Jump to content

Hannu

Members
  • Posts

    462
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hannu

  1. There is not and there will never be any computer program which can be guaranteed to be bugless.
  2. I keep old versions too. I think that if I want to play or need them, but there have not been many cases in couple of years. However, they do not take anything, 1-2 GB hard disk costs couple of cents. I have 0.18.2, 0.19.0, 0.19.1, 0.20.0, 0.20.2, 0.21.1, 0.22.0, 0.23.0, 0.23.5, 0.24.0, 0.24.2, 0.25.0, 0.90.0, 1.0.0, 1.0.2 and 1.0.4 for 32 bit Windows, 0.24.0 and 0.24.2 for 64 bit windows and 0.90.0 and 1.0.2 for Linux. I have also all versions of all mods I have used and text files to tell which versions work together.
  3. KSP have some errors in SOI change detections. Therefore orbit predictions are often inaccurate. It is very annoying especially around Jool. Such a capture needs 3-body interaction in real world. Third body takes energy and leaves system with higher velocity. However, KSP's simplified gravity model loses always energy when ship enters into SOI. It is not very difficult to get such an orbit with bodies which have small SOI compared to their mass. Jool's large moons and Ike are good candidates.
  4. Why it is million dollar question for you? It takes one afternoon time and 100 GB hard disk space to install Linux on the side of Windows, graphix drivers, KSP and load of mods. Disk space costs about 10$ and time some tens of dollars if you want to think so. I agree that it is annoying and possibility to use other Windows software simultaneously is so important that I played my last save in Windows without graphical fancy stuff and Outer planets mod. But if such things are necessary for someone it is easy and cheap to install Linux and play instead of waiting and complaining from year to year.
  5. I use dual boot system with Linux Mint and Windows 7. I installed Linux mainly for KSP. I do not know if Mint is the best Linux but at least it is very stable (both OS and KSP) and relatively easy to install. Nobody else can say how 64 bit windows version works in your computer. Somebody says that it is good and stable and somebody can not use it at all. Most people are somewhere between extremes. I tried when it came first time but changed to 32 bit after couple of days, many crashes and tens of annoying little bugs. Test it if you like to use Windows software at the same time. Otherwise I recommend Linux.
  6. Memory bandwidth is typically not a bottleneck in games. Especially if you use mods you should take 8 GB. If you have only 4 GB operating system and other softwares take something and KSP is not able to use maximum amount of 32 bit program (practically about 3.8 GB). I recommend also Linux and 64 bit KSP if you want to use many mods, especially graphical ones. Probably Squad gets also 64 bit Windows version to work at some day. You get a huge advantage with 8 GB if you use 64 bit KSP.
  7. This poll do not have middle options. I have many mods and I have some stability problems but I think that it is quite acceptable level if I have to start KSP again about every second hour. This is not work or business software which have to work weeks without breaks. Other little bugs are more annoying. For example bad orbit predictions and errors in SOI change detection in map view. But I would not say that there are loads of bugs.
  8. I think that small 1 man pods are for very short missions. Like first suborbital and orbital test flights and for very light one man landers to transports an astronaut between the surface and orbiting mothership. Larger 2 and 3 man capsule are for longer missions which need more complex and massive life support equipment. I use them in Kerbins SOI. Missions last typically less that 30 kerbin days. For interplanetary use I use extra hitchickers or modded crew cabins. I feel that pods are quite well balanced. Maybe the 2 man lander pod could be made lighter but then it should burn always in re-entry or high speed atmospheric flight during ascent from planets with atmosphere.
  9. It is interesting to learn to calculate burns and execute them manually. It also teaches about orbital mechanics. But basic maneuvers are quite repetitive and laborious tasks. Some things are almost impossible with information KSP gives (for example pinpoint landing to large planets with atmosphere). In some point you know exactly what to do and when and then you may find that it is good thing to give routine stuff to autopilot and concentrate to more engineering stuff than piloting. Real space programs use very complicated flight software. MechJeb is simple part of videogame compared to automation of spacecrafts. They model thousands of orbits and what if scenarios per every maneuver. They said that the flight control software of the Space Shuttle was the largest and most complicated computer program in the world when it was introduced.
