Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pandaman

  1. What this feature seems to be doing is continuing a trend by squad of introducing 'features' that address/represent genuine RL considerations, but in a simplified form. eg. reentry heat, aero and thermal stuff is there, but not as complex or critical/deadly as RL. The same for ISRU. And I think it's a good thing. It increases the educational aspect by at least making players aware that such issues and potential problems exist IRL and need to be considered, even if 'in game' it may not matter too much if you forget a radiator for a simple space station or a heat shield for a LKO capsule r
  2. The fundamental problem is that we all see the tech tree as the 'main goal', as it is the only obvious thing in career mode that marks progression or 'achievement'. When in fact all the tech tree does is provide access to progressively better 'tools' to help achieve the 'real goals' of the space program. Unfortunately the game does not set any 'real goals' for the space program at the moment (other than contracts, which don't really count as game 'goals') so we are left with sandbox that we had to grind to get to. Hopefully we will see that aspect of the 'career' game get more attention b
  3. Been suggested lots of times previously. But gets my vote (again) anyway. Not tried it myself, but I believe the mod Kerbal Attachment System has this feature.
  4. Don't all the beads slide to one end in a high G turn? Edit... @AbacusWizard - just got chance to watch the video - Impressive stuff. No matter how good technology gets the battery can always go flat. GPS is great, but a map and compass is far more reliable... As long as you know how to use them. Edit 2... Recent posts on this thread reminded me of a story we read at school (1970's). A group of school children were on a field trip, but they didn't go to school to learn 'stuff' they went to learn how to use their personal portable mini computers to find out whatever they needed when they n
  5. True. It's becoming a bit of a dying art with all the techno gadgets we have nowadays. And much as I enjoy doing the actual flying myself in game, and haven't installed Mechjeb, if it was RL and actually mattered I'd 'cheat' the he'll out of it and get all the help I could too. Thanks again for all the responses guys and gals. This thread has turned put to be very informative and interesting. Cheers Pandaman
  6. That's very interesting, thanks, and it shows why they wanted test pilots that can stay calm under pressure as the first astronauts.
  7. Thanks and +rep to you all. I guess GPS makes this a lot easier nowadays. Or is it considered 'cheating' (like using mechjeb) by the traditionalist protractor and slide rule crowd? Awesome, thanks again everyone.
  8. A thought occurred to me just now, after dropping a mining base on the Mun, with all the launching and orbiting shenanigans that it required. In KSP we know our orbital velocity and whether or not we have a stable orbit and how circular it is because we have nice numbers and lines on a screen to tell us. But what about REAL spacecraft in REAL space? Especially in the 'early days'. They can calculate what velocity they NEED to achieve an orbit at any given altitude, but how do they know how fast they are ACTUALLY going? And when a stable orbit is achieved? There is no atmosphere to get an '
  9. Yes it would, absolutely IRL, but in KSP it's not an issue (for reasons given elsewhere), we just have to 'assume' it does it anyway. Though you could possibly simulate it by setting your SAS orientation so it turns away from the Sun when you switch to the vessel. It won't work when on rails though.
  10. My first 'solo' rendezvous and docking. My youngest son helped me get my first ever (he's a natural at stuff like that). It then took me ages (weeks) to do it successfully on my own after that. It's never 'easy', but now I have the confidence to tackle it any time. First Mun landing was a high too, but running out of fuel a few metres off the ground and tipping the lander over took the edge off a bit.
  11. Thanks 5th. Much appreciated. Reassuring to know that there are no plans for 1.0.5, we know that what we have is staying as it is for a while (barring unforseen emergency fixes of course - as always).
  12. Apologies of this is off at a bit of a tangent, but. .. I lnow the direction Sentinel is pointing in is not an issue in KSP, which makes sense to me for game play reasons and avoiding unnecessary processing demands. If the Sentinel is in a lower orbit around the sun than Kerbin (or Earth) then it will orbit faster. As I inderstand it Sentinel scans 'space' in the region of Kerbin orbit, so pointing it constantly at Kerbin will cause it to 'spin' as it orbits and actually limit it's scanning area. What it needs to do is point constantly directly away from the Sun, so it scans the whole sky eac
  13. A simple suggestion. As the title says, in the opening menu where you select an existing game to play have it show your selected 'agency' flag next to the game type icon. Maybe even allow changing the flags from here too, if that's viable.
  14. Gets my vote. Specific 'natural' features like unusual rock formations etc could be made in the same way that the anomalies are, but just made to look more natural. It would be good to have at least one point if interest per body too. Actually Kerbin has quite a few interesting natural features. The impact crater with the central island, several significant mountain peaks and valleys, numerous lakes etc. Maybe as a starting point some of these already existing features, and similar things on other bodies, could be officially named and marked in some way.
  15. @JeanHavoc. I get your point, though it's not been a real issue for me personally' I have had my moments. You could always play sandbox, that way you get to do whatever 'projects' you want without grinding to unlock the science, and leaning the new aero etc will pretty much 'happen' as you do stuff.
  16. IMO there should be a dv indicator in the build editors as standard (maybe for career starting at tier 2 and improving detail with each tier would make some sense). If in flight it was linked to crew skill levels then maybe use both pilot and engineer skill levels (highest present) would be a reasonable solution.
  17. At first I read that as not having 'Alternating Current' and got a bit confused, but you mean 'Air Conditioning' right? Yeah, not much fun dripping sweat all over the keyboard I imagine. My sympathy to you all suffering with this.
  18. I did suggest a while ago an option to 'strap cargo' when something connects to a docking port or claw inside a cargo bay. This could then automatically create a couple of 'struts' to hold the load secure.
  19. Yes. This, ideally, should be how a stock AGL altimeter works IMO. That said anything would be better than the nothing we have in stock atm.
  20. A laser rangefinder would be a good new science part. Handy to know how far to that crater rim etc. Yes it could be used as a above ground level altimeter, if mounted correctly and pointing straight down, but I think that should be standard function. If a parachute knows exactly how far above ground level it is so that it opens at the right time how come the crew in the object the parachutes are attached to don't?
  21. Could you grab him with a claw? Tricky flying, but you may be able to avoid having to land on water.
  22. Same here. Great game, not perfect. Visual and environmental improvements would be a great bonus, but toggleable and or adjustable to cater for old machines like mine. A few more assistance features like KAC, KER etc would also be a great improvement.
  23. This may be a 'campaign' (for want of a better word) to get it integrated at some point, though I don't think anyone is particularly worked up about it. Unlike the 'confetti fairings' issue which was purely cosmetic and had no real impact on actual game play, unlike this. Edit: Yes I agree that stuff like U5 and bug fixes are far more important overall, but this relatively small mod especially for Asteroid Day makes perfect sense. And it would IMO be a good proper addition to stock in a future update. I don't personally like threads that aim to 'pressurise' squad into implementing some or
  24. I'd like to see it become integrated into stock rather than as a mod. But it was the right decision to do it as a mod, rather than as another update, now. That way there were no expectations of bug fixes etc. or fallout from another update so soon.
  25. I do like the idea of giving the stars and constellations names it would add some nice depth to the 'Kerbal reality'. As would 'officially' naming significant geological features on the planets etc. And a player participation naming 'event' like you suggested would be a great way to do it. Hopefully 1.1 will have a better skybox and that IMO would be the best time to start a project like that.
  • Create New...