MetricKerbalist

Hi Ben J. Kerman, You are referring to Myanmar (Burma) and Liberia. But I believe that even they use degrees Celsius. Thank you for your post, which was interesting. Stanley

Hi Serenity, What you said is most interesting, and could be causing the problem. I have sometimes gotten a message about controlled folder access, until now not related to Kerbal Space Program. As I understand it, Windows 10 is highly security conscious, which for the most part is good practice. So if controlled folder access is bumping into KSP, what would you recommend as a solution, please? Thank you. Stanley

Hi steuben, OK. That helped clarify things. Stanley

Hi everyone, OK. I have only recently begun with KSP, so I am a novice with it. But I am not a complete computer ignoramus, I thought. So I started a game in Sandbox mode. I named the game. I saved the game. I began building a rocket. I saved the rocket with a name. I made sure that I saved it. I left the game to go eat dinner. I resumed the game. I was able to reopen the game. But the rocket is nowhere to be found. I know how to save files, I thought. Could someone please tell what I am doing wrong. I am allowed to use any characters in a rocket's name, am I not? I called the rocket the following: MetricKerbalist's 1st Rocket I don't understand what the situation is. Thank you very much. Stanley

Hi UmbralRaptor, Thank you. That solved that. Stanley

Hi everyone, I find the music in the background to be distracting. But I don't want to turn off all of the sound. May I please ask if turning off just the music is possible. Thank you. Stanley

Hi Zhetaan, First, both of your posts were scholarly and instructive. I enjoyed reading them, and I learned by reading from them. Second, your conversion of astronomical units to cubits made me chuckle and intrigued me. Given that dispute exists as to the exact length of a cubit, your conversion is correct! Stanley

Hi everyone, I am quite interested in model rocketry — high-, mid-, and low-powered rocketry (but especially high-powered model rocketry). I am a member of the National Association of Rocketry, in fact. One of the purposes for my wanting to learn Kerbal Space Program is to apply it to understanding the flight of model rockets. Not to misunderstand. Excellent software packages exist to simulate the flight of model rockets, and two widely used packages are OpenRocket (open source) and RockSim (proprietary). Still, these packages -- especially wonderful in designing model rockets -- have limitations in simulating their flight. I believe that KSP can fill some of the gaps found in model-rocket simulation software. Two things in particular that I currently would like to investigate are using canted engines to try to induce spin to the flight of a model rocket. I would also like to see how changing the number of fins, and also canting the fins, changes the flight behavior of a model rocket. I understand that one can play KSP in three different modes: Sandbox, Science, and Career. Since one of the first things that I want to do with KSP is to simulate the flight of a model rocket, would Sandbox mode provide a realistic model-rocket simulation? As I understand it, Science mode would not be the way to go to start building rockets. So do I need to use Career mode? The problem with Career mode for my immediate purposes, as I understand it, is that I would have to build up quite a few qualifications to start constructing rockets. Or am I wrong in that? I must say that I find KSP quite daunting to use. I have started to go through the training tutorials for Career mode. I can build the rockets alright, but getting the hang of orbital maneuvers is so far not going well. To conclude, therefore, let me summarize my questions: Does using Sandbox mode provide as realistic a flight experience as Career mode does? If I used Career mode, could I build a rocket without needing to earn qualifications? For the moment, I don’t need to engage in fancy orbital maneuvers, docking, or landing. I just want to examine the behavior of a rocket as it lifts off, burns out its solid fuel, coasts to apogee, ejects its parachute, and drifts back to land. Thank you for your consideration. Stanley

Hi Zhetaan and Kerbart, Thank you very much for your interesting and informative posts. They offer much food for thought. Stanley

Hi Zhetaan, Thank you for your response. So first -- and this is a genuine question -- what units does Kerbal Space Program use for electrical measurements? I honestly don't know, so could you kindly inform us. Second, why do you say that astronomy is so non-metric? Here I assume you refer to the fact that astronomers and astrophysicists often use astronomical units and parsecs to measure distance. But the BIPM (that is, the International Bureau of Weights and Measures, which has day-to-day responsibility for administering SI) specifically allows these non-metric units to be used because they are so useful in space science. However, if space scientists were to translate astronomical units and parsecs to metric units, then these non-metric units would be converted to metres or to some sub-unit or super-unit of metres (for example, kilometres). They would not be translated to -- heaven forbid -- miles or feet. Stanley

