TNM

Members
  • Content Count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

About TNM

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast
  1. Well, now that 1.1 is out i'm trying to get back into KSP, and EVE is just a great mod i really don't want to do without. Sady, there is a bug i can reproduce that i have narrowed down to EVE (can't reproduce it in stock ksp, i can reproduce it in EVE and the EVE offshoot SVE, so i guess its related): Is this known for 1.1, can i do something in the settings to avoid it or do you need "more info"? Its basically happening on reload (resetting to VAB, getting back to main menu, reverting to launch), it happens after a few reloads (not the first time). If after the crash i check files in Steam it usually does reload 1-2 files. Thx.
  2. @Roverdude If a modder thinks he needs AAR, he can go for that, and BTW, why is that something "bad" now? What you are basically saying is that you want a modder that thinks he needs AAR use any open licence but then EXPECT ppl to behave like an AAR-licence is in place. Is that how it should work? Is that what all your "being polite" argument is about? Did you ever think that maybe a modder who uses AAR licence doesn't want ppl to use his mod AFTER he leaves? He could have changed his licence, but he obviously didn't care enough to do so. Why is that the communities fault now? P.S. did 2 modders really cross the line with a "black list" in this thread? We are going places i see...
  3. I see you totally got my point and answered with a very witty comment. I congratulate you sir, you win the internet. I don't know why i came to the conclusion that parts in a mod that match in size and function would have anything to do with eachother, so seeing 2 parts that didn't fit the pattern seemed strange to me. As you explained the description explicitly says "with the new heatshield for the small pod, this decoupler will fit niceley and meet flush with the pod", so why on earth would i come to the conclusion that parts would fit i don't know, its a fault of mine, i sometimes just don't get obvious stuff. I will refrain from asking silly questions, of course these are just random decouplers that have totally nothing at all to do with the mod, they are just...there. Thanks for showing me the error of my ways, good sir. Should i have insulted you in any way and taken precious time from your daily schedule of answering important forum questions, i apologize. If there is something i can do to reduce your pain i will do my best. *what is happening to this forum...ppl are so angry these days
  4. Quick question: did a fresh install, could it be that some parts don't match up? Should there be matching parts but maybe this installation package is missing them? thx. UP13 -> 1.25m . check UP20 -> inflatable . check UP25 -> MK1-2 . check UP40 -> 3.75m . check 0.625 -> no decoupler? UP30 -> no heatshield?
  5. Just wanted to say "great work", hope your dedication pays off and modders will migrate
  6. Here, ESA 2012 is calling Nobody want's to talk this down, for many space-geeks its just not the first time we hear about it, thats all, many are interested in some basic tech that allows that, the whole ATV-fully automated docking was part of that long term goal to do automated servicing in space. Astrium wins satellite servicing contract
  7. You are making strange connections here. Lying about your condition hoping that the physical won't bring it up and taking performance enhancing drugs for a sport competition is, well, interesting, but i wouldn't get too attached with that comparison. We all know its not needed to be in perfect health to go to space, its just safer to do so right now because there is no infrastructure in space to service humans (=hospitals) and, because of close loop systems, you really don't need someone who is sick to infect all others on a station. Once we do "space tourism" you will see how different the requirements are. Think about it like the tests between a pilot (airliner) and all the passengers in the back. They both survive the flight, but of course the pilot is in much better health because we rely on him and want him to be. EDIT: i'm sure some pilots (and most were) didn't mention everything outright, but they are on close scrutiny anyways, they probably know more about their health then they ever wanted to know.
  8. The title sounds a bit grandiouse, this is more about satellite servicing, which is, of course, long overdue. Will it work out economically? Who knows, there is still the fact that you may prefer putting a new satellite up with new technology instead of refueling the old one after 10 years. Broadcast tech changes alot in 10 years, so do all other instruments.
  9. sure, every day once why is "how to i breathe" such a common problem in here?
