whatsEJstandfor

Do you think women are pregnant for 12 months

A 2060 Super was pretty underperformant when it was new, but you should still be getting better framerates than what you listed (I'm assuming you're playing at 1920x1080). This is a dumb question but are you sure that your GPU is plugged into a x16 PCIe slot?

Posting this here since this thread is more relevant, but in response to @MARL_Mk1's post: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/224277-developer-insights-23-black-hole-sun/page/3/#comment-4378423 About the suggestion of having the department heads give little progress updates each month, I love this idea but my fear, given how communication has been the last few years, is it'd just be several people saying "we're working on cool stuff but can't go into any details yet" each time. And, to ask a question in response to the hypothetical quote I just made up, why specifically CAN'T you go into any details yet? Is it because marketing thinks revealing too many details will make people less interested? Or is it because those details haven't been finalized? If they haven't been, why not give the details along with the caveat that they can still change (which should be implied regardless since this is early access)? Or is it because you're not confident about the state of development, and think that giving details would make us lose confidence, too? What do you believe is the benefit of continuing to be vague and coy? Whatever the answer, I'd like to suggest that the good will lost from keeping the community out of the loop outweighs it. EDIT: To clarify, these questions aren't aimed at @Dakota; they're aimed at whoever the people are who make decisions on how much info to release and when. Whether that be a higher-up at IG, or PD, or T2.

Are there going to be any weekly or biweekly non-KERB updates? I get that there isn't much utility in the KERBs if the focus is now on new features instead of bugfixes, but the community's biggest complaint has so far been, imho, a lack of regular communication, so this move feels super tone-deaf

I'm quite sure that the reason Nate didn't publicize it was because it wasn't his video. Like, clearly it was recorded weeks before it was published. Was Nate supposed to say "I did an interview with a rando; be on the lookout for it at some indeterminate point in the future!"? What if that rando had decided to never actually publish the interview. Now Nate's on the hook for something he had no control over. As for publicizing it after it the video was published, that, again, doesn't seem like it should be Nate's job; it's the video creator's. That we didn't get wind of it on the forums until someone else happened to stumble upon it should lead you to be critical of the dude who did the interview, not of Nate.

Probably not. At least not yet.

I've been trying to stay stock for as long as possible but boy oh boy, does that mod look like it'd go down real smooth

But that doesn't show AP/PE for a planned maneuver, which is what I think OP wants. Very much agree that it should be a feature, though.

I don't know why everyone's so incredulous; I've had this exact same issue several times (though, I think, not as often as you). In my case, like yours, the chutes will either not deploy, or only a subset of them will. For the ones that don't deploy, no amount of clicking "Deploy" or the other buttons in the Part Mangler or adjusting the deployment pressure or whatever has any effect. It's as if the chutes become purely decorative. I've seen it often enough that I'm surprised how it appears that a lot of people have not.

So many quality-of-life fixes! And this update came so fast after 0.2.0.0! I love how this update snuck up on me, and it's even better because I've already been having an order of magnitude better time since 0.2.0.0 dropped than I did from February to December. I can't wait to see what KSP2 greatness we see in 2024!

A zillion percent agree. Kerbols? Debdebs?

In the Alt-F8 cheat menu, you can teleport to specific coordinates on a celestial body. I wish there were a way to navigate to specific coordinates without cheats, but I assume that kind of thing is coming as a QoL update at some point down the line.

Funnily, I was using the hydrogen engines a lot prior to 0.2.0.0, but, once I had unlocked them in the tech tree, I ended up not using them at all for a while. For whatever reason, I felt like methalox was sufficient for everything I was doing. But then I tried them out again in a transfer stage, replacing a methalox tank and engine, and my dV for the stage shot way up. What they lack in thrust, especially in atmosphere, they make up for in being so efficient and in their fuel being so light. Try replacing one of your interplanetary stages with a SWERV and just see if you like it.

I believe the maneuver planner takes a vehicle's TWR into account as it does its burn, doesn't it? If this is the case, then how would the maneuver plan treat a vessel that runs out of fuel? It can't just keep increasing the predicted TWR throughout the burn, because it could potentially just increase unbounded and lead to physically impossible burns, which'd be of no use to the player. Should it just assume the vessel's TWR remains constant after it runs out of fuel? I suspect that it's this nonlinearity in the TWR's change that makes the current system not able to handle out-of-fuel trajectory calculations. In other words, I'd bet that the current trajectory calculations require that d/dt of the TWR remains constant throughout the burn. If this is indeed what makes it currently impossible to calculate burns beyond out-of-fuel-events, then maybe, while editing a plan, you should be able to toggle between KSP2's non-instantaneous maneuver plans and KSP1's instantaneous maneuver nodes. The instantaneous one would be less accurate, but would sidestep the issue of taking a changing TWR into account.

I believe this is a known bug. The way I've gotten around it is, supposing I want 6 boosters around the outside (3 sets of two), I put on 2x symmetry instead of 6x, and then place those 3 sets of two manually. That way, you can separate each pair of decouplers from the others. I hope this is fixed at some point, though, since it's impossible to line stuff up perfectly.

This is pretty much what I do, except I do adjust the throttle so that my apoapsis stays around 50 seconds ahead of me at all times. I guess it might not be the most efficient but it seems to work pretty flawlessly for me.

Not to hijack the thread but I haven't been able to get asparagus staging to work in general (at least not in the way I did it in KSP1) because if I put, say, 6 decouplers in symmetry around my center stage, I can't move individual decouplers to their own stages; it seems like I can only move the decouplers to other stages all as one unit. In your example, how'd you get those decouplers in their own stages? Did you just do 2x symmetry and place multiple sets of them? EDIT: I must not have looked very closely at the image; I see now that yours isn't symmetrical, so I'm guessing you didn't use radial symmetry, so you bypassed the problem I have.

Just wanted to say that, since For Science!, I've been having so much g*sh d*ng fun. Last night, I stayed up till 5 AM trying to rescue Bob from the Duna monument. The mission was a success, and good times were had by all (except for Bob). There are still some extremely frustrating bugs, but, for the first time since launch, absolutely none of them have made me stop playing. For the first time since launch, I'm stopping each play session because I'm an adult and unfortunately have other responsibilities. anyway good job ig ilu

MORE LIKE FIVE SCIENCE

Here's the link for those of us who hate looking for things:

My wife minored in German and, when she was teaching me German vowels, she described pronouncing ü as making a long-E sound with your tongue, but then shaping your lips to be a long-U. Incidentally, ü is often transliterated as "ue".

You know I love a technical deep dive and this is no exception. Thank you for this!

Is this the most "Fix implemented and verified"s we've seen in a KERB? Stokeddddd

LET. US. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

oh yeah big time