Kerbfleet: A Jool Odyssey-CHAPTER 22 pg 2: Yet >another< narrative device!

[DarkOwl57]

21 hours ago, Soda Popinski said:

Getting it through the atmosphere will be a challenge unless they remove the other nacelle.  I'd imagine asymmetric airflow would be a problem.  If they have to land somewhere, I'd say Minmus.

*grabs chainsaw* whrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr *SNAP!* Got it! Symmetrical! (wait, did we need that other nacelle?)

[Dman979]

25 minutes ago, KAL 9000 said:

I think I'm up to speed. I have only one question:

Who the heck is Gregmore?

3 minutes ago, 0111narwhalz said:

Greg who? I don't know any kerb (-al or -ulan) by that name. 

(It's a running joke. Whatshisface is always forgotten.)

No, I'm pretty sure that we haven't forgotten anyone.

[Trios]

16 hours ago, adsii1970 said:

In Star Trek III, The Search for Spock, the Enterprise enters the atmosphere... and we all know the rest of that one...

It should be noted that in ST:III, the Enterprise entered (I almost wrote re-entered, but that wouldn't be accurate for Genesis) after the self destruct sequence had already destroyed most of the primary hull. Obviously the shields would not be up and there was no helm for anyone to control the entry angle or velocity. This shouldn't be used as evidence that the ship can't enter an atmosphere under normal, not-currently-also-blowing-itself-up conditions.

[Dman979]

Why are we talking about Star Trek? I get that it's interesting and all, but what about Kuzzter's magnificent storytelling? Ok, Enterprise is an allusion, but you guys might be unpacking this a little too far. Kuzzter hasn't given any canon about reentry in a capital ship, and it seems like ya'll're making it up.

Personally, I have confidence in Shirley's helmskerb. Good luck, we're all counting on you.

[DarkOwl57]

Just now, Dman979 said:

Why are we talking about Star Trek? I get that it's interesting and all, but what about Kuzzter's magnificent storytelling? Ok, Enterprise is an allusion, but you guys might be unpacking this a little too far. Kuzzter hasn't given any canon about reentry in a capital ship, and it seems like ya'll're making it up.

Personally, I have confidence in Shirley's helmskerb. Good luck, we're all counting on you.

Mainly because since the ship is modeled after the Enterprise from ST, We're trying to see how well it can compare

[Hotaru]

2 minutes ago, DarkOwl57 said:

Mainly because since the ship is modeled after the Enterprise from ST, We're trying to see how well it can compare

If Kuzzter is following Star Trek canon, then it's safe to assume the Enterprise is capable of Warp 9 and armed with photon torpedoes. 

[Dman979]

1 minute ago, DarkOwl57 said:

Mainly because since the ship is modeled after the Enterprise from ST, We're trying to see how well it can compare

Kuzzter has said in the past that he is not strictly following ST canon. That should be obvious enough from the various other allusions and references, and he also said it in a post somewhere (but the author is dead).

I think you may be focusing too hard on the wrong aspect of the story.

What will Gene (not Gus!) do to defeat The Ghost? How will the Kerbulan violence affect Kerbal society? What will happen to Kenlie?

[DarkOwl57]

1 minute ago, Dman979 said:

What will Gene (not Gus!) do to defeat The Ghost? How will the Kerbulan violence affect Kerbal society? What will happen to Kenlie?

Find out on next weeks episode of.....

Star Trek Kerbfleet: A Jool Odyssey

[Trios]

5 minutes ago, Dman979 said:

Why are we talking about Star Trek? I get that it's interesting and all, but what about Kuzzter's magnificent storytelling? Ok, Enterprise is an allusion, but you guys might be unpacking this a little too far. Kuzzter hasn't given any canon about reentry in a capital ship, and it seems like ya'll're making it up.

Personally, I have confidence in Shirley's helmskerb. Good luck, we're all counting on you.

We wouldn't all be here arguing semantics regarding warp capability and reentry effects if it weren't for Kuzzter's fantastic writing. The truth is that we're all dying to hear the next part but we're also polite enough to not just post tons of 'PLEEZE KUZZTER POST MOAR COMIC' so we degenerate into semi-off-topic discussion in an attempt to be patient and wait for the author to continue being awesome at his own pace.

