Mr Shifty

It doesn't help to match the inclination of the target planet. What you're looking to reach is the inclination of your transfer ellipse, which will most likely have a different inclination than the target, and will change depending on what transfer parameters you choose. AND you can't get to the correct transfer ellipse inclination by matching it in Kerbin orbit. You have to do a vector sum of Kerbin's heliocentric velocity with your spacecraft's hyperbolic excess velocity at Kerbin's SOI edge, then extrapolate that back to LKO.

I like the mod and have been using it; very nice and compact. Just a couple questions/issues: 1. How do you get the gizmo to appear? 2. I notice that the window is capturing key presses (like to orient my vessel) even when not focused.

I'm curious what you mean. There's this article in the Unity development manual, which mentions the problem and offers a couple ways to manage it, and there's this (long) article on Gamasutra, which suggests that the problem is even more intractable than the dev manual suggests somewhat due to Unity using an outdated version of the CLR, and some due to implicit object creation. There's a list here of how to minimize it. Unity appears to be working on the situation with the slow introduction of IL2CPP (not available in Unity 5 for non WebGL platforms.)

I've been playing for 3 years and never noticed this before, but I started seeing it today (it was probably always there) and now I can't unsee it. I've tried to pare down mods to make it better, with limited success. I notice on the fps indicator on the debug menu, it'll show an average drop of 5-10 fps just after the glitches. Good to know it's not a mod issue; I was tearing my hair out trying to figure out the cause. It was making some of my craft nearly unflyable.

Disregard above, I was using bad versions of a few mods (Infernal Robotics, Persistent Rotation, and KPlus.) I deleted those (updated IR) and everything runs great.

I've been away from KSP for awhile, jumped back in for the 1.1 release. This mod looks incredible (unsurprising, since it's a @nightingale mod.) So here's a bug report. Using the 1.2.1 release on a KSP1.1 x64 brand new Career mode save. I'm getting a bunch of CurrencyPopup.OnGui NREs, as well as a bunch of ReflectionTypeLoadExceptions. This is making the UI pretty unresponsive. I've got a fairly heavily modded install, so it could easily be a conflict. There's an image of my modlist below, and here's a link to my KSP.log.

IgorZ is the current maintainer and he doesn't have access to change the thread title. If you go to github, you can find the current 1.1 release.

@IgorZ, thanks so much for updating the mod and coordinating testing for this one and KAS. A couple of minor notes about the release on github: 1. The release links are called "Source code.zip" or whatever, which is unusual. Usually the source code is a separate download, and the release only contains the files necessary to run the mod. Both are included with that download zip, so it's fine; just confusing. 2. There are two *.version files in the downloads: one in the root directory for the mod, and one in the /Plugins directory. (This is true for KAS as well.) This creates duplicate entries on the KVC. Not a big deal, but an easy fix. They're identical, so I deleted the one on the /Plugins directory.

Is it your branch or Koritastic's branch that's not working? The only difference I can see in the OnGui event is that in the section that disables click through for the editor, Kori's code checks to see whether the tooltip exists before hiding it: if(EditorTooltip.Instance) EditorTooltip.Instance.HideToolTip(); If the EditorTooltip class is implemented properly using one of the singleton patterns, referencing Instance without checking first should never cause null reference errors, but if not, it certainly could.

Very nice. I still don't understand why this isn't standard behavior. Who doesn't immediately pull up the NavBall immediately upon entering the map view every time? Now if we could just stage from map view...

It seems that commits were done to the main branch, which updated the .version file that AVC pulls, but there's no release download -- the changes haven't been built and published to the "For release" repository (except for the version file.) Unless maybe I just don't know where to look.

I think there's a tendency among scientifically aware folks to over-minimize the risks of radiation due to nuclear facilities, as if it's a silly concern that exists only in the lurid fantasies of tree-hugging environmental loons. But, it is actually quite dangerous. There's no question that standing unshielded anywhere near an operating nuclear reactor will be invariably fatal in painful and grotesque ways. I never understand why people throw up that xkcd chart seeking to minimize radiation danger when the punchline is the little square in the middle that shows the dose at Chernobyl after the accident. I've been a radiation worker for more than 15 years. The reason the public generally doesn't have to worry (mostly) is because of stringent regulation, engineering, training, and procedures. It's not because what we're doing isn't potentially dangerous.

