Arugela

Was watching some random youtube videos on tornadoes. I was wondering if anyone has every just tried to design a very rugged unmanned glidder to watch tornadoes develop. something cheap enough you can do repeated hit and miss attempts to get as much of a tornado formation as possible and just watch them form. Even try to rotate around one and or get in the middle to catch all aspects of it. It would seem like a cool project since you would need to account for alot of things and potentially armor it like a tank. It might be fun to try to develop more advanced and light weight ways to bounce stuff of a plane to deal with the high velocity objects.. Assuming they are that high velocity that is. If not it would be a fun way to to play with aerodynamics. Would it be difficult to get it to be aerodynamically sound in all point of a tornado? I would think that might effect things a bit with the sheer wind speed and directional changes.

I wonder what it tastes like? 8) That is where renet for cheese making came from. It's not abnormal from a traditional place food comes from. I think the farther back you go the more it gets like that because it's convenient. Why make a machine with all the hassle when you have biological machines making it for you. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/03/21/civet-poop-coffee-southeast-asia-globalpost/82066314/ <- 100 dollars a cup. I will never know! >< I'm surprised poaching is a problem. Rodents usually over populate and farming them would only spread them or increase their numbers... I guess the problem is cruel treatment from skimming more.. And in large numbers I guess. They could just farm them as a country and sell them cheap to stop poachers. And get rid any other blocks. Unless they are worried about the prices dropping ultimately. There no reason not to bread it into a normal commodity. That is what we do with cows and everything else we use for food. Suddenly I'm reminded of that heathen guy from futurama. "*Cough*Cough* A little poo in my coffee please!"

If you had a wombat farm you could probably, "build up," the materials over time. 8) And make some nice money selling wombat stone bathroom tiles! >< And internet is still dead and has been for decades. Can't find a picture of a wombat poop tile wall... 8\ Here is some wombat poo paper I guess: https://www.trendhunter.com/trends/wombat-poo-paper-launched I keep running into this also: We're getting more specific in our poo shaped stuff toys.

In the modern sense. I'm curious if they used any finer variations to produce real stone looking constructs. Like the concept they cast limestone for the pyramids. it coudl be convenient for various reasons as it could be shipped in lighter less dense methods potentially. Especially if the casting methods takes along time. It would be interesting to see massive stones cast to size and shape with all, "cuts," in them and then placed no site. I'm surprised they don't do that now. We know and likely in the past they knew what stones are made of. Why not just try to make them artificially. We could have much cheaper large stones for constructions. It could be fantastic for foundation work as it can be stronger in some ways than other methods. Not sure what the limits are for size and breakage and stuff though. A proper granite artificially made to any size without need to worry about cracks or other issues from finding natural deposits could knock the socks off new and old materials potentially. That is outside of using something that can contract and expand to different sizes with replacement of denser materials. That would be convenient. And a really cool building method. Just have to get the time down it takes to do replace the original materials. replicating natural stone methods in nature would be cool. Some of it is crystallization and other things. Enough familiarity you could probably figure a way to speed it up with the collection or addition of additional materials. Naturally or otherwise. If it existed it would have been fantastic for both defense and not having to rebuild later. Unless someone started pulling rock out that is.

My question is how was this not fit for the science section... This is a blatant biology joked based thread. You would think they would want it there. This is the same tactic used all over the world to educate in science. But I guess it's not fit for their forum.... 8\ The, "science," fields are devouring their own now. I still wonder about the artificial stone concept. I wonder how many methods there were in the past. Especially something more stone like or denser than concrete. It would be convenient if methods were known for a lot of constructions like this. And the farther back you go the more likely they are to have more advanced or convenient material knowledge. As the farther back you go the broader the knowledge generally is. Material knowledge stems from mass raw experience with materials which we naturally find more and more way to reduce in human society as time goes by. I wonder how many we use now. This is where you usually run into the funny part where people who are unfamiliar yell and scream you are stupid but anyone with a little knowledge knows it exists and is common but not commonly known. Even if it's part of what makes things in everyone's daily lives. Either way, yay modern world! Or in this case ancient. BTW, most real construction and other methods of building, let alone everything else, stem from observation in nature originally particularly when people deal with things around them more consistently as we used to in daily life. Poop in an animal, or person, is an example of material use. In this case of certain methods of compaction and then dehydration to some extent. It was at minimum the start of things like bricks and clay construction. People dealt with alot of poo in the past. Still do. The mass use of materials is literally then applied after it's known long enough. That is how things develop. Something else I was reading before I posted this said the wombats poop was also used to literally make paper because it was so full of fiber. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/07/140729-dinosaur-coprolite-paleontology-dung-fossil-auction/ There have probably been, and probably still are, methods to speed up what is in essence fossilization to produce molds or casts. In fact you can be 100% sure that is where the idea came from in mondern, "science," to create that idea of fossilization people think of today. Technically, all you would need are a good source of very fine grain or easily grindable individual resources.

