Can Kerbal Space Program Really Teach Rocket Science 

+Snoop Doge Sputnik had neither.....

+Scott Manley Sputnik was a demo, like a Xbox kid said: "Its not about put sputniks into orbit, Its showing everyone on Earth USSR did it"

+Scott Manley That doesn't mean they forgot to attach them... But, well, who knows.

+Snoop Doge GET RECKT

+Snoop Doge I can't imagine situation, when NASA engineers was so high, so they completely forgot to attach parachutes, or heatshield to spacecraft, that meant to be returned home =_=

+6Twisted So true!

Pretty much

+6Twisted omg so true! they have ruined starwars

+Javier Soto Pacetti Interstellar was probably the most accurate though - time dilation, dV, staging.

+6Twisted NEVER BURN TOWARD THE PLANET TO DEORBIT

+Moondoox and you can always mod the realism in afterwards ;b

"A hundred billion parts, each with a hundred billion tweakables" -Carl Sagan

+Moondoox and a hundred billionth of a frame per second to watch it in

+ThePizzabrothers Gaming lol

You know what is the best thing in the universe, KSP and Universe Sandbox combined.

"No fuel left for orbital insertion Rest In Peroxide Dear Jeb".

So true

Ahh I think I have a bit more delta-v you know what. We’re landing on the moon/mun too

And without Jebediah Kerman. Can't forget Jebediah Kerman.

More like the old soviet space program "Oh, the rocket exploded and we cant revert to launch? Ah, just say it was unmanned."

Also, they don't forget docking ports.

Also the world is 10 times larger for NASA

Space x because they sent a car in space

Hah strait lines

@@JP-kk7re I mean there's probably a geometry where the geodesics on its surface are orbits...

@@badbeardbill9956 mmm

@@badbeardbill9956 Spherical geometry, maybe? I remember that 2 parallel straight lines converge in spherical geometry.

@@badbeardbill9956 You just summarised General Relativity

so may times HAHAHA

Yep. Launch clamps disengage, rocket has a lack of upwards acceleration, huge fireball, revert to VAB.

Screams "I agree" in bad staging

So true.

It's morning in Poland now and i had enough internet for today, thanks

No Sh*t

_nms updates joined the chat_

@@RandomNameLastName811 exactly. Does nms teach you rocket science and how to actually build a good rocket? Ksp has to be the superior one.

@@amberlewis012 "Ksp has to be the superior one." the superior what? education tool, probably... but most people don't want to learn about rockets. and since building rockets isn't really the point of no mans sky, just like astroneer, doesn't make them bad games and their "goodness" shouldn't be based on the comparison about what they can teach. we still play to have fun for the most part

Preach

:)

HO LAM YIU The pilot stick. When you push forward oon the stick, you pitch the aircraft downwards, hence making you fly closer to the houses - making them bigger. When you pull back, you pitch upwards, flying away from the houses, making them smaller. When you pull back too much, you end up doing a loop, causing you to face downwards again, getting closer to the houses.

Artameful, pulling back too much would cause a stall, causing you to fall down.

@@parabirb that's actually a much more reasonable answer

Am glider pilot, can confirm.

It also made it so I'm a bit disappointed every time I watch a movie and they 'drop' something from orbit down to a planet or do burns in directions that would be either highly inefficient or just not work. Although it is worth it because now I can appreciate a movie like Apollo 13 so much more.

Such a fantastic movie.

I saw the "Planetes" anime not too long ago. What hooked me into watching the rest of it was realizing that they were de-orbiting a piece of space debris by attaching a booster to the front (i.e. on the prograde-facing) side of the debris. "Okay," I said to myself, "This is worth giving some time." :)

i was interested in space ever since i knew what it was!

I hadn't noticed that yet! Watched a dozen episodes and I'm kinda disappointed by all of the tedious drama, but some episodes were interesting.

+MalfunctionM1Ke personally i would love to see that in the news "manned sun orbit using a razor malfunction because of crisps stuck under the s key"

Lol, "manned mission to mars went lost into deep space after the pilot mistakenly pressed shift instead of x and while desperately trying to press x he pressed space and staged the engine away leaving the craft without propulsion whatsoever" XD

Damian Reloaded that would be the funniest thing i would have ever seen in the news

+Damian Reloaded omg hahahahahahahahah

+MalfunctionM1Ke Crap! F9 doesn't work!

