All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. That'd be NSWR, possibly also some variant of flow-stabilized fusion drive. As a bonus, both of those provide steady acceleration, which can be problematic for crewed flights. However, total energy requirements are always at the root of the problem. If you demand both high thrust and Isp for a sustained period of time, the question quickly becomes where to get all that energy from in first place.
  3. ...\Kerbal Space Program\Logs\ModuleManager\MMPatch.log shows what patches were applied and in what order. ...\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\ModuleManager.ConfigCache shows what the state of all the data items was after all patches were applied. Given those and some standard text searching tools (on Windows I like Agent Ransack) you can trace back where the content is coming from.
  4. Yes, I saw that, which had me wondering if I should wait, but then again, who knows when in 2020 it will actually be released.
  5. I don't have any problems with the file size, but for all of the new stars, the flare is completely seperated from the actual star itself, as seen in the picture. Also for some reason Europa, Enceladus and some similar moons look a lot darker than they do in real life photos.
  6. That's kind of what I thought after looking at the savefile(s). Well, I guess I'll have to settle for a smaller class... (And use another craft for that one contract.)
  7. By the way of that option, are there any news on this topic?
  8. Another update: TextureReplacer.dll update for KSP 1.8.x add support for "future" (Breaking Ground) suits add suit directory suffixes: directories containing vintage or future suits must have ".vintage" or ".future" suffix, respectively rename `hideParachuteBackpack` setting to `hideBackpack` as it hides both parachute and cargo backpacks now re-add normal map support for heads fix default vintage IVA suits fix default texture fallbacks on models with vintage suits code cleanup and reorganisation
  9. The MK3 bulkhead from Florida is in Texas now.
  10. You made a comment to me saying, inter-alia "$60 is a bargain even for KSP 1". Maybe you are just trolling but in my universe it's polite to reply to people who address you, however irrelevant and unreasoned their comment. I have no idea how you can reconcile that quote with, "I also never told anyone to pay twice the list price", but that you were, "making a recommendation". As you don't either and can't support your comments I have no idea what your point in addressing me was. That's a 'no' to having any evidence then. Could I thank you, however, for what was the most to-the-point post of yours I've read. These are the points that I'm taking from what you've written, please correct me if they are not what you meant: "The typical modern day "AAA" is a 15-20 hour walking simulator with most of the budget spent on useless wallpaper" USD $60 is the 'standard' price for an "AAA" game [no quote in this thread, I paraphrase others but hope I accurately illustrate your view] "to be worth those 60$ a simple modern remake from professional developers is enough" "only willing to pay 5$ every 8 years is a big part of the problem" ['the problem' presumed to be "there aren't many options for a space SIM as niche as KSP"] "there is no good alternative other than waiting for KSP2" From those there are three conclusions that I understand you to draw: KSP 2 will be worth USD $60 because it'll be an "AAA" update to KSP 1 Paying USD $60 is good because it addresses 'the problem' of not enough space sims. "there is no good alternative other than waiting for KSP2" Hopefully that's pretty uncontentious so far. I apologise if I have accidentally misrepresented anything you've said here or elsewhere. My response to each of those is: Since typical "AAA" games are bad (your first point) and only bad "AAA" games charge $60 (more or less your second), charging $60 for KSP 2 says, to me, "This will be a bad 'AAA' game so don't buy it". For me, the high price tag and "AAA"-by-professionals labels are very strong negatives, exactly because all the $60 "AAA" games are so bad compared to many (but far from the majority) of $30 'indie' ones. $60 does nothing but encourage "AAA" bad-game developers to make a bad game. $60 doesn't pay for good game development, it pays for bad game studios' millionaire bosses. While I have no idea where you get "5$ every 8 years" I take the point and assume you didn't mean it literally. Good game developers understand mine, which is I'll happily pay $10 every year for a good product, regularly supported. Charge $20 every 2 years for a new version or $30 every 3 years and you've got a repeat customer. Look like an "AAA" and charge $60 after you've ignored the product for 6 years or more and you've lost me. Good alternatives to waiting for KSP 2 (my addition: "at launch"): i) Buying KSP 1, now, for half the price or, next time it's on sale, for even less. ii) Buying SimpleRockets 2, now, for $12. iii) Whether or not you buy anything now, not buying KSP 2 until at least its launch-bugs have been fixed, reviews are favourable and, prefereably, when it's cheaper.