I believe giant wombats once pooped magnificant giant piles of building materials we once used as buildings. When they died out, we had to learn to make our own damn buildings and the modern age began. Discuss! And before someone goes complaining. This is how science starts!! Has any every done a cross analysis of those substances? In what ways could it be effected over time? Could they for instant grow over time increaseing the presumed size of the wombat and it's poop. Let alone the size of the original structure and humans that used them?! This in general gives a cool idea. Like some people say fossilization actually happens quicker than we think like with the mount St. Helens lumber. Is it possible to use it as a building method. Could you use an easy to mold substance and then put it through a process where it literally turns to stone?! That could be a lot easier than stone carving potentially.

I put another pop bottle bottom on the pepper plant so it has a nice large greenhouse for now. I completely forgot you could do that. Probably would have speed up the sprout time since I'm growing a pepper plant. I'll have to leave it on and see if it helps it grow faster. 8) I forget little things like that easily. Simple tip, if anyone does this. Make sure the greenhouse top is inside the base so the water dripping down goes back inside the main bottle. Or else you could get water getting on things and water leaving the system. It's simple but it's easy to forget until you have water pooling up on the table. BTW, I'm speaking from experience. 8d I actually cut two very small slits in the top of the greenhouse base(less than a centimeter) on each side to give a little room for the greenhouse top to fit inside more easily. It seems to help. Just make sure the greenhouse top goes down farther than the slits so it doesn't leak. And that the slits are well above any dirt line you want in the bottle in the future. Modifications are permanent. But of course the bottles are cheap. I wonder if keeping a greenhouse top on it the whole time would help even the water out enough you could get plants growing on the bottom. If you are careful about the water added and it helps spread it out enough not to overwater the bottom, you could get a little terrarium in the base. I wanted to do this originally to grow things that might help the upper plant grow. Say, if a certain plants likes or needs nitrogen, maybe grow a legume. Or something that can grow and die enough to reduce the need for fertilizers etc. Anything that might aid in the systems longevity. I wonder if watering from the bottom would help as it may provide a little extra outlet for water, but I don't know for certain. You might be able to put some pure drainage holes that might help get some back into the base until it needs to soak it up again. I tried this a little but messed it up. But it still may be doable. I think a tip may be to prepare a bottle without planting in the top but having the dirt on top and water slowly to get the terrarium going first. Then plant the plant. Might not make a difference though. That is an idea I have wanted to do properly for some time though. When I did a version where I cut a hole in the bottom for access I was hoping to get access to grow a second plant to harvest like basil with tomatoes. But you could sacrifice watering time for a second plant growing area. You could also put more dirt in the bottom and put the pop bottle top up higher or use something to hold it up in the middle so it doesn't sink to much and give a bottom plant more dirt to grow in for a double layered planter. You could even do more than one hole in the bottom but you might have to watch out for structural issues at some point. Sadly, I don't know enough about complimentary plants to really do a lot with this idea outside of stuff that is good to eat together. Although I would really like to.

