jarmund

On a related note, when it comes to drivers, I've found that AMD and NVIDIA are opposites: NVIDIA official driver: Great NVIDIA 3rd party driver: Buggy AMD/ATI official driver: Buggy AMD/ATI 3rd party driver: Great (at least the Omega driver that I tried a few years ago) -------------------- I found that CKAN is unable to check for updates to itself, because of a certificate problem with mono. The first thing you get when starting CKAN is a dismissable warning about failure to open download stream or something like that, try this command: mozroots --import --ask-remove That'll download the root certificates for you. I had no issues after.

My answers: Is KSP compatible with Linux Mint ? Yes. I'm using Mint 17 with XFCE myself, KSP installed via Steam. Can I install Steam on a linux system ? Same answer as above Will Steam detects it is on Linux and download a linux-based KSP ? Yes Is CKAN compatible with Linux ? Testing now, as I need to update some mods, and I'm tired of doing it the manual way. If it's anything like CPAN, it's going to be awesome... googling.... clicking... reading... testing.... concluding.... Yes! Note: You need to have mono and libcurl4-openssl-dev. When that's sorted (via apt-get, most likely), just: mono ckan.exe Will I get CKAN GUI or be forced to use command line ? It gave me a GUI. Are all and any mods compatible with Linux or only some of them ? I haven't encountered any mods that are incompatible with linux 64 bit. Some mods disable themselves on windows 64. Do they do the same on linux 64 ? Same answer as above Can is use my linux-ksp saves on a windows-ksp installation and vice versa ? Yes Is there anything else i should know/be aware of ? Make sure you use NVIDIAs own driver, if you use their cards. Mint defaults to the open source one because of licenses and such, but switching is VERY easy. No instructions needed - If you try to switch, you'll figure out how. thanks You're welcome.

Short answer: Yes Longer answer: Yes, but depending on the availability of a connection point in a convenient place, you might have to do some fiddling. If you're lucky, this might work: 1. Build your ship + lander + mount points for the rovers (You might want 2 rovers, just to make sure your ship is balanced) + everything else 2. Hit the Open dialogue, find your rover, but instead of "Open", click "Merge". That'll give you the rover ready to attach. It should be noted that the attachment points are based on the first and last part connected to the rover, regardless of any other points, such as docking ports and whatnot. If the attachment points are in the wrong place, keep on reading. If not, you're good to go as it is. 3. The fiddling: Go to the SPH, or wherever you built your rover (I like using the SPH for this due to mirror symmetry as opposed to radial symmetry.), and open it up. Now, on the attachment point you want to use, stick some part. Any part. And on that part, place another part. Then use the reroot tool (if I remember correctly, it's the rightmost one, next to the offset and rotation button). 4. Click the two junk parts. The second part will become the new root part (What this means isn't THAT important right now, but you'll learn eventually. I'm sure that for now the goal is just to have this work). In this case it shouldn't matter which part becomes the root, as long as it's one of the junk parts you attached 5. Open up the subassembly window by digging around the parts window. If you can't find it, I'm sure there are plenty of threads explaining this already. Also, I can't remember the exact sequence of clicks to get there. 6. Pick up your rover by clicking on the part that you want to be the attachment point 7. Drop in the subassembly dropoff area, and save. Now, this should allow you to load your rover as a subassembly when back in the VAB, with the green connection point in the right place. Hope this helps. Good luck with your launches.

Alright, at least I have a basic idea how. Or I did until I noticed that the mod had updated today, so I upgraded it. I mainly started with this mod, because I also use TAC-LS, and food was my biggest concern, as it was the only thing keeping me from being self sufficient. So the goals for my Duna base are as follows: Stage 1: Establish a base that can - Produce food, possibly by consuming Waste from TAC-LS. - Harvest and store resources in preparation for stage 2 - Support at least 5 kerbals - No supply runs needed Stage 2: - Produce, refuel, and launch ships from said base So my questions then are: 1) Which parts do I need to send for stage 1? I thought I had an idea, but as I said, there was an update today, where some parts were removed, and some added. I decided to take a step back and unlearn what I (thought I) knew already. 2) Which parts do I need for stage 2, in addition to what Extraplanetary Launchpads add No need to list the connecting tubes and the module base, as they are obvious. I did try to use the MKS tutorial, but it seems very outdated, as it referred to both parts and resources that do not seem to exist in my installation. PS: I don't want to bother with orbital stations at the moment, and I need to reduce the amount of parts for the sake of my ability to keep track of what I have, so can I just delete all parts starting with OKS in the parts folder? For the record: Using UKS version 0.31.0.

