All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. FreeThinker

    [1.5.1] Blast Awesomeness Modifier (BAM)

    ignore
  3. The argument out of range thing is not related to our plugin, maybe some other KSP bug. I also did aerospace for uni!
  4. Кажется я понял, мне надо развернуться?)))
  5. <THIS IS NOT A BUG REPORT, ONLY A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT> Public Service announcement for anyone using scrapyard, Earlier today I spent close to 4 hours tracking down what I thought was a Kerbal Construction Time bug, only to find I wasn't hunting what I thought I was hunting. After a conversation I had with Gap back on the 7th~ish when I updated my KSP to 1.7 today and started a new save, I turned on this feature of scrapyard: (WIP) Funds can be overridden so that using parts from the inventory do not contribute to the cost of the vessel. You do still need to have the full amount of funds (for now). I've never used it before and began playing. I shortly noticed I was getting a massive frame-rate drop and performance hit. I was also getting a endlessly scrolling error message from KCT. {hence why I spent 4 hours tearing apart my install to try and find what mod was causing my KCT error. I still haven't found it.} Turns out the performance hit and frame-rate chug was all from enabling that WIP feature of scrapyard. I was able to repro this on a clean install with only scrapyard installed. Video of my test below: Perhaps, if @severedsolo would be so kind, a warning could be added to the first page that enabling the WIP feature of scrapyard, may provide a performance hit, and stuttering in the build editors. {Other user's performance may not be as negatively impacted. performance may vary by user system specs.} @gap I'm tagging you in this because of our conversation about the WIP feature of scrapyard, and I seem to remember some running conversations over on the KCT thread about stuttering in the VAB/SPH. Thought I'd give you a heads up here so you can investigate on your own and see if this helps you alleviate some of your symptoms. Thank you for your time.
  6. KerikBalm

    N-body simulation software?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point#Stability Its why we find lots of examples of "trojan asteroids" and such at Sun-Jupiter L4 and L5, but no example of them at L1 or L2, nor L3 really. The closest to an L3 asteroid are the Hildas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilda_asteroid By stable, I mean... its not a danger to Kerbin/ it won't do what they think Theia did- as I said " I'd like to know if... I've doomed Kerbin "
  7. Death Engineering

    [1.7.x] Snacks! - Friendly, Simplified Life Support

    Thanks for the input. I don't see output_log.txt or KSP . log files and the whitelist file is present. Using the 1.1.3 snacks but will reinstall both buds after work.
  8. It sounds like even their so called closed cycle gas core rockets were still spewing out fissionables in the exhaust. SO It was a leaky nuclear lightbulb design? Its my understanding that while open-cycle gas core engines were considered on the American side, they were quickly rejected due to the extreme amount of radioactivity they'd spew out. Thus the "nuclear lighbulb" concepts, which would be very difficult to develop. I must have missed the part in here describing how the USSR/Russia had made any progress towards a closed cycle gas core rocket. Open-cycle, even if lit in low orbit, would spew out may more radioactivity than is acceptable.
  9. YNM

    N-body simulation software?

    They're a point equilibrium, which means it's not stable. Even spacecrafts only orbits around it.
  10. I have located the stuttering effect I was noticing, it was coming solely from the scrapyard mod, and had to do with the WIP feature, funds override. once I disabled that, the stutter went away, so far have not been able to reproduce the endlessly scrolling text pictured above. Still working on it, adding mods back in one at a time.
  11. Today
  12. Ну вообщето показывает. И у тебя на скрине наклонение 32,40802... Обрати внимание в какую сторону у тебя КА летит по орбите, и в какую нужно...
  13. KerikBalm

    N-body simulation software?