I've been messing around with plant potters made of 2 liter pop bottles for some years for some pepper plants I like to keep. I found a way to do something interesting that may go to some basic principles applied to plants that may make them more water efficient. This could probably be used in several different areas. Don't know if this is already applies to things like plants in space or other normal plant potters. I know some use seperate bases for water to drain. But I don't know if to the same effect. They may though. I think orcid pots or similar might do this regardless of if it's intended to. I don't know either way. I was at some point also trying to make a double layers terrarium concept I think. Although I was seeing if it was useful after making some out of other plastic bottles to save money and just mess around with stuff. 1. What I started doing was taking 2 liter pop bottles and to save money I cut off the top just above the label where it starts to curve. take off the cap unless you find some reason to leave it on. 2. Possibly poke holes in the top of the part you just cut off for drainage and possibly the bottom of the 2 liter bottle(if you do make sure the holes are on the flat part touching the surface it sits on unless you want drainage holes also.). The bottom was if I wanted to water from the base to stop dirt condensing over time. If so you need something to put it on to hold the volume of water you want to water it with. If you have too little volume on the thing it sits on it can get very annoying quick if you want/need to put more water in(unless you don't care and just put the rest on the top, but this can lead to it spilling over in the bottom container after it settles and making a mess). The holes on the bottom should be as small as possible but big enough for water to get in. The smaller the better as far as I know. 3. Fill the bottom of the 2 liter with some dirt. This should be packed into about the height of the top of the bottom dents. Originally I cut a hole in the side I wanted to tape close to put other plants and or water directly in the bottom chamber, but this turned out to be a bad idea. And it decreased how long I could go between watering. 4. Put the top you cut off upside down and push it in. There should be a space that is clear with no dirt between the label, dirt, and the top of the upside down plastic top. 5. Fill the top with dirt. If there are any other steps you know yo should do do it to this and the bottom layer of dirt first. There may be additives you want or need depending on the plant. 6. Plant your plant in the top layer. 7. Water and stick in an appropriate place and wait. This doesn't work as well for young plants and care should be given potentially to them. Although it may keep a nice even moisture for longer than other planters. But once a plant is of moderate size and the roots go deep it should be able to avoid watering for 3 - 6 months. It may also help with more tropical plants like oranges or whatnot as it creates condensation/humidity that may help them survive better. From what I can tell it decreases the oxygen flow through the plant. this combined with condensation from the bottom layer and general sides of the bottle slowly and evenly spread the water throughout the plant. Also, I have mine in only moderate sun because I don't have the best windows for plants. The sun is partially blocked by trees etc. This may extend the watering time but I don't know by how much. Downsides: 1. If you water too heavily from the top it may take a little longer to drain and can more easily waterlog the plant or roots potentially. 2. Two liter bottles may become a little prone to being top heavy in this configuration. This is because of their general shape. Other bottles may solve this. Although if you cut a little more off the base of the bottle it may help with this. But it may reduce the space the roots have to grow in. 3. Can potentially grow mold or fungus or other oddities in the base of the bottle. From what I've very briefly looked up, what is in the bottom of mine may be a harmelss fungus. It's white and soggy soil and might be what I've seen called a saprophytic fungus. But I'm not even remotely knowledgeable on this. So, I can't say realistically. It may be more prone to this type of thing and take longer than normal to dry out also because of how it retains water. This can be annoying with younger plants as you have to keep watering them. It's a bit less of a problem when the plant is older as you don't have to water as much. Not sure if this can be bad for your health or not. Use with caution. I've seen stuff about using cinnamon as an anti fungal. You might be able to put some in water and feed it to the plant. It might circulate into the area and reduce it without having to open the container if it needs to be. I've tried using cinnamon in the past but I don't remember much about the results. I think it worked in general. I have no guarantees on this though as I don't really know anything about it. On a separate note. The dirt I use may be slightly clay like and this may reduce the oxygen flow further. I think it is the oxygen because if you cut a hole or bigger area and increase the air flow potential through the plant it will drastically reduce the time between watering from my experience. Has anyone ever tried this or seen this concept applied elsewhere? I do it so I don't have to water plants very often and to save money as plant pots are a bit expensive. But if it's applicable it could be an interesting concept in other areas, assuming it's not already used. It could help anywhere water is short or needs to be preserved relatively. Here is a similar concept which I think I have tried: But these tend to get nasty because of the sitting water. I also have no idea how long these go between watering and probably work differently and may use more water. The type of bottle I described above will not release smells as far as I can tell. Although you may get some mild stuff in the bottle in the clear gap. But it will likely be heavily reduced to non existant. You also will not need to open them up virtually ever. Literally until you need to repot or replace the plant. At which point you can simply let the bottom chamber dry out with dirt sealing it in until it's a non issue as far as smells go. Note: With my written instruction above you don't cut the bottle at the base or near the bottom. You cut the top at the top of the 2 liter label at the top curve. This goes upside down all the way to the bottom. You do not cut it halfway like in the above picture. I also don't think that type of water in the base thing seals the oxygen off as well either because it's just sitting on the bottom of the pop bottle. The ones I do actually put the top of the pop bottle deep in the 2 liter bottle and cover it with dirt making a seal. It also removes the need for any type of wick which is annoying and rots over time. Either way, the point is the ones I've been making have a possibly absurd amount of time per water for the plants. Or it makes it seem like it does. It could just be the dirt allows a sponge to hold the same volume of water but retains it in the system and then evenly slowly distributes it. But either way it leeds to less water over time potentially. Or a lot less hassle. It's also cheap because you only need an empty 2 liter pop bottle, some scissors, the dexterity not to cut yourself, and dirt, and a plant. Brain fart: I think this idea is part of the reason a terrarium works. 8) That is one of the reasons I made it this way originally. But it's a cheap way to do it and from my experience pretty effective. Do they use this concept on the ISS or anything. It could be useful in certain circumstances. Might be good in habitats etc. Not with pop bottles necessarily, but in general. And potentially the ISS and habitats are somewhat a giant concept of this. But it might work in even smaller scale. Although the fact it can grow small amounts of mold or fungus in the base might be bad if the container is in a sealed habitat... not sure about elsewhere. Actual pics: The last pic is a bit bad. But the bottom has dirt. And you want you ca place holes at the bottom of those little flat spots on the bottom that the pop bottle rests on. this will allow it to draw up water. Just don't make big holes. And place it on something to collect excess water and or put water in to water the bottle. I also don't know whether you want the label on it or not. if you leave it on it may expose the roots more. I have no clue which is better or worse. Or if it matters to different plants. I'm not sure if the sunlight might be good for helping with fungus and other things either.

