All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. GRS

    Make a fake KSP mod.

    No, and i don't care...The Kerbals could fly without anything and withstand that much Impact in any parts, so you'll feel like playing a DBZ fighting Game other than a Physics Game
  3. Ho Lam Kerman

    What did you do in KSP today?

    Yesterday, I built a KSP clone of the cancelled TKS spacecraft. But who wants who know what I did yesterday? Today I was pretty much messing about in KSP, trying to make a Tsar Bomba without BDarmory (and putting it on top of a Proton, which I then put in a missile silo), messing with TAC self-destruct and the abort key (you can actually set TAC self destruct on the abort keybinding!) and taking a look at stuff littered around the Kerbol System. I jumped to a particular asteroid named Comet Halley that I HE'd into a high elliptical orbit 10 years ago reaching past the orbit of Plock. (That gives me something to be excited about when it comes back every few decades.) And then the planets of the Kerbol System, all of them except Plock, were lined up, ready for a photo shoot. And so I got a Voyager-style Solar System family shoot! In the remote outskirts of the Kerbol System, the Kerbol System poses for a family pic. (And yes, Dres is there. It's about three pixels in area. Try zooming in.)
  4. qzgy

    Star Wars IX: The Rise of Skywalker

    .... You saying they're gonna implement time travel or something? Cause that (from my understanding) is the only way this could chronologically work....
  5. Ultimate Steve

    POLL: When did you start playing KSP?

    0.19. Back when rover wheels, aerodynamic effects, and structural parts were new. The first release to not have the launch tower. Also, I noticed three people chose 0.6.5... Unless I missed something, the earliest public release was 0.7.3. There was an 0.6.5 zip file found a while back, but I don't think it would have been available to anyone.
  6. KerbolExplorer

    POLL: When did you start playing KSP?

    1.2.2 I still remember how i killed my first kerbals
  7. MisterKerman

    What did you do in KSP today?

    Damn dude. I love asymmetrical too, but yeesh. Nice aircraft.
  8. Correct. This was purely to update some gravitational parameters in the included file based on newer data released by NASA JPL.
  9. Echoing a pro-B9 stance since it also gives you a lot more capability as a mod author especially with some of the new features being rolled out. With competitors like Firespitter dying B9PS is becoming ubiquitous like MM is, so I don't think it's all that big of a deal to include as a dependency. It's not like @blowfish is about to pick up and walk away from KSP any time soon. But, if not, I say the second option - just have them as a mesh variant, with no provision for switching the fuel amounts. The difference in performance is nominal, and you don't have to go through the headache of which Soyuz is the "correct" one for balance purposes.
  10. pincushionman

    Launch into angle of target, orbit calculations

    Given that the compass heading for north is 0° and east is 90°, then your heading h = (90 - a), where a is your desired angle from@OhioBob‘s equation, and is a positive number for heading northwards and a negative number heading south. Do note, however, once your vessel gets more than a few degrees north or south of the equator (that is, your position is), don’t bother trying to match the navball heading anymore and focus on getting to orbit, as your actual heading throughout a great circle route (which all orbits are) changes continuously. You should be close and any orbital correction later on should be cheap. You’ll need to convert from -180<h<180 to 0<h<360 as appropriate, but when you need to do that it should be obvious.
  11. Zhetaan

    Launch into angle of target, orbit calculations

    Technically, it already does. The problem is that Kerbin has a surface velocity and that velocity is defined to be in the eastward direction. Any formula that accounts for that surface velocity is going to need to account for its direction, as well. Since @OhioBob's formula essentially calculates and applies a correction factor to account for that velocity during launch, it is both mathematically and reasonably appropriate to consider the correction relative to the velocity that needs correcting. Of course, it's not really a problem: if Kerbin didn't have rotation and the attendant surface velocity, then it would never be possible to launch into orbits whose ascending or descending nodes were not directly over the KSC. The plus-minus part of the formula is similarly unavoidable, and exists because of the difficulty of applying a two-dimensional correction factor to a three-dimensional, rotating frame of reference--rotating, that is, relative to the launch point, provided that we hold the launch point stationary and equatorial, and always launch to a heading from that point, which, being the KSC, is always the case. If we were to apply it to launches from various landing sites, then it gets quite a lot more tricky. In those cases, you need to account both for the fact that the surface velocity changes (it diminishes to zero as you travel from the equator to the poles) and for the fact that you cannot launch into an equatorial orbit from non-equatorial locations, which means that you need a correction relative to the inclination you'd start with, but the range of possibilities is restricted because there are certain inclinations that are no longer available. To wit, you do not need a surface velocity correction if you launch from the exact north pole. But you also cannot launch into anything but a polar orbit from there.
  12. Option 6 : Just include them normally alongside the others ? If the parts already exist, it sounds like the work is already done.
  13. As previous posts mentioned it is within the laws of thermodynamics, the 2nd specifically. The key here is the peltier element. They are however quite expensive. The advantages of course are that there light in weight and have no mechanical moving parts so last a lot longer than the alternatives. I am sure for certain applications thermoelectric cooling does have some great advantages..
  14. OrbitalBuzzsaw

    POLL: When did you start playing KSP?

    0.20 is when I bought it, but I started seriously playing around 1.0.4
  15. Ultimate Steve

    Kerbin Collaborative Space Station

    Seeing as it has been two weeks since the last post, and little has been done to reduce the cost of the station, I will consider this challenge to have been failed. That being said, if you want, you can still launch the station for fun.
  16. kerbiloid

    Star Wars IX: The Rise of Skywalker

  17. Today
  18. It's not on the list but I would like the ability to share save files between friends so that a sort of "pseudo co-op multilayer" could be achieved. Two or more parties could build and launch and the save file would auto sync between computers. Would love to build a space station with my friends like this...
  19. Only Wernher Von Kerman, formerly at KASA, has provided any explanation...
  20. kerbiloid

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Will they add safety valves on Dragon. Or a safety panel like in Abrams. Btw is the hypergolic explosion a detonation or a deflagration→detonation?
  21. tater

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Locomotives used a series of pipes to increase the surface area in contact with heat to make more steam (super heater).
  22. Just Jim

    The Saga of Emiko Station - Volume I - Complete

    "Kerman's alive?????" Guys... you're making this really, really tempting.... Are there any weapons mods out there with lasers????
  1. Load more activity