    So in my system I started with Sigma dimensions to do a 3x rescale... Dres did not get scaled up, and had its surface gravity decreased. Minmus was moved to an orbit similar to that of dres. A vesta analogue was added. Jool's surface gravity was increased from 0.8 g (like saturn) to 2.5 g (more like Jupiter), so its influence on a moon relative to the influence of the other moons is greater. On top of that, I only scaled up the moons by... 2x I think it was instead of 3x, and decreased their surface gravity, so they should disturb each other less, and Jool has a tighter grip on them. Duna I made a moon of my mod planet Rald, which is 3 or 4 x the mass of Duna, Ike became a distance moon around the two... I wonder if its a stable system, or if Jool plus Ike's influence would make them collide. Then... I added a Mun sized body to Kerbin's psuedo L5 point (60 degrees behind Kerbin, same SMA +0.01 meters for purposes of not breaking the sentinel telescope wich will pick a body to map based on the next closest SMA that is greater than the crafts SMA). This one I also want to know if its stable... L5 points should be stable... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant-impact_hypothesis#Possible_origin_of_Theia I'd like to know if my mun sized body there is stable (not really any planetesimals here to work with, but still other planets), or if I've doomed Kerbin, and they really need to get to Rald and Laythe fast, and be prepared to stay there a long time.
  14. Exactly what parts are missing KSPIE fuels?
  15. So, they mention Uranium Flouride quenching... Would it be any better if one was using Thorium? as in a breeder reactor? Most of the fuel elements would be thorium 232, and Uranium 233 would be consumed shortly after being produced (so there is very little uranium at any given time)... could that help, or would the thorium quench just about as much as the Uranium?
  16. It doesn't automatically lead to cancer, it is still associated with cancer. To divide indefinitely, cells need to maintain their telomeres (cancer cells that don't express it use an alternate route to maintain telomere length). To become cancerous, cells must develop a way to grow without being given the signal to, ignore signals to stop growth, and maintain their telomere length. By stopping the production of telomerase, cells have a limited time to accumulate all the needed mutations. Extending telomeres extends the time the cell has to accumulate all the needed mutations. Thus, indirectly, lengthening telomeres increases the chances of a cell becoming cancerous, simply because it has more time to become cancerous. Luckily many mutations that lead to cancer also make an embryo non viable, so there's a lot of selection before one is born. Also, one has to keep in mind the total cell number. More cells means more chances for bad stuff to happen, so it makes sense that evolution would limit the number of cells that automatically maintain telomere length. There is clearly potential, and the enzyme is known, but you don't want it to be delivered to cells with defective copies of oncogenes/tumor suppressor genes. If we were doing personalized medicine/ you had a very low incidence of cancer in your family, you may want telomerase in your somatic cells. If cells aren't dividing (or aren't dividing much), telomeres don't shorten. If the cell can clearly be recognized as being out of place, the immune system can kill it even if it would otherwise be cancerous (which is why cancer is usually not transmissible, except in cases where genetic diversity is very low, as in threatened species, or species that have been through a bottleneck: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canine_transmissible_venereal_tumor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_facial_tumour_disease) this may be why testicular cancer is not sooo common. But I can virtually guarantee that if a drug were to come out, that wasn't carefully controlled (starting with genetic testing), it would increase the cancer incidence in those taking it, and it would be pulled from the market. For my master's project, I made a series of viruses which had a viral promoter replaced with the human hTERT promoter. Thus if the cell was not making transcription factors that would transcribe the hTERT gene in the cell, the viral genes would not be transcribed either (and the transcription factor that the virus encoded doesn't work with its own promoter). Thus the virus would not replicate in most somatic cells. Of course, you don't want a virus that kills stem and germline cells either... so you replace another viral promoter with a human promoter that is active in differentiated cells (not stem cells)... in my case this was done by a master student before me, and the promoter was Tyrosine, which is highly active in melanoma cells (Tyrosinase: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrosinase ) and is involved in the production of melanin. Stem cells don't produce melanin, that is a marker of differentiated cells. On top of that, the Ad5 virus normally produces an anti-apoptotic protein to stop the cell from dying due to apoptosis (from an internal or external trigger in response to infection) - cancer cells already have defective apoptosis mechanisms... so the virus won't reproduce unless it finds cells with a defective apoptosis mechanism, that express high levels of tyrosinase (ie, make a lot of melanin), and high levels of telomerase... the idea was that any cell fitting those conditions would be cancerous (stem cells, even adult stem cells should have working apoptosis mechanisms, and shouldn't be producing tyrosinase until they've differentiated and stopped producing hTERT). Of course... the project was purely academic... injecting live virus into people also faces an uphill battle against regulatory authorities... because of cases like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger as well as this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-linked_severe_combined_immunodeficiency#Treatments If i recall correctly in that study though, they used Gamma-retroviruses, which were later shown to have a higher than normal propensity for integrating in spots that cause cancer (lentiviruses have been shown not to have this propensity, and using TALENs or ZFNs, or maybe CRISPR too, should allow one to choose the site of insertion). I currently work in pharmacovigilance... and I think the regulators are way too cautious and conservative, its holding progress back. Even that study where 3 of the children died, 9 out of 10 were cured for a severe genetic disease (although not lethal). To me that would be worth it, especially if it was changed from a gammaretrovirus to a lentivirus, and then from there we could move to targetted integration sites (review: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4866806/ , another article... so many to choose from http://www.bloodjournal.org/content/117/20/5332?sso-checked=true ...not statements such as " γRV-mediated insertional mutagenesis" refer to GammaRetroVirus-mediated mutatgenesis) The adenoviruses I made were very specific against cancer cells (tissue culture in the lab, controls were cultured embryonic stem cells, and differentiated human fibroblasts taken from the nearby university hospital, who got them from... *ahem* human foreskins after circumcision *ahem*). Of course... adenoviruses are quite weak, and the immune system would respond and neutralize subsequent treatments (the immune system could be temporarily suppressed), and there's always a risk of a more severe than usual allergic reaction... but there is so much potential being held back because a negative reaction that occurs in 1 out of a thousand people will lead to hundreds of thousands of people having negative reactions... So I suspect any hTERT therapy will be likewise held back given the seemingly weak nature of the effect (since there are conflicting studies), the very long clinical trials needed to see a benefit (you'd have a hard time proving your drug has a therapeutic effect, and getting approval before the patent expires), and the significant expected risk of higher cancer incidence. On so many issues, we have a social apparatus that isn't well suited to the real world.
  17. @FreeThinker Oh right that explains, Well thanks!
  18. Citizen247

