Show and Tell - Colony fuel factories

[The Aziz]

7 hours ago, Wubslin said:

So, how do we guess that last fuel type?

Neither of already revealed fuels works in jets, and I highly believe we're going to have these, so kerosene?

[dave1904]

Do we have liquid Hydrogen in the stock game or not? 

[Lo.M]

2 minutes ago, dave1904 said:

Do we have liquid Hydrogen in the stock game or not? 

Probably, yes.

[dave1904]

14 minutes ago, Lo.M said:

Probably, yes.

Well imo it's a must have. If it were up to me monoproplant should also require an oxidizer. Imo the term monoproplant is a bit misleading.  

Edit: Not really the term but how its displayed as a single propellant in the tank. 

Edited February 20, 2021 by dave1904

[Sky Kerman]

9 hours ago, SOXBLOX said:

Riding a controlled explosion of flaming cancer to the stars is the pinnacle of Kerbal-ness

 

Jeb and Val approve!

[MechBFP]

1 hour ago, dave1904 said:

Well imo it's a must have. If it were up to me monoproplant should also require an oxidizer. Imo the term monoproplant is a bit misleading.  

Edit: Not really the term but how its displayed as a single propellant in the tank. 

That is not how monopropellants work though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopropellant

[RyanRising]

8 hours ago, The Aziz said:

Neither of already revealed fuels works in jets, and I highly believe we're going to have these, so kerosene?

We know for sure you can get kerosene to work in jets, yes, but hydrogen also works for jet propulsion, and since methane sits in the middle of those two I don't see any immediate reason why you couldn't get a jet to run on it. The RAPIER will presumably use methalox for its rocket mode, so it would simplify the fuel choices to have it use methane for its air-breathing mode, and as long as one jet is running on methane it seems logical from a gameplay perspective to run them all on it. Well, all of them that we'd expect to use kerosene in real life, anyway. We might see some more advanced jets using more exotic fuels as well.

[starcaptain]

6 hours ago, dave1904 said:

Well imo it's a must have. If it were up to me monoproplant should also require an oxidizer. Imo the term monoproplant is a bit misleading.  

Edit: Not really the term but how its displayed as a single propellant in the tank. 

Well monoprop" could be UDMH (which has many ingredients to make one chemical) or it could be Teflon (which is much simpler). But fitting with the game's general simplification principles, names of actual fuels are generally left out. All we care about as players is Type and Performance specifically.

[dave1904]

5 hours ago, MechBFP said:

That is not how monopropellants work though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopropellant

What do you mean? Monopropellant is a fuel and an oxidizer. I am by no means an expert but you have to store the fuels in seperate tanks and not in a single tank and simply call it mono propellant. Am I wrong?? It even says so in the link you sent. "This can be contrasted with bipropellants that release energy through the chemical reaction between an oxidizer and a fuel. "

What I mean in my post is having it like in realism overhaul or so. Like UDMH and NTO for example

Edited February 20, 2021 by dave1904

[MechBFP]

39 minutes ago, dave1904 said:

What do you mean? Monopropellant is a fuel and an oxidizer. I am by no means an expert but you have to store the fuels in seperate tanks and not in a single tank and simply call it mono propellant. Am I wrong?? It even says so in the link you sent. "This can be contrasted with bipropellants that release energy through the chemical reaction between an oxidizer and a fuel. "

What I mean in my post is having it like in realism overhaul or so. Like UDMH and NTO for example

You need to read that link a little more closely. “*Contrasted with bipropellants*”.

Monopropellants usually use a catalyst of some sort. Catalysts aren’t fuel as they aren’t used up during the reaction. (That is what makes them a catalyst). 

Edited February 20, 2021 by MechBFP

[dave1904]

6 minutes ago, MechBFP said:

You need to read that link a little more closely. “*Contrasted with bipropellants*”.

Monopropellants usually use a catalyst of some sort. Catalysts aren’t fuel as they aren’t used up during the reaction. (That is what makes them a catalyst). 

Ok cheers apparently I need to look into this in more detail. 

[WalebKassa]

I am really happy that we are getting these short Show and Tell videos recently. I hope that it remains a regular occurring thing. I joined the forums just to share my appreciation for the KSP 2 developers, even if we still got a while yet before the game's release.