+Ja-Shwa Cardell meanwhile most us are too lazy for that and just googled how much delta V you need and then got mechjeb

+Ja-Shwa Cardell Kerbal Engineer really needs to be included into the stock game... somehow.

+Tommy Huang nope, I just build huge ass rocket and land with half of stages left >.>

petti78 I know

petti78 At lower difficulty level... good idea :)

Hahahahaaahahha same

It’s also like riding a bike with a plane (in ksp at least). Lean over a little in the direction you’re turning, or someone will get hurt.

Oh SE (space engineers) did that for me by messing with gyros

+MonkeyOfTheSpud and of course Scotts videos

+MonkeyOfTheSpud I can't wait to take physics next year! I'm going to take physics at the advanced level and my friends are telling me "don't do it you won't like it, it's too hard". But they don't understand how deeply I love doing physics and learning about the nature of our Universe. Most of the reason why I enjoy physics now is because of Kerbal Space Program. But the reason why they don't enjoy physics is because they see physics as a bunch of equations on a textbook. They don't see the cool things that you can do with it and how much it makes you question nature.

+sausy mayo Physics is awesome

+MonkeyOfTheSpud KSP and Scott Manley is basically what inspired me to go do physics at university

+MonkeyOfTheSpud That's a good point and I think the reason I had a very hard time paying attention to science in highschool back in the 1990's. Science as taught at the time, I don't know how it is now, had very little in the way of demonstration or explanation about the applications of theory. Highschool physics would jump almost instantly to equations after a very brief and very half-assed scenario explanation. Chemistry jumped straight in to the periodic table. Immediately you're talking about the atom, nucleus, and subatomic particles. No explanation on how do we know this, how was it discovered, why these things are important, what applications we can apply this knowledge towards. For me, when everything is nested in theory like that my eyes glaze over and I cannot pay attention. And so I performed poorly, even though I am quite capable of learning these things as I have found out independently as an adult long after grade school and university.

the funny thing is that monopropellant isn't 'mono', it's usually 2 fuels that mix and self-ignite

@@TheAechBomb No, two fuels are bipropellant; if they self-ignite the mixture is called "hypergolic." Monopropellant is usually pressurised gas that you let escape, the so-called "cold-gas thruster" (usually nitrogen), or a molecule like hydrogen peroxide which you run through a metallic grid which catalyses its decomposition into oxygen and steam. Hypergolic fuel mixtures include hydrazine and derivatives like unsymmetrical [sic] dimethyl hydrazine (1,1-dimethyl hydrazine), which are hypergolic with nitric acid or dinitrogen tetroxide. I mean, I guess formally the Ion engines (as well as the Nuclear Thermal Rockets) are also monopropellant, because the the single propellant species are accelerated electrically in the former case and thermally in the latter.

@@wtrmute I was referring to KSP's 'monopropellent', I should've specified RCS thrusters instead. Thanks for the info though, I didn't know hydrogen peroxide was used as a type of monopropellent.

@@wtrmute ah yes hypergolic fuels, not to be mixed before use

+Dragic I've no idea how you get invited to that kind of thing

+Scott Manley There are the TEDx talks tho, just check if there's any events nearby your location and hit 'em up!

+Dragic His presentation would have to be generalized or else it would be one big product placement. Otherwise +1.

+Dragic That is an epic idea!

+Gekkibi Didn't the guy who made Spore have a Ted talk literally just about Spore? I know he did cause its the main reason that game disappointed everyone.

+Ularg And the Manleyest gameplay on RU-vid. Also the most educational.

Conspiracy confirmed

+Daniel Vestøl That wasn't a mistake, that was intentional.

Scott Manley Wait, did they actually do that?

No, I did that to exploit a bug in KSP.

Hahaha, so true! :)

@James Kessler rn I'm playing simplerockets 2 but when I get an xbox imma play ksp

Update. Made it to Mun, successfully rescued both crew and data. We didn't have enough fuel to reduce our speed though, and burned up on re-entry. 2 confirmed KIA. Luckily the wreckage rained onto the oceans. (if you're wondering what I mean by that, I have stock visual enhancements (absolutely beautiful mod, by the way. Kerbin looks so beautiful, especially with scatterer) and that adds city textures to the ground in certain areas, so I roleplay that those are actual cities. 1 rocket, Kerbin II, was meant to be my first orbiter, but it failed and the fragments rained down onto a residential area. Only 1 actually landed on the city texture, so I roleplay that that one landed on a house and killed 4 kerbals

my god, what a beautiful story

F

Oops I mean aerodynamics stupid autocorrect lol.