    MAD - Aerospace Parts (v0.6) KSP 1.4.5

    It will as and when I have available time to do so. At the moment I'm working on a major overhaul of another mod, and 1.7 has only just been released. I've tested the parts in a clean install of 1.7 just now, and they loaded and worked fine as far as I can see. What's the problem you're having?
  19. I'll have the new version ready until the end of this week. I had a lot of RL things on my plate lately.
  20. has anyone been able to test if this current version works with 1.7.0?
  21. @TheRandomGuy1029 Which planes are you entering into the competition? You can submit more than one if you want, but it seems you have withdrawn a couple and I'm not sure which ones you want in.
  22. vardicd

    Universal Storage II [1.3.1 and 1.4.5 - 1.7.0]

    Ah that would explain things, I don't use that mod pack. Thanks for the answer.
  23. So sorry and I can only commiserate from afar. That must have been incredibly frustrating to discover...that sinking feeling when you realize stuff's vanished. I'm glad you won't just give up and we'll see the rebuilt parts when you can get to it.
  24. Paul Kingtiger

    Universal Storage II [1.3.1 and 1.4.5 - 1.7.0]

    They are primarily designed for the Bluedog Design Bureau Gemini parts. There is a 1.875m cylindrical fairing coming in a future release which will support the 5 bay core.
  25. Poodmund

    Universal Storage II [1.3.1 and 1.4.5 - 1.7.0]

    @Daishi this sounds exactly like what happened on stream the other day where my Scientist could not even activate the materials bay after it had been used twice.
  26. An HDD as a drive to boot from? You should rather look for a SATA SSD like a Samsung 860 EVO (not QVO) or Crucial MX500.
  1. Load more activity