Show and Tell - Clouds

[prestja]

4 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

We're finally getting to the part where things get pretty!

These planets are already so pretty you could put a ring on them.

[minerbat]

On 4/2/2021 at 6:00 PM, KSPStar said:

Wait till you see how they look on Jool!

Well they wouldn't take the effort of making extra fancy clouds on Jool except if they expect more players than the occasional very ambitious guy to go there for some reason... floating colonies?

[Bej Kerman]

25 minutes ago, minerbat said:

On 4/2/2021 at 5:00 PM, KSPStar said:

Wait till you see how they look on Jool!

Well they wouldn't take the effort of making extra fancy clouds on Jool except if they expect more players than the occasional very ambitious guy to go there for some reason... floating colonies?

Not many people have been beyond Minmus, so what?

[K^2]

30 minutes ago, minerbat said:

Well they wouldn't take the effort of making extra fancy clouds on Jool except if they expect more players than the occasional very ambitious guy to go there for some reason... floating colonies?

There's also marketing, including indirect via streamers and YouTubers, so there's a lot of value in making hard-to-reach places purty in particular because they are hard to reach places and will attract a lot of attention because of it.

That said, floating colonies would be awesome. If they aren't in the game, I hope the modding system is flexible enough that it can be added.

[MechBFP]

With the ability to build in orbit any location within the Kerbol system will be ridiculously easier to conquer since you save 3500 dV and that is fine by me because it allows more players to experience more content. 

[PlutoISaPlanet]

*clap*

[TLTay]

4 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

You noticed the docks! I think Manley asked for that one personally.

So there are docks... realistic bathymetry... and something in the puff ocean... 

Do I smell underwater exploration? It could just be the beans from earlier...

[Guest]

12 hours ago, TLTay said:

So there are docks... realistic bathymetry... and something in the puff ocean... 

Do I smell underwater exploration? It could just be the beans from earlier...

I Certainly Hope So Building Working Subs And Boats Is Always A Fun Challenge 

[TLTay]

2 hours ago, Iron Kerman said:

I Certainly Hope So Building Working Subs And Boats Is Always A Fun Challenge 

I'm building a sub even if I have to use junk found lying on the side of the road.

[prestja]

3 minutes ago, TLTay said:

I'm building a sub even if I have to use junk found lying on the side of the road.

That's where Kerbals find most of their parts anyways.

[whatsupsevensup]

this looks great! also are those little circles right of the launch pads small landing pads for reusable boosters?

[Wubslin]

On 4/3/2021 at 2:13 PM, Nate Simpson said:

We're finally getting to the part where things get pretty!

Does that mean the meat and bones of the game are solved problems already? Craziness like interstellar flight, constant thrust flight paths, and multiplayer are working for the most part and nothing's throwing huge wrenches anywhere?

[mcwaffles2003]

I love how the clouds are at multiple altitudes and have very wispy and cloud like design... they look amazing and I cant wait. Not to mention stock lens flare and those reflections look gorgeous. Terrain is looking great too, can't wait to see it in its show and tell.

I'm wondering how detailed this will go, will cumulus type thick clouds be low altitude and thin wispy cirrus type clouds be high altitude?

Also

On 4/2/2021 at 12:00 PM, KSPStar said:

Oh, before we forget – we’ve been working on some proper clouds as well. Wait till you see how they look on Jool!

SHOW US!

 

Also, boat launches? Lets go!

Edited April 5, 2021 by mcwaffles2003

[Dr. Kerbal]

When craft fly through clouds will the crafts interact with them via slowdoan or cooling. Or even cutting the clouds?

[Bej Kerman]

27 minutes ago, Dr. Kerbal said:

When craft fly through clouds will the crafts interact with them via slowdoan or cooling. Or even cutting the clouds?

Clouds aren't flying bodies of soup, they shouldn't affect craft flight measurably. KSP 2 already simulates clouds in the form of the plumes that come out of the pad from take-off so it's possible the devs might find a way to turn parts of those procedurally generated clouds into fluid the craft can interact with.

[PlutoISaPlanet]

7 minutes ago, Bej Kerman said:

Clouds aren't flying bodies of soup, they shouldn't affect craft flight measurably. KSP 2 already simulates clouds in the form of the plumes that come out of the pad from take-off so it's possible the devs might find a way to turn parts of those procedurally generated clouds into fluid the craft can interact with.

Clouds must be soupy, this is why the Starship blew up before hitting the ground!?!?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you cant tell im joking

[K^2]

6 hours ago, Bej Kerman said:

Clouds aren't flying bodies of soup, they shouldn't affect craft flight measurably. 

Well, ok, if we're having a real talk, clouds actually affect aircraft quite a bit. Not so much because of what the clouds are made of, of course, but because of what makes the clouds.

