• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

120 Excellent

About Luis

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That's great news. Many thanks for looking into this so promptly.
  2. I may have found a bug in the 1.2 pre-release. I'm using a very simple airplane takeoff script, early in career: function D{parameter m. hudtext(m, 4, 2, 60, yellow, false).} D("R to launch"). wait until rcs=true. rcs off. set H to 90. set P to 10. set T to 1. lock throttle to T. set ship:control:pilotmainthrottle to 0. stage. lock steering to heading(H, P). wait until alt:radar>10. set P to 35. wait until alt:radar>300. set P to 20. wait until altitude>1000. D("Manual control"). This is my airplane: The script will initially rotate the tail fins to aim the plane upwards but as it picks up speed on the runway, they slowly turn themselves horizontal again. Eventually the plane has enough speed to take off anyway, but it never attempts to pitch up. If I fly the plane manually, it is capable of lifting into the air at about 35m/s. I have rebuilt the same craft with the same script in 1.1.3 with the 1.1.3 version of KOS and it takes off correctly. If I fly the plane manually
  3. The video displays a 'not available' error for me, but from the comments it sounds as if he is displaying the map in the terminal, which would be wild.
  4. I would subscribe to this in a heartbeat.
  5. I've played the game since 0.15 and I almost never make it interplanetary with any of my saves. The manoeuvre system is entirely inadequate for that sort of mission. Precise Node helps but it's still dauntingly, depressingly complicated. Even at the reduced scale of the Kerbal solar system, aiming at a tiny target like Duna from so far away feels more like luck than judgement. In my view, the stock game needs several improvements to make planets easier to visit. 1. The tracking station should have an upgrade level that includes transfer window planning. 2. The manoeuvre node widgits should be pinable, so they can be viewed when the node itself is off screen. 3. The node widgit should display numerical dV and allow keyboard tweeking of the numbers up and down. 4. The ship info should state the dV for every stage and the total for the craft. 5. The node widgit should make it much easier to place nodes on hyperbolic orbit lines and much easier to select one craft over another in a crowded map view. 6. It should be possible to design a mission plan of connected manoeuvre nodes, before the ship even leaves the launch pad. 7. Orbit lines shouldn't jitter. I'd much rather they got wider or blurrier to represent the imprecision of the orbital calculation. Orbits that leap from having an encounter to not having one, are very off-putting for lng range missions. This isn't about reducing the amount of challenge in the game. It's about having challenges that aren't a consequence of bad UI design or game engine limitations.
  6. Not really. The point of the pre release opt in is that *after* Squad has found and fixed all the bugs they can, a fresh set of eyes gets to look over it and try and break it in new ways, so that even more bugs can be found and fixed. If all the bugs could be found by the experimental group on their own, there would be no need for the opt in.
  7. The fifth screen has a sentence that reads: "Once we've touched down we can use this scanner to ground truth the planet and improve our orbital survey accuracy." (my emphasis) I'm pretty sure that's an extreme grammar issue, since I have no idea what it's trying to say.
  8. I definitely think that the game mode missing from KSP is a campaign story mode. In my current save, I am role playing a series of missions that has the Kerbals gradually learning about a threat from beyond Kerbin, centred on the easter eggs. Each mission gives them a specific task (eg send rovers to photograph each of the Munoliths) and I write them up in a notepad file to build an ongoing narrative. At the successful completion of each mission I award myself one or two new pieces of technology. These are always key pieces, like engines or fuel tanks. I assume that the little things like girders and adaptors are always available. Certain tech advances require some extra havesting - the uranium for the LV-N can only be mined from the Mun, for example. I'd dearly love it if KSP added a framework for campaign mode that allowed the community to write linear sequences of missions with their own briefing text, completion requirements and rewards. This would override th tech tree, because the missions would determine which parts were available. Money could exist as a limit to the total amount you could spend for that mission, but a new revert mode would always allow you to revert back to the start of the current mission, so you'd never bankrupt yourself into a dead-end.
  9. This is similar to the way that flywheels are used to control spacecraft attitude. You can rotate a craft in space simply by spnning a wheel inside the spacecraft and the laws of conservation of momentum are not violated. But the important thing to remember is that it's not the *movement* of fuel or the flywheels or anything else within the rocket that exerts a rotational force, it's the *acceleration* of the fuel or flywheels, because F=ma. So in the asparagus statging rocket, the fuel from the outer tanks exerts a torque on the rocket for as long as it takes to accelerate the fuel up to its steady flow speed in the pipe, and then the torque stops. This would create a small initial torque when the engines were first ignited (and the rocket is still on the launch pad) but none in normal flight.
  10. It launches eastward from the coast of Florida, so it's flying out over the Atlantic ocean. At stage separation it is less than 100km down range. The next bit of land to the west is still thousands of km away, which would require a lot more dV to reach than simply turning around. The return trajectory is also pretty vertical. The reason it has to cancel out some westward velocity at the last minute is that it deliberately aims for the sea, in case the engines fail to relight for the final braking burn.
  11. Not meant as snark, but delta V is expressed as a velocity in metres per second (m/s), not metres per second squared (m/s^2). The latter would be an acceleration and implies that you jump from zero to orbital velocity in a single second! :wink:
  12. If you really want to, you could always use [URL=""]HyperEdit[/URL] to move your bases and space stations into place. But as others have indicated, this would quickly feel very hollow. Getting a simple 1-man capsule into orbit around Kerbin will feel better than hyperediting an entire base on Moho.
  13. I skipped to the end and I'm no wiser. The resolution is too low.
  14. In a way, what you are describing is what happens already outdoors. A whole ecosystem of organisms work to break down anything that can be broken down and nutrients are efficiently and endlessly recycled. A meadow or a forrest floor are self cleaning, but the end point is leaf litter or soil, not polished parquet floor or carpet. Houses already have their own ecosystem of dust mites, spiders, ear wigs, silverfish, mould and bacteria that feed on the organic detritus that we bring in. And rather than welcoming them because they eat dirt, we count them as part of the problem. The business of cleaning essentially consists of removing organic matter as completely as possible to cut off the bottom of the food chain and shrink the ecosystem. What you are proposing is to leave the energy source in place and instead just add a new organism to eat it. But what about the organisms that eat this organism? At best, you will replace one domestic ecosystem with another, but you won't make your house any cleaner.
  15. By immersing them in a bowl of warm, soapy water, maybe?