My mothership has four Structural Fuselage (MK1), with one LV-N each. Each of these also has a gigantor solar array for radiating heat. What I do is that I stick these on radially to the main ship body, feeding fuel to it via hoses from a large stack of MK3 liquid tanks. They can burn continually for at least 5 minutes (which is plenty for me) without any overheating.

ee is the only way to go. - - - Updated - - - I've been using various flavors of linux and other unix-like OSes as a server OS for about a decade, and I've mostly used centos on the desktop side. But a few months ago I decided to give Linux Mint a try, and here are my experiences and impressions: - Most things work out of the box. Install steam, and you get KSP working out of the box - The default open source nvidia-drivers didn't work too well, but switching to the proprietary one was a few mouseclicks away, and after that, it worked like a charm. - I was always a fan of gnome before version 2.0, after which I consider it too bloated, so this time around I gave XFCE a go, and I quite like it (Always hated KDE) - While I prefer to do things via console, the GUI-side is very well built, so I'm sure new users to linux in general will have no problem adapting - I've only used Ubuntu briefly a few years ago, and I must admit I didn't like it at the time. Maybe I would today, but I'm sticking to Mint unless I feel like going back to Arch at one point. I'm sure for the vast majority of newcomers to linux who want to play KSP, both mint and ubuntu will do fine That being said, the major hurdles have already been mentioned: - Program compatibility. You're likely to find equivalents of most of the programs you rely on today. - Drivers. This depends on your hardware, but in most cases you'll be fine, as vendors supporting linux has gotten a lot more lately. I suggest that people who are curious about it try boot from a live CD of some sort and poke around. The Linux Mint install CD can be used as a live OS, and allows for a partition of persistent storage. Give it a try if you want, or go all or nothing and do a complete install from scratch.

My computer is very potato limiting my builds somewhat, but I'm sure KSP itself would also struggle with this: Battlestar Gallactica, complete with expandable landing bays. Then I would burn through the atmosphere for a landing as done in that scene where they need to rescue surface-trapped humans from the cylons and evacuate. This, ofcourse, by somehow hooking mainsails into the RCS system. Alternatively, a Dyson Sphere around Kerbol.

Sounds to me like your best bet is undeletion. How to do this depends on the filesystem in use, but I'm willing to bet 20$ that you're using NTFS, in which case I would recommend a program named GetDataBack. If it's ext3, I would go for a combination of grep, strings, head and tail. Either way, the important bit is named persistent.sfs. In addition to the above, some steps should be taken: STOP USING THE HARDDRIVE IN QUESTION. Every time a write-operation is done to the drive, changes are that the space on the drive where the actual data is, will be overwritten. It is therefore recommended to connect the drive as secondary, build an image from it, and then do the recovery operation based on the image. This way, you can do what you want without having to worry about overwrites.

Only in the stock toolbar. But if it showed up in blizzy's too, that wouldn't be a problem as it can be easily disabled. I did notice that Distant Object Enhancement has it in options, so now that one is fine too. I cannot see a similar option for Scansat which also shows up in both.

Simply put, I have roughly a three buttloads of mods installed, the most important of which, for this post, is the toolbar mod. The toolbar mod is great because.... you already know why it's great, no need to go into that. However, many mods still display as an icon in the top right, and it has gotten to the point where I can no longer see the rightmost HUD-info from KER. The mods still showing a stock-panel icon: Science alert (but that's fine, as I want to see the animation when it has something to tell me) Distant Object Enhancement (despite also showing up in the mod-toolbar) ScanSat (this too is in the mod toolbar) Kerbal Engineer Redux Kerbal Alarm Clock HyperEdit What I'm wondering is: Why do some mods show up in both toolbars? Is this a failing on my behalf, or of the mod developer? Is there something I can do about it?

I find that what I like to call "launch to target" is the key to many precision flights. This helps you practice towards timing launches so that you save a lot of time and potentially fuel. This is especially useful when having time constraints such as life support systems running out etc. To practice this, put a very basic station into a nice circular orbit, and see if you can launch and dock with it less than half an orbit after leaving the pad. This ofcourse depends a lot on your craft, but I find that launching just before the target rises over the horizont isn't too far off. When launching into a polar orbit, the craft specs also matter a lot, because one of the early maneuvers involves stopping the eastwards momentum you have from the planets rotation. This means that your TWR plays a big part of the timing, which leads to the following conclusions: - Learn your craft! Build a craft that you can fly a lot so that you get good at eyeballing maneuvers by knowing how fast it can accelerate under certain conditions. In addition, learn its optimal launch profile. - Get good at timing launches With those two skills under your belt you will find that you will no longer have to spend time in interplanetary space, waiting for planets to line up for a holman transfer. Instead of orbiting to sync, you just launch to transfer. That being said, transfer windows is probably something you should look into. I find Kerbal Alarm Clock to be really useful for this. Even if I don't have any flights I need to keep track of, I still use it for keeping track of launch windows.