First of all, there is humidity. It's at 100% by definition, and because tiny droplets do contribute to the dynamics at the scale of aircraft, the effective humidity can actually go a lot higher. That has impact on performance. Humid air is denser, which is good for your wings, propeller, and compressor in the jet engine. You get more thrust and more lift when flying in humid air, all else being the same. (Just the opposite! Humid air is less dense, and even with droplets of condensation, net density inside the cloud is lower. So less lift, less propulsion overall. Bad times. Thanks to @Jacke for correction.) On the other hand Moreover, humid air contains less oxygen by weight, so the engines that rely on external air for aspiration are going to perform worse. It's not a huge change, and for gameplay purposes can probably be ignored, but it actually makes an impact on fuel estimates and navigation by dead reckoning. If you are flying through clouds, you should be taking it into account.

But it also gets a lot worse in freezing temperatures. If your airplane is coming down from high altitude through a cloud that's near or at freezing point, you're getting iced. The worst part about it is that you might not have had any problems on the way up, while the plane was warm and your engine was running full power, nor at altitudes, where the air was dry. So if you didn't think to turn on heat for your pitot tubes and carb, you can be in a lot of trouble. Landing with a dead engine, no air speed indicator, and at risk of losing some of your control surfaces to ice formation, is on a short list of worst things that can happen to your aircraft while flying.

Second factor is more drastic and actually impacts rockets. There are a bunch of ways clouds can form, but usually it involves cold air meeting humid air. And if you have interface between two fluids with different properties, odds are good that you are getting turbulence along the interface. This one, I'm sure, many people who have been on an airplanes have experienced. When the plane is just taking off or coming in for landing and has to pass through clouds, and especially if they are big fluffy kind, you can almost bet it's going to feel like driving on cobblestones. It's no picnic for a pilot, either, as this means constantly having to correct the controls if you want to keep the plane on course, while also having no visibility and having to do all of that solely by instruments. And this is the kind of stuff that will matter not only to airplanes, but to a rocket heading out to space as well. In fact, to a rocket, turbulence can be far more destructive.

From gameplay perspective, I think KSP is the wrong type of game to make you worried about all of that. But it'd be nice to have turbulence be a factor when flying through certain kinds of clouds. Nothing too drastic, just having it mess with controls a bit would be fine.

Edited April 5, 2021 by K^2
Factual errors.

[Bej Kerman]

11 minutes ago, K^2 said:

Well, ok, if we're having a real talk...

...having it mess with controls a bit would be fine.

TIL

[The Aziz]

35 minutes ago, K^2 said:

So if you didn't think to turn on heat for your pitot tubes and carb, you can be in a lot of trouble.

Just make the rocket out of titanium and gold alloy, like Iron Man, to prevent icing problem. Or just straight up from nano parts of unknown origin.

[Jacke]

4 hours ago, K^2 said:

Humid air is denser....

Afraid not.  That's a sometimes psychological reaction.

Humid is one of aeronautic's 3 H's: High, Hot, and Humid, which reduce the density of air and the performance of aircraft.

Gases at a given temperature and pressure have about the same number of particles per volume.  Nitrogen has molecular mass 28.  Oxygen has 32.  Argon has 40.  Carbon dioxide has 44.  Water vapour has 18.  Increase the humidity and the density of the air goes down.

Edited April 6, 2021 by Jacke

[K^2]

3 minutes ago, Jacke said:

Gases at a given temperature and pressure have about the same number of particles per volume.  Nitrogen has molecular mass 28.  Oxygen has 32.  Argon has 40.  Carbon dioxide has 44.  Water vapour has 18.  Increase the humidity and the density of the air goes down.

You know, I was already thinking about it in terms of droplets, and increasing density due to water droplets themselves being dense, so I didn't even think about molecular mass, but turns out, that even with that taken into account, the low molecular mass of water is enough to offset it, making the net density inside the cloud lower than that of surrounding air. I guess, these droplets are a lot smaller than I have thought.

Thank you for pointing this out. I'm going to go and add a bunch of strike-throughs in my post. XD

[Superfluous J]

Wow how did I miss this for 4 days!?

...

Oh, the video's unlisted.

[Francois424]

On 4/3/2021 at 3:36 PM, minerbat said:

Well they wouldn't take the effort of making extra fancy clouds on Jool except if they expect more players than the occasional very ambitious guy to go there for some reason... floating colonies?

Well I never was one to build colonies in KSP1, I'm more of a Rover guy.  
However with KSP2 Multi-player, I wouldn't  mind docking with other players facilities on my way to Proxyma Centauri... for a small fee, of course !

Mission reports in KSP2 are going to be so sweet !

[Guest]

On 4/4/2021 at 3:18 PM, TLTay said:

I'm building a sub even if I have to use junk found lying on the side of the road.

Agreed

[kerbiloid]

<q-onspiracy mode>

Spoiler

They made the game and now are waiting for the epoch of better PC  to support all those eye candies.

So, every year a shift officer awakes from the cryochamber, looks a fresh issue of "Gamer PC' 202x" magazine, ensures that i7 is not marked as "obsolete" and updates the release date by +1 year.

So, the answer to the question "when?"is "When your PC gets ready."

The answer to the question: "Will KSP-2 run on an average CPU" is "Yes. When the average CPU gets matching the system requirements".

</q-onspiracy mode>