Space craft simulator in space center.

[Lord_Demon]

Hi.

I know a lot of people build their designs with accurate mathematical models and careful Delta-V calculations.

But I guess there are a lot of players like me, who simply build the rocket based on a "hunch" or reliable "let's try if this works" principles.

This is all fine and good in the early stages, like getting airborne, getting on orbit, going to Mun and minmus.

But when you want to start planning more complex and longer distance designs, you can't really test your stuff without actually getting it to other planet, which takes time and money. And then you notice you forgot the landing gear or something equally silly, or that your design doesn't work well as a lander or something. You could use hyperedit, but that is not so handy.

So could we have a space craft simulator in the space center for testing our designs in other situations? One could design a vessel, and then try that out in a simulator. Simulator would have different options to start the vehicle from (From low orbit or surface of any planet). You could use this to test if your design works as a lander and can possibly return to orbit, or see if your SSTO can take off from other planet. Or you could even try to see if the design can do planetary transitions. (for this, you might want date/time setting for the simulator too)

Gameplay wise this would create a alternative universe, where there are no other objects but the simulated vessel and planets.

In addition:

-Time should also not advance much (maybe a bit, but simulators should be able to do the time compression without game time moving faster.

-Actions in simulator would not field any science, and would not fill any mission conditions. I guess EVA should be disabled in this model too.

-Running the simulator should cost a little credits (fixed amount maybe? Or small % of ship cost) in "programming fees".

-Simulator could have multiple levels as a building, with higher levels locking more distant planets to be used in testing.

So what do you guys think? Would there be use for something like this? Is there some things I didn't think of that need addressing? Is my idea explained clearly enough?

Feel free to post comments and questions.

[cicatrix]

That's basically what save/load games are for.

There is also a revert button.

OR you can install HyperEdit.

I don't think that adding a simulator within a simulator serves any purpose.

[pincushionman]

I use Sandbox for this. However, if I could enable/disable nodes in the tech tree to limit me to the appropriate parts, it would be easier. I always have to write down what I have available first.

[KSK]

I think its a good idea having played with something similar in Kerbal Construction Time. It would also make Hard mode games more fun. Some of the game mechanics (especially rep) only really work if you assume no saving/reloading or reverting, but that can also be a real nuisance given the lack of stock design tools.

I don't mind losing a crew due to a piloting error or losing funds because I mess up a parts test flight and need to repeat it. I do mind losing a crew because my spaceplane undercarriage wasn't correctly set up to the nearest fraction of a degree, or spending way more on a parts test contract than I'll get back from completing it because it takes me three attempts to get the design right.

[Lord_Demon]

That's basically what save/load games are for.

There is also a revert button.

OR you can install HyperEdit.

I don't think that adding a simulator within a simulator serves any purpose.

I don't think saves are good for this. If for example I would want to test if a lander can get down on Duna and up to orbit again to meet with main vessel, it would seem pretty silly to create the whole thing and fly it to Duna just to find out that the lander part does not work. Then you have to load your save, resign the lander, then fly again to other planet to test it. And maybe changes added too much mass, so now you can't even make it to the planet, and you must design your main vehicle again.

Specially if you are one of those who design stuff on gut instinct, I think it would be a nice option that you could test just one part. It would enable you to build programs in reverse so to speak. "can this lander part get to orbit from the surface of other planet" -> "what do I have to attach to that part to make a working lander?" -> "what kind of delivery system do I need to get the lander on orbit?"

And as said, this could be done with Hyperedit. But that will complete any missions and train the Kerbonauts. So I don't know if that is ideal way to do this. That is why I would like to see a simulator built in. I think it would be pretty easy, as it would simply save your old game, and start a new one with defined parameters (and when that one ends, you would return to your previous game.) From implementation POV it might be quite easy addition (not sure but based on my limited programming experience) so it would not be that much effort to do it.

I guess the same framework could also be used as a scenario editor, allowing people to create scenarios with their own designs, and maybe share them like ships. After all, scenario is only a save file with pre defined situation and description and some parameters for success/failure, isn't it?

[Wjolcz]

I like the idea. Though maybe it should be locked in IVA mode only for the simulation and dont have actual terrain of planets but grids or some low-res terrain without any hills. Basically what IRL sims do. They only generate the stuff that are important for the mission. You won't render the whole planet, buildings and trees If you want to test if something can land on the runway only.

How I imagine you would roll out a list of options just like when editing a text file on PC and:

"Simulate X (take-off, landing, etc) on planet Y (would simulate gravity and atmo, and show the surface as some sort of grid maybe?) at the speed of Z m/s."

[tater]

KCT has this, but honestly, that's what revert is actually for. Perhaps sandbox could have a hyperedit feature, and the ability to load craft files from other saves.

