Search the Community

Greetings, fellow KSP 1 enthusiasts. This forum post is a fun one. A "give a little, get a lot" type of post. After much thought and excitement, I’ve decided to make the leap and become a KSP YouTuber! I used to deem myself too shy and reserved for that, but I decided to make the leap as you can tell. That’s one small step for a Kerbal, but one giant leap for Kerbalkind! Basically, long story short, I gave making a Kerbal Space Program video a try the day before I wrote this post (July 4th, 2024!!!!) and found that it actually felt quite natural. There I was thinking that my voice might have been a bit too grating or whatever-you-want-to-call-it for that, but upon listening back to it that day, I realized it was the contrary. So, that being said, my request is simple: send me whatever KSP video idea you have, as long as it's actually feasible, which is much different from practical, so that I can try it out! I feel like, in doing that with all of you, that might serve to be one of the best parts, if not the. Whether it’s challenges, mission concepts, or spacecraft designs, I want to hear it all. I’m ready to take on ambitious, daring, and out-of-the-box ideas that do things like play around with the boundaries of what can be done in Kerbal Space Program and such. It’s like taking a piece of your imagination and beaming it up by broadcasting it to the entire community. How legendary is that? It's a win-win: you get the perks that come with being the one who gave me my video idea, and I get the fun challenge. And, well, people need things to help them stay sane, right? Well, KSP is one of those things for sure, and I feel like what I have described would and will be a welcome supplementary addition. Got things too adventurous, crazy, simply plain dumb, or maybe even merely too involved to try out, but still want to see? I got you covered. Keep those Kerbals safe and sound. I'll do it. This is about unity... Unity Engine unity, even — coming together as a fandom and showing what happens when you pool collective genius. It’s about creating something epic together, turning the spotlight on each and every one of you who wants it, whilst giving credit where it’s due. As of writing this post, I was ready to start making KSP videos for all of you to watch short of having the channel for it created yet. But that is precisely the plan, and, as much skill as I may have with making KSP videos, I want and even need your ideas, which is why I wrote this post. So... go ahead! Type out what you want to see, and I will talk to you about it ASAP. What are you waiting for?! I'd count "Make it rain Kerbals on the KSC!!!" as a valid request and do it if that's what you asked. Your idea, my execution! Minimal effort, maximum reward! Get a shoutout! Be a part of something fun!

Do you think that there should be reactive missions? I.E.G: Find Jeb’s lost sandwich on minmus, and you actually have to do an EVA and pick up an actual sandwich. Or rescue lost kerbals?

Planet Staus: A Concept, No ideas or textures. Just Started making, May be a name and texture. First Prototype. May be planet pictures. Pre-Release: I will leave a link to download the planet for peeps to test. I want some feedback if you were to test it. PLS This means the planet is complete and it will be downloadable in a planet pack when it is released. The Planets A Hot-Jool Planet at about half the orbit of Moho with alot of moons Moon 1: A lava moon. May have another small moon orbiting it Moon 2: A less Lava-y Moon. May have a big crack in it Moon 3: A very small red Asteroid moon Moon 4: Another moon may be a small moon or an asteroid one. This planet would have rings Fazo/Faza : An asteroid Moon of Moho Moho may be re-textured A third Kerbin Moon/Probably a asteroid Moon 2 water planets, 1 between Eve and Kerbin and one between Kerbin and Duna Get rid of Ike for 2 smaller duna moons. Sarna: A Gas Giant bewteen Duna and Jool Dres and Vall are moons Will Probably add more moons Jool will have many more Asteroid Moons and will probably. Goal 20 moons. Uarnus: Has a odd ring and many moons orbiting in weird inclinations Nedo : A Planet with a heavy atmosphere which gives it oceans Neiden : A Light Blue gas giant with not as many moons as Jool. Will have many weird and Interesting moons. Armedia: One of a few dwarf planets on the kerbol system outskirts Pluti : Another Dwarf Planet. Erno: A third Dwarf Planet Xi : A ROuge planet that entered the outskirts of the Kerbol System Stars: Sol: This star holds our home system. Alpha Centari Trappist:1 A couple rouge planets. Maybe a random pulsar. A made up 2nd solar system. Contents unknown This are my ideas so far. If you have any ideas or name suggestions pls comment them. I want more things and this is a ll i got

