitory. 6. Kerbal customization. I would love a KSP avater creator, maybe there could even be randomly generated kerbal avatars. 7. Sandox mode planet creator. It would be AWSOME if we could create our own planets in sandbox mode. It would be cool if we could share our systems/planets in the workshop. So thats my recomendations.

I play Kerbal Space Program since rhe beginning of the last year, and I think there are some little details that could make KSP way better, like air an air compressor, wich transforms intake air in oxidiser using some EC (it could be an IRSU feature) and the possibility to (as a cheat in Sandbox mode) add parts and edit the rockets that are already launched; another cool feature could be an air-distributing sistem just like the fuel one. Another thing I think should be changed is that you must set structural pilons for every part singularly, making this a very long process for big rockets. I think those could be small, usefull features and changes to the gameplay.

Imagine visting Duna and seeing solar glare from Kerbol. Or landing on Laythe and seeing a meteor shower. I think that the small things, like auroras on Kerbin and Laythe and small flashes visible from Jool's moons on Jool (meant to represent turbulent lightning storms). I don't even think this really has to be features in the game world; it could even be a change in other aspects. What i'm asking for really is just some small details that add to the realism and immersion of KSP2. Some more examples would be the frequent solar storms on red dwarfs; if there is a red dwarf (We don't really know what System 3 is), then solar storms would be great. Another good thing with gas giants would be the way that wind currents travel on them. Wind currents travel in bands on Jool; this implies that there are belts and zones on Jool, just like on Jupiter. In that case, the zones would be high, cold air, i.e icy and therefore lighter in color. the zones generally move slower than the belts; but their relative speed varies. They also form less storms. Again, the immersion benefit would be absolutely massive if these sort of tiny, but good, changes make it into KSP2.

In the game now in the pause menu there is only a button to "Exit to the menu", but in most other games there is also a button to "Exit to Windos". This is very important because it saves people time so they do not have to load the main menu before closing the game

So i was looking around the KSP 2 Develpompent ideas, and I couldn't find any "General Ideas" Threads. So I made one. My Ideas: In the colony construction, let us make monorails that can take Kerbal diffent places, or even another colony. The rails would be fairly cheap, but the train part would be much more expensive. The part manufactutear would be KNRF, or Kerbin National Railway Foundaion. Yet another plug to get my fake company into KSP 2. So that is my short idea! Also, please put exoplanet ideas into this thread. https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/203802-exoplanet-ideas/

I thought about KSP2 game mode, which will replace career mode, and decide that this "progression" mode must have some important details to correspond to its name or/and meaning When you played career in original game, you after achieving records have messages in game mails from Kerbin World-Firsts Record-Keeping Society about your achievements. You could see them in your contracts journal. But in KSP2 I'm not sure we will have contracts and journal, maybe only archive with science notes. And I suggest my idea of improved journal After reaching orbit or surface of some celestial object or another important event you will have in your journal date and description of event: where and what you did, name of spacecraft, names of kerbals if it had it. For example: Year 245 Date 5/6 11:34 First landing on Mun by autonomus spacecraft Lander-1 Year 245 Date 7/9 22:57 First fly-by of Duna by autonomus spacecraft Dun-3 Year 246 Date 2/1 16:04 First landing on Mun with crew Jeb Kerman and Bill Kerbal by spacecraft Mun-lander Year 246 Date 4/3 00:48 First fly-by of Minmus with crew Bob Kerval, Bill Kerbal and Tim Kervin by spacecraft Orbit_minmus ... Year 259 Date 9/1 08:45 The Duna colony Duna-Startown population reached 500 kerbals How it will fit into the game depends of developers' view, maybe it will be in archieve with science or there will be another special journal This will highlight all your steps and achievements on the path of space exploration, and they will not be forgotten, but rather enshrined in the journal. You can easily turn your gaze to the past and see all the path you have passed. This journal will be the history of space exploration of kerbalkind It will encourgae players to reach new limits, thereby adding to the list of achievements in the journal. It can be comfortble fuction for speedrunners because they will have be able to record their achievements in pleasant form. For multiplayer space race can be also added name of player's agency in message Overall I expect also improved writing in game, and not only parts, but agencies, sciences experiments, bodies will have interesting and important descriptions with lore of game

They should have destroyed ships floating around in space stuff Like in Career or Science mode you can recover them and get Science and Reputation and also fun thing to find on the tracking station I would personally LOVE THIS!!! Let me know of your thoughts

I imagined how will look like space skycrapers with fusion engines in KSP2, and remembered a beautiful serial from my childhood: Space Odyssey: Voyage to the Planets. I saw that I wasn't alone and many another people watched it. The most coolest moment from serial is starting sequance, the beginning. I have looked for OST for a year and finally I found that Don Davis downloaded complete OST on Youtube I believe it is perfect music to feel like a discoverer who starts voyage to kerbal system planets on your interplannetary spaceship with thermonuclear engine to research worlds far beyond your homeworld

So I was thinking about it and was wondering if there could be an optional Water requirement for Kerbals like you could collect water and stuff from like the oceans and ice from Duna or other and that I think would add another reason the use ore/maybe ice Tanks for missions and such