Same here :D

same but I'm 12

Same

Same here!

Idk, seemed retarded they they had to phisically blow up the airlock with a motharfucking BOMB instead of just bypassing the software restrictions and ... Idk ... Just OPEN the bloody door ?

@@mihailazar2487 This could potentially offset the vector of thrust. The opening in the hull had to be made in less than a second to actually work.

This is so nice! It took me so long to wrap my head around getting to orbit and even longer about going to other worlds. Have you had to do any Eve rescues since?

Screwing around can be more fun. Writing things down is boring :) My motto is ''mod it 'till it crashes!''

"The only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down"

+Sander Datema Mine is "Mod it 'till it crashes! Then add more mods to fix the issues!"

+Jebidiah Kerman Adam Savage eh?

...So, I'll be the guy who mentions he spelled "recordong" wrong.

And when you say "dont have langrage points", install Principia and have fun!

Fun with ejecting planets?

+Sander Datema Principia have the capability to add gravity force principle and push up your apoapsis using gravity.

+Sander Datema fixed

+Aled Cuda Long-term?

Some people get so addicted to KSP that they stop doing anything else in the house. Even when there spouses start orbiting kitchen appliances towards them they think they are facing the final boss.

+JACJoe Jeb never dies.

Last time I came this early, Panty kicked me out

+JACJoe Last time I was this late, my space station ran out of life support 3 years ago and everyone starved, suffocated, de-hydrated, and drowned in their own waste at the same time

@@Combatsmithen what mod is that?

@@awhahoo I think it was TAC Life support but I'm not sure

Please papa manly please

please papa manley

+Gekkibi oh yeah, that'd be clool !

+Gekkibi I would watch an hour long vid of him making fun of those people

NightPanda Ya, same here. I've always enjoyed pseudoscience debunking videos (for example CoolHardLogic's "Testing Geocentrism" series). Flat Earth -theory- -hypothesis- assertion is becoming really popular now, and it should be ridiculed non-stop.

+MasterMapMaker There are stock wings which can store fuel now.

+Scott Manley indeed, but they are much bigger than my usual builds and non-modular

use tweak scale

+Scientifica Kosmos if only it allowed me to change the camber and chord of the wing as well, I build insane things that require manual precision, reason I love the modular parts

MasterMapMaker Well sorry can't help out, don't know nearly as much programming as is required to make a mod that would easily cover all those functions with stock parts.

+Combatsmithen While I'm sure that was meant as a joke... sadly enough you might be right.

Lillian Theuma lol

Ayup

I can't imagine me trying to lithobreak without exploding in the process

Oscar Arenas exactly

Laughs in explosion

Bruh I have some spacecraft which are designed to explode

Didn't you see the spaceship? YAAAR, says Jeb!

cheeseman They are, at least according to XKCD, *strictly* an Orbiter shop.

+Slpk I don't doubt it.

+Slpk Probably.

+Slpk well they do it in every eve online presentation I've ever been to. So yeah.

+Linkxsc it's a common thing to say in eve. we just brought it with us everywhere else.

darklord bob I know. along with o/ which no one outside of that game seems to understand.

I clicked first bitch

+Rickey & Jimbob who cares

+Rickey & Jimbob Scott Manley clicked the video first matey.

Rickey & Jimbob actually, i think i clicked it first because there was no views, no comments, and no likes/dislikes, so either i clicked first, or we clicked at the same time

If your real name is Óðin, then you deserve to be an astronaut.

hahaha it is my real name

Ride the thunderous skies on the back of Sleipnir, my Lord, and reach for the shining lights that illuminates our night skies. Go forth, and discover! Don't forget to adjust your apoapsis once in a while.

haha

OMG I thought i was the only one who feels that way XD

+A E S T H E T I C x OH HELLO

+A E S T H E T I C x LOOMINARTY CONFIRM!!!

Stock teaches the concepts, RSS shows how those concepts manifest in the real Solar System. I would say both are very valuable learning experiences! :D

rapter229 As someone just getting used to RSS, getting in orbit requires over 5000 delta v, it's quite difficult with stock, even modded is hard still.

+A Muffin yeah, its a bit of a rude wakeup. You get comfortable and confident in stock KSP. But RSS slaps you around. No more kiddie pool, time for the deep end (not to imply stock is for kids or anything, just a metaphor).

XD

Why would you say that XD

Lol

+Nick Chambernator There was nothing remotely confusing in this video...