How far could you take electric propulsion in the form of rotation and get in the upper atmospwhere of EVE to reduce needed wait for ascent. If you design a craft, especially a more stable ssto spaceplane type design, you could hypothetically incrase payload and decrease needed fuel and other weight to get off eve making it more accessible. And it utilizes it's one advantage, heavy atmosphere. Here is a concept craft. This can get to around 3500m on kerbin. With eve's thicker atmosphere this concept could easily reduce fuel to something much more accessible and allow you to start from sea level anywhere on eve. To use the craft open activate SAS then hold Q to begin taking off. It can go to about 12.5m/s directly up with this slapped together design. When it starts to wobble to much hold E or let it stop rotating then generally realign with up, then hold Q again and repeat. Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/zabndivo5x8brfm/eve electric lifter.craft?dl=0 I wonder if you could use something as simple as angled aerobrake devices so that they can be stowed later and act as breaks. This could allow an SSTO spaceplane Rocket hybrid design fairly easily. Possibly even one that can get off kerbin with air breathing engines. Here is a more stable version: (got this version up to 16km on kerbin.) Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l2aoy91ct77p1i3/KTE Electric Lifter 1_0.craft?dl=0 Craft2.0: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2w1kik6xttkom0s/KTE Electric Lifter 2_0.craft?dl=0 <- This one has a crew station and can use mono to land on eve with set orbit. There is an interesting phenonom that might be exploitable. If you use the minium authority limiter for the wings then increase it to max you get a sudden burst of speed. It's not much, and after a few seconds stabalizes, but if you could maximize this could you act like a flying saucer and rotate and suddenly increase to a larger amount of speed? Could you even get enough to shoot out of orbit or to close to neede velocity for escape on kerbin, even, laythe, or jool. And what about the sun. I think it technically has an atmosphere. So could you use this design idea to lauch from around teh sun as you have potentially infinite DeltaV. You could use it for completely different types of maneuvers. Both from sol and jool. To use burst speed on this one you use E instead of Q. And the low setting is 150 and the highest speed is -150. If you take off with 150 and after taking off quickly slide it to -150 you will go instantly to about 15m/s upwards and it will then drop back down. This could be potentially maximized to get higher velocities in atmospheres. It's depends on how exploitable it is.