I recently went back and looked at KSP 2's feature show case Episode 5: Interstellar Travel. And I noticed something at around 1:20: "-And you see, like in the real world, closet star is about four lightyears away." Now, Nate doesn't outright call the 'closet star' Debdeb, but seeing as Debdeb is the first interplanetary system, it would make sense to make it the next one over and the closet. If Debdeb is 4 LYs away, then that means we're going to be spending a LOT of time in empty space. Yes, we'll have time warp, but we don't know how fast time warp will be in KSP 2 yet. I doubt they'll make time warp fast enough to get us 4 LYs in a few seconds, even with the Daedalus which would theoretically take us to 7% to 12% the speed of light. Now one could make the argument: "Well, it's kerbal, so the distances will be shortened. 1/10 the size remember?" To which I say, no. Again, I quote, "-And you see, like in the real world, closet star is about four lightyears away." Like in the real world. That to me tells me that, no, the distances aren't cut down. We have a full 4 lightyear journey to look forward to with Debdeb. Which brings me to my next speculation: The "To be revealed" solar system will be beyond 10 lightyears from Kerbol, possibly 10 lightyears beyond Debdeb making it 14+ LYs from Kerbol. These are just my thoughts and opinions. I would like to hear from the community about these speculations and whether you feel I hit the hammer on the head or if I'm off center. I would also like you know 3 things: 1) Will you go to Debdeb when it's added or wait for the "To be revealed" system to be added? 2) If waiting, why? 3) If waiting, will you shoot for TBR first, skipping Debdeb entirely? Why?

Hello dev team and Kerbalers! I feel like probes and satellites in KSP1 are quite not worth the investment, it is always better to build a manned rocket to go to a planet to gather science, rather to send a probe to that body. I think it needs to be looked at and reworked, rather for science probes to be limited in science transmission, it would be much better to implement a system, where you first need to scan the planet or it's surrounding area first, to know what to get, so first you would send a probe and that will allow you to pick more science, whenever you send a manned mission. But to avoid situations where you send a manned vehicle with probing-grade stuff, I would make those probes parts really not worth the investment in a situation, where you want to send a manned mission (like, the cost or some limitations like that - like an option to calibrate manned mission equipment for that particular planet, so the price spikes up with manned missions a lot (similar cost with manned and unmanned so combining those two are basically a waste of money). This way the player is encouraged to do things like in the real world. It's obvious we scan planets or objects of interest first, transmit the findings, where we build upon a manned mission to that object, based on the data we have got from those probes. Other than that, the entire idea of space telescopes would be neat! Like, to find a planet, first you need to build either a ground telescope or a space-based one, to find it, analyze it and then probe mission to map it to see what to expect, then and only then, a manned mission is the next logical step. So to summarize: Mission cost where probe equipment is paired with manned mission is ridiculously high To get full science, you need to analyze the planet/object Manned science equipment needs to be calibrated for full science return The only way to get calibration data is by analyzing the data coming from the probe Implementation of telescopes to find new bodies

In KSP we fill tanks with two combinations for liquids - kerosine and kerolox, and in ksp are special tanks for each combination. I would like to suggest a more complex but more comfortable mechanic for future. You can fill tanks with any (I mean liquids) type of resource and limit is only volume of tank and total volume of your resources. Here how it will work You open settings of tank and choose what you want to fill the tank with - specific mix (methan, metalox, hydrolox, hydrogen), which provides right proportions of components, or your custom mix. To avoid confusion in which tank what fuel I propose to make a filter that when you turn it on the tanks displayed the type of mix. So that a beginner is not confused by all this at first, it is possible to make methalox as the basic mix There aren't mentioned xenone, ores or exotic fuels becuase for these resources the special tanks are needed I think that function will reduce amount of tanks -> amount of parts and simplify using of different fuels for all spacecrafts

A recommendation for people looking for more difficulty in the game, add the potential for parts failure as an option. Engine failures, control surfaces sticking, gimbal lock, partial damage states for parts overstressed by aerodynamic or gravitational forces. Maybe for each of those add a way to mitigate the potential for these problems too, balanced against extra weight for reinforcement or reduced speed for an aircraft. Several mods out there already based on realism and equipment limitations.

Here's a first look at the in-progress Kerbal Space Center, showing off the beautiful work of artists Matt Reynolds and Jordan Pack.

Hello, if KSP2 will have more advanced manoeuvre planner than KSP, why not to add landing prediction? On the eye it is hard to predict where you land, because you can't really know how atmosphere resistance will affect on trajectory and how point of landing will move because of planet rotation. It would make game more easier, which can damage spirit or/and experience of ksp I think, but it can reduce another not so pleasent routine and you can concentrate on more interesting things. And it doesn't cancel process of creating your mission's route, when you plane all maneuvres and where you will land and start. Also you always have choice to not use this function if you don't like it Maybe you can balance this function by unlocking it only when you reached certain level of space center or have certain amount of navigation satellites on orbit

Realistic aerodynamics is not only an essential topic for aerospace engineering, it is absolutely FASCINATING. I wanted to break the sound barrier with the Farrem Aerospace mod and the Realistic Progression mod tech tree. This led me to spend a whole 2 days researching aerodynamics, including watching the old Shell Oil film "High Speed Flight," which explained all the considerations of transonic and supersonic flight. This included elevator issues, thin wings, the area rule, sweeping wings behind the shock wave so they experience subsonic flow, etc. I spent 2 days excitedly researching, but I had also taken both incompressible and compressible flow courses. Think of all the fun I would have had if I were to discover those aerodynamic principles for the first time! If the developers want to make a game marketed as being a fun way to educate the next generation of engineers and scientists, they should go all the way and implement realistic aerodynamics so players can try to break the sound barrier and optimize the aerodynamic profile of their spaceplane for supersonic flight. Procedural nozzles could even be added just to experiment with optimizing engine efficiency for different atmospheric pressures (future update?). Make the game the ultimate sandbox of aerospace engineering! (The same goes for including realistic n-body gravitation like in the principia mod! But while it can and should be implemented I know it probably won't be...)