JoeSchmuckatelli

I'm with you - wish the game simulated space exploration, not just flight. They're dumbing down a lot of stuff. I can only guess that's because they're pushing towards a Satisfactory-esque Resource Management mini-game with Colonies and RM. Anything else is just background noise (Science) or icing (Interstellar). The 'cake' of the game is stuff we haven't seen yet.

Wasn't this done in Marvel's Guardian movie? The gold folks had drone ships, IIRC.

Doesn't explain why Sasquatch is blurry

Not sure if related, but it either just became illegal (or they decided to step up enforcement) for any Chinese citizens to post pictures of military hardware on line. Something about open source Intel. Space news (outside of official releases) may be covered by the same law Edit - not offered to explain Steve's absence - and yes, he is /was a valued member of the forum

Giant ring of galaxies https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/science/2024/jan/11/newly-discovered-cosmic-megastructure-challenges-theories-of-the-universe

Anyone have experience with Eaton UPS units? Replacing an old and currently underpowered cyberpower UPS.

The obvious thing to note is that sandbox mode is not a game. We need gamification somehow in KSP2 and the devs chose Science! for the player progression system. That doesn't bother me as much as it does some folks. Mostly because I acknowledge the benefit of a player progression system and am largely untroubled by them calling XP science points. Accomplishment points or achievement points or visiting points - or science points - the specifics don't matter *to me*. My specific quibble is that I wanted the science system to expand the educational / immersive opportunity that KSP1 did not quite reach. Instead the system implemented seems a step backwards. Or as stated in the OP - designed to accommodate only those players who want to progress quickly through the unlock system to get bigger better faster parts to build amazing / wacky crafts. And what frustrates me is that THEY have sandbox mode - but I don't have anything that lets me feel like I'm exploring interesting new worlds with interesting biomes and discovering alien artifacts. There is no story telling - just box checking.

Yeah - um... My first thought when someone says, "Nuclear War" has never been, "Run to the Zepplins!"

Posting this so I can find my way back here later. (Kraken-Banned... again). Thank you

I've got it - we get Tim the Magician to ask the aliens their favorite color!

@Vanamonde Like Stranded - S&Sf has worked for me for a while now - but suddenly today I'm unable to see the sub. Error 500 again. Is there a change log or something for the past 24 hours or so? I was able to access the sub just yesterday https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/165716-ula-launch-and-discussion-thread/?do=findComment&comment=4357160

On the one hand, I agree totally - on the other I recognize a new but nascent capability, which may also provide if not yet competition, alternative transport / increased capacity. In fact I'm hoping all the leaders (RocketLab, Stoke, etc) succeed. Let everything shake out later

I'm just glad to see the US have two domestic produced orbital class rocket engine manufacturers. Not a fan of monopolies. Competition is gud!

Okay - I'm going to have to report you for crimes against humanity. My Win95 PTSD is real.

That was some magestic cynicism and snark! I fear for those poor unfortunate aliens. BTW - if they've got so much antimatter that they can load it into bullets for their grunts - why not just blackhole the sun?

Walked into that one. Thank you for the explication. I'm usually quicker on the uptake.

Ah - I see the problem. You failed to understand what I was saying. I said The key word here is door. As in THE DOOR to the plane. I said nothing about a plug - which I had not heard about until this thread.

Truth. She got another crew member to look at it.

