yorshee

Ah, now it's covered by a cloud...normally the moon is bright enough to shine through a thin cloud like the one that's covering it, but not now. Time to go back to sleep.

I said intense - not bright

I'm seeing it right now! Wow! I never expected the red colour to be so intense. I wish I could lug my telescope outside and get a photo for those of you with clouds, but unfortunately it's far too late for that.

I have an alarm set for 3AM, when the full eclipse starts here, hopefully it won't make me feel too groggy when I have to wake up again at 6

A bright, bubbly personality. If you have lots of good ideas and fancy streaming equipment, it doesn't do much for you if you're unentertaining to watch.

Doing this worked on the launchpad with a test craft, but for this particular mission I had to hack gravity to get back. https://www./?4i75bovkb1xpa94 Here's the .sfs file of the Kerbal and lander on Tylo, you guys can feel free to try and get her back into the capsule.

I'll have set up some different ladder configurations on the launchpad to see what works. I had tried that, the Kerbal bobbing up and down is me pressing up and F at the same time, though I did also try pressing F while not pressing up - nothing happens.

See title. I landed on Tylo and I can't get back into my capsule because my Kerbal won't climb over onto the top of the fuel tank. http://gfycat.com/SickInnocentGelada Every time '[F]: Climb Out' appears, I'm pressing it, but the Kerbal doesn't do anything. I could always enable Hack Gravity to get back into the ship but I want to know if it's me who's doing something wrong. I have mods but I don't think they're doing anything to cause this. I have Kerbal Engineer, Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, Kerbal Alarm Clock, and Stock Bugfix Modules. Thanks!

Landed on Tylo!

The furthest I've been is to Neidon from the OPM mod.

I just watched the VOD, that speech about the KSP community and the game's growth was very sweet.

Aw man, I regret not watching this one live.

Thanks! I draw when the inspiration strikes, which is quite often when the subject matter is Kerbal stuff. KSP is a fun, creative game after all.

Forgot to post this fanart in this thread. Oops!

The Kerbal could have been launched from the spinning cockpit really fast which could have made it happen. I've had this glitchy terrain happen to me because of a bugged maneuver node before.

Why does it need to be fixed? You just need to reload the persistence save file. Or make alt+F5 saves. Having autosaves automatically save over the last quicksave would be terrible.

Three. A 100% stock install, an install with just KER, KAC, KJR, and Claw's Stock Bugfix, and a more heavily-modded install with KAS/KIS, EPL, KSPRC, Atomic Age, Lack Luster Labs, B9 Aerospace pack, and a load of other stuff.

The performance improves if you aim the camera toward the sky, which makes me think it's an issue with Kerbin's terrain. Try turning the graphics down a bit? That's what I did since I had the same issue.

This isn't about realism, it's about gameplay - the same reason why the ability to use manoeuvre nodes isn't given to you straight from the start.

Yeah, I want them to implement it since it's an essental feature. KER itself can be inaccurate and can glitch out sometimes, especially when it comes to SSTO's, but that doesn't make it any less useful.

We haven't heard anything of it in months now so I'm still doubtful about it. A small mention in the devnotes that says something like 'we're focusing on Unity 5 at the moment but we haven't forgotten about this!' would be sufficient but nothing has been said about it.

Yes, I find even a 100% stock craft made of the Kerbodyne parts will wobble unrealistically with the stock joint strength.

Stock dV (and TWR) readouts were probably the one feature of 1.0 that I was most looking forward to - and I was super disappointed when it was seemingly forgotten about. I haven't heard anything about it in months now and I'm worried it's been scrapped. In my opinion this is something essential that needs to be put into the stock game asap... I want to know the forum community's opinions on this, as I know lots of other people were looking forward to it too. I have some rebuttals for common reasons why this shouldn't be included in the game too: 1) These confusing numbers will confuse new players too much. Yeah, it probably will, which is why it doesn't need to be in some huge window like how KER does it. A little section in the bottom of the Engineer's Report is sufficient - not too in-your-face to scare away new players, and the info is still there for us folks who would like to see how far our crafts can go without a spreadsheet or a mod... Plus, KSP already has tons of confusing lingo that might dissuade new players, such as engine specific impulse, planets' mass, area, escape velocity, and gravitational parameter, and even the delta-V required to perform a maneuver (why this but no dV for the craft itself!?) - a lot of this information is totally useless (and a bit daunting) to new players yet it's still in the game anyways so this is no excuse to not have stock dV readouts. There could always be a new tutorial fitting into the game that explains what these numbers mean, too. 2) It would be impossible to fit into career mode. Not at all! I'm not a fan of how KER does it where you can just slap on a part that you get at the start of a career save and you instantly have all the data. You could get the dV readouts in-flight by having an Engineer of a certain level in your roster, or by having a high-tech probe core (which is how KER also does it, though with KER the Engineers can be any level), or you could have this info in the vehicle construction mode by upgrading a building to a certain level, which is how maneuver nodes and patched conics are given to you in career. I'm not too sure which building would be the best choice...the VAB/SPH itself, tracking station, mission control, or the R&D building? Maybe a combination of the three! You could get different references for TWR and atmospheric drag losses, like how KER lets you toggle between atmospheric and vacuum modes and also lets you change the planet you're getting your TWR for. This could be accomplished by performing a gravity scan and atmospheric pressure scans with the GRAVMAX Negative Gravioli Detector and PresMat Barometer parts and transmitting/recovering the data. 3) I can play fine without this information. Ok, that's fine, but you probably only got there with a LOT of trial-and-error, having to scrap lots of missions because they just didn't get far enough. This is terrible for career mode because you could put your entire budget into a craft that you were hoping could accomplish some contracts on Tylo, only to have it all thrown away because you underestimated the amount of fuel you needed to land there. It's incredibly demotivating and I think this will drive off a lot of newer players more than having some numbers in the corner of the screen. What is your opinion on this? If you still don't think it should be in the game, let me know why you think so. (posting this in General KSP discussion because it isn't a new suggestion/feature, I just want to know the community's opinion on this)

I often get inspired by Robbaz's complex starships and carriers, but when I try to build one myself, my old crappy computer is the thing stopping me from even getting these things into orbit - my FPS is awful with these huge crafts and they're so big and unwieldy that they often wobble themselves apart, even with KJR. I need to invest in a better computer, and maybe use the welding mod more.

Pretty sure it's just you. You must have some weird audio virus or something.