  10. In grave. Or more accurately evaporated in Kerbin's atmosphere. He learned sudden changes of the natural laws by a hard way in very early phase in my career. It was that false center of mass of pod and heatshield combination.
  11. Cheating is a personal opinion in one player games. I do not use clipping to increase performance. Sometimes I make structural things by clipping of fuel tanks and use one of them or estimate what is volume of the structure. I clip structural parts inside tanks because it is fully artificial restriction to have just couple of standard parts (for example lengths of modular girders, structural plates etc.).
  12. a RTG has just small amount of some radioactive isotope. It decays to less dangerous stuff. Nerva is a fission reactor, practically like in power plants. Fission process products large amounts of very radioactive nuclides and that is much more dangerous. RTGs are also quite small and light and they do not need material change with environment. Thermal flow is only in kilowatt range. They are easy to pack in hard shell. Nuclear engines are very much larger and huge amounts of propellant must run through because heating power is at least hundreds of megawatts even in smallish upper stage engine. You can not conduct such power through thick protective shell. But of course most of fears against nuclear pollution are unrealistic fear against unknown. Probably it would be relatively safe to use Nervas. Possible accidents would be small and local like severe power plant accidents have been. This kind of rolegame restrictions are mostly balancing of the game. Even properties of the LV-N are severely nerfed compared to real counterparts they are very overpowered compared to other engines. If using of real Nervas were allowed there probably would not be any large or middle class chemical engines. Nervas would be outstanding in every aspect and there were as many reasons to use chemical engines than ride with horse instead of jet airliner in intercontinental journeys.
  13. You are right but you can say that all computer gaming is waste of time. There is no real threat in game if somebody do not use computer program to generate millions of debris on low orbits but roleplay is essential part of KSP. I like realism but I also feel interesting to see how debris accumulates during long game. Therefore I do not try to prevent debris.
  14. I have combined mining and refinery ship. I do not see point to lift ore to orbit. It is not very massive but it can refuel my interplanetary operations with one trip. Ship on right is a fuel tanker. It have 2 men crew, pilot and engineer. It lands near mining unit and crew connects ship (with KAS connectors). Mining take couple of days but there is unlimited time warp on surface. Then the tanker ascends to orbit and dock to station or large interplanetary ship. This refinery is on Ike but it is practically identical with my Minmus refinery. - - - Updated - - - Fantastic factory. Do you have a contract to replace all fossil fuels on whole planet?
  15. I can not say that I feel guilty but I have my own rules that nuclear engines are not allowed to land or intentionally crash anywhere. Their radioactive pollution would surely be negligible in radiation conditions of space (or Kerbin) but I roleplay that there are environmental activists and green political parties in Kerbin and also planetary scientists do not want that artificial radioactivity (even Nerva's low levels) disturb their radiation measurements. However I do not care what happen to abandoned spacecrafts. Sometimes they have been left on orbits which can be changed by celestial bodies and hit to something after that. And if there is an emergency situation the crew safety is more important. Typical such situation is return from interplanetary orbit to Kerbin's atmosphere. I try to install a pod to service modules so that they can maneuver out of atmosphere after uncoupling from command module in Kerbin's SOI. But if I forget the pod I allow service module to hit into the atmosphere. Now I prefer large crew transport ships which brakes to space station around Kerbin. They are too expensive to be abandoned after each mission.
  16. For me it is Pol. Annoying place with minimal gravity. Every move takes minutes because time acceleration is forbidden near surface. There have also been strange bugs. I have collided several times to invisible surface hundreds of meters above the visible surface. It was couple of versions ago and I do not know if errors are fixed. Typically I just visit there once per save to put a flag and to watch those nice surface scatter things. Gilly is even more boring but it gives easy science points in career mode. Ike was another place I did not like. It was dark and there was nothing interesting. But ISRU changed that. Now Ike is perfect place to land with mining and refining unit and supply fuel for manned Duna research. It also gives much science. Last expedition to Ike gave me more than 8000 points. Unlike so many others, I like Dres. It have interesting eccentric and inclined orbit which gives nice and varying maneuvering challenges. However, Dres have exactly one interesting place to land, the large canyon. Dres is easy to underestimate. I have needed more rescue operations to Dres than totally anywhere else.