I used it a lot for probes before, and with the new Isp, I'll use it even more. Excellent for small crafts that don't need a lot of thrust. Also good for landers destined for Gilly

I've always used Minimus for this since I started with Kethane eons ago, and here's why: - Low gravity makes for easy landing of heavy miners (my miner doubles as a fuel barge) - Low orbital velocity for fuel-efficient orbits from takeoff - Many flat areas to mine from - Somewhat easy to get a gravity assist from Mun after visiting. - It has a nice color, and it might be made out of mint pudding The only downsides that I can think of: - More fuel needed to reach from LKO - inclined orbit making it a somewhat tricky last stop for an interplanetary expedition - You can't take off your EVA gear to taste the pudding

Short version: How do I edit my savefile to cancel a flight? Longer version: I launched an interplanetary expedition, and I later installed a mod that I would like to include, part-wise, on that ship. It is too late for revert, as it is a mothership that was assembled during multiple launches, and it is well underway. What I want is to pretend the ship was never launched, by simply deleting it from the savegame, and magically having my kerbals (all 12 of them) be back at the space center. Is there a relatively easy way of achieving this? (I realized that having ~15 tonnes of food onboard is stupid, so I installed a greenhouse mod instead).

Normally I discourage answers on par with "There's a mod for that", but I find that Docking Port Alignment Indicator is a must-have and should be stock. It'll account for the issue you're describing and it generally makes docking a lot more fun.

I like playing with TAC-LS. I never liked letting kerbals orbit forever until a rescue mission, and I want wasted time to come at a cost. One problem though: My motherships and bases, while self sufficient in terms of water, oxygen, and electricity, I always run low on food, and continuous resupply missions are both costly and boring. Is there a way to extend TAC-LS, perhaps with a different mod, to somehow allow growing food or something else that allows for self sufficiency in that area as well? I don't mind if the part is heavy, it's supposed to be restricted to huge motherships or bases anyway..

Two things I do that might be helpful to you: 1. I have my KSP directory mounted via NFS, which would allow this. It might be a bit too slow to run, though. 2. I also have my home directory backed up every 5 minutes with rdiff-backup, so if screw up, I can revert my persistent.sfs to whatever it was n amount of minutes/hours/days before. This would also allow for a simplistic approach to what you're asking without involving any 3rd parties Both of the above are primarily made for linux, but I'm sure there are windows equivalents if not ports

Some quick theories: - I don't see any power generating devices. Out of electricity? - One wheel pair spinning the wrong way

Same. I have a mothership with a miner heading there, with 12 Kerbals onboard and not enough fuel to return. Now I know they won't have to drift there until TAC-LS run out.

Yes, that's correct

Here's my TODO-list of new saves: - Orbit - Mun and minimus flyby - Mun and minimus unmanned landing - Mun and minimus manned landing and return - Probes to EVE and Duna - Manned landing on Duna, Ike and Gilly (NOT eve!) - Set up infrastructure such as Mining operations (This is back on the ticket now that KSP has this stock. Way back I used Kethane), stations, bases, and comm sats (the latter if you play with that antenna mod that I can't remember the name of) around kerbin and its moons - Colonization, recreation and procreation on other planets.

My one year old son likes these smoothie-like fruit-based foods that comes in a small squeezable packets. I think I need to buy some for myself as well.

Since nobody else has, I will be the one to say it: MOAR BOOSTERS Now that we've gotten that detestable expression out of the way, I'll add some pointers from a serious perspective: - Those radial engines you have on the lander are somewhat inefficient. If you can, swap to an undermounted engine with higher Isp instead. My Duna lander worked great despite only having ~1.1 TWR on launch. I recommend the poodle for you, as a single one of those is similar to two of the radial ones, but with better efficiency and lower mass. It's also fairly short, so it's good for landers. My landers are normally built on Poodle, LV-909, or Aerospike, depending on the thrust needed. - Consider scaling down. That pod plus the hitchhiker can should be a total of 7 kerbals. Do you need that many? An MK2 lander can is both cheaper and lighter, with only one seat less.

This. While I'm OK with it being possible to return a pod or a simple craft from LKO without a heat shield because of the simplicity and entertainment value, I find the reentry heat to loose its meaning when I can return my minimus miner to kerbin without losing anything else than a ladder to heat. No, I didn't aerobrake over multiple orbits, I did what I almost always do: Plese periapsis around 30k, burn if it looks like I'll skip through. I played with deadly reentry pre 1.0, and from the looks of it, I'll be going back to it again unless the reentry effects will be made tougher on the crafts. I'm waiting a few patches before deciding to see where any balancing measures will converge.

Personally I love the aerospike. Good TWR, and decent Isp, so when the LV-909 lacks in power for my lander, I go for the aerospike. It is currently in use on the lander of my Dres-expedition. It's very low profile makes it easy to build wide instead of tall.