Hotel26

My feeling is that it is so utterly irrelevant.

Team effort working under the Chief Architect, Caerfinon. (Fun was had by all.)

This brings back memories of Christmas, 2014, when my son gave me KSP. He had been playing it with my grandson (Calvin) who was about 3 at the time, and Calvin's sole, gleeful duty was to hit the space bar at the end of the countdown. I bet the SPH & VAB could feel pretty much like Lego to a youngster! (Just need some guidance diagnosing what happens outside after leaving the runway or launchpad.) Well, I'm going to give the Dad a quick demo of KSP on a laptop sometime soon.

Riddle: "What's the difference between a divorce and a house fire?" "A house fire doesn't take half your salary..." OK, OK, sorry. (And congratulations to all the January TOTM award members!) I'm here researching the new(?) Lego ISS because a non-KSP colleague (yes, we all are blighted with them), has presented his six year-old with this Lego kit (even though it's rated 16+) and I'm trying to engineer a way for aforesaid colleague to get aforesaid six year-old hooked on KSP. Hmm.... Too early?

19 hours ago, KSC Command was quite jubilant about having found a super-secret mountain-top location on Eve (right on the equator), at an altitude of 6,439 meters. It is a pretty flat site and quite large. Easy to land a rocket glider on reliably. Mauve Mountain, we've proudly called it. Since then, we've noticed that heavy/expensive equipment (rocket-powered interplanetary vessels), parked atop the aforesaid location tend to "drift" at rates measured up to 5 cm/s. We weren't happy. We all Trust in Squad as they say, but on this occasion, we felt that Squad had let us down. A few hours in a bulldozer and we flattened the site. Brought in a few makeshift buildings to make it seem a little less barren and a little more businesslike. [click + arrows] (Imagine our surprise, though, when the KSC grass we imported turned a funny hue of purple within a few minutes! Oh well, it did look out of place.) So, problem solved. But inasmuch as this has been a costly affair for the long-suffering taxpayer, we've successfully sued for a Rule Change. In brief, "since KSP (1.7.3) vehicles have this magical power to overcome friction at any time of most inconvenience, we have now command of a crawler-way tractor to position rockets landed on the mountain-top to the launch pad". It's only fair!! We have dubbed this machina ex Squad: Vessel Mover. [And yeah, we know about grip strips, but our principal vehicle sports a Papa dock for base and we're not gonna deface it...]

I have flown a prototype of an Eve SSTRV called Eagle. The first three images below [click + arrows] show Eagle: a) crossing 90 km upward into space, b) apoapsis at 121km and a sub-orbital speed of 1,665 m/s and c) passing back down through 90 km after 2m 51s in space. An SSTRV is a Single-Stage To Rendez-Vous and you probably haven't heard the term very often[1]. It's a Krakpot notion. The next phase of the project is to design a companion RV Interceptor. It will wait in a 120 km2 Eve orbit, traveling at 3,156 m/s. Eagle launches from a mountain-top on Eve[2] as Interceptor approaches and sets up a close rendez-vous before entering "coast", fuel exhausted. The Interceptor immediately begins maneuvering to reduce speed from 3,156 to 1,665, dock with Eagle[3] and then reboost speed sufficiently to raise periapsis above 90km. That's a total speed change of at least 3 km/s with the stopwatch ticking off something under 3 minutes to get the job done[4]. Don't worry: we have our best guy working on this. He's from Krakpotistan. A fun part of this project (so far) has been to ensure Eagle can fairly well pinpoint its landing to a mountain-top. Eve's thick atmosphere certainly aids and abets this. After setting up the w&b for effective gliding, our first attempt landed about a kilometer distant: [1] We will not be the first team to succeed with SSTRV. I've seen a YouTube of some other desperado outfit achieving same. [2] We're using Mauve Mountain as a launch site. At 6,439 m, it's not the tallest mountain on Eve but, located at 0 31 15S / 167 30 49E, just south of the equator, it's certainly convenient. [3] like a "suicide burn" to land, "suicide docking" requires performing the job with extreme prejudice. This will NOT be "putt, putt". [4] the critical part of the interception is up until completion of the dock. Docking within the atmosphere, even at the highest altitude, is extremely squirrely. Once dock has been secured, however, even if the pair then fall back into the upper atmosphere, quick acceleration should arrest the fall before any fatal dose of drag has been administered. So the total window is probably better. Also, the preliminary maneuvering can begin as soon as Eagle goes into "coast", which is well before it reaches the Karman Line...

