Snark

This is more a discussion than a question about how to play the game... so moving it over to KSP Discussion. Personally, I usually end up rotating the camera all around at different angles depending on context. The navball is my reference for anything actually important (i.e. navigation), so for me the camera view is eye candy, and I therefore tend to rotate it around to whatever gives the most fun or pretty or interesting view in a given situation.

From the last time this question came up: Also,

Professional software engineer, for the last quarter-century or so. (I was a physics major in college, but afterwards ended up finding playing with computers more fun, not to mention more employable.) Oh, and play KSP, of course.

Nope, nothing to do with BBT. Whatever's going on here, it's pure stock behavior. BetterBurnTime hasn't done anything with maneuver node burn times since I released version 1.7 in October 2018, for compatibility with KSP 1.5: (BBT does still do burn calculations... but only for target intercepts and surface landings. It doesn't do maneuver nodes anymore, deferring to KSP's stock behavior.)

As with all mods posted in the forums, the answer is in the license, by definition. In the case of MissingHistory, there are different bits of it under license to different people, as enumerated above. But all of them are under licenses that let you re-use the material in derived works (such as your own mod), so the answer to your question is yes, you can use. Main thing is to be sure you comply with the license requirements in doing so. Porkjet's stuff is CC-BY-NC 3.0, and everything else is CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 (by various people as listed). See the full text of the license (follow the preceding links) for the full, official rules pertaining to those licenses. The executive summary boils down to this: you can use you have to give credit to the original author (who that is depends on which bit you're using-- see above list) you can't use for commercial purposes (e.g. anything for sale; but a mod you post here for free is fine) for the "-SA" ones (i.e. everything except Porkjet's), you have to put the same license on your own mod as this one

An interesting and lengthy discussion came up here, which ended up not really being about MechJeb itself. Therefore, the posts involved have been moved off to a thread of their own, for anyone who's interested. We now return you to your MechJeb thread already in progress.

In this thread? Absolutely. In the forums generally? Not even vaguely. There are only a few of us, and we're part-time volunteers who just use the forums same as anyone else, most of the time. There's no way we have the bandwidth to read everything goes on. So, we don't read everything in the forum, any more than you do. We browse around the forums a fair amount, like anyone else, but as moderators we generally only see stuff that people report, unless we just happen to notice something in passing.

Well, I don't actually use Kerbalism myself (and am probably unlikely to do so in the future-- it sounds like a cool mod, but isn't my cup of tea), so I won't be doing any sort of patch like that, myself; don't have the bandwidth for that sort of thing. That said, though, it might (or might not) be possible for someone else to enable such a patch with just a bit of config. The relevant question is, does Kerbalism expose a boolean field that indicates whether an antenna is currently transmitting? Or not? If it does, then IndicatorLights' built-in config language is flexible enough to accommodate it; see IndicatorLights wiki documentation and sample config for how to use the feature. Again, this isn't something I'd be likely to take on myself, but the good news is that anyone with knowledge of ModuleManager syntax could do it, without any need for actual code, and no changes needed to IndicatorLights itself. And I have another mod, IndicatorLights Community Extensions, where I'm happy to take community-supplied config with patches like that one, and incorporate it. If Kerbalism doesn't expose such a field, then there's likely not any way to make this work, unless the Kerbalism author would be willing to expose such a field.

Lotta words below, as is my wont ... but it basically boils down to "I expect so, yes." Personally, this pretty much sums up my own take on the matter. More wordy stuff below, but the TL;DR is that I think the most important factor in situations like this is, "who's working on it and what are their values". And in this case, I think we're in good hands.

Hi folks, To anyone who's arriving late to the party, just a note to let you know that this discussion was originally split off from another thread, where the lively discussion was kinda derailing the original topic. Since it's an interesting suggestion worthy of discussion in its own right, we've split off the entire discussion-up-to-this-point into its own thread, here in KSP2 Suggestions. As a side note, let's please remember that while lively debate is fine, we all need to remain civil-- so please try not to stray into personal remarks. It's possible to disagree without acrimony. Thank you for your understanding, and we now return you to the discussion already in progress.

A suggestion made earlier in this thread sparked a spirited and lively discussion, with many posts. Though the debate was clearly of interest to multiple people, and certainly pertinent to KSP2 (as a suggestion)... it was only tangentially related to the topic of this thread, and ended up derailing this thread in the process. Accordingly, we've moved the discussion over into a thread of its own, which anyone who's interested can find over here: We now return you to your original thread, already in progress. Thank you for your understanding.

Hello, and welcome to the forums! Moving to Gameplay Questions. Is it possible your ship ran out of electrical power? What sort of batteries and/or solar panels do you have? Are you running any mods that might conceivably affect controllability?

Some rule-violating content has been removed, due to: trolling / flamebaiting personal remarks Folks, please try to stay civil. There's nothing wrong with expressing hearty disagreement, but it's possible to do so like an adult, without stooping to ridicule or name-calling. Such tactics help no one, do not advance your argument, and make the forum less fun for everyone. Also: if you see someone posting what you believe to be inappropriate content, please just report the post so that the moderators can have a look, and do not otherwise engage. Trying to hit back just results in a flame war that derails the thread, and everyone loses. Thank you for your understanding.