Congratulations for being part of the 1/4 that understands anything and everything about this video! I showed it to my mother, a high school science professor and she said a lot of it was pretty advanced. I was making a simple observation that Scott is covering a lot of content in the video and maybe could condense it into some simpler topics to get the point across quicker when arguing KSP as a teaching utility. Which btw I wholeheartedly agree with. Gosh I really don't know why I took the time to respond to this xD

Nick Chambernator Scott explained everything he was talking about in the video, which parts exactly are you and your relations struggling with?

Mike Hunt I agree, nothing remotely confusing in this video... if you already know about KSP. However this talk/video is made for people who don't and so I agree it will be tough to follow for most of them. It's actually kind of ironic, because he talks about how much easier orbital mechanics and other physical principles can be understood with how interactive KSP is. Yet he doesn't show any video footage of the game, which would help explain certain things *much* easier, for instance when he talked about the manoeuvre node, structural integrity (or lack thereof), aerodynamic forces, the pendulum that turned out to be rubbish etc.

+paulytools OH HELLO

Can relate

+Mr. KoRn OH HELLO

+Ultimate yes because the last time I gave the talk live that was the case

Ok

+Scott Manley Scott, do you think that later in development, Unity or what they will use, it will be possible to add more realistic features, such as orbit degradation?

+RektSkrubs well technically orbit degredation is in KSP, but only for orbits below 70k (Around Kerbin) :P Its just not possible to realtime calculate all crafts in your playthrough at the same time, thats not limited by Unity, but that is just really expensive to do for any software :P. Thats why only one craft (or in a small area of 2km around the current craft) are calculated, the rest is just on-rails

true, but it would at least be cool to simulate under 70km without simply deleting the craft, while loading it and seeing if it would really burn up.

+MadShyPie OH HELLO

Who the hell is mama max?

+MoustacheMage99 and why should we care?

who the hell is that and why is it all over the comments

+sir meme Your face is epic

+Mister Dodgers Could you tell it was a bread loaf? And yes, it does indeed hang around little children.

max larsen Well I thought it's a Vietnam veteran that caught a flashback.

Mister Dodgers close, he caught a flashbang, with his teeth.

I agree and they could use RSS in high school too.

+Jana Slamnig cute kid/10

+Jana Slamnig OH HELLO

+TimmacTR IIRC James Webb Telescope will use one

+TimmacTR in an nutshell and from what i understand a spaceship is an a lower solar orbit compared to earth so it should go faster but the earths gravity keeps it there this also works for the moon

Kevin J. Dildonik well i tried

+TimmacTR Lagrange points exist because of multiple (two or more) influences of gravity pulling you equally in their direction at the same time, basically holding you in that position, so long as you don't propel yourself, and nothing else with enough mass comes along to perturb you out of that position. In real life everything massive enough to have a measurable gravity source is pulling on you at the same time, and this is why we have tidal energy on earth. (Because the moon, and the Sun to a much lesser extent is pulling on the earth, and noticeably perturbing oceans. Less noticeable is the effects this tidal energy is having on the earths rotation, and the moon's orbit around the earth. The earth's rotation is slowing. The Moon's orbit is getting further away from earth. Whenever the earth's rotation slows enough so that one side of it is tidally locked with the moon, the moon will no longer be drifting away. But current projections put that eventuality towards the end of our Sun's red-giant phase, and many other calmintous things could have happened to the earth/moon system by then.) Anyway, this is also why our solar-system evolves over time, slowly altering the orbits of our system's planets in a relatively stable system in which profound changes take several mellenia to develop. In KSP only the thing that is being read as "sphere of influence" is the gravity source pulling on you so there's no L points. KSP uses simplified Newtonian physics model, with a clockwork system as the planets around kerbol aren't really effecting each others orbits the way ours are. Real life uses a dynamic physics model with more varibles than we currently understand, and our best approximation of what's going on "out there" is Einstein's physics concerning relativity. In real life L points can be used to place satellites in a relatively stationary position in our solar system, usually in relation to the earth, so they'd be good positions for fueling depots / space stations. Currently they are used for space telescopes, most of which are studying our own sun. They also would make good communication relay positions if we had lots of stuff and people operating in deep space, because you basically have to have line of sight for communications to work well in space. When you don't have line of sight, you have a black out period, like the Apollo missions had whenever they went on the far side of the moon.

TIXE RIGHT Just thought about something...Lagrange points would be idel places for LIGO type experiment/tools for measuring with more precision gravitational waves and their position in space... DAYUM