This is a false alarm and inspection of the code and some better testing have shown that the latest Haystack works fine. In debugging a similar problem in Kerbal Konstructs, I learned that one may change the CKAN "minimum version" setting and, as a result of doing so, the latest Haystack updated into my KSP 1.7.3 installation. This is what rectified the textures/icons problem in Haystack, I believe. Please ignore the report above.

A very warm welcome to you! I will look forward to your posts and read them with interest.

A new airport has opened at Heavenly Valley so I thought I'd fly in and take a look. Apparently a ski chalet will open in the mountains nearby for helicopter traffic with maybe a very short strip with a tricky approach for prop commuters. [click + arrows] And the first commercial arrival, an UltraPaxjet-W, arrives after a 27m flight from Kerbal Space Center.

A collection of rovers. Pacemaker I'm currently doing a Kerbin circumnavigation with this and, in the plains, it's easy to maintain 45-50 m/s. KW Jetta enormous fun on the Mun. Invader my stock standard with lots of aerial transports for it. Krew: 8 kerbals. AFF Scooter original idea from AFF, but his was mono-prop propelled but I discovered that it could be RW-propelled.

I think Caerfinon wrote this excellent guide (cited in his signature) almost immediately after @Kerbal-fan's post: Getting Started With Kerbal Konstructs It's excellent; please check it out.

Congratulations, SpacePixel!! That is one beautiful ship and it was, for me, love at first sight!

OK then. For other desperados, here's the method (Ubuntu, Mint): https://askubuntu.com/questions/50085/setting-the-working-directory I added this line to the launcher in ~/Desktop: You can get your own Path from the Exec line in the launcher and truncate it to just the path to the directory. In the case of Kerbal Konstructs, this is especially egregious because, not only does the mod not work, but you cannot deploy to the runway and you cannot exit KSP. Kaput. (I've reported it in that topic.)

tl;dr KSP mods -- including Haystack, Kerbal Konstructs -- seem to rely on the assumption that cwd is the KSP base directory (buildId.txt, GameData) in order to find their own assets, causing pointless problems. This is just exploratory. I've been running Haystack for three years under Linux and wondering why the appearance of the UI is so bad. (Under Windows, previously, it was quite pretty.) It appears that Haystack makes the assumption that the cwd is the KSP base directory (the one containing buildId.txt and GameData) and uses this to find its own assets (textures, icons). This isn't my case on Linux Mint using an App Launcher on the desktop. Kerbal Konstructs assumes the same and this one problem stopped me using it altogether also for three years. In my opinion, it's not enough that there is a work-around for this, since people don't know and aren't told about it; they just have to go without. It's possible this is a KSP Linux-only (or Steam environment) bug but I do regard it as a bug to be fixed, one way or another (e.g. AppContext.BaseDirectory.). Have I got this wrong? And is there anything that can be done? [keywords: Linux]

Name change! Name change! One time only. Tell them H6 sent you...

tl;dr I have installed KK six times and de-installed it a similar number times (6) within 30m. That's my track record. I contacted SIr @Caerfinon, O.K.E., yesterday, seeking professional help. With his help, I have been able to load KK & Kerbinside Remastered. I have long suspected KK doesn't work (well) on Linux. The problem (extracted from the full log) is: I am using an app launcher located in /home/kmk/Desktop to run KSP 1.11.2 -- which is located in /home/kmk/env/games/KSP/1.11.2.3077/ In consultation with Sir Caerfinon (yes, he just received his Knighthood via express email!), I executed a quick work-around, et voila, KK works (so far) on Linux. By the way, please check out Sir Caerfinon's new and thoroughly excellently helpful link: Getting Started With Kerbal Konstructs ... How good is that?! Anyway, I am posting the full log as a bug report and suggesting that a relative path, from the KK DLL, be used to locate its own assets., The .NET AppContext.BaseDirectory appears to be the most appropriate way to locate the starting point. Lucky Installation Number 7! Thank you, Caerfinon! Much indebted to you.

Hello, Ralph Kraken!!...

Ctl-f on this page does not reveal a single usage of the word, 'carrier'. Which is quite surprising given there is widespread 'carrier fever' in the forum at the moment, as any avid reader of e.g. WDYDIKT would know. A couple of evenings ago, I tricked up a rev'eng Mirage (not a RL Mirage) I found kicking around (since August, 2019) in my Ships/SPH, putting a chute and main-gear steering on it. That gave me an idea today, while bored at work -- an idea still Classified, I'm afraid. But stay tuned for a full report later today. Here it is. Mirage definitely benefits from its 4x Vitos, especially on take-off.