KSP simply flashes on in a window for a split second then disapears... This could be from stuff I had to do to recover my operating system from a full root drive. I had to delete /var/log/journal/* to get it to properly get into the OS. I then deleted several desktop environments to make room on the root drive etc. I used: "$sudo dnf remove @lqtx"; "$sudo dnf remove @xfce"; "$sudo dnf remove openbox"; Now ksp won't start. I assume I either deleted something the the logs it uses and needs or a dependency with the OS environments. Anyone have any clue or know where to look to find out what could be the problem. I've since tried verifying the game files in steam, which said one was bad and repaired, deleted the game and fresh installed several times, and resintalled steam itself. Nothing changing the behaviour. The game was working fine before all of this happened. Fedora 27 64bit KSP 1.4.2.2110 (steam) I don't think it's producing a log file atm. Neither steam start or using the KSP.exes is working. Same exact result. I'm assuming this is either a missing dependency or something in /var/log/journal/* ksp needs. Does anyone know how to check dependencies for linux? Edit: I just got the same warnings. My root drive is full. Something is filling it up constantly and if I restart my computer it likely won't start up again... anyone know anything about this in general in linux atm?! I have no idea what is going on. Something is continuously filling up my root and destroying my system. the problem is it's not the journal. The journal folder is still empty from having just deleted it's contents. It's something else. What is stupid is that it's not showing up as full in disk usage analyzer(it shows only 13gb of 20gb of my root being used.). There is something invisible filling my root. Edit: I figured it out. /var/spool/abrt was filling. It was filling up every 3 seconds with a small 44.4 folder... Deleted them all and seeing if it fills up again. Had to delete them because it was filling root and making the system break down. Not sure which thing was causing it. One was system manager KF5 which I think might be from my lovely broken plasma desktop. But I didn't go through to check. Not sure if this is related to KSP or not. Still no luck on getting ksp started. I'm assuming something got removed with the desktop environments. But I think the root partition has stopped filling up. I also don't need to change to manjora as I was about too. Just need to figure out what was removed. I have no idea where to find something that might show what is going on. The window is open for a split second when the program starts then stops. Not sure where that might be logged in linux. And starting it is not producing the logs in spool. I don't even think the process is showing up in the mate system monitor. I'm going to try to reinstall all of those desktop environments and restart to see if it helps. Edit: No luck. I didn't fix or change the problem from what I can tell. Fixed: I reinstalled the video drivers. Something must have gotten removed. It's loading now.

No fairings. It's all cargo bays. 8) Thanks for the info though. I'll watch out for that if I use fairings on something. BTW, does anyone know where the log file is for linux now? It has moved from the location in the sticky. I found KSP.log in the main folder. Is that the one needed? BINGO: It has something to do possibly with the ramp being attacked to the cargo bay. When I removed the cargo bays off the rear of the craft and attacked the ramp directly to the fuel parts it stopped producing this lag. I'm not sure how to circumvent this though while still using the mk3 cargo ramps and the cargo bays together. Or why it is only happening in this circumstanct atm. I prefiously had this on all but the center one. And now I introduced it to this.... Der. I'll try readding fresh cargo bays and see if it's the problem...8\ Nope! I put fresh cargo bays on and it didn't solve it. The drag came back. Bingo2: I also removed the two rear cargo bays(50&25) and replaced it with a 100 and added the mk3 cargo ramp and the drag went away. Not sure what is the cause yet. 3x25 cargo bays also do not produce the drag. I wonder if it's the 50 and it's orientation. Maybe if I flip it around. It may have been an old 50 cargo bay. I replaced the front and back on the edges and replaced with new parts and the drag is gone. Not sure if the aero menu problem is still there though. Hopefully that is from the same issue and it gone. The problem keeps coming back. Every time I get it fixed, if I move parts or add anything it has a high likelhood of reintroducing the problem. And then I have to restart the game each time because of the aero info bug.