  10. Well, last large SLS-Conference gave the following info on Orion: 1st iteration = Moon return entry design (not Mars rated, the heatshield couldnt handle it) -> this iteration is ready to do the asteroid mission designed to bring and study a small asteroid in lunar orbit. the first 2 testflights will also go there, doesn't matter if the asteroid will be there at the time or not, the capsule test will be done anyways. the first test will be earth orbit atmo-reentry 80% lunar orbit speed, then 2nd to lunar orbit, then manned lunar orbit. 2nd iteration = after Asteroid redirect mission the capsule should be updated to do Mars orbit reentry = heatshield and radiation updates needed 3rd iteration = Mars landing upgrades, maybe inflatable heatshield...but thats very speculative for now. Well, Mars is rather speculative. There is not much info on what comes between Asteroid redirect and Mars, so basically everything is open for Orion, an update is needed anyways to do Mars so that may never materializes. If Dragon will be Mars rated before Orion i could picture Nasa just buying some Dragon Capsules instead of refitting Orion.
  11. Ok, lets get the speculation going for the admin-building...here we go:
  12. Aerodynamics Something better is needed, no question about it. The "mass/drag" model is...counterintuitive. I found that out fast the first few days of playing when i couldn't understand why my larger plane with more thrust couldnt do as well as my first little testplane. Universe Scale This is maybe the only point i don't feel is a big showstopper, could be related to the max-timewarp effect, i don't want to have to wait longer. But for every problem there is a solution. Basically, i don't feel either way about it, do as you please. Isp Well, i'm not a fan of something beeing misrepresented. What we have now is simply not ISP. Now, we can say "we don't care", but the argument of "it would be too hard" is just that, an argument for the sake of argument. For that matter, who is the one to judge what is too hard for others? We have engine overheating!!! How often could i not go full thrust because the rocket would just overheat? If thats not too hard... Just do it right instead of finding arguments to do it wrong. Life Support Absolutely needed. Why? Because its the MAIN difference between a short trip into orbit and to the moon and a multiyear mission to the outer planets. When ppl say "not needed, too hard", then how about fuel for the rocket? Its exactly the same stuff, just for Kerbals. If fuel is not too hard, then consumables for Kerbals arn't either. Lets face it, it adds to the challenge, and once you reach orbit/moon, KSP can need a challenge. Its called "game progression". Re-entry Danger Well, as i always said, i still don't get why this is not implemented, Squad even took the time to FX it and put values on the parts. If we accept that its a challenge to GO to space, then we will surely accept its a challenge to RETURN from space? Why shouldn't it be, isn't that what KSP is all about, mastering the challenge? What could be "too hard" here? Its all a question of tutorials and giving ppl feedback when something explodes. my 2 cents the always used argument "its too hard" is a logical fallacy. nothing is too hard if you give feedback as to why you failed so you can do better. you are not to judge what is too hard for ppl, even more so when we are talking about "basic understanding" of the representation of spaceflight in a game. We are not talking equations here, we are talking "oh...it did go booooomm...the game tells me i overdid xyz". Thats something a child will understand, because all humans work like that, trial/error. Don't always underestimate your fellow humans.
  13. There is a fundamental difference of geological evidence a 50km-asteroid impact would cause and a forgotten city overgrown in a rainforest. Now, to understand why would need you to take some time to understand the basic principles of physics and geology, its actually very interesting once you get into it, and its very much space related too (forming of the solar system? exciting). But don't argue with "i don't know so you can't know either". Once you have the basic principles down you may still not be able to draw every detail, but you can outline very well what absolutely must happen. Thats what sience does, once you understand the principle you can make predictions, the predictions get tested again and again and a model developed accordingly. Then, you can feed anything into the model and get solid predictions for events you can't directly test. Thats why its different from "believe".
  14. A 50km Asteroid could hit anywhere, it would just vaporise the water and hit the crust anyways...too much energy to absorb by a mear few km of water. We would have all kinds of geological evidence of tsunamis (worldwide at the same time), the ashes from the following fallout in the ice layers (everywhere on the planet) and so on. Nope, only 12000 years ago? Not in any way, shape or form, not enough time to remove the geological evidence. And we can model quite well what would happen, because today we understand basic physics...mass/velocity/energy...its not rocket sience...well maybe it is
  15. Hi guys. Can someone explain the "conics modes" to me? Whats the difference between 0-4? Thx