[Dman979]

1 minute ago, Trios said:

We wouldn't all be here arguing semantics regarding warp capability and reentry effects if it weren't for Kuzzter's fantastic writing. The truth is that we're all dying to hear the next part but we're also polite enough to not just post tons of 'PLEEZE KUZZTER POST MOAR COMIC' so we degenerate into semi-off-topic discussion in an attempt to be patient and wait for the author to continue being awesome at his own pace.

Fair enough, and I'm sure he appreciates that.

My point is "Why not do on-topic discussion?"

[Trios]

Just now, Dman979 said:

Fair enough, and I'm sure he appreciates that.

My point is "Why not do on-topic discussion?"

Eh, they start that way, hence why I used the term 'degenerate.' I mean this with absolutely no disrespect, but I'm certain that Kuzzter has noticed that this thread goes more off-topic the longer that time goes by without a new comic posted. There's only so much on-topic discussion we can get into, and while our author has stated that he likes it when we guess at storylines, I personally find no humor in such a thing; I usually just step in to correct blatantly wrong or misleading information that I see, whether it's comic-related or completely off-topic.

When we have more content to discuss, I'm certain the discussion will come back around to more on-topic things, and the next time a content lull comes by then it will degenerate again. If this bothers Kuzzter, his option is really to ask to have the thread closed to discussion except for the 24 hour period immediately after he posts a comic. Otherwise the very nature of conversation means it'll go off-topic again.

I will state again that my opinion is that off-topic conversation, especially when it's about something as closely related as the shows that the author pulls so many tropes from, should not be seen as a bad thing. We're all here because we enjoy the comic; nobody is going to come into this thread only to talk about 1701-D's landing in Generations, but we talk about that since it's so closely related to what we're seeing in our favorite Kerbal comic.

[Just Jim]

1 hour ago, Trios said:

I will state again that my opinion is that off-topic conversation, especially when it's about something as closely related as the shows that the author pulls so many tropes from, should not be seen as a bad thing.

The real issue is what the moderators consider off-topic. Rule 2.3d states:

"Messages that purposefully change the subject of conversation in a thread without a natural tie to the topic at hand are forbidden."

That being said, @Kuzzter's story is loosely based on the Star Trek "mirror" episodes, so I don't think debating how much, or little, @Kuzzter's Enterprise will be like the trek version is going to draw their attention. We all know in the end @Kuzzter will do what he likes anyway... 

 

It's when the conversation spins out of control that the moderators end up stepping in.

Edited February 8, 2017 by Just Jim

[something]

Ok, so @Kuzzter accidentally destroyed the Enterprise and now he's trying to glue the parts together again. That is, right after he caught them from the debris field which is now canonically known as Kessler I . I understand this takes time....

[Torgo]

Everyone is so focused on landing the Enterprise, but my guess is it's not meant to land again, at least intact. 

We've seen how many characters fared on the Kerbiashi Maru simulator, but never Admiral Shirley. She also seems to think Val is the Next Generation and is ready for Val's own greatness. I can foresee a scenario where Admiral Shirley, when things are looking very bleak for our heroes, makes a heroic sacrifice that involves the destruction of the Enterprise to bring about an end to hostilities. The Kerbulans have taken out some Kerbfleet buildings. I bet the Enterprise can take out a few, too. 

There seem to be enough Glidos around to take the rest of the crew home safely, at least for now. 

Just my guess.

[Soda Popinski]

Well the thing did start off as a sea-going vessel.  If it's ever going to go back on the surface, seems like a splash down is more likely.  No need for a working undercarriage in that case.  Kuzzter did mention those wheels were just there to get it from the runway to the water.

[Dman979]

40 minutes ago, Torgo said:

Everyone is so focused on landing the Enterprise, but my guess is it's not meant to land again, at least intact. 

We've seen how many characters fared on the Kerbiashi Maru simulator, but never Admiral Shirley. She also seems to think Val is the Next Generation and is ready for Val's own greatness. I can foresee a scenario where Admiral Shirley, when things are looking very bleak for our heroes, makes a heroic sacrifice that involves the destruction of the Enterprise to bring about an end to hostilities. The Kerbulans have taken out some Kerbfleet buildings. I bet the Enterprise can take out a few, too. 