[Wubslin]

1 hour ago, WalebKassa said:

I am really happy that we are getting these short Show and Tell videos recently. I hope that it remains a regular occurring thing. I joined the forums just to share my appreciation for the KSP 2 developers, even if we still got a while yet before the game's release.

Yeah I heard someone speculate that these dollying showcase shots could be a weekly thing now. I'd honestly be super happy about that, considering how many crazy engines and colony modules there are in the game. I'm not picky though. A dolly shot of structural panel #12, landing gear comma tiny, and monopropellant tank three would make me happy. But still we've seen some wacky stuff in the promotional materials. How about that magnetic nozzle thing with the radiators what looks like lizard gills, huh? 

[Guest]

I just saw this. Nice job KSP 2 team you guys amaze me as always

[Guest]

On 2/19/2021 at 1:18 PM, Nate Simpson said:

There are more than four fuel types. There are two fuels we have not talked about yet.

Big bets one of them is antimatter  (or I guess )

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

If the Kerbals are this advanced... I'm starting to fear them. 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

If the Kerbals are this advanced... I'm starting to fear them. 

Well they already managed to explore their entire solar system in ksp 1 so they are already more advanced than us so i think im with you on this one

[Davi SDF]

5 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

If the Kerbals are this advanced... I'm starting to fear them. 

Nah they are peacefull

Unless you ask if Eeloo is a planet or not

[Kernel Kraken]

Will the colony parts be different from ship-based parts, or are they interchangeable? 

[TLTay]

13 minutes ago, Kernel Kraken said:

Will the colony parts be different from ship-based parts, or are they interchangeable? 

I was wondering this as well. It looks like the larger round parts could be easily modified to fit massive asteroid mining rigs.

[PlutoISaPlanet]

35 minutes ago, Kernel Kraken said:

Will the colony parts be different from ship-based parts, or are they interchangeable? 

Not sure but I do want to note that colonys can be made in orbit, so they will probably have different parts then land colonys (or at least space variations).

[JimTheBeet]

Fuel factories looking good! 

[WalebKassa]

On 2/20/2021 at 6:41 PM, Wubslin said:

Yeah I heard someone speculate that these dollying showcase shots could be a weekly thing now. I'd honestly be super happy about that, considering how many crazy engines and colony modules there are in the game. I'm not picky though. A dolly shot of structural panel #12, landing gear comma tiny, and monopropellant tank three would make me happy. But still we've seen some wacky stuff in the promotional materials. How about that magnetic nozzle thing with the radiators what looks like lizard gills, huh? 

As a game developer I can understand how frustrating marketing a project can be. With everything that has been happening in the world, its easy to understand why we haven't been getting a lot of content showcased over the past couple of months. I just hope that the goal has remained the same and that the developers can continue forward now as things begin to settle later this year. Also, all of these new fuel types have me so excited. (More specifically Metallic Hydrogen) I would like to see some comparisons between parts from the original game with their updated looks as well!

[Dr. Kerbal]

Nice faculties KSP dev team @Nate Simpson. I just can’t wait to see what the game looks like when it comes out. You have me already SOLD!

11 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

If the Kerbals are this advanced... I'm starting to fear them. 

Okay, ya. Me too. Maybe they actually exists and over look us. Make sure to look up .

[mattinoz]

On 2/20/2021 at 7:31 AM, Nate Simpson said:

As others have said, there's an "easier" path and a "harder" path for building large colony modules. There's nothing (other than physics) stopping you from attempting to bootstrap a colony straight through Phase 1 and deep into Phase 2 by putting a ton of colonists, raw materials, and Phase 1 colony parts on an enormous lander. That's an area where I'm really looking forward to peoples' individual solutions to the interstellar colonization challenge. You'll be able to make some very ambitious colonizer ships that can essentially contain cities-in-a-box. But since you won't necessarily know what unique environmental challenges those colonists will face, you can either go full yolo and hope your design is flexible enough to work with whatever you stumble across, or you can send interstellar probes first to get a sense of what you'll be dealing with. THIS GAME IS SO RAD, GUYS! 

But if insane superlanders isn't your bag, the sane(er) way of doing this is to establish a small foothold colony and then set up one or more delivery routes - automated dropoff missions that periodically bring new materials to your colony to allow it to grow on a slower timeline. In practice, this method of growth works best at least until you get to the metallic hydrogen portion of the progression. That's when your heavy lift abilities start to get silly.

Can we consume the superlander itself for materials?

Assuming there are any redundant parts after careful design.