How can the list not have Chaikin's A Man on the Moon? Mary Roach's Packing for Mars is pretty excellent as well.

Like this?

I'm fairly sanguine about the forum change; I visit once a week or so, but am only active sporadically. That said, it seems like announcements leading up to the forum change didn't mention all of the problems that have come to light since. It might have been useful to provide preview screenshots and mention that BB code would break and that subscriptions would have to be recreated (unless I've missed something and this was mentioned somewhere.) This would have allowed the community to process the change before it happened and perhaps prepare a bit. I've been managing people for a couple of decades and the one big principle I've found is valid no matter where I work is "More information to your people is always always always better than less." To that end, it might be smart to make a thread here or somewhere else prominent with an OP that notes community complaints about the forums, contains information and updates about whether and when those concerns will be addressed, and provides a forum for suggestions in the thread. That seems simple to me, and I'm not sure why it hasn't been implemented. I really miss Felipe being the public face of this project, rather than the rotating roster of marketing people, particularly when the marketing people seem to constantly be at odds with the game's community -- from CurseForge to Flying Tiger and the console ports to the precipitous beta and 1.0 release to the new forums. These announcements/changes engender a considerable amount of head scratching about what Squad's plans and priorities are for KSP, which could be mitigated simply by communicating more. (Didn't KSP exhibit at PSX last weekend? Why has there been zero news about it except for a vague line in the weekly devnotes?) I love KSP, and I don't think the product I love is really hurt by all this, but the community was a big part of the game's appeal for me when I joined a couple years ago, and I don't think there's been sufficient care to preserve that.

I've updated the table in the OP to conform to our new forum overlords who like lots of whitespace and hate BB code.

I believe Lucas filmed that event in 1977, not 1974, but in the original film he produced, there was no image of a Praxis ring around the explosion. The ring was added in 1997 in order to "enhance" his original imagery. You can view the difference in this documentary here.

You can't do "&heyBubba = mystring;". The & operator returns an address, which you can't assign to. You could say "char *heyBubba = mystring;" but you can't assign an address directly to a non-pointer variable in C. There's no mechanism for preventing another variable from referring to the same memory location and changing it. The const keyword provides some protection which strength depends on the compiler, but there are usually ways around it with pointer tricks. Any variable declared with extern scope, or declared at the top level (i.e. outside of any function definition) of a module (*.c file plus included *.h files) will have global scope and will be assigned a symbol by the linker. Typically each module is compiled to an object file (*.o or something), which contains assembly code with linker symbols in place of memory locations, and some information for the linker about how much and what type of memory the module needs. The linker trolls through all of the object files you give it, looking for symbols (function names are symbols too) and creating a symbol table: symbol name, number of bytes needed, initialization value (if any), and special instructions for it (like an explicit address assignment, or an assignment to a specific memory block using preprocessor directives or something.) Once the symbol tables are compiled, it assigns addresses to all the symbols, then pulls all the assembly together into final machine code, with the proper addresses in place of symbols. The linker doesn't care what language your source code is in; it always works with compiled assembly. It has no problem integrating an assembly object file, provided the symbol table exists. It's worth looking, sometime, at all the intermediate files generated by your compile chain to get a sense of what each module does. tl;dr - If you pass a parameter by reference, you can always be assured that the correct memory location will be addressed, regardless of whether your passed variable is global in scope or not. The function has to have global scope, but they are by default.