[Wjolcz]

KCT has this, but honestly, that's what revert is actually for. Perhaps sandbox could have a hyperedit feature, and the ability to load craft files from other saves.

I would like this actually.

Also just another argument for: Its always better to invest in a simulator at your training center than building and crashing another flying bedstead, right?

Edited March 31, 2015 by Veeltch

[pincushionman]

This is going to start sounding like a thread hijack, but here goes:

In order to use Sandbox as a "simulator mode," we'd need some options added:

. 1) ability to freely upgrade/downgrade buildings

. 2) ability to upgrade/downgrade Kerbals' levels

. 3) ability to timewarp in forwards and reverse (including timewarp 0) to let you set up initial confitions to your liking

. 4) ability to import the state of any other save to use as initial conditions (planet positions, building state, hired Kerbals)

. 5) ability to import ships from other saves, including those in flight there

. 6) "Launch" becomes "spawn," where you choose:

. . a) body

. . landed/flight

. . . i) if landed, specify lat/long

. . . ii) if flight, specify orbital params

. . Of course, the defaults are kerbin/landed/launch pad or runway coords.

You know what? This is sounding more like "simulator mode" than just sandbox.

. 6) No automatic saves. This is a test environment.

Edited March 31, 2015 by pincushionman

[tater]

This is going to start sounding like a thread hijack, but here goes:

Stuff

All it needs is the ability to load craft files from other saves, and hyper edit functionality in terms of placing craft in different locations in the kerbol system. (does hyper edit allow you to set year/day?)

Any limitations you have on budget/facilities are not needed (as your craft files will reflect this).

Seeing the thread made me think, "I heard you like simulators, so here's a simulator within a simulator for you."

What if a player is in career mode, and they want to simulate the guys in the simulator needing to simulate something? Can we have a simulator mode within simulator mode, just in case?

[Wjolcz]

OK, after rethinking all this I come to conclusion that KER is actually enough.

[pincushionman]

All it needs is the ability to load craft files from other saves, and hyper edit functionality in terms of placing craft in different locations in the kerbol system…

I agree, that's the minimum functionality needed, and it's essentially my (5) and (6). I haven't used HyperEdit, but it seems like everybody uses it to place ships in certain locations. So a replacement for the "launch" functionality is the obvious place to put the Hyperedit options.

The other things I suggested are more along the "let's go whole hog with this" line.

Reverse time warp would be a really useful test tool.

Building limitations like no maneuver nodes or patched conics are an important consideration in career, as are pilots' Exp abilities, so a test environment should allow you to account for that.

Turning off tech nodes doesn't do anything except make it easier to build and tweak without having to keep track of what parts your real save has.

And importing the state of a save does nothing except make it a one-step process to do the other things.

[JimmyAgent007]

This idea keeps showing up from time to time. Id like it. Hyperedit wont ever become stock and the simulator can be a goal in on itself. We can start out with an empty simulator and gradually add planets/moons as they are 'discovered' via the space program. If you want to test your Duna Lander then send a probe first to collect readings. How dense is the atmo? How much gravity? The probe doesnt need to survive or return home, just needs to get there and send some science back. Then the challenge of completing the simulator for all space bodies becomes a challenge to complete.

Granted, we could guess at a lot of this info for our own solar system before sending probes but we frequently learn that we got stuff wrong after we sent something to take pictures. A bare bones simulator, start in Duna orbit of 150k, only simulating the qualities that have been returned from previous missions would be very helpful when designing that stage with minimal hassle.

[Sampa]

This is going to start sounding like a thread hijack, but here goes:

In order to use Sandbox as a "simulator mode," we'd need some options added:

. 1) ability to freely upgrade/downgrade buildings

. 2) ability to upgrade/downgrade Kerbals' levels

. 3) ability to timewarp in forwards and reverse (including timewarp 0) to let you set up initial confitions to your liking

. 4) ability to import the state of any other save to use as initial conditions (planet positions, building state, hired Kerbals)

. 5) ability to import ships from other saves, including those in flight there

. 6) "Launch" becomes "spawn," where you choose:

. . a) body

. . landed/flight

. . . i) if landed, specify lat/long

. . . ii) if flight, specify orbital params

. . Of course, the defaults are kerbin/landed/launch pad or runway coords.

You know what? This is sounding more like "simulator mode" than just sandbox.

. 6) No automatic saves. This is a test environment.

I might even add that the reliability of the simulations should depend on the number of times something is sent to a specific planet...say...Duna. The initial time, the simulators would be extremely unreliable because the Kerbals have never sent anything out there yet. The more times they send stuff out there, the more reliable the simulators get and thereby, the more reliable the craft we send there! Just my 2 cents on the idea.