There are some articles out there about Jupiter and Saturn having wandered a bit during the very early formation of the system. Grand tack hypothesis - Wikipedia They're also the two planets responsible for changing the eccentricity of our orbit (Milankovitch cycles). Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles and Their Role in Earth's Climate – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (nasa.gov) Planetary migration[edit] Main articles: Nice model and Grand tack hypothesis According to the nebular hypothesis, the outer two planets may be in the "wrong place". Uranus and Neptune (known as the "ice giants") exist in a region where the reduced density of the solar nebula and longer orbital times render their formation there highly implausible.[66] The two are instead thought to have formed in orbits near Jupiter and Saturn (known as the "gas giants"), where more material was available, and to have migrated outward to their current positions over hundreds of millions of years According to the Nice model, after the formation of the Solar System, the orbits of all the giant planets continued to change slowly, influenced by their interaction with the large number of remaining planetesimals. After 500–600 million years (about 4 billion years ago) Jupiter and Saturn fell into a 2:1 resonance: Saturn orbited the Sun once for every two Jupiter orbits.[46] This resonance created a gravitational push against the outer planets, possibly causing Neptune to surge past Uranus and plough into the ancient Kuiper belt.[68] The planets scattered the majority of the small icy bodies inwards, while themselves moving outwards. These planetesimals then scattered off the next planet they encountered in a similar manner, moving the planets' orbits outwards while they moved inwards.[46] This process continued until the planetesimals interacted with Jupiter, whose immense gravity sent them into highly elliptical orbits or even ejected them outright from the Solar System. This caused Jupiter to move slightly inward.[c] Those objects scattered by Jupiter into highly elliptical orbits formed the Oort cloud;[46] those objects scattered to a lesser degree by the migrating Neptune formed the current Kuiper belt and scattered disc.[46] This scenario explains the Kuiper belt's and scattered disc's present low mass. Some of the scattered objects, including Pluto, became gravitationally tied to Neptune's orbit, forcing them into mean-motion resonances.[69] Eventually, friction within the planetesimal disc made the orbits of Uranus and Neptune near-circular again Another question is why Mars came out so small compared with Earth. A study by Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, published June 6, 2011 (called the Grand tack hypothesis), proposes that Jupiter had migrated inward to 1.5 AU. After Saturn formed, migrated inward, and established the 2:3 mean motion resonance with Jupiter, the study assumes that both planets migrated back to their present positions. Jupiter thus would have consumed much of the material that would have created a bigger Mars. The same simulations also reproduce the characteristics of the modern asteroid belt, with dry asteroids and water-rich objects similar to comets.[71][72] However, it is unclear whether conditions in the solar nebula would have allowed Jupiter and Saturn to move back to their current positions, and according to current estimates this possibility appears unlikely.[73] Moreover, alternative explanations for the small mass of Mars exist Formation and evolution of the Solar System - Wikipedia

Thanks. I have Notepad - but Windows did not want to open the file via it for some reason. Made me guess there was some kind of special editor required. I'll try from within Notepad.

Got hit with the dreaded 'landed state' bug. Got the ship up to orbital speed - but no orbit lines; also every time I go back to Tracking Station then revert to the ship, it's down to 10m/s (from 130 - orbiting (not) Minmus). Biome thingy on the left of the screen claims the ship is landed. So - after trying to force the game to get the ship orbiting... I'm down to editing the save. ... What do I use to open it and edit it?

Reported Version: v0.2.0 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Ryzen 5 5600x | GPU: 3070 | RAM: 16 Depending on the zoom level the player-camera is around Minmus (at least) the sun goes out. Far zoom: . Next zoom in: Included Attachments: .ipsImage { width: 900px !important; }

Reported Version: v0.2.0 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Win 10 | CPU: Ryzen 5 5600x | GPU: 3070 | RAM: 16 I looked for a similar report to add to - having been told this is a 'known issue'. Apologies but I could not find it. Two issues player cannot select the orbital path in the [Body] Focus view. It's evident to the player, and we can illuminate and pin the pe marker - but not interact with the line or place a node in that view. IIRC we usedtacould in a previous build. Would love to see that capability return. attempting to place a node at the pe marker on the craft's orbit lines, or the crossing line at the intercept in space will not allow the player to create a MN that will circularize. Please see this thread for details: Included Attachments: MinIntercept2.json .ipsImage { width: 900px !important; }

I had something similar around Mun. Disabled engines on craft I was leaving in orbit and landed an Apollo style mission. Returned and docked and now combined craft showed no fuel and would not allow placement of a MN (no fuel). Activated engine, turned on and off docking mode, etc. Did not notice anything about staging. Still unable to create MN. Except. I eyeballed a return and hit 'z' and low and behold the engines lit. Was able to use map view to get a Kerbin pe low enough to aerobrake to the surface. Somehow the systems are not talking to one another.