Hello, and welcome to the forums! Moving your question to Technical Support. Fortunately, KSP doesn't actually depend on Steam to run, once it's been installed locally. So you can just put a shortcut straight to KSP_x64.exe on your desktop, and start with that. It'll work just fine and won't involve Steam or logging in or anything. Assuming that you've installed it the default location that Steam likes to use, then on a Windows machine, it'll most likely be located in the following folder: C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program (or whatever your system drive is, if it's not C:)

Moving to Add-on Discussions.

Hello, and welcome to the forums! You'll be able to, just not yet. The forum software automatically puts all new users into a sort of "probationary" status for their first five posts, during which time they can't edit their profiles, and their posts require moderator approval before becoming public. After your first five posts, that restriction gets automatically lifted and you're free to edit your profile (such as setting an avatar picture, signature, etc.) We're sorry for the inconvenience, we realize it's kind of a pain. Unfortunately, it's a necessary measure in order to prevent spambots from flooding the forums with advertising-laden profiles. Again, welcome, and hope you have fun here!

Hi folks, Some posts have been removed. Please remember the forum rules, specifically: Please do not make personal remarks about other posters (rule 2.2.d) Please post in English only, in this part of the forum (rule 2.3.c). There is another subforum where you can post in Chinese (中文), if you are so inclined. Thank you for your understanding.

Some content has been removed. Please leave politics out of the forum, folks. Thank you for your understanding.

Moving to Add-on Discussions, since this sounds like a question about some existing mod, rather than being a mod release thread itself.

Hello, and welcome to the forums! Moving to Add-on Discussions, since this is a question about a mod.

Moving to Gameplay Questions.

Moving to Add-on Discussions.

Hello, sorry for the late response! So, about the countdown dots, like this: ...The current version of BetterBurnTime only shows those dots for the closest-approach tracker. It doesn't show them for maneuver nodes or the surface-impact tracker. Reason why it doesn't show them for maneuver nodes: Actually, it used to. However, KSP 1.5 added a much improved burn-indicator for maneuver nodes, so BetterBurnTime now defers to this, since BBT version 1.7. Reason why it doesn't show them for surface impact: It's never shown them for that, mainly because the code in the mod is not currently smart enough to be able to accurately calculate exactly when the burn would start. (Reason for that is that it requires split-second accuracy, and being accurate about that is a Great Big Fat Hairy Difficult Problem™, so I've never had the gumption to tackle it. It would be a very big job.) You should be getting the dots for the closest-approach tracker, though, so if you're not getting them for that, then that would be a bug I'd like to know about.

Well, in general, the way BetterCrewAssignment works is: If you've previously manually assigned a specific kerbal (e.g. "Val") to a slot for that ship, try to put that kerbal in the slot, if they're available. And if they're not available, try to assign a kerbal of the same profession as the one you assigned. "Val's out on a mission, so you get Jeb, since he's a pilot too." Or, "The tourist you previously assigned isn't here, so you get this other tourist." If you've never manually assigned a specific kerbal to that slot in this ship, then it uses part-based rules (from the ModuleManager config) to decide who gets priority. I believe it would be possible, for example, to put ModuleManager config in place for a particular part (say, crew cabins) if you were so inclined, so that the game would try to fill that part with tourists when available. However... regarding this comment, ...that's kinda problematic. Because BetterCrewAssignment has no idea what your intended purpose for a given ship might be. Suppose you've got some tourists that you intend to send on one mission for contract A, and you have some other tourists that you intend to send on a different mission for contract B. And then you build a ship in the VAB, which has a part on it that (let's say) you've used ModuleManager config to prioritize tourists for. Well... BetterCrewAssignment has no way of inferring which contract you intend to satisfy with that ship. Are you planning to send that ship on a mission for contract A, or contract B? It doesn't know-- so it therefore has no way of knowing which of the tourist kerbals it should assign there. Now, that said: let's say that you intend it for contract A, so you specifically manually assign the contract-A tourists to it, and save the ship after doing that assignment, and then you launch. And let's say you accidentally mess up the launch and then revert to VAB and launch the same ship again. Well, in that case, your saved preferences should stick with the craft file, and it should remember that you wanted this tourist Dinkledorf in that Hitchhiker seat, so it should put Dinkledorf there again when you launch. Beyond that, though... I'm not really sure I see what more it could do?

Interesting! Thanks for the suggestion, I'll consider it next time I update SimpleFuelSwitch. Thanks for the concrete code examples. Out of curiosity, though: why the specific concern about "craft being saved into a file"? i.e. what's the reason for thinking it's okay in a craft file, but not anywhere else? Also, even granting that concern, why is it needed to check that ShipConstruct.SaveShip() is in the stack trace? For example, if you're checking that HighLogic.LoadedSceneIsEditor, why is that not sufficient to cover that condition?