#wenksp

Hello again, pog frog

The bean space program is 6.49 billion usd in debt due to dead astronauts and nuclear weapons treaty sanctions

Is you!!!!

Kevin was taking notes on this video

@Eli Snyder he performed mitosis

@Eli Snyder probably his brother

@@enderman5423 no he performed mitosis

@Devan S. which Kerbal?

This is the funniest thing I’ve seen all week

So do I. This could’ve been a good OBB book

They’re not officially gone, Brad’s just said he isn’t sure what to do with the overarching story of it so he’s taking a break.

who doesnt xd

you'd need a ton of engineers tho. b/c of the gravity

Reminds me of Subnautica Seamoths, they fly in space and in water(supposedly), but you can't use them to fly in air without mods.

Most (all?) of the stock planets/moons have had texture upgrades over the last year or so.

@@sixstringedthingYes, I know. Perhaps Brad landed in a more mountainous area then I've seen. Mountains have their own texture which adds variety and realism to the surface's appearance. With Eeloo's new texture announced, we're just waiting on Pol now!

belkan engineering #belkadidnothingwrong

_Yes, into an atom_

@@mariasirona1622 a few magnitudes to large

@@ATemplarIGuess hmm, i guess you are right.

that's what stratzenblitz does

Cool Idea. Perhaps the sea base should be submersible and be able to attach to the sea bed but also rise to the the surface. That would make more sense than two sections.

@@OrionAerospaceKSP yeah but docking is cool

it's done already

@@eva2602 vid name? can't find it

@Bently Masingale He did, and it was very cool. Tho I consider the heatsheild wings to be "realism breaking" personally. I'd love to see a small ssto spaceplane tho. I can't imagine it'd be very small tho, as Bradley mentioned bigger is more efficient : . Smaller is harder.

Low-tech SSTO is an interesting idea!

@@BradleyWhistance Here's a challenge: An SSTO that can carry and deploy a full FLT-800 Tank into Orbit using no engines higher tier than the Panther. Bonus Kudos if the Panther is the ONLY liquid fuel engine (Solids for circularizing and monoprop RCS for deorbiting?)

Single stage to all I think

@Eli Snyder sste is a grand-tour rocket (usually requiring many gravity assists or kraken drives) whereas Ssta means you can take it on a round-trip to anywhere in the sol system.

This does apply to real rocket engines. Rocket engines work according to Newton's third law - the exhaust is ejected out the back, and an equal and opposite force is exerted on the craft forward. As a result, there is a constant force imparted by the rocket engine regardless of the speed you are travelling at. Impulse is force over time, and specific impulse is the ratio of impulse to mass of fuel consumed, so both of these are invariant (constant) relative to velocity. Since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity, rocket engines therefore are more powerful the faster you are going. This should seem quite odd - it may sound like free energy. The "extra" energy isn't from nowhere, its a result of the fuel already having kinetic energy from being at a non-zero velocity. This principle of impulse being more efficient at a higher velocity is one way to understand the 'Oberth Effect' - which is the reason why we do our maneuvers when we are close to a planet or moon, and therefore at a higher velocity relative to that body.

@@BradleyWhistance Intresting, thanks for the time to make this comment But since the propellent acts on the craft in the craft's own reference frame, from the point of view of the engine, the propellent is leaving the chamber at the same speed no matter how fast compared to a celestial body said engine is going, so, how does that affect in any way the thrust exerted on the engine? Doesnt the entire push push reaction happen in the engine's reference frame?

It doesn't affect the thrust. Thrust is force, and the engine has a constant thrust output over all speeds. However, since work done is force applied over distance, the same force while moving faster applies over a greater distance, increasing work done.

@@BradleyWhistance Soooooo.... Would attaching engines to a pole on a planet at 90°s in an attempt to spin up the planet be considerably less efficient than using the same engine to speed up an impacter to incredible speed meant to transfer it's kinetic energy into rotational energy? Really changes the way I see rocket physics, very counter intuitive

@Eli Snyder weird, it looked like i was, must have been time dilation

texturereplacer