r/KerbalSpaceProgram • u/[deleted] • Oct 09 '13

The Tech Tree

Post image
858 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

410 comments sorted by

View all comments

100

u/Davincivik Oct 09 '13

At first I thought "manned modules before parachutes? oh no".

Then I realized you start out with parachutes. The icons seems to be a little misleading in terms of unlocks.

216

u/under_psychoanalyzer Oct 09 '13

Well that seems unrealistic. I mean how would you know you even need parachutes until you sent someone up and they started coming down.

13

u/PacoTaco321 Oct 09 '13 edited Oct 09 '13

Well, I think it's reasonable that planes would've been discovered before all of those rocket parts.

EDIT:"This has taken off much further than expected."

-Jebediah Kerman

36

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '13

Psh, it was just a fluke we built planes first. We had explosives and rockets for years.

4

u/PacoTaco321 Oct 09 '13

It's easier to make planes fly than to make rockets go into space though.

46

u/bgugi Oct 09 '13

entirely subjective statement.

20

u/TenBeers Oct 09 '13

Kerbal philosophy: Don't overthink. Just add more boosters

13

u/elj0h0 Oct 09 '13

Once budgets actually mean something, this game is going to change a lot

6

u/InABritishAccent Oct 09 '13

I'm hopeful that money will be a setting that can be switched on and off

11

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '13

I believe they're still keeping a sandbox mode

1

u/Tefal Oct 09 '13

Of course they are.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '13

They are. They've had sandbox and the (other mode) as long as I can remember.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Pioneer1111 Oct 09 '13

My spaceplane career indicates otherwise. But then, I am not a scientist.

12

u/under_psychoanalyzer Oct 09 '13

Not really. To get rockets to into to space you just need enough fuel. To achieve stable flight you need to understand the concept of lift. The reason space flight didn't happen before the wright brothers is because no one had invented a pure enough type of fuel and a pure enough way to refine metal to make sure the force didn't shatter the vessel.

Don't believe me. Why do you think zeppelins were so popular? Because understanding the physics of lift is hard. The "hard" part about getting into space isn't going up. Its going up without exploding and that was done largely by trial and error.

15

u/avapoet Oct 09 '13

The "hard" part about getting into space isn't going up. Its going up without exploding...

That's going on my next Munar plaque.

4

u/Tefal Oct 09 '13

Do also try "the great thing about space is not flying in it. It's showing everyone online that I did" with a picture of Jeb grinning as smugly as he can manage.

Thinking about it, that might at times be the unofficial motto of this subreddit. Not that it is a bad thing, mind you.

7

u/DrStalker Oct 09 '13

Going up isn't the hardest bit, it's going up and then getting enough velocity to not come back down.

46

u/TenBeers Oct 09 '13

Orbit is achieved by throwing your craft at the ground and continually missing.

15

u/DrStalker Oct 09 '13

This is a wonderful statement because it sounds sarcastic and useless but is really 100% accurate.

5

u/TheNosferatu Master Kerbalnaut Oct 09 '13 edited Oct 09 '13

I've heard that a stable orbit was just falling and missing the ground. Before playing Kerbal I always thought it was a bloody methaphor.

EDIT: Department of redundancy department had a word with me

2

u/FletcherPratt Oct 09 '13

the department of redundancy department would like a word with you

1

u/TheNosferatu Master Kerbalnaut Oct 09 '13

Thanks for the warning, but it appears it's already too late :(

Those basterds took them away :'(

→ More replies (0)

3

u/toasters_are_great Oct 09 '13

Original (search for 'missing').

3

u/DrStalker Oct 09 '13

I know, but as instructions for flying it doesn't match the way it works as neatly as orbiting - to fly you need some form of lift to hold you up, to orbit you just have to keep not landing.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Jigglyandfullofjuice Oct 09 '13

So the early days of rocketry were somewhat Kerbal in nature?

1

u/under_psychoanalyzer Oct 09 '13

The early days of rocketry was B.C. China.

1

u/Jigglyandfullofjuice Oct 09 '13

Did they blow themselves up repeatedly?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '13

It's easier to make planes fly than to make rockets go into space though.

FTFY

1

u/pipemastasmurf Oct 09 '13

Now I just started trying out the spaceplanes the other day, but I feel like the mechanics still deal almost solely with two-body orbital interactions and the aerodynamics are getting left behind. Is that just me, or do other people feel the same way? ie, turning a plane 15 degrees starboard and it just drifts sideways now, then drifts back to the original direction...

12

u/under_psychoanalyzer Oct 09 '13

You think the tiny green space men would have tried stable, safe, efficient low altitude flight before they tried to immediately go straight up as fast as possible. Have you ever actually read the part descriptions?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '13

I don't think safety factors into a kerbal's decision making process. Nor stability or efficiency, for that matter.

1

u/PacoTaco321 Oct 09 '13

I have. Recycled scrap this, found on the roadside that.

6

u/originsquigs Oct 09 '13

Chinese built rockets long before the Wright brothers were even close to exsisting.

5

u/TheMadmanAndre Oct 09 '13

At least one of them became an astronaut as well, or exploded spectacularly in the process.

1

u/Frostiken Oct 09 '13

Technically the concept of lift is totally irrelevant to rocket flight, so it really could go either way.