Starman4308

If it's for a satellite contract, there may not be time to go for a bi-elliptic. What I might try is adding a small burn deep inside Jool's gravity well, to take advantage of the Oberth effect and exit Jool's SOI with more relative velocity than you started. You'd set up the slingshot mostly as normal, with the exception that you probably want to aim your return vector a bit towards the sun*. Then, just set up a maneuver node at peri-Jool and add a bit of prograde until you get a solar periapsis that isn't a sundive. In short, at the periapsis of a Jool slingshot, you're deep in a gravity well; use the Oberth. *The most efficient direction to be exiting Jool's SOI is directly retrograde of it. Since you'll be adding velocity at peri-Jool and effectively straightening out the U-turn a bit, you want to set up the slingshot deliberately curved inwards.

Don't they actually build out of the SPH? I thought SpaceX didn't do vertical assembly and integration.

That is simply a natural follow-on to somebody claiming to be king, in defiance of every written letter of law and contract. If you're in Europe... still the right continent. The original French was "life, liberty, and property" when translated, the US Preamble says "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness*", and I kludged those together. *Hypocritical Southern slave-owners objected to "property". Now, if you cannot even debate in good faith, lying about the nature of MIT/BSD and GNU GPL, making up extremely exaggerated strawmen, etc, well, I have better things to do.

It's just a bit outside your criteria, but I've had success with the Acer R240HY. Overall, one very important question: do you prefer very fast response, or a better looking screen? Usually, TN panels are cheaper, and it's easier to find 144 Hz TN panels, while IPS (In Plane Switching) panels tend to look a bit better.

All I know is, in five minutes, there will be only one, because there can be only one. Alternately, we play rock-paper-scissors; the winner gets the identity as me, the loser gets the rights to sell the story to the media.

If you're not the owner of GTA V, nor the person writing the laws, then who are you to say what does and doesn't go. I would also kindly request that you do not put words into my mouth. At no point did I say you could not continue posting your opinions; I merely said I think your opinions are incorrect. You feel entitled. Let me make this clear. You are not entitled. You were born entitled to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. So were the executives of Take Two. They agreed to share their property in exchange for money and agreement to certain conditions. You are seeking to subvert those conditions, to go back on a deal signed in good faith. At no point did Take Two have to distribute its product to you. You came in, you signed "I Agree" to the EULA, you are playing in their sandbox. At no point was any of this hidden from you so long as you actually read the EULA. You signed a contract. You abide by the contract. You don't get to make stuff up because you want it. While technically you can sell open-source software... there's nothing keeping me from taking your software, and re-distributing it for free. While some customers will be honest enough to pay... many won't. People should have the right to commercialize their software and forbid unauthorized redistribution, and the open-source paradigm is not a good paradigm for commercial software. Take the Sublime text editor, for example. There is a trial version that's free, the only issue being that occasionally it nags you to buy the full version. Guess who still hasn't paid for the full version? As to your case scenario with MIT/BSD... what? The original software is still out there, still open-source, still free to use. While somebody could wrap that piece of software in a proprietary package and resell... they still have to have the MIT/BSD license information in there, they still have to advertise "yes, we used this open-source software library", other people can still use that segment of code. I guess my primary argument here can be summed up as: "weeell, of course you can use it, unless you're one of those eeeeevil money-grubbing corporations, then no you can't." An ARR license says "private code, do not touch", a GPL license says "eeeeeevil corporations!".

You're not the owner of GTA V. You have not the slightest right to say what TT can and cannot do with their IP. This warped and entitled sense of fairness has nothing to do with what does and doesn't constitute piracy. That is the entire point of the GNU GPL. Any work utilizing GNU GPL-licensed code must be distributed under GNU GPL itself. Therefore, there's no way to include a GPL-licensed software library in your proprietary, closed-source, ARR program. You can do that with something like the MIT or BSD license, where you have to include a copy of the license with your program, but the program itself can be under any license. The lesser GPL does not have that stipulation, but the full GPL is basically a viral license, forcing conformity to the author's views on how software should work.

There's also the possibility that you need to clear your input lock stack. Hit Alt-F12, expand the console section, go to Input Locks, and hit "Clear Input Locks". It's something I have to do every so often, though that's probably mostly because I'm buried under mods.

My understanding is that there's 850 W power supplies, and then there's 850 W power supplies I'd actually trust to power a system that needed 850 W. A good PSU will have a number of protections such as over-volt protection, and produce a very stable DC voltage. Not all "850 W" power supplies will actually do that. When I built mine, I took some advice from the pcpartpicker forums, and looked at some professional reviews of power supply units. It's much easier to throw a big AC/DC converter into a box and call it a day than to make sure it's actually stable and reliable.