  17. It could be done by using gravity assists. Messenger used such a strategy, it made several Venus and Mercury flybys to lose orbital energy before it was inserted to orbit. I think that it saved more than 10 kilometers per second. However, it is quite long and complicated process which needs suitable help software (or much masochism). Time limit of 10 years may also be a problem. That would be interesting maneuvering challenge but if you think economically you would get same money much easier by launching satellites.
  18. It is true. Differences between engines are quite large and there are often choices should I use one larger engine, which is somewhat overpowered, or two or more lighter engines which requires complicated radial or cluster structures. For example between Mainsail and Skipper in launchers, LV-Ns, Poodles and Terriers in interplanetary use, Terrier and 78-7S in small probes and landers etc. Difference between 1.25 m and 2.5 m systems is also very large (multiplier is 4) and forces to make choices. I feel that such restrictions gives place to creativity. It is not creativity that I decide to use mu favorite part to every possible purpose and demand that devs must make it possible.
  19. I like nerfed SRBs. In 0.90 they were far too overpowered and practically free. I made often first stage from only SRBs (sometimes 40 largest SRBs) and it gave over 2000 m/s. Now they are much better. Liquid engines gives most dv and strong SRBs only help to lift stage few kilometers so that main engine gets near full thrust.
  20. I am happy now. Only question is Eve ascent. Old Aerospike was excellent for that but now it is practically useless engine (or maybe it is suitable for spaceplanes). But I accept that there are extremely hard and also totally impossible things in the game like in real world. I think that nerfing of all engines was good thing. Interplanetary dvs was far too easy to achieve before. Now there are nice possibility to make huge ships easily (1000-5000 t launch mass) but there are no use for them because you can send anything to anywhere with small ships, you can get ore and fuel from everywhere and so on. I miss crazy and unstable 2000 t 1200 part launchers from about 0.20 era. One launch to Eve and back ships, massive fuel supply ships to Tylo surface base etc. Then joints were very flexible, there were not 3.75 m parts and it took hundreds of hours to learn to make such a monsters. Maybe they could cut LV-N's ISP to about 600 instead of insane overheating. I know that it would not be realistic. But realistic Nerva (high ISP in all pressures, high thrust, moderate costs) in KSP scale solar system would make interplanetary transporting as routinely and cheap stuff as intercontinental flights are now in Earth. It would not be interesting in KSP like game. Real Nerva would also replace all large chemical rocket engines. Maybe politicians think the balance of real life rocket engines when they ban Nervas.
  21. I have read speculations that ocean planets could have oxygen containing atmospheres because solar radiation decomposes water molecules in upper atmosphere. Light hydrogen escapes to space and oxygen accumulates to atmosphere. I do not know what conditions it needs or is it really possible. Earth is practically an ocean planet (70 % of surface) but there are not much water vapour or non biological oxygen in air. Probably at least temperature must be high and amount of water must be huge.
  22. This mod seems to be balanced to stock solar system. 6 years half life is enough to make anything reasonable (except maybe grand tours by using gravity assists). I hope also that there would be some long living element for planet mods. For example with half life of 20-30 years. It could be in larger and heavier unit (is it easy to scale the current model?). What is purpose of kyandere and krontium? They are short lived and low powered. Are they cheap and KSP calculates the price wrong?
  23. Sorry, forget this. Ejection angle is there. I do not understand why I did not notice it. Maybe too much KSP hours have melted my brains.
  24. Finnish astronomy hobbyist's magazine made an article of KSP. It sounded interesting and I decided to try demo. I was addicted immediately and purchased a full version after few hours. 18.0 was then just released. I knew basic celestial mechanics and techniques of real space flights before so first orbital and Mun missions was relatively easy. Manned Duna mission was first hard thing which took tens of hours. It required practice of rendezvous and dockings, making of relatively large rockets, calculating of dvs and thrusts, landing, (I did not have any mods then) etc.
×
×
  • Create New...