The ampersand serves multiple functions, but in this case it's a pass-by-reference operator, not an aliasing identifier. It simply means that when you call this function, the compiler will ensure somehow that the parameters passed by reference are actually referenced. Usually it will do this by pushing the address of the variable onto the stack (which is the explicit implementation in C that K^2 showed), but C++ abstracts that a bit and leaves the actual implementation up to the compiler. In C#, you do the same thing using the keyword 'ref': // C# style reference. void foo(ref int x) { x = 5; } static void Main() { int y = 7; foo(y); Console.WriteLine(y); } Note that in C#, only value types (int, long, double, float, bool, struct, enum) are ever passed by value. All other types (i.e. classes) are always passed by reference. Every time you call the function, a new set of parameters are pushed onto the stack and used to execute the function. It doesn't matter if it's been cleared from scope or not. You can call the function from inside itself. The only way you can create problems is to declare your local variables inside the function (x in this case) with static scope, which will essentially mean that they're always called by reference. This feature proves useful for recursion or for tracking values. It's not quite aliasing. Both C and C++ require some understanding of the underlying memory model. Variables describe memory locations that hold values. When I say "int x=0", the compiler assigns the name x to a particular memory location and stores the value 0 there. (Actually it's the linker that assigns memory locations; the compiler simply exports a set of symbols to the linker.) Every time I refer to x, the compiler grabs the value 0 from that memory location. When I pass a variable to a function I can either pass the value of the variable or the address of the memory location where the variable is stored. If I pass the value, then it doesn't matter what I do in the function because the function only has the value , not the variable itself. If I pass the memory location (i.e. pass-by-reference), then what happens in the function affects the value of the variable because it's affecting the same memory location.

There's a sense in which all the languages you mentioned (with the exception of VB, but who codes in VB?) do share a syntax. They're all C-like -- that is semi-colon statement terminations, grouping with braces, case sensitivity, whitespace ignored, unary increment and decrement operators, type names and strictness. Java is included in that class as well, and even perl has some of those features. Certainly there are other coding models (e.g. Python), but C-like ones are easily the most common. You can code in assembly, compile the assembly to an object file, then link in the object file as a function call from your C or C++ code. There are ways to give the object file a handle that the linker will recognize, but you'll have to look those up as there's no standard way to specify a linker's activity, so it's implementation specific. There should be a section in either your compiler or linker documentation that describes how to link in an assembly object file.

Usually, yes, but the particular implementation depends on your compiler and machine. Assembly is always machine specific, so there's no generic case for it. You'll have to dig into your documentation to do it. It's also probably possible to simply re-write the routine in C. C is somewhat terrible at bit-wise manipulation, but it can be done through masks and the XOR operator. You can also do it by specifying field widths in a struct (or, more likely, a union), but this is typically not a recommended practice because it creates non-portable code. (It will break on a machine with different register sizes and/or byte ordering.) Both methods will compile down to the bit-manipulation instructions that are found in most assembly instruction sets (a rare case where C is more verbose than assembly).

I find this to be true more and more as well. It used to make me a little more socially 'slippery' (where I'd let things 'slip out' that I wouldn't have sober), but anymore, I just get sleepy and quiet, which is a nice effect after dinner or right before an afternoon snooze. I will submit, contrary to the self-perception of increased creativity and intelligence, that when I am sober there is no one I know whose company I prefer drunk -- or even tipsy -- to sober. My perception is that people generally get more stupid and/or boisterous and/or mean. I'm fairly certain that my IQ generally falls as my BAC rises.

There have been several discussions of this over in the Orbiter forums over the years. Here's probably the most relevant: http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=34352 Near the end, user dgatsoulis posts a set of scenarios that are as close as possible to what you see on the show.

Probably some have seen this; it's a charming little well-produced film short (in the Vimeo style) showing a group of dudes who made a scale model of the solar system in the Black Rock desert with Earth the size of a marble.

I'm about 3/4 through the novel now, and it is another space-nut must-read, like Neal Stevenson's Seveneves. It's set 500+ years in the future, but qualifies as diamond-hard sci-fi. All the technologies in evidence seem feasible, and there are very detailed descriptions of everything. I was struck, when I read the Mars trilogy, by how much economies are driven by energy, they're energy at the root. In Aurora, I find a similar focus on the integrated nature of ecologies, of which Ship is one. Aurora is about biology, organisms, mass psychology, micro-politics/societies, human cognition, how narrative functions, short-time evolution, etc. The book is fascinating start to finish, has very accurate orbital dynamics, and has obviously been researched to the nines. I'd love to see a KSP or Orbiter remake of a particular maneuver found late in the novel. Read it.