  11. Today
  12. The TGdesk Lessons that use KerbalEdu mission files appear to still show the deprecated Mission Library links. Consequently, below are direct links to the KerbalEdu TGdesk mission files that go with the TGdesk Lessons (I revised the names & descriptions to better match what you see in TGdesk for the KerbalEDU TGdesk): Links to the relevant file by TGdesk Lesson: "NEWTON'S FIRST LAW OF MOTION" (A_Edu_TGdesk_Newton_First_Law_Out_of_Fuel.sfs) "NEWTON'S SECOND LAW OF MOTION" (A_Edu_TGdesk_Newton_Second_Law.sfs) "NEWTON'S THIRD LAW OF MOTION" (A_Edu_TGdesk_Newton_Third_Law_Planes_on_Other_Planets.sfs) Lessons "ORBITAL MANEUVERING" and "ORBITS AND DOCKING" both use (A_Edu_TGdesk_Orbits_and_Docking.sfs) Link to see the whole folder Using the KerbalEDU Mission Editor Tutorial The EHC lessons & missions links appear to continue to work fine. Link to Album Showing the Above Revisions
  13. Thanks. I was afraid of that. Clearly there's a strong bias in the Linux community in favor of those who upgrade everything at the earliest opportunity, vs. those who ride the old as long as possible to avoid having to spend their work/play time fighting bugs and learning a new system only to have it change again (figuratively) the next week. If you jumped off 16.04 in mid-2017, it had to be to 17.04 or pre-release builds of 17.10, and as you say, it's anyone's guess whether stuff made to run on that would work on 16.04. I'll grab the binary you pointed to and see if it'll work. Thanks for the help!
  14. Yeet ......................................... I think the correct thread is now:
  15. AFAIK, the average radius/volume is fixed with the class. So the answer to your example question is not really. The shape is randomized, so if you could handle a longer skinnier asteroid in the space it might work.
  16. It seems this hotkey and the bug only exist in mission builder while building crafts for testing the mission
  17. The oldest binary that supports 1.6.1 is at You're on your own, though: we upgraded past Xenial (16.04) in June 2017 so if a binary produced after that date works on Xenial, it's pure luck. Recent versions of Principia want libc++-8-dev and libc++abi-8-dev, and I am not aware that these would be available before Bionic (18.04).
  18. Odd bug - not sure if caused by ReStock but my Experiment Storage Unit (the stock crate looking thing) has seemed to change to 4 super thin pillers. Like it's just the edge outline and is empty (clear) in the middle. I'll try excluding it from restock to see if that fixes it or if there is some other mod changing it - any idea how I can tell what mods are applying patches to it?
  19. A shuttle is not an SSTO. A shuttle has stages, but is a spaceplane. Is the Gull a spaceplane or just a regular plane? Because if it has rockets attached to the side to get it into orbit, it's still a spaceplane.
  20. No... I was wrong. The Gull is not an SSTO. I took a weeklong break between building it and playing this save... my memory failed me again. Wait... what challenge?
  21. You probably don't have Making History or Breaking Ground, right? I forgot to add a check if kerbal models from these DLC are missing.
  22. You can pull up the scatterer GUI in-game (Should be CTRL - SHIFT- ALT - F11) and you'd want to mess with ExperimentalAtmosphereScale.
  23. First note thar MJ can't do anything else than would be possible with manual control. So the craft need to have the ability to act to the controls. Second, noone can help you without logs and/or craft files.
  24. I'm on 1.8.1 windows with both DLCs and pure stock clean install
  25. These legs solve the problem of slipped down the hill: With these electric fans, I will make sure that in a case like that, he will return to land: Trying now this one:
  1. Load more activity