ColKlonk

Nice trees.. You didn't use the camera viewfinder, I take it. Well, at the risk of placing yourself under observation... it's a cloud, or a weather balloon. Do you live near an airbase - That there is a small cloud there, and you say it was traveling at 'high speed'.. there would have been a longer vapour trail, maybe horizon to horizon. Nah.. just trees and a cloud

Here's another to drool over... https://www.dropbox.com/s/o38f9jyoxwgutrq/Avoid3.f4v (85MB) The thing with DCS at that stage is that the AI rarely made 'mistakes', so it teaches you to think and fly well. What I used to do, is let the AI (FW190) get behind me.. then I'd try turn the tables - difficult, but possible. It's easier against a human opponent as you can trick them into making mistakes. These are cuts from the same mission... some 10 minutes long (which is a longgg time). Right at the end I turn the tables and another 5 minutes to needle him.

'There's no such thing a free lunch'... Wait till when enough people have taken the bite.. then Msoft 'pulls the plug'.. and says.. you must now pay for upgrades ...errr...I mean the botch-ups that should have been fixed before release

Not bad... For a lunar surface, a location similar to Area-51 would have been more convincing..

This why.. and I've said it for years... never use your real details on the net. Obviously for online shopping you have to.. but for everything else (Especially KSP [], F.book, Tw.tter..etc) = false name, numbers and aliases. At least MSoft is being honest about this here... whereas most others don't bother

Oh, you mean worir4....!! I wouldn't worry about that... KSP's aerodynamics and control systems are.... hmmm, what can I say....hmmmm.... UNITY based.. that it..

NathanKell: Coming across a slight problem wrt to reduced SAS wheels ? As Squad haven't bothered to fix the PID for node locking, and RO has reduced the wheel effects, this results in a large wastage (maybe unrealistic) of RCS fuel, while the craft wobbles around like a telly tubby on ice - never actually centering on the node. Wouldn't it be an idea to nudge the wheel effects up a bit, to compensate for this ?

Me ?

Well, most of us cannot afford the real thing.. but it's nice to play with these 'toys' even if it's virtual. https://www.dropbox.com/s/4le9ssjw2jc2nqs/P51TakeOffLanding.mp4 (130MB)

The flight sim story varies amongst pilots, but general consensus is that a 'flight sim' student learns quicker in the real environment, usually . . . Edt:As I remember things.. The UK/EU can be a very busy airspace, and very bewildering to a newbie. There are different viewpoints on this, but I'd recommend finding an approved flight school in a 'quiet corner' of the UK. Close a busy airport is ideal, but not too close The reasons are numerous:- 1) A new student is not overwhelmed by the new 'code' talk and procedures 2) You get more flight time, instead of waiting in long queues to take off, which wastes your time an money. 3) More airtime = more experience and helps the student get comfortable with his 'office' quicker = less money spent. Once the PPL is obtained, move to a flight school either at a busy airport, or next to one. Here the student, then proficient in controlling the aircraft, can now concentrate on big airport procedures. It'll take 5 or less hours of this, for a PPL to settle down.. then they're on their way.

I forgot to add.. Get this flight simulator... http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/ and the P51, ME109, or FW190 aircraft. This sim is close to real aerodynamics, and a good experience on procedures.. etc. There are the commercial sims on civil aviation, but I've never bothered with that - but they're good in getting you acclimatised on today's aircraft. I'm not sure how good these are but many people play it... http://www.microsoft.com/Products/Games/FSInsider/downloads/Pages/FlightSimulatorXTrialVersion.aspx Obviously, Flight Sims are not the real thing, but they go a long way in preparing you for the environment that you work in.

Before you even consider doing a COM, go have a Commercial Medical (this has to be done yearly) instead of a PPL medical (1x every 2 years where I am). The medical is expensive but it'll save you a lot of time and money if you don't make the medical grade. There have been some PPLs that have gone the whole route to COM, only to have failed their COM medical... dashing their hopes. So you pass the COM medical... as mentioned have a look at some 'Aviation uni's' - I wish we had those here. School subjects are the Physical Sciences, Maths, Geography and English (an extra language is an advantage) - Do well in these core subjects. Seeing that you're in the UK, register on this website and you should get more specific info for your area - http://www.pprune.org/ Also do your homework on flight schools, your local Aviation Authority - In the UK you'd fall under the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) There is a library full of documentation that you must wade through. You have to study to be a pilot.. and it's 'worse' than studying for a degree Remember that these schools and UNis are after your money - it's business. If you're wise enough and do your 'homework', you can do it much cheaper. Just make sure that you're at approved schools - check with FAA-local authority Flying School/Uni advice:- 1) No money up front (unless loan/bursary/scholarship) - pay as you go (1 or 2 sessions in advance). You'll have registering/medical/basic expenses to pay first - Don't be shy to ask difficult questions, it's your money!! 2) Only register at a school/uni that has a minimum of 3x aircraft of the same type, that you intend to qualify on. This is necessary as there will be maintenance/repairs and other down-times, which will only extend you flying program, costing you more money. Also flying is a practised art, if you don't keep up, you lose touch.. further extending your flying time before qualification. 3) Don't do it in dribs and drabs. Do it in one go, for reasons mentioned above. NOW this is the most important advise, while gaining hours to COM: Once you've obtained your PPL (50 - 75 hours), you'll have to complete 200 hours for Commercial license. 1) Do your Instrument Rating (~10hours) 2) Do your Night Rating (~10 hours) 3) Do 100hours (min) night flying PIC (Pilot In Command) = Flying by yourself at night on navigation trips - This is an ATPL requirement. 4) Get ratings on a further 3 or 4 aircraft - all single engine light aircraft 5) Get an instructors rating - Companies want to know you can teach other pilots This will set you up for the commercial route. As far as possible stick with the light aircraft to about 1000 hours, then converting to twins and turbo-props around that stage, onto 1500-2000 hours. I say this as your real flying experience is gained on these aircraft. Moving direct onto too big an aircraft too soon... you don't have that important experience. If necessary, pop along to small aviation operations, Skydiving clubs, Emergency services.. etc.. and let them know you're available. Volunteer to do the dirty work (ramp rat) at these places.. be patient, an opportunity will arise, as people move around. Don't expect too much payment.. you're still gaining experience and more importantly, hours. Also When you're flying these aircraft, safety is paramount, and you're are the boss. If maintenance is shoddy and/or you're not happy with something - DO NOT TAKE OFF!! - resolve these issues on the ground first. If you're lucky enough to get a direct route into a good job... as far as possible, still do the things I've mentioned - experience just talks:cool:

