Jump to content

swjr-swis

Members
  • Content Count

    2,543
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,193 Excellent

About swjr-swis

  • Rank
    Self-proclaimed Groomer of the Orbits

Profile Information

  • Interests
    KSP

Recent Profile Visitors

10,472 profile views
  1. You're either missing the point, repeatedly, or just trolling me. So I'm gonna let that munar dust bury this exchange.
  2. I just thought of more that might affect this: Assuming that the nearest Sentinels are actually matching orbit with Kerbin, did you check that: they have both EC and signal to Kerbin? (check for EC in the resource panel -top right- and the Comms indicator -top left- in map view) they are currently actively 'tracking objects'? (when rightclicking the Sentinel, the option should say 'Stop Object Tracking'. If it says 'Start' instead, you need to click to re/activate it)
  3. The Sentinel needs to be in a solar orbit, and will monitor for asteroids near the closest planet to its own orbit. Sounds like you made its orbit just a bit too wide around Kerbol then, and too far from Kerbin. Its orbit matches more with Duna than Kerbin, so it shows you Duna asteroids. Not 100% sure about this one, but I think it was programmed to replace the 'stock' spawning algorithm (Sentinels used to be part of a separate, free DLC): as soon as you launch your first Sentinel, it no longer uses the regular spawning, and instead starts spawning according to what the o
  4. Fair enough, and easy enough to correct (in this forum): I'll unfollow this thread to avoid superfluous notifications that might otherwise lead to cluttering feedback. V(o.o)V
  5. I beg to differ. The command pod is much heavier, bulkier, and draggier than any of the first probe cores. They are sold with the same (or more!) SAS capabilities as untrained kerbals. They can be fit inside a 1.25m bay, including a set of early science instruments and batteries, making a more efficient control module than a manned one. 'Spinning out' is a problem with CoM/CoL and drag, not what control method is used. And it just makes sense that we first try shooting up unmanned stuff before risking valuable and limited kerbals' lives... even in a game. Actually, there is reco
  6. Ah yes, the good ole 'cannot deploy while stowed'. 10 years of KSP and we're still having to work around that amazing invention. Because we really needed to be prevented from opening things inside an enclosed space. Meanwhile, we have always -and quite happily- been allowed to 'deploy' anything we want as long as it's clipped inside a fully solid part...
  7. You separate these as if they're different things, but all of those are 'like KSP 1'. I just want a tech tree that actually makes sense - a fully decked out pressurized space-worthy command pod is 'invented' before a thermometer, a wheel, a ladder, or even a basic steel plate?? Basic structural parts should exist from the very start. Progress from rolling equipment, to flight, to orbit, then whatever we need to go beyond. Learn to walk before you leap. The rest of the mechanics can remain much as they are, I don't feel strongly one way or another.
  8. Very interesting designs. You mentioned that this was 'while you were waiting', so that may be the entire explanation , but I do wonder: why so much wing? Prompted in part by this question, I wondered... and ended up extending one of my older cargo designs into a full CRG-100 + ramp, mostly just to test how lean I could make it and still retain good performance. Testing with 51t of cargo. Cruising mach 4.1 @ 18.7km. With 20t cargo (more typical for rover/base modules), cruise altitude is 20.8km. Full album: https://imgur.com/a/GoKNZ7r
  9. That tail section is perfect... wish it was a stock part.
  10. Three cheers for Dick, Amelia, and their support crew! And a warm welcome back to Newgas - your long service is appreciated.
  11. Please do! The planes are what matters in this challenge, not the carrier. You don't need to actually build or use a carrier to prove your planes' capabilities - you can use the section between the SPH and the runway as a replacement, like I did.
  12. There's a dedicated thread for Spacedock in this forum - you could ask there. But keep in mind it's an unpaid volunteer-run website... they have lives and work to tend to.
  13. Instead of taking some action based on a poll with questionable representation... why not simply make that (or any, for that matter) notification optional? That way it's left to the users to decide if and/or when they want to get any notification.
  14. Predicted CRTC statement, 10 years from now, after sparking some heated debates: "Sorry, eh?"
×
×
  • Create New...