Understanding what you are hoping to achieve with the challenge, this makes sense. I'd suggest hybridization of the current format. That is, you post various contracts as you choose, but without restriction. If someone builds and submits a form of aircraft (role, purpose) "free-form" but that role appeals to you, you could formalize the type with a contract specification and then choose best-of-class submitted thereafter. (A bit like some of the Airline Challenges.) So, for example, someone submits a submarine-capable craft that is capable of being deployed from a carrier, or a cargo resupply plane that can land on a carrier; you respond with a contract specification; other interested parties submit craft in that category; you announce which one(s) you would select for your own fleet after enough entries are submitted in that class.

I wake up in the morning thinking about them and I go to bed at night, dreaming about them. (Think Marlon Brando in the street bellowing, "Hey SQUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADD!!")

Gee. I just place a Mk3 cabin on the Kerbin gameboard somewhere and call that a "town", similar to Monopoly. Build the town (Mk3) and (hand-waving) the airplanes will come. Real (procedural) airports would be wonderful, though. SQUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD????!! (Hear my plea?) (And, no, Thumbs Down, I have never gotten Kerbal Konstructs to work.)

I am not, nor ever will be, a realismo guy but I have an aim to build two carriers, Yamamoto and Nakajima. They're intended to be minimalist and effective in the KSP world. And mainly for fun landing planes on a small deck. But I thought I'd put some effort into personalizing the "island" for the new Nakajima, the bigger ship. KSP being Lego (and vice versa) and a bridge being a series of blocks with book-ends to hide the mess, I started by borrowing heavily from @chadgaskerman (whose work I truly admire and will never equal) and also from the astounding first entry into the projection of naval power, SwiS Carrier I "Praying Mantis" by @swjr-swis, from whom I've outright stolen his mast), but I am nevertheless pleased with the modest tailoring I have done and especially that the result is surprisingly clean (I think) compared to my usual shoddy work. Possibly the only surprising thing about this work is hidden away in the book-ends: 2x Hammer solid boosters to provide a resupply to visitors landing with the employment of a Sudden Arrest System (retros). And, finally, as a result of this job, I can say that "I have finally learned to love the bomb cargo bay attachment points" (thanks to @Starhawkand a comment made long ago about "mod-attach to a node"). Blooper: You hear about people forgetting a chute or a ladder... This time, I forgot to set the thrust on the Hammers to 0... A couple of instant red heat bars around the bridge were the only clues to cause of the very quickly ensuing detonation.

You were on the right track!

What's worked best for me is to depart at Moho's Ascending Node and reduce PE to Moho's altitude at its opposite DN -- and it additionally works as you drag out the injection maneuver node, to dial in the inclination adjustment. This latter doesn't have to be fussy: if you can get the inclination down from 7 deg to < 1, you're getting it with Oberth and you can finish it at the other end with Oberth. The big benefit is it makes getting an encounter a lot easier because your arrival orbit is so much better aligned with Moho's, meaning the encounter is not a pinhole intersection. This is, I think, a better approach than using a transfer window (although you still have to go at a particular time). The cost will be that, when you arrive at Moho's DN (and your ultimate rendez-vous point), you will need one more Moho orbit (approx.) to align that encounter. The benefit is its about the simplest technique I know for Moho. Note that Moho's DN is not too far from its own PE, which would be the optimum rendez-vous point in terms of matching orbital speeds (ignoring inclination). This is why DN arrival is preferred to AN. Here's the link, read through this: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/196048-when-is-the-annual-moho-transfer-again/

I spent the morning on further refinement of my new Nakajima class carrier, continuing the pursuit of Joint Chiefs of Staff "Minimalist Carrier Policy". Sea trials have commenced and this run yielded 45.8 m/s (164 kmh): It looks very much at this stage like it might be feasible to extend the project to attempt hydrofoil capability for Nakajima? (A shout-out to @chadgaskerman whose bridge I purloined for inspiration. (I'll revise all this during the final development.)) Nakajima carriers sport 12x Goliath engines arranged in two banks, amidships (used alone for turning) and stern (engaged additionally for cruise). The KSC naval base pilot corp insisted on salt-water bathing facilities (i.e. a ladder rescue system to get out of the shark-infested waters after failing to stop before "carrier's edge" during training)... UPDATED: a mock-up of a new bridge. Now a pastiche of borrowed ideas... Lots of Z-fighting.