Disclaimer: While I have not yet purchased KSP2, I have been following the development and launch though the dev’s own promotional material and player reviews. The following are just some personal views and observations. Being a long-term player of KSP, I was excited at the announcement of a sequel. But I was also apprehensive as to the direction the game would be taken. I had been playing flight sims on and off since 2004, so when I came across KSP it was the perfect union between a simulation game and physics sandbox I didn’t know I needed. KSP2 has the potential to take that unique formula and expand it, unshackled by it’s predecessors roots as a simple unity project. It is my understanding that KSP2 was written from scratch, and does not borrow source code from KSP1 (please correct me if I’m wrong). This should have left the doors wide open for a radical re-imagining of what KSP (and space sims as a whole) could be. Instead, the developers chose to make Kerbal Space Program, again. Albeit, with some very welcome quality of life improvements and graphical upgrades. Because of this approach, I’ve seen bugs and physics problems have either been solved or alleviated in the original for years, re-appear in the sequel. For example, wobbly rockets, which is an inherent problem of a vehicle made from dozens of interconnected parts, was worked around in KSP1 using struts and later auto-struts. KSP2 presented the developers with an opportunity to redo the vehicle assembly and parts physics from the ground up. But instead, in an attempt to stick with the familiar ‘pick and place’ building method, they have given themselves the same obstacles they already overcame years ago. The tutorials, while not a big deal for plyers like myself, are an important part of making an otherwise technical game accessible. But if the developers felt that the accessibility of the first game is lacking, I see no reason why that tutorial system could not have been added in an update. The feature set to come to KSP2 during its early access development are exciting, but it’s hard to ignore the fact that most, if not all of these features are already available though KSP1’s modding scene. And while I’m sure that these feature can be well implemented by the devs, to me, it still doesn’t justify the sequel on its own. I would have liked to see an overhaul of the vehicle assembly system, including: Fully procedural parts like fuel tanks, engines and even habitation and command modules. N-body physics instead of sphere of influence orbital mechanics (even if it is just for the currently active craft). And maybe even control of kerbals inside spacecraft and habitation modules. But It's looking like we're not going to get the next generation space sim we've been hoping for. Thanks if to made to the end of my ramble, I needed to get this off my chest. Fly safe!

I lnow its too late as the Title suggests.. but i had a very stupid thougt while at work today and thought i would share it here for you Devs to ponder about adding maybe in the future. My idea is.... A kerbal grave yard for the Brave Kerbalnauts the didnt Quite make it back home, with broken ship parts as the headstones and maybe a small video player linked that saved the last few minutes of their flight, with info about where they died and their misson logs ( how many flights / orbits and jobs and levels). Just so that the kerbals that knew them ( Posibly animated walking around the memorials) and the Director of the Program can remeber them fondly and set off Fireworks in their Honour. As i said its a stupid idea that i think would add a little more Kebalality to the little dude that we see panic each and every flight!! Let me know what you guys think.

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/

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

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

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

So I want to build a rocket car does anyone have any ideas to use for it (I have no mods just breaking ground). The fastest rocket car ever in ksp was 3,500 MPH but it uses mods.

Everyone wants colors. This is a known fact. Colors for rockets, colors for kerbals (suits), and colors for colonies. I know most of this has been confirmed by the KSP2 team, but how do you think this will work? Some ideas for parts: Some ideas for kerbals: Some ideas for colonies: One last idea: (might have strayed away a bit from a game about building and flying rockets) I don’t know if all the things listed above are possible, but these would all be cool in KSP2