Depends on your budget and what else you want to do with the desktop. I'll forewarn you: nothing will let you run 1000+ part monstrosities at smooth frame rates. The limiting factor is the rigid-body dynamics solver, which scales super-linearly. If it takes 10 milliseconds to run rigid-body dynamics on a 100-part vessel, it takes more than 100 milliseconds to run rigid-body dynamics on a 1000-part vessel. Overall, though: CPU: The absolute best is going to be an overclockable, latest-generation i5/i7. For pure KSP, they should be almost indistinguishable, though the hyperthreading of an i7 would come in handy for streaming and video encoding. Coming up close behind are the Ryzen series, which have almost as good of single-thread performance, and have significantly better multi-threaded performance than Intel at each given price point. Future games might take better advantage of mutli-core CPUs, but I wouldn't hold my breath for too long; parallelized programming is a hard trick to master. GPU: Does not hugely matter. Stock graphics will probably run on any recent integrated GPU (warning: Ryzen chips do not have integrated GPUs). With visual mods, I would consult the mod authors. For other video games, GPU can be hugely important for maxing out graphical settings without compromising on FPS, but KSP's stock graphics are a light load to carry. RAM: 8-16 GB. 16 GB is probably preferred if you're running a very heavily modded game with background processes, etc. Storage: You may want to load KSP from a solid state drive, particularly for mod-heavy installations. Even with the fanciest SSD, though, it can take a while for heavily modded installations to boot up, part of which is just parsing the config files and Module Manager patches. PSU: Don't skimp out. I'm not quite as up-to-date on what PSUs are recommended these days, but the PSU is the one thing that, if it goes out, can take the rest of your system with it.

I'm slightly confused. Are you in open-cycle mode (running off liquid fuel + intake air) or closed-cycle mode (running off LF+O)? If you're in open-cycle mode, there's a simple reason why you could have 1 run after the rest flame out: your aircraft has enough intake air coming in to power one, but not twelve, RAPIER engines. If you're in closed-cycle mode, I will have to admit confusion there. I could see why you might have a very brief bit of power on one engine if the game says "okay, not enough LF+O left for all twelve, shut-down", but there's still a tiny amount left in the tank, enough for a few physics ticks of one engine, but that should be less than a second.

Welcome to the forums. A recent i5 is an excellent choice for KSP, since you're mostly limited by part count and the single threaded rigid body dynamics solver. 16 GB of RAM is probably overkill, unless you're really heavily modded and running stuff in the background. The Ryzen chips will come close to Intel for single thread performance, and absolutely shine for multithreaded workloads, of which KSP... isn't really. It's that rigid body dynamics solver that kills large part counts. EDIT: KSP can offload some stuff, but is still limited by single thread performance for large vessels.

It doesn't really fit with KSP as it is now, since most of the work was indeed internal, it'd be hard to fit in with the game as it is now. It could make for a killer VR game, though: "Repair the Salyut!" The closest I can think of would be a scenario, requiring KIS/KAS, to find a part that was disabling the rest of the station. In the end, however, thanks for the video; I hadn't previously watched anything nearly so detailed about Salyut 7, the most I knew about it was that there was a conspiracy theory regarding whether the US could have tried* to capture Salyut 7. *Short answer: no, at least not without multiple missions and the Soviets noticing.

Launch due east, and transfer due east. The Mun's inclination is 0, and KSC is on the equator, so if you are careful not to create any inclination during ascent, an equatorial Mun transfer should be very easy to get.

I'm pretty sure the drag cube has something to do with stock aerodynamics. Core heat is for parts that produce heat during operation, such as drills and ISRU units. It basically manages the thermal inertia and heat transfer properties of the part. Generally speaking, parts have only those modules they need.

I explored Lili. Briefly. There were two problems. #1: I ran out of delta-V, with a shortfall of about 500-600 m/sec if I wanted to actually orbit the walnut. #2: I... underestimated the terrain height on Lili. Next one comes in on an SEP (Solar Electric Propulsion) stage, possibly with a fuel cell to help with night-side burns instead of giant stacks of batteries. I also finally have the core of one of my lunar ground stations en route to Iota. She still has 20 tons of batteries, but with a fuel cell, it'll be easier to keep the station running overnight without turning on the nuclear reactor. A game for you: which of these are rocks, and which are a rain of transfer-stage engines that came down all about my rover as it landed on a separate skycrane! Finally, if anybody knows of additional mods (other than SpaceY, KW, and Novapunch) that add really big upper stage/orbital engines to Real Fuels-Stockalike, I'd like to hear them. There are all these nice, easily clusterable, super-heavy first-stage engines like the Emu, but most of the available upper/orbital engines are either not powerful enough, or too big to practically cluster.

