• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

416 Excellent

About LameLefty

  • Rank
    Occupy Duna

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

2,584 profile views
  1. This. All of it. I've been playing this game - sometimes more intensively than others - since March 2013. I have Feelings™ and Many Deep Thoughts™ but they're all inchoate (Google it). So I'll let my apparent spirit animal and spokes-kerbal Mr. @5thHorseman speak for me.
  2. I have KSP installed wherever Steam puts it (*); since my C: drive is relatively small (256GB M.2 SSD) I keep most of my games on my D: drive, but KSP is one of the few exceptions. (*) C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program
  3. You can make a little hack to your save's persistent.sfs file. I'll leave this hack as an exercise for the reader (Prof. Google is your friend here, though it's just a forum post right back in here somewhere that shows you what to do). There's a risk that enabling the BG features in your existing save will cause things to go kablooey, that didn't happen to me for my late-Science Career 1.7.0 save. Anyway, back to our usual waiting re Kopernicus (I miss my Jool rings )
  4. Read the subject line of this thread more closely: it works in 1.7.0, not in 1.7.1.
  5. Shuttle used them, the SpaceX Falcon 9 uses them to run the grid fins for landing, and I'd be utterly shocked if Dream Chaser doesn't use them too, but I'm not particularly familiar with its design. Point being, hydraulic systems offer very high torque and response speed for very low energy input. The trade-off, of course, is the weight and complexity of the plumbing, but risks of leaks and pressure failures. There are always trades. *shrug*
  6. The KAL module forgetting all the programming upon reverting a Quick Save seems like a pretty obvious bug to have been missed.
  7. That depends very much on the system involved (actual engineer here) and how it is designed. It's quite possible for a failed or de-powered hydraulic system to still allow movement. Aircraft, for instance, often have 3 independent hydraulic systems for control surfaces. If the moving parts froze upon system failure, the redundant systems would be unable to continue carrying the workload.
  8. Yep. If you routinely launch to the same parking orbits and don’t take care when staging to ensure your booster stages are suborbital when staging, and you don’t set the game to minimize persistent debris, that’s bound to happen eventually.
  9. I plan to send missions to land on the Mun, Minmus, Duna, and the Joolian moons with the new deployable science parts.
  10. It is. Go into your GameData \Chatterer\Plugins folder and edit the Chatterer.version file (it's a text file) to specify KSP version.
  11. Nope, just not there. May be because I have a gaming laptop with dual GPUs, an integrated Intel core for most desktop stuff, and then an Nvidia GTX1070 for gaming. I can use Intel's control panel application but that doesn't do a lot for KSP. The only real work-around I've found for this whole res-switching nonsense has been to manually change my Win10 desktop resolution to 1080p before launching KSP. Interesting, no other game I play has this problem including at least one other Unity-based game (REENTRY, an early-access "switch simulator" game emulating Mercury, Gemini and Apollo spacecraft, now in Early Access through Steam). None of them just randomly switch resolutions mid-stream like KSP does these day.
  12. I can't read the text in your version of the Nvidia Control Center, but you have a lot more options than I have on my (US English) version. No such options for my setup, unfortunately. This silly problem has now persisted for a year. I have to manually change my Windows Desktop resolution to 1920 x 1080 in order to avoid the constant resolution shifts on scene changes. It's quite annoying.
  13. I didn't see the reference on the previous page - apologies. I may have been distracted by the pretty screenshots. Thanks for confirmation that it's just a harmless annoyance, however. Would be nice if B9 wasn't crying wolf here and making users worry needlessly.
  14. Airbus has had its own flight-control issues, in case you've forgotten. See, e.g., AF296, AF447 and AA587. No need to rehash these things in a KSP forum.