Ah missed that.. Thanks.

As it says... I'd like to turn down the wild screen jumping during launch phase (and other times), so I don't get a headache trying to read the numbers. thanks for any help.

History Channel == Make Believe

Ja.. a pity.. I was hoping for some firm base 'connection' Afraid a necessity to 'grunt' this load into orbit.. I could bring it down as bit, but I'm trying to minimize my number of rockets - - - Updated - - - NP... I realised that after I posted... but it works well non-the-less It'd be nice to have real professional rocket aerodynamics, then I could add some 'anti-cones' around the engines to redirect airflow.. You know

Maybe maybe not.... tried this but the claws wouldn't take on Phobos I'll try land harder next time The Crew won't suffer from lack of Gs with this baby

Try manually transferring charge (Alt+LClick) from the panels to the battery - maybe this is a new trick in V1.02 (A connection link between the battery and panels ?) I'm not sure whether items work in accelerated mode... try 1x mode in the sun. Otherwise we might be looking at another bug. Edt... ah.. I remember what Steve says from V0.90 i think it was..

If you 'Right Click' on each instrument, there should be an option to toggle it Activate/Deactivate (On/Off). You might have Antenna range mod (or something similar) installed, where you need 'line-of-sight' with the Ground Control station in order to control the probe. With no sun or comms.. your probe is virtually dead until it comes into view of the ground station again - don't forget to place decent aerials on the probe. I haven't tried on a probe, but put mechjeb (auto-flight computer) on it and set up the flight parameters - this might help.

You know everyone is crying about their rockets being aerodynamically unstable... Finally taking the leap and installed V1.02 plus RO.. and immediately down to designing and testing new rockets. The designs haven't varied much from V0.90, except for one thing. After twiddling around a bit I decided to make conic fuel tanks (bottom diameter being 1m wider than the top). Then it struck me that this makes perfect sense, as there would be more drag on the lower sections, and the pointy thing up top, would point in the right direction. Than again the N1-3L rocket has been staring us in the face for decades... .. eliminating the need for winglets and stabilisation fins So getting serious with RSS design work... Early stage engines don't throttle, so we have to make the stages heavy enough so we don't pancake the Nauts. But also not to heavy so we don't go nowhere slowly. So to put my ISS into orbit, we end up with this.. which ends up being a fairly comfortable ride - Wernher's got nothing on me The toy for orbit assignment.. ..ze rocket.. .. and ze results..

Ja..thanks, have Deadly ReEntry installed.. that must be it then.... Was a bit of a shocker.. Kibble: The rocket's rock stable.. in fact too stable, as when I turn Mechjeb off it's hard to turn the thing, even with a big wheel installed It's just mechjeb that seems to be doing funny things.. or not what I want it to do A bit more fiddling is required.

A question on RO's Deadly entry, or RO physics... Would it produce heating, so early like this, and at a low speed ? I'm not sure whether I have the correct physics installed.. etc. The ModuleManager physics file has the same values as in the RO_Physics. :confused:

Ja... what Wanderfound said: Also don't get involved with 'politics' and academic politics... it's a minefield and waste of precious time. Be firm in your own convictions, but always have an open mind

Still with v0.90.. baffing around while RSS V1.02 is still busy.... Twiddle thumbs.. and what do I do... Well... I'll just make my own ISS... it's more of a testing ground for greater things to come.... so NASA promises us In reality testing MechJeb and different rocket weights... not happy with mechjeb (a bit dense) Switched off MechJeb at 100km altitude and manually piloted to orbit.. A heavier myISS2 section swayed on liftoff, but MechJeb held this just fine. I was contemplating manual control, but my pilot experience let it go a while longer. Dumping myISS2 sections myISS2 was overloaded so docked (difficultly) and transferred fuel, then dumped last stage. .. then redocked as per plan Hydrogen is light stuff.. lets place empty tanks on myISS. Why... Coz we can and it's good for health... SRB separations on myISS3 Final stage separation on myISS3 (thought the sunspot looked ok) myISS3 approach.. all docked.. .. and a good old chat/skinner session...:cool: