• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MGCJerry

  1. LES -> Decoupler -> Lander can. As far as ditching the LES, here's how I do it. I add the LES engine, and its decoupler to my toggle solar panels action group. Hit the button and it takes off into oblivion and my solar panels open. I typically do this between 65-70KM. This keeps me from wasting an action group on getting rid of it. Another option I've used, is to just add the decoupler into your staging so you can decouple it while you coast to AP, and it will be nowhere near in your way when you circularize. Of course I'm a terrible KSP "player", so my ideas may be completely stupid. Your mileage will vary.
  2. Yes. I would be even more insane (and great), if you and Danny2462 collaborate on some projects. Oh no... Poor Kerbalkind...
  3. After reading this post, my developer mind is screaming... Scope Complete != Finished Version 1.0 != Complete Scope Complete = Version 1.0 Final Version = No more fixes or updates for current version. I'll shut up and return to code.
  4. This is a no brainer.... Danny2462 & Scott Manley.
  5. I like the T1 runway. It would be great in sandbox if you can rollback to previous tiers of buildings (but not their limitations). I'd love the ability to be able to build rovers in the SPH and launch them directly onto the "rallyway" and play around. Id even like if there was a similar type landscape near KSC to test rovers.
  6. Website. I prefer games without cloud/internet dependencies.
  7. Same here. I don't name my vessels until they are "functional" or possibly very useful.
  8. There was this time where I seen it EVERYTIME I started KSP for about a week. Haven't seen it since.
  9. In a previous "serious" save, I have hyperedited my kethane rovers onto the mun after 5 botched landings when SAS & RCS refused to work when trying to land. Every time after completing the mun deorbit burn, it caused SAS/RCS to refuse to function. Unobstructed thrusters, plenty of electric charge, plenty of rcs fuel (and reserves) and RCS/SAS worked great up until that point. It must have been a bug or something after a certain point. This was my most massive launch and my highest serious part count ever so its not like it was a short routine launch and I got sick of wasting my time.
  10. My suspicion is that it was once in a weird orbit around Kerbol, and within a "habitable" zone for some type of microorganisms that living in its liquid oceans and on the land, and they managed to consume whatever was plentiful on Minmus as it also had a *very* small, very thing atmosphere. These microorganisms, when die also become food for the others so they multiply. Suddenly there was a huge solar flare that pushed Minmus further out of its orbit, which stripped its atmosphere killed the microorganisms causing them to die, and burn into some weird green material. This caused Kerbin to pickup and alter Minmus's orbit to become its own moon. I just made that up so its going to have a lot of holes.
  11. Unfortunately I was a member of an avatar fansite and many of those people are umm... hardcore fans and they're stuck in their little world. I was always interested in the technical side of the technology used in creating & filming. I'm the kind of person who prefers watching "behind the scenes", than the actual product.
  12. Right now "3".... • Test career. Ugh, to grindy for me, but a lot of games are too grindy for my tastes • "Serious Save". My serious space program save. I try to take care of my guys and equipment and treat reverts as 'simulations' when using new designs. I revert "failed" launches once I run through my abort procedures only if I can land/recover the primary equipment (landers, rovers, etc). Dead kerbals = no revert. • "Goof Save". Everything goes. Everything is reverted unless if I pull off something epic.
  13. I had something similar happen to me, but took a worse turn. A teacher believed that Pluto was always the farthest away. I shown the teach proof otherwise (the internet wasn't what it is now) and I got scolded for it. I was then told "not to bring it up again" or I "would be sent to another school for abusive youth" (Joke was on you pal, I had a clean record so that wouldn't happen) and that I'm to adhere to what he said. "Come back and prove me wrong when you have a PhD in your name." He said a lot of other absurd crap as well where I could probably write a book. "Uranus is blue because of oxygen", "Mercury is the hottest planet", "Granite is the hardest mineral", "Iron rusts in space due to the water vapor in space"... Plenty of other idioms too. Despite always being ahead in science, I barely passed (Earth Sciences) and I think it was because I didn't dumb down my work to his level. Thankfully the following year I had a biology teacher who was more knowledgeable and we would get into some really great conversations about space, some physics, to the point in which it would eat into class time. The great thing, when I took chemistry the following year, I had the same guy and found out the idiot in my first paragraph was no longer teaching at the school due to "complaints & disputes with his techniques". I did lodge a complaint to the dean & to the school board. However, I was not able to complete his class because I ended up moving and had to change schools. Edit Avatar movie (with the blue cat/smurf people) reference.
  14. I did this with a Kerbal awhile back and shot him far away, really really fast and far... Perhaps I can adapt this to the challenge at hand and create an entry. Are "engine mass drivers" acceptable?
  15. Rescue mission time! Failing that, you'll have a new EVE base.
  16. Bug fixes and stability improvements. I get a nice warm fuzzy feeling in my belly when I see "Stability improvements". Not seeing stability improvements while seeing new features in release notes is like slam dunking purring kittens into a running meat grinder. KSP isn't fun when its being unstable at times. If its not fun to play because of issues it doesn't matter what the features are. When you lose the "beta" title, its for real. You don't want to repeat "Big Rigs" or any other similar game titles that claims to be finished (not beta, alpha, dev build, etc regardless of version) but clearly isn't finished or lacks polish. Personally, something I'd like to see in KSP is load parts only when flying a ship with parts to improve memory. Simple low poly previews or even animated icons for parts in the editor would suffice. Once you click that part, it loads in memory for the current session. Perhaps a "flush parts" button somewhere to clear the current memory of loaded parts that are not in use on the current craft? No need to preload EVERYTHING unless you're using it. IMO its wasting already limited memory. Make preloading all parts an option for high RAM and/or 64bit machines. I think we could all create much bigger ships this way. Whackjob could end up creating 30,000 part ships because tanks engines girders & struts are already loaded and may make a smoother launch. Anyway, here's my order of preference... Highest to lowest. » Bugfixes & stability (kraken takedowns, part strength, part rebalancing, SAS fixes, etc)footprint. » Finish whats in it already (experience, aero overhaul, experience) » New features (Female Kerbals, multi-player) » New content (moar boosters, moar engines, moar buildings, additional air/space ports to land at, more stuff to visually explore not just biomes.Maybe different ground scatter for each biome?, etc) » Visual improvements (mach effects, clouds, ground clutter, cities, etc) Thats my $0.02
  17. I built this... Empty payload, and it handled pretty straight up to about 5500m, then all hell broke loose... Just after taking these pictures, it flipped out of control, so I separated the boosters, then the tank. Once that happened it took me another 2500m to regain control of the shuttle and ended up landing it in the grass mostly intact 38km north of KSC. I lost 2 engines on touchdown.
  18. I have done it once. However I had to use mechjeb for the flight profile and play with the engine throttle limiter on engine 1 on the way up because I couldn't do everything at once (3 main engines). Despite a problem clearing the launch clamps, but managed to recover the launch and made it to a 120k orbit. It flew like a plane fine both empty and loaded with a full jumbo. Using the main engines it was able to take off 3/4 of the way down the runway, but of course the fuel doesnt last long. Landing was a failure because the tiny gear are such a pain with the mk3. I don't have that craft anymore and I have been unable to reproduce that shuttle and launch.
  19. Crashed Crashed Crashed Failed getting to orbit... Subsequently crashed Crashed Crashed Productive day. I was playing around creating weird things.
  20. I have 33 right now. All of them online.
  21. Edit the parts file and give them an ejection force of 0 so they just fall off and don't do that stupid "hit center stack" crap. Also eliminates the need for additional parts because I run a limited part count.
  22. I use the cheat menu for several things, and stuff like this is one of them. For me playing with an ion engine to do multi-hour burns and waiting DAYS for the next maneuver is not my idea of fun. Sure, timewarp works but if you have other stuff going on too, you may miss a window or a node, and then more waiting. FUN!!! IMO, this is not cheating if your craft is capable of the maneuver dV wise but the time is prohibitive if you have other missions waiting on a node or a launch window. I think if it as cheating if you're out fuel, didn't pack enough battery or due to a technical design flaw. I'd also consider it cheating if this was done during a "serious career" save. Your mileage, kilometer or delta V may vary, but that's how I see it.
  23. Less than an hour. It used to be more, but times have changed and I can't play it as much as I would like.