I have a past iteration of this(can't remember which one or if I still have a save) that also had this problem. It was symetrical across all but the center cargo bays. It has now poped up on one side causing the craft to tilt to the side. I can't figure out what is causing it. It shows up as an assymetrical single large line of drag from one part that I cannot identify. Stats: KSP 1.4.2.2110 (Steam version, I think.) Fedora 27 64bit Stock game, upgraded from various previous versions. The craft file should be fresh. I believe I restarted the craft from scratch. There are not files at this folder location so I can't give a log: "Linux: The log is written to ~/.config/unity3d/Squad/Kerbal Space Program/Player.log" KSP.log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ocq7p3crk2vaq51/KSP.log?dl=0 <- Didn't notice the length. I will make a new one. Might have the gui issue in it. KSP1000xlshort.log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/r5zau2mt3g07oj5/KSP1000xlshort.log?dl=0 <-Couldn't recreate the aero gui issue with this log. Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ypubi9gev460ha8/Cargo Plane 1000xl 1_0 NMKDVSI.craft?dl=0 Parts: 660 (original craft) Craft2: https://www.dropbox.com/s/kybgp8ijz8pl0px/Cargo Plane 1000xl 1_0 bug test.craft?dl=0 Parts: 344 (bug testing craft)<- Less parts. Less lag. Fly to 100m/s on runway to see drag line using F12 to see aero lines. At 120m/s you will see the other normal drag lines. Using aero gui or aero context menu(action menu) info then relaunching at runway will cause other bug.(Although this seems to have stopped for me all of a sudden. Maybe be hard to reproduce. Not necessarily important. I included it incase it is somehow related.) The craft is not stable structurally. It requires unbreakable joints to use. There is also another bug where if you open the aero gui or context menu info or similar from the RightShift+F12 menu and then try to reload on the runway it will break on runway even with cheats. It will then have further problems as time goes on. This problem with the aero menu and other info is making it very hard to test. It makes me restart the game every time I look at any numerical drag info in the game relevant to the craft. I'm not sure if the two are related problems or not. With the full sized craft, at between 366-400m/s the drag will overcome the craft and draw it sideways until eventually the tail fins cannot control the slippage created by this mysterious drag. You can see it on the right side of the craft. It's one red bar much longer than the others in the clouds of the engine smoke. This is a top down view of the craft. It's starting from somewhere in the right most pillar on the right with the extra fuel and one single cargo bay. I cannot figure out where it originates. It almost seems like it not from a part but from some phantom force. Normally this level of drag comes from an uncapped part. But I cant' find one within the craft. Is there a possibility this is happening between joints where the cargo bay meats the fuel tank or similar. Or from any joint. I would say it might be from forces opening a joint on the craft but I think it does this on the runway also even though you can't see the drag at that point as far as I know. Edit: I think I just found the drag location. It appears it's the rear cargo bay door. At least on the runway. I'll try to replace it and fix it. It's weird it's only the one side. BTW, it starts to show the drag line at about 100m/s while trying to take off. Not sure why, but I didn't think it showed excess drag last time when I went over the parts in that column. In fact I think the bigger bug here, if not related, might be the problem with reloading on the runway after using the gui or menu physics/thermal info... If you go back it starts decaying your game by blowing up on the runway then looking up into the sky and lights textures start to disappear. You have to restart the game entirely from desktop to resolve it. Changing out the part did not remove the drag.. I'll reduce the engine number for parts reduction and see if it's still an issue. I just modified the plane to fix some issues with the wings and COM/COL not related to this bug. I managed to make the same drag switch from the right side of the plane to the left in the exact same manner... Could it be related to mirrored parts put on in double symatry. I'm getting some other odd bugs with parts in this config dispearing or otherwise acting up. Modified Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/t5cpxcpu73manzu/KB-52 NF.craft?dl=0 Parts: 676 Modified Testing Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/exx96k1g3vx2dnf/KB-52 bug test.craft?dl=0 Parts: 360 This craft has the same problem on the left side instead of the right side.. Not sure what is causing it. I reproduced a new log(KSP1000xlshort.log) and I could not get the aero gui problem to reoccur. maybe it went away. I wonder if it's realted to my computer accessing swap from being out of memory. My swap is 8gb on/in a raid volume and it a linux file based swap and not a partition. I'm also getting low disk space warnings on my root partition for some odd reason. Here is the KB-52 bug test with action menu(formerly referred to by me as context menus.) I think the drag is appearing on the opposite side of the side you place the part in symmetry. Yep, just confirmed it. It's always the opposite MK3 cargo ramp. It also seems independent of autostrut or rigid attachment settings.