There seem to be enough Glidos around to take the rest of the crew home safely, at least for now. 

Just my guess.

@Kuzzter, who made the Kerbiashi Maru sim again? Was it Gene or Shirley? I know you mentioned it, but I can't find where.

[Guest]

Hey all, still really busy and STILL appreciative of this good and, I think on-topic, conversation!

Regarding the discussion of exactly what KSS Enterprise can and can't do--for which the discussion of "what pop culture reference is this thing based off" is indeed relevant, I state the following:

-Don't forget, this is meant to be the same ship that we saw "the year before year zero": a purely seagoing vessel.

-Said vessel was based on the USS Enterprise carrier that served in WWII. That is, CV-6, and not the nuclear powered CVN-65 recently retired.

-It's canon (Mort and Gus discussed it) that the nacelles were added to the sea carrier KV-6 to make it a "spaceworthy" flagship.

-In its present configuration, by part count or mass, Enterprise remains about 90% CV-6 and only 10% or so NCC-1701. The bridge is still the carrier 'island'. There is no saucer section. 

-Warp drive? Please. There's been no indication of any such thing. Those are RAPIERS on the nacelles. Come on.  

Carry on

[Zhetaan]

I am not our author, @Dman979.

By that I mean to say that I took a guess after analysing Gene's command of the Gliido wing, but it's not canon unless @Kuzzter says I guessed correctly.  It makes more sense to me that Gene wrote it, first because he's a retired Air Service Lt. Kernel who managed to get transferred to a position of flag-rank power over the whole space program--so he's got an inordinate amount of talent for command and leadership in general--and second because the version that Adm. Shirley took is more likely to have been titled 'Pirates of the Karibbean' and would have required her to manage an attack of the dreaded Sea Beet--I mean, Kraken.  Or foul weather.  Or maybe even real pirates, but in the Kerbin implementation, they are simple seafarers who invite themselves aboard and eat all of your kod without bothering to say, 'Thank you.'

Edited February 8, 2017 by Zhetaan

[Hotaru]

9 minutes ago, Kuzzter said:

-Warp drive? Please. There's been no indication of any such thing. Those are RAPIERS on the nacelles. Come on.  

Um, just for the record I was joking about it having warp drive. I was just trying to point out that whether or not the Star Trek Enterprise could land has no real bearing on whether your one could. 

Edited February 8, 2017 by Hotaru

[Dman979]

3 minutes ago, Zhetaan said:

I am not our author, @Dman979

I was quoting you because you mentioned the Kerbiashi Maru, and I know that Kuzzter mentioned the writer once.

[The solid fuel chemist]

between the mk 3 underbelly and those VTOL aerospikes, as far as KSP goes i have confidence that it could water land seeing as you can now hit water pretty fast and survive and mk3 cargo bays (which i assume the underbelly is made of) are pretty solid parts. Bring up a klaw with a bunch of parachutes attached and you could definitely land the thing. 

[Zhetaan]

2 hours ago, Dman979 said:

I was quoting you because you mentioned the Kerbiashi Maru, and I know that Kuzzter mentioned the writer once.

My apologies:  that was another Star Trek reference from the end of the reboot, where Spock mistakes Spock Prime for his father.  I'm told that my delivery can be somewhat subtle.

[boccelounge]

7 hours ago, Dman979 said:

What will happen to Kenlie?

Right on.  As interesting as the Enterprise discussion is (moderate-to-high, IMHO). Kenlie's fate is what I'm really interested to see.  I suspect THAT is the crux of the Kerbal-Kermulan conflict (and. one hopes, its resolution), not warships and suicide drones.  That's my guess, anyway,  What's going on with Kenlie?!

(Just to note it, this is of course in no way a suggestion/prod/nag/etc. directed at the author.  I'm quite content to watch the story unfold at its own (i.e. @Kuzzter's) pace and direction.)

[Wildcat111]

10 hours ago, DarkOwl57 said:

WOW You're behind!

Yeah I know, just caught up.

[Deddly]

Seems to me that the Kerbulans plan on having Kenlie Kerman under their control - hence the agonizer he has been forced to wear. Time will tell whether his loyalties to Kerbfleet outwiegh his fear of pain.