Welcome to the forums! In terms of delta-V, Minmus is actually easier than the Mun. It takes a small amount more to inject into a Minmus transfer orbit, but Minmus's much smaller gravity well means you'll find orbital and surface operations once you're there much easier. The trick is hitting Minmus's inclination correctly and cheaply. There are a few tricks to this: #1: Minmus's orbit crosses over the equator (where KSC is) twice per Kerbin day. Wait until KSC is at one of these points, and then launch 6 degrees north or south as appropriate, such that you end up in approximately the correct orbital plane for a trivial amount of extra ascent delta-V. #2: If your Hohmann transfer begins near either the ascending or descending node, you can add some incination adjustment to your Hohmann transfer and largely bury the cost thanks to the law of cosines. A 100 m/sec inclination change is expensive, but a 100 m/sec inclination change plus a 900 m/sec Hohmann transfer is 905.5 m/sec. #3: After you make the transfer: if you have an AN/DN far away from Kerbin, you're in luck; because you will have lost the vast majority of your velocity by then, it's much cheaper to change the plane of your orbit. Overall, going to Minmus is easier for the experience KSP player, but novice players may have more trouble with it due to being a much smaller target on an inclined orbit, requiring better understanding of orbital mechanics and more precision to efficiently transfer to. The #4 trick, which requires good timing, precision, and probably a bit of planning, would be to use a slingshot maneuver around the Mun, which has the advantage not only of a cheaper transfer outwards, but also cheaper insertion into Minmus's orbit if you do it right. I don't think I've ever quite done it that way, but I get a similar effect on missions that go from the Mun to Minmus; capture into Minmus orbit is cheaper from a Mun transfer than a Kerbin transfer.

Of the two, I honestly suspect the ISRO vehicle is the most likely to be a long-term success. I strongly suspect Orion will fly once or twice before the Senate quietly quashes that entire embarassing porkbarrel program, with US astronauts carried to space aboard commercial vehicles like the Boeing CST-100 Starliner and SpaceX Dragon. Federation... maybe if it saves Roskosmos some money? They'll be deprived of their cash cow of sending US (and probably Canadian/European) astronauts to the ISS once the US commercial vehicles start regularly flying.

Pretty sure you can ask to be banned but not have your account deleted; the mods generally don't delete content unless it's absolutely needed. Otherwise, have fun out there. Feel free to come back or not to come back; the choice is yours. Make sure your memories are happy, and not forcing yourself to play something you don't like. I just hope your memories to date have been happy, and that you've learned a fair bit from KSP; I know I certainly have.

Ah. Yeah, that makes more sense: just have the drone piggyback on top on the way down.

"I, too, am the proud owner of a superheated and rapidly dispersing cloud of plasma that was once a CPU that hit 36 GHz. Briefly."

Not quite sure what I'm looking at, but I think it's that the the leg on the left that has internal material poking out, and overall looks like that leg will never fly again. Correct me if I'm wrong; I'm hardly a SpaceX fanatic, though they sure seem to be leading a charge of cheaper commercial access to space. EDIT: I'm not trying to be snarky, I just am actually unsure if that's the damage being talked about, on the left leg. Regardless, the engines are by far the most important thing to recover, probably followed by the fuel tank and avionics; if it's only one leg that can't be re-used, well... that's still a rounding error compared to the cost of everything else.

Remove from thy brain all thy knowledge about rovers in KSP. Real-world Mars rovers go not 30 meters per second, but 30 meters per hour. That means, in a single sol, a distance of around 740 meters. It's more than possible for a drone to, in a 3-minute hop, catch up with the rover, snap some pictures and get a good map of terrain, and then set itself back down. No need for it to piggyback on the rover; it's not like it's going very far before the next drone flight.

I think nowadays it offloads more, but if you want to make enormous thousand part vessels, the single threaded rigid body dynamics solver is rate limiting.

Only a few. dozen. To tune the difficulty of going places to where I want it: Sigma Dimensions (with the GPP-bundled 3.2x rescale), Real Fuels-Stockalike, TAC LS, and FAR. To make me think about how to power and communicate with my probes: RemoteTech2 To power my probes in the most distant reaches of the Ciro system: Near Future solar/electrical. Those reactors man. To let my probes execute maneuvers without direct control: kOS. Still don't know how to use the actual RemoteTech flight computer. Besides, I'm not sure that flight computer knows how to do ullage properly. For information during vehicle construction and as a second "can't bother to do this manually" tool: MechJeb and AmpYear. For additional rocket parts: almost all of NecroBones's suite, KW Rocketry, others I may be forgetting. For ISRU: a combination of Karbonite, SCANSat, Starwaster's Heat Pump mod*, KIS/KAS, and numerous MM configs of my own writing. *Gotta keep all that freshly mined hydrolox from boiling off, ya know. To make science more interesting: SCANsat (again), DMagic's Orbital Science, CactEye, and most recently, the Surface Experiment Pack. Even the abridged list is a fair lot, most of which comes from having decided to play at > 1x scale, and then finding I needed things to run my missions with that and all the other realism/difficulty mods I've loaded myself down with.