There's pretty much no rocket science in unmodded KSP mate. Like.. none. Neither do you have to chose fuels, nor do you have to worry about re-ignites, fuel pumps or anything that actually is rocket science and not orbital mechanics. Which are not rocket science, yet again.
I think since rocket science is not a well-defined term, people should be allowed to decide what is and what isn't rocket science for themselves. I would say it is a very restrictive view to say that orbital mechanics is not an element in rocket science. I will agree that KSP abstracts and simplifies away the majority of what goes into rocket engineering though.
There's pretty much no rocket science in unmodded KSP mate. Like.. none. Neither do you have to chose fuels, nor do you have to worry about re-ignites, fuel pumps or anything that actually is rocket science and not orbital mechanics. Which are not rocket science, yet again.
I think since rocket science is not a well-defined term, people should be allowed to decide what is and what isn't rocket science for themselves. I would say it is a very restrictive view to say that orbital mechanics is not an element in rocket science. I will agree that KSP abstracts and simplifies away the majority of what goes into rocket engineering though.
Even if you'd include orbital mechanics in rocket science, then you're left with, well just that in KSP. It's not simplified rocket science, it simply is not rocket science.
It's like saying "Surgeon Simulator 2013" is "literally neurosurgery, just simplified in some ways". It's not, i'm sorry.
That doesn't make it a bad game or anything (i poured roughly 500 hours on steam into it - and more to come) - it just doesn't make it rocket science.
Just because you simplify it does not mean it is not there at all.
KSP is a lot better in portraying the actual science of space travel than any other game i have seen so far. Designing crafts in stock KSP still has a lot of the relevant aspects to it. Staging reasonable engines in a way that allows you to boost loads into orbit by dropping some parts of the rocket once they burn out, aerodynamic designs (Though stock aerodynamics are not the best, they are still relevant to keep in mind), dealing with reasonable space physics, designing landers, stuff like that.
The things you mention that are not there are not really core parts of rocket physics. Yes, they are important in actual rocket design, as are a host of other things that neither you or i know about. Sometimes it is important to not get bogged down in details and look at the broad picture, especially when talking about what is fundamentally still supposed to be a game and not a job at NASA.
Enthusiasts sometimes have this tendency to get bogged down in details and start to believe that those details are actually the big picture. Yes, fuel selection, reignitions and who knows what else become relevant to rocket design once you have actually understood the basic principles of multi-stage rockets, orbital insertions and the likes. But at that point you are already learning a lot about the science of rocketry (which one might call rocket science). Just because there are some parts of rocketry that are not simulated does not mean that none are there.
Them new shuttle engines... oh my. I was able to get a shuttle (mostly intact) to orbit in under 15 minutes and 4 launches. Then had to rescue the crew because the wings got knocked off by the main tank separating.
One of the first thing I tested was to have a controlled crash in the ocean with a simple plane. I hit the water much harder than intended but the plane was still in one piece. This was not at all designed to be a sea plane, but the plane was still able to take off by throttling up.
I managed to rip stuff off even when using kerbal joint reinforcement and below ~70m/s. It might be quite friendly to controlled crashes if your vertical speed is minimal to none
If they make the jets/rockets not work under water, how else will we move our submarines around? It's not like they'll give us a prop any time soon. (Unless Porkjet gets bored.)
Surviving on water is probably based on the vertical speed, from quick testing with KJR on i seemed to be able to survive at very high speeds at long as vertical speed was controlled
these panther engines seem to like to flame out when disengaging the afterburners and sometimes even stay flamed out for a few seconds. If you're relying on the thrust vectoring for stability aid (COM not far in front of COL) and that happens then it can be fatal, i've had a plane yaw slightly to the side and then snap backwards @ >50g's :D
They also asymmetrically flamed out on me and i was under the impression that it wouldn't happen any more like that
fully reusable rocket to put 100t in LKO, at revision 1.03 ATM
It seems tricky to land. I'm surprised it could handle a 12 m/s touchdown, especially for such a large object. Are you playing 1.03 because of mods or because you disagree with the current reentry heat/drag in 1.05?
Mods in this game are an addiction. Once you install, it's hard to go back because some of them completely change how you play.
12m/s was too fast, i didn't handle the landing that well. RCS got it covered :D
Legs don't seem to work in large sizes, i tried a dozen times and a 6m/s touchdown would make it bounce and flip - one attempt i forgot to put landing legs back on and landed perfectly then was able to reproduce it, the addition of RCS just made it much easier. Should have always had RCS on it but i underestimated the power and overestimated the fuel consumption of those things
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vGbIRZk.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cQR8ZK0.png)