I'm already using that command from linux. I'm using english but have always needed it for other reasons. I just ran a seperate older version of 1.2.2 that was for modded craft. It doesn't have (m)any mods in it as it was for my trying out moded custom parts I made. It may only have 1 or two extra mods. But it has some sort of text with it and stops at the same point now(even though it used to work) it says to many open files and something about IOreference among other things. And again I can't produce a log because the game seems to have stopped producing them. I even reinstalled the game and it still didn't work. I found the normal KSP.log in the main folder. the ones in home/user/.config/... are no longer generating properly or something. I'll post the file soon. KSP.log KSP2.log

Fedora 25 GA-970A-D3 mobo GTX 1060 2x4gb ram Phenom II 1100t Logs:(both logs are after a fresh reinstall.) KSP.log KSP2.log <- This seems to display the too many open items error. Edit: I let it go for a while but it never finished trying to load. And the bar never moved... I'm not sure what is happening. I think I"m on 1.3 but i'm not sure as I can't log in to be certain. I update via steam though so It should work. I will try t reinstall later but I need to wait a few days because of bandwidth limits. The game loads to, "loading asset bundle definitions." Then the text disappear or quickly flashes a few text and then disappears and get stuck at halfway loading. it still changes the joke writing above but never finishes loading. The white text saying what files are being loaded vanishes. I've tried the various things to fix it like -1 from the resolution and the script and trying to delete pref files in /home/user/.config/Squad/kerbal space program/... to -force etc in both ways I've seen mentioned and nothing. The game simply seems to not be working now. And now i can't even put up a player log because it has stopped putting in player logs to allow me to put them up. It will not auto refresh the pref or player log files for the game after deletion... It is not generating any of the files it used to. Edit: placed a log for KSP.log. Still cannot get them from home/user/.config/.../Kerbalspaceprogram. Edit: I tried 32 bit and it seems to be doing the same thing also. I keep seeing something about java errors. How would stock KSP be related to a java app in any way?! I ran: "ulimit -n 4096 && /home/..../steamapps/common/Kerbal\ Space\ Program/KSP.x86_64" and it got past the point it was stuck. Waiting for it to load... So far so good.

Not sure. There was definitely something about DLC though. But, either way, I think this game is way too early as far as development to be monetizing with DLC. It needs alot more base content before making dlc worth it. They should add alot more and do enough to the base game that it simply brings in more players. Add more of everything and make the game revolve around options. Make the mods for alot of purposes just be adding onto it. Or have the stock game be more or less preset choices and then use mods and things for changing that. There is endless room to improve the core game. Lots of stuff that arguable should have been in 1.0 and earlier. It's not really good to try to make money from DLC when you can still develop the core game. You can simply develop the heck out of the game and make money from core sales until the game has all the stuff you would think was originally supposed to be in game and then when sales max out from a greater value like world wide potenial sales then consider dlc potentially. The game is not finished. I would not want to pay for stuff that under better circumstances should have already been in game and including in my purchase. It's not right on the users end. Always run game sales from the standpoint of benefiting the player the most and money should not be an issue. the probably just need to get themselves past the engine limitation or do as much as possible until they can get around it or something. Try lots of smaller stuff like my idea on graphs. Maybe little random generated things on surfaces or add robotics to go with it. Stuff to maximise and expand on the game to give it more playability all around. Keep doing that to get player numbers and consistant play up. Then after going overboard on features monetize dlc potentially. Having the development stunted by an engine then dlcing is a bad combo all round. With the chage to the new company could they get more work on getting around engine limitation or finding ways to get the game to be unhindered by software issues and get more base stuff in the game that was supposed to be in it? That might be enough to start getting more sales in general and get more people in the game and not need to dlc stuff. How many people have they sold to out of the 7+ billion. This game is interesting enough(as it is currently the only game trying more fully use physics atm.) and has the potential to bring in lots of people. It just need to get around it's current problems and could bring people in. They should probably consider that too. If they don't work on physics before it becomes common it might be harder to compete(maybe) they can get stuff done now and either makes lots of early money or help make it more common and improve things in general which itself will bring in competition and more ideas for development. The older philosophies on game development by the best companies were always make money off of as much development as possible(IE maximize work and the community will take care of you!), as opposed to making as much money as possible off of as little development as possible. Always work to the max towards the users benefit and the user will always give in return. That is especially for something like this that should be like an educational community(not college, real world). It's about access and work more than other things. That benefits the community best. I've never liked the idea of DLC. There is no real reason until you max out sales at good bulk of world population or gaming population. This game taken far enough could and should be able to bridge game genres and hobbies when developed to the max because it's potentially a progressive actual physics game and something that should have been possible a long time ago in general. It should ultimately be sellable to anyone and everyone. Edit: They also shouldn't dlc and minimum until my game stops becoming unplayable every version update. It's worse this time than before... They need to get some fundamentals down first... Whether those are related to engine limitations or not. Think how many things can be stock still. They should do a DLC after they maximize stuff for this solar system. Then DLC for things beyond it!

