RizzoTheRat

In the UK some supermarkets have said they'll prioritise deliveries for the over 70s, might be worth looking out for down there. My mothers approach has been to book a delivery slot in a couple of weeks time with only a few things in her basket, and then add what else she needs nearer the time.

Installed this the other day but only just occurred to me to look for a Kerbal team having not found a work one. Currently chugging through my 4th WU, have joined the team but I'm guessing I wont show up on there until it uploads my next one. It seems like a great cause to donate some computer time to if anyone fancies joining us and even give you some pretty graphics if you want

The technique for real word gliders is to use pitch to control the airspeed, and the airbrakes to control the sink rate, which is the other way around to what you'd think. With Trajectories giving you an impact point this means you should be able to use the pitch to maintain a speed comfortably above your stall speed, and then use the airbrakes to bring the impact point on to the runway, once you get low enough pitch up gently (flare) to trade speed for reduced sink rate, but not so much that you start to climb again (known as ballooning). Ballooning can result in a rather hard landing and I may have managed to crack the wheel faring on a Grob Viking doing that

How are you drawing solid lines that cross? I've been using the | and __ characters and it doesn't look anywhere near that good.

Not been playing much recently, but fired it up again this weekend. As is my usual approach, I've started a new career for version 1.9, and following some experimentation with Decision Trees in my 1.8 game I've used that as the basis for my kOS scrips for this game, although it's currently linear rather than a true tree. The top left is the mission, which is defined by a series of menus, which in this case was "New Mission" - "Kerbin" - "Polar Orbit". Top right is the Task Queue. This gets built on the fly, so it started as just Launch and then the Launch function inserted AtmoLaunch and Circularise based on the status at the time. Central block is used for the menus and parameters that are updated in real time. Bottom block is the output log. Task queue is saved on the ship so the mission can be continued a save partway through, and currently is processed sequentially, as I can't really see me having mission complex enough to require that, instead at the moment where there are multiple options a task selects the required option and loads the follow on tasks associated with that. First flight was manually controlled and got enough science to unlock the first kOS module, after that it's all completely kOS driven. So far I've done a few suborbital tourist flights to earn some cash, and have just put Jeb in a polar orbit to do some EVA science.

Air bug aside, surely it would be more sensible to set their flow rate rather than set a time to drain a tank? I know that's also a bit unrealistic as it doesn't take in to account tank pressure, but it would stop them generating massive thrust.

Completely agree but as none of us on here have the power to fix it any suggestion here is going to be workarounds to avoid running in to the issue. Of course if the fix to prevent people clipping parts in the VAB I think most of us would prefer to have the problem back "Should" being the key word there I don't know if there are some parts that always have same vessel interaction turned on, the say way that some parts have autostruts permanently on (which is a pain in the @&$£ is you're trying to fit landing gear too close to something that hinges.

Oh *****, now I'm going to have to start a new career all over again.

Do you have any parts clipped in to other parts? I believe this can sometimes cause problems on loading physics. Landing gear and wheels have some known issues too. Maybe try fiddling with the spring/damper settings. 1.7 Mun base sat on the ground and I used the friction pads from Breaking Ground to hopefully ensure they don't slide. I didn't have any problems with it sinking in to the ground but I've not built a base in 1.8.1 yet so it might be different, or I might have just got lucky.

You've got a lot of drag at the front even with that faring, and quite a few draggy parts behind it too. Where is the centre of mass compared to the fins? As you burn the fuel in the side boosters your centre of mass will move forwards, which is probably why it's fine for the first 15 seconds or so. The idea with fins is to get the side area behind the centre of mass bigger than in front, and the more drag you have up front the worse it is as well. I would try and enclose more of the front end in faring, everything in front of that central fuel tank if you can, and get some fins, or even wings right at the back to get as much side area back there as you can. ETA: Ninja'd by Hans, agree with what he said, although I'd also add you can also reduce the drag, at the cost of fuel efficiency, by launching at a lower TWR, or throttling back a bit, until you're above 10-15km and the air starts to thin a bit,

Then of course there's the Troy pound, which is traditionally used to measure precious metals and gemstones...and gunpowder so in theory calculating ISP of early SRBs would be even more complicated

Escape - Settings, and scroll to the bottom.