Hi all, i have some ideas for features in the new game First off, i'd like to talk about "Suit Upgrades." You can find them in the administration building in career and science mode, but in sandbox they are automatically unlocked for you. In career you have to use credits to purchase the upgrades. That makes us go to Grav Boots. Do you hate it when you make an interior for your ship, only for your kerbals to float? That's where gravboots come in. You can toggle them with a button press and they make you stick to the floor and walk around like if the ship was landed. Something else i'd like to note is interchangeable launchpad designs. I know the game wilI have launch towers, but i would like them to be colorable and customizeable to fit rocket sizes, something like modular launch pads does. Also a weird idea, but i want cosmetics inside of the pods. Like, say i could add maybe a teddy bear or something in the pod. In iva, it will be there, and the lower the gravity gets it might float. I would want that feature to liven up ivas. hope people like and agree with these ideas, maybe to the point they're implemented. And, speaking of suit upgrades, i'd also love the feature to be able to upgrade the jetpack, for it to consume less fuel, or go faster, or consume different types of fuels. I would also absolutely adore communication upgrades for suits, for longer range signal bouncing. Edit: i have more ideas. How about docking ports that your crew can go through, kinda like connected living spaces? Also, i would love adjustable or longer ladders.

I had a mad idea last night. If this isn't fiesable for the game, I sure hope it will be for a mod: Monorails. Inspired by Lego Space sets, perhaps surface-based trade routes between different colonies on the same world could be strengthened by building a monorail. Gameplay-wise Monorails would be faster, deliver more resources and cost less to operate than regular surface trade route missions, but require a major investment of time to build at the outset. I've included pictures to show what I mean. Here is a representative colony on some planet/moon, with the vehicle assembly building and some other attached modules. The red building is a buildable module that serves as a kerbal passenger station and freight loading depot. As far as trade routes are concerned, this building is what's functioning in the player's economy. Everything else is just cosmetic decoration for their surface base(s). At the station, the player can easily adjust the frequency of train departures and arrivals to match their economic needs or whatever. Or perhaps just put a dial that says "send a passenger train every 15 minutes". Forgive the crudity of these models, it's all simple illustration. Yellow indicates track, which is procedural generated (see below). Red towers are the support columns for the track, and these are the things which cost the aforementioned time to build. They're plopped on the surface like Deployable experiments. Once deployed, they cannot be moved or affected by outside forces and behave like invincible structures. Between the center-points of the deployed tower structures, a virtual curve is interpolated. A straight line is virtually drawn which points to the previous tower (cyan). This straight line drives the control points of some kind of spline (blue). This spline then is offset for Left and Right track paths (black). The track is then procedurally generated along the virtual path (orange, shown above). This also becomes the governing path of where the train vehicle goes, which is then animated when a train is sent to or from a station. No, I'm not trying to imagine KSP2 as a game that competes with Surviving Mars or Per Aspera or Cities Skylines. It just occurred to me and I thought I'd share. Again, if nothing else, it's a novel idea for a mod.

Hello, i just wanted some ideas for Duna lander, becuase i tried to make one, but all of my attempts were unsuccesfull. The final product is wobbly as hell and the landing struts are very unstable, engine efficienty is very poor. I want a lander that can fit and dock. Don't worry i have both DLC's because i'm attracted to this game! I got to the mun like 67 times and it's getting boring, so i wanna go to Duna, but my spacecraft is very unstable, wobbly and inefficient. You can give me any ideas you want, i am an ace at maneuvering and redenzvous. Thank you!

I'm just curious, since I have a few asteroids that I've mined, but I don't know what I should do with them

I would love to have a Camera of the Groundcrew, just like the IVA cam. The Groundcrew could cheer when a Rocket lands on Mun or cry when it explodes.

What do you think about some Spectators who could watch a launch?