Not yet. FE comes out in July 18th I think. I was hoping they would do a surprise release of low and mid range because of the video card buyouts. I got tired of waiting though.

I'm just replacing my gpu because my old one died on me. I use my hardware for along time though. I was hoping to use my current gpu for a few years more to get to see what new stuff might come out for a more future proof or interesting gpu... I was hoping vega would lead to some interesting permanent shifts in hardware design finally.

I use whatever I have if it looks like it's needed. What is missing seemingly from this game is the ability for the command pods to use the mono propellent from it's nose to slow down as it balantantly is suppose to by those wholes in the front. Why did they never add this in. It's much easier on design than needing to add extra parts. It seems obvious it was meant to be able to do this. I'm pretty sure this is why they have the mono propellient in them. All like parts should have automatic RCS mono thrusters in them to aid in craft control.

I didn't say it was free for everyone before 1.0. The specific sale said free dlc etc with the specific sale in 2014. That sale stated it was free for being before 1.0 as an extended last chance additional early access giving people a second chance to get the benefits. The sale was focused on DLC because there was a scare about DLC content at the time so they purposely pointed out about DLC and offered things like this to calm people down and bolster sales before 1.0. I've found the sales listing on the steam history type page but it doesn't have the full info anymore. There was more info at the time on the main page with the sale that stated these things specifically for the sale. It was then removed when the sale was removed as it wasn't needed. The info was specifically on the main steam page as part of the sales info.

Why doesn't the game free dlc include the Christmas season sales in 2014 and/or 2015 that also stated free dlc via steam store... Every time I have asked this it's been denied. These were all continued early access sales and said they would also allow free dlc because it was sold before 1.0. This is part of the reason I bought the sale on steam!

Installed and trying to get old version of KSP to load... it's going rather slow. No graphics anomalies though.

Yea, if they want to not contaminate things they should send it into deep space or the sun. For all we know Saturn will be the only place with bacteria. And if it turns out that way we will now never know where it came from.

Just in case anyone wants the last 1060 that will be left in the whole world to buy: http://www.amazon.in/PNY-GeForce-1060-Video-Graphics/dp/B01L9K8X26 I'm assuming this is for 100 at once though.... Or is it really prices wrong? Maybe someone was hoping ole money bags bill gates would personally take the bite and buy one. Are they actually coming out with Nvidia and AMD crypto cards like I've read?

That would be a cool thing to add in if they added stock parts. They could do a section for gears and older mechanics dating from the renascence and back! Could make fun boats and old fashioned mechanized robots!! >< Although that is a little junkier than I was thinking at first. The picture made me think something made by Leonardo Da Vinci. Those wings are giving me flashbacks of LightHouse!

Is there supposed to be anything coming out that might drop prices again. I heard they were trying to make cards for mining specifically and the Vega FE workstation card is coming out. Could that offload enough of the miners to drop prices. Or would it shift the cards down in price a little? Bought a 1060 3gb. Will install later. Then I can finally work on my rockets again! >< http://www.bestbuy.com/site/pny-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-gddr5-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card-black/5613853.p?skuId=5613853 This was 40$ off. anyone know what it normally goes for! >< I'm assuming you can get this for the same price elsewhere. I'm not seeing it anywhere else. Did best buy have an exclusive on this card or do most people just not sell this 3gb model. Edit: it is sold by others but it is out of stock everywhere! Best buy seems to have stock still though. So if anyone needs and upgrade that is the cheapest 1060 you can find from what I've seen. I'm assuming this should be decent since I'm still on an AM3 system with only an 1100t 6 core. It's replacing a 560 ti with only 1gb vram. I should be able to play the games I play at better graphics settings. Mostly STO(Star trek) KSP and older titles. I was playing MWO, but they just nerfed my clan mechs instead of simply increasing the other side and leaving mine where it needs to be for combat capabilities... I dodged a bullet: http://www.amazon.in/PNY-GeForce-1060-Video-Graphics/dp/B01L9K8X26 ;p