How close are you getting before selecting the port? Have you tried getting right up close to the station without selecting anything? The reason I ask is because there are 2 stages to the whole physics range thing, with a Load distance where it puts in on the screen and I think starts calculating the physics for it as one lump, and an Unpack distance where it starts calculating physics on all the parts. The default unpack distance in orbit is 200m, so it's worth seeing if you can get well inside that to ensure the station is unpacked before targeting the port, which will tell you if it's a physics problem when unpacking or an issue with targeting the port, as I think it will let you target a part before it's unpacked, but I don't know if that forces it to unpack. Sometimes clipped parts can cause things to fall apart on unpacking. Agree with AHHans that the Clamoptron Seniors are pretty good. I autostrut the extremities of all my stations and ships, ie the docking ports and engines, to the root part and find everything's stable. As above though I don't manoeuvre my stations and leave SAS turned off.

R.A "Bob" Hoover definitely learnt to fly at the same school as Jeb!

They appear to be a kind of heat pump, relying on being warmer than the night sky so generating some electricity as they transfer heat from the warm earth to the cold sky. To operate in space at night I guess you'd need a big heavy heatsink to absorb heat during the day and then use that heat to generate electricity at night. Probably not the most efficient way of storing energy. However presumably you could use them as radiators to dump excess heat during the day by projecting it out the shaded side.

Very much this. The sense of achievement of my first orbit, first Mun landing, first docking, first trip to Duna, etc using kOS have all been similar to my firsts in the standard game. Next plan is to land on Duna, something I've not done at all for probably a couple of years Realism Overhaul is one I plan to have a go with at some point for something very different too.

Assuming you mean the crewed command modules, EVA the pilot, right click on the experiments, and select Take Data. The pilot can then board with the data and you safely jettison all the experiments.

You should get a navigation marker in your navball, try doing a 360 turn and see it shows up.

I didn't realise KAC could do it as per Hotel26's post above. The only other mod I know can do it is kOS, which allows you to programme your own stuff within the KSP environment. I just started overhauling my inclination script the other night and now measure the angle between the North vector (which is a built in parameter for each planet) and the vector from the ship to the centre of the body. This gives me the exact time of the next ascending or descending node. Once I've worked out the maths for it this should allow me to time my burn so that I end up on the correct longitude of the ascending node as well as the right inclination.

For rendezvous with a craft you want to dock with? It's well worth trying to improve your technique there, with a bit of practice it's easy to get it under 5km and it makes the whole thing a lot quicker and more fuel efficient.

There's also some mods that can help. Kerbal Engineer Redux (KER) can give you loads of extra data including the orbit inclination, longitude of ascending node, and your current longitude.

On Sunday I launched a probe to Duna and was very proud of my kOS script that got it all the way there. On Monday I realised that I couldn't undock the satellites from it with the communications delay imposed by RemoteTech, so ended up reloading from a save and adding some hinges to fold the satellites out to the side. Today I launched the satellites in to a lovely formation around Duna, with very little eccentricity on the the orbit. Then I realised I'd forgotten to target the dish on the transfer stage, which is due to go on to a polar orbit carrying an an array of ScanSat sensors, but luckily I had activated the omnidirectional antenna so it should be able to talk to the Kommsats and therefor link back to Kerbin...except it couldn't. I spent quite a long time calculating cone angles and distances to see why it might not have a connection....until I relised I'd forgotten to put a $%&£*@! probe core on the £$%£@^& thing! AAAAARGH!

Nope, you put them on the end of a girder and still move Kerbals and fuel through them. It's a bit unrealistic but you can always define your own play style to not use them in that way.

That's neat. Presumably your payload is on a decoupler and the ejection force fires it out of the end of the tube? Any problems with it not firing out straight? I thought the drag issue with structural tubes is that they don't shield stuff inside them, rather than they're draggy themselves. I may well be wrong but if that is the case then attaching the faring to the bottom of the structural tube might be ok if the payload is short enough that it doesn't project in to the tube.

I don't really see the point of fuel dumps in Kerbin orbit. If you're launching a big craft yes it can a lot easier to launch the fuel separately, but with a fuel dump you have to dock the ship and the tanker with the fuel dump. Why not just dock the ship with the tanker instead? Similarly if you're bringing in fuel from Minmus because it's cheaper than launching it from Kerbin, why not just dock with the ship and the tanker? Unless the ship needs multiple tankerfulls of fuel, in which case you need a bigger tanker! Fuel dumps around other bodies do make sense to me though. In the early game I park a fuel dump and lander around the Mun and Minmus, and have the crew do 2or 3 landings per mission. When the next crew goes up they have an oversize transfer stage to top up the tanks on the fuel dump. However as I also play with USI-LS I find stations are a useful staging point for crews to top up their habitation and reduce homesickness time before spending a while in a smaller ship, so as I have the station there I make up the payload weight on my standard lifters with additional fuel so do end up using my stations as fuel dumps