Thanks to @Hotel26and his boost glider idea, as well as @swjr-swisand his additional design ideas, I decided to create my own Science Boost Glider for use on atmospheric worlds. The savings on fuel would be great and makes sense to me. I will use a standard launch vehicle to get a return pod and a boost glider to a planet with atmosphere and collect (nearly) all science that I can in what is essentially a single mission! Using the boost glider means it can easily be the same tonnage as my usual landers however the bonus is, with its ability to 'skip-hop' across the planet, I can use the same fuel and vehicle to get science from each biome in a single shot and return in the same mission instead of sending multiple missions or large refueling facilities. My first attempt was the XP-87 Harpy (7.603 tonnes empty; 13.723 tonnes fueled) I used a MK2 service bay, crammed all the science I could in it, and tested it. It flew pretty good and needed only a very short runway to get airborne. Quick shot of the service bay. The problem was it kept hitting an altitude ceiling that was essentially too low for my purposes. Switching modes it still could not effectively leave the atmosphere and skim in with any fuel left. It also had an over heating problem in the RAPIER because of how hard I pushed it while it was still in the atmosphere. I didn't want to add radiators or precooler at this stage since it really wasn't performing as I would like. So... the design was nice, but the changes would switch COM and airlift enough to require a redesign... I just started over and used twin intake and engine from a failed (for my purposes) SSTO design (XP-62) and meshed it with the science, basic wing design from the XP-87 to create a completely new Boost Glider... XP-88 Peryton (10.840 tonnes Empty; 18.940 tonnes Fueled) It may be larger, but the result was great! Exactly what I was looking for! Of course there was some heating on reentry that could be worrisome, but this is it! It is actually more maneuverable than the Harpy due to better lift to COM placement and COM movement during fuel drain. I am now going to finish up the design, put on the lights, RCS, struts and this bad boy will be commissioned the KBG-001 PERYTON in time for Vals return from Mun. Many thanx to the guys with the good ideas (Hotel26 and swjr-swis) and to the kerbals brave enough to test these theories out!

I am not a very creative person and I really want to make a mod for KSP. If you guys have any concepts plz tell me and I'm gonna probably make a mod out of it.

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

Recently I have been getting into model rocketry and have always been a true KSP fan, and one day had an idea. BTW, this is only a suggestion, which I think would be a good idea. My suggestion is that KSP starts selling paratrooper (figure with parachute attached) kerbal action figures that can be put in real model rockets. They would fit in the fuselage above the parachute and have their own parachute, or be placed in payload fairings. They could be sold at either gaming or model rocket stores. Again, just a suggestion, but I think it would be a good idea. I do not know if something like it already exists, but I think it would be a nice touch. Let me know what you guys think! (This is my first thread so I don’t know if this would be the right category or tags.)

Recently i have been browsing on the internet and I have found this awesome fan art: This gave me an idea: what if there will be a mod that allows any landed "debris" to be "swallowed up" by the terrain? For example, if there is some piece of junk in the desert, it would be gradually covered up by the sand until it is fully covered up and then it would automatically be destroyed. Since i am not a programmer, and I think this is a great idea for a potential mod I, therefore, am calling out to anybody seeking for a challenge and/or inspiration to make this mod.

Hey everyone! I have built a ship and it seemed to work. But, it didn't (as usual...) The problem: Every time I do a broadside with the 12 M1-Abrams at once, the ship's opposite side instantly rips open and nearly always crashes the game... So, can someone help me with this? Here are the mods required 1.)Firespitter 2.)BDAc (BD Armory Continued) 3.)TweakScale (I think so...) PS: It might lag, it has over 1500 parts, you see. (If you have a CoreI7, 8GB of RAM and Intel HD960 Graphics AND a x64 bit Computer Expect to wait around 2-5 MINUTES before seeing the craft and, it has a tendency to break upon splashing things...) I will upload the craft file shortly... (If you decide to use this craft, go ahead but, please give me credit for spending around a week building it, I had exams in the middle...) Thanks.

I'm chock-full of ideas for stories and novels. Most of them sci-fi, but some aren't. Here's a list of my ideas and the order I'll be doing them: Here's my books already being written: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/149532-fly-higher-a-scifi-novel-chapter-2-update/#comment-2794024 https://www.wattpad.com/333316704-world-war-iii-a-war-story-part-1-wip-chapter-1-a (Warning: Violent and potentially offensive) And the books I have completed: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/143762-my-book-outpost-update-chapter-18-the-end-completed/#comment-2675169 As I get started on more ideas, I'll be posting the links to their individual threads above. As I get more ideas, I'll be putting them down in the comments below. If you have any suggestions, please put them here!

Hello, this is just an open decision about the design of KSP Military Aircraft. Feel free to upload pictures of aircraft. Feel free to have constructive conversations about these aircraft.