Hi Gordon, Thank you for your response. I didn't want to start a big thing, because I really am such a big fan of Kerbal Space Program. But OK. First, I wouldn't want to begin tweaking a configuration file in the program -- and doing so might be beyond my skill set in any event. I am simply putting forward a friendly suggestion to the developers for the next version of this wonderful program. Second, I am seeing non-spaces between numbers and units all over the place. Right now, I am looking at the training module "Getting to Orbit." Right on the opening screen where there is the map ball -- is this the correct term? -- the rocket is sitting on the surface, and it reads 0.0m/s. That is, no space between the number and the unit. Stanley

Hi Singhnaut, Well, that is nice of you to say. Stanley

Hi everyone, I have become a big fan of Kerbal Space Program -- that is for sure. I have already noted in another forum how KSP's being thoroughly metric has tremendously impressed me. I am going to note, however, that for the most part KSP does not correctly use labels. Namely, a space must always be inserted between the number and the unit abbreviation. Thus, for example, one needs to write 123 m, and not 123m. That is the case with any unit. So, 1.5 atm is correct, but 1.25atm is not correct. Another example would be 3.5 hPa (correct), and not 3.5hPa. I will point out that this rule pertains even to the foot-pound system. You should write 25 lb, not 25lb. Thank goodness, however, KSP does not touch the foot-pound system with a three-metre pole. Stanley

Hi wumpus, OK. I will ponder what you say. Thank you for weighing in. Stanley

OK. Thank you, Spacescifi.

Hi Spacescifi, Thank you for your response. But a zero-eccentricity orbit is possible. Is that correct? Stanley

Hi everyone, We see that Kerbin's orbital eccentricity equals zero. In other words, its orbit is circular. In our real solar system, every planet's orbit has a non-zero eccentricity -- that is, a non-circular orbit. (For the most part, the eccentricity of every planetary orbit in our solar system is small. Nevertheless, they all have a positive value.) So my question, please, is this: In the real world, can a planet actually have a zero-eccentricity orbit around its star? Is that physically possible, even if it is rare? Thank you. Stanley

Hi everyone, I am a complete newbie to KSP. I don't even have it installed on my computer yet. I intend to do that soon via Steam. But I am very enthused about the program, and I am eager to start learning it. Once I have gotten rather more familiar with KSP, I will give greater attention to KerbalEDU since I am an educator. I have so much to learn, but I enjoy learning. Stanley

Hi Starhelperdue, Looking at your description, apparently you are involved with the European Space Agency, which of course is highly impressive. Regarding the metric system, Germany and the entire European continent is way ahead of the United States. In my considered opinion, full metrication is one of the biggest reforms needed in the United States. That is why I was so enthused to see just how metricated -- that is to say, completely metricated -- Kerbal Space Program is. Stanley

Hi Vanamonde, Thank you so much for changing my name to MetricKerbalist. Stanley

Hi everyone, I will also point out that I have already learned a lot about astrophysics from KSP. I have now spent a lot of time looking at the KSP Wiki. Looking at the specifications of the seven plants in the Kerbol System has got me to examining or reexamining orbital mechanics. I know a very little bit about the subject, and thinking about it in the context of the Kerbol system has led me to ponder old things -- that is, subjects which I already knew but have not thought about in a long time -- and discover new ones. I am very enthused about KSP. Stanley

Hi everyone, I am so glad that Kerbal Space Program uses the metric system exclusively. The metric system -- that is, the International System of Units (SI), as the modern metric system is known -- is a precondition for doing any kind of serious science, including space science. Hooray for KSP. Stanley

Dear Supernovy, I would please like to change my name. I understand that this can be done only once. Currently my name is Stanley M. I want it to be the following: MetricKerbalist

Dear Supernovy, I would please like to change my name. I understand that this can be done only once. Thank you for your consideration. Currently, Stanley M