Aser

Thanks. It's mostly just curiosity. I'm doing a new Interstellar playthrough, and I wanted to compare my progression to some older saves. Total science points seemed like a good yardstick because the tech tree is completely different. Calculator isn't hard, but it's not as easy as clicking the button that shows you the total (if it existed).

Is there a way to view my total researched science points? I'm looking for an easy total. I can see the huge list in the archive section, or I could add up all my research nodes plus my remainder. But preferably, there'd be somewhere in the game that it adds it up for me? Haven't been able to find it if it's there.

Thank you! That page didn't show up in my initial searching (using the wrong keywords I guess). That's an interesting read.

Sometimes the range safety officer has to initiate a self-destruct of a malfunctioning rocket. I'm wondering what the mechanism for the destruction is. It doesn't seem like they would place a bomb inside of the rocket, so how does it work?

Thanks for posting that OP. No wonder people of the time were so excited about space.

Might try turning it off? Although I haven't tried it in game, so it's probably just a generic answer. The space bar thing is only if you have the Free EVA mod installed. (Incorrect. See below)

Years...*cough* I wish I could have that many debris in my KSP save. Whenever I do, it's nothing but lag city.

The fuel flows from the tank the line is placed on first into the tank the line is placed on second.

I get where you're coming from, but I hope you are wrong. The reason being: I feel like that level of cooperation is quite a ways into the future, and I really hope it doesn't take humanity that long to reach Mars. Unless another nation starts a large spending program within the next 1-5 years, I'm hopeful that Ole Glory will be the first human planted flag on mars. If someone else were to get there first, I would support them 100%. Whoever does it first will have my full backing and enthusiasm.

I'm happy for the increased NASA funding and all, but when dealing with the US congress, don't forget to look a gift horse in the mouth. (CISA)

I believe you are correct. I'm working on a solution, but it's looking like things might be about to get slightly complicated. Edit: Ok, I think I have something for you. Disclaimer: This requires math. The math it requires isn't too complicated, but I did just teach it to myself, so the possibility of this being incorrect exists. I suggest you go over and check to make sure I'm not leading you astray. The answer I have is add 170,693km to your final number. Here's how I arrived at that number... You should be able to run a few tests to (dis)prove my solution. Good luck.

Have you tried turning it off and on again? Seriously though, I have had luck several times with killing the game and restarting. I would also double check the contract in mission control. Make sure there aren't any more specifics to the contract.

Well...let me think about it for a minute or two... 1. You could try lining up with land either to the direct north or south. 2. You could try visually taking a degree measurement from KSC (might not be very accurate) 3. You could plant a flag or dummy vehicle near KSC. Set it as your target. Launch the SSTO to Ap and record target distance. Fly KSS. Set the same flag or dummy as your target. Orbit until it matches your previously recorded value. Set a maneuver node right behind your craft in orbit. When you are T-(time of SSTO to Ap) from your maneuver node, check your distance to target. Save this number. Now when you target KSS from the SSTO, use that final number for your launch indicator. (I think this will work)

Find the point that your SSTO reaches Ap and time how long it takes you to get there. Then find a landmark below it on Kerbin. Go into map view while flying your KSS. Then set a maneuver node where your SSTO reaches Ap. When you are T-time it takes your SSTO to reach Ap, you need to find another landmark. When KSS reaches that landmark in its orbit, you launch your SSTO and you should be relatively close to it at Ap.

I think they meant that oil will be cheaper than in the 1990's, if it hits $20/barrel, because of inflation.

I had recently designed my first ever SSTO. I was pretty excited about it because it had taken my tons of tries, so I was flying it a bunch, trying to get some skill at landing the thing. On one of the landing attempts, I clipped a wing into the ground and the plane blew apart. Luckily the capsule survived. Noticing that I was in a new biome, I figured I would have the kerbal jump out for a surface sample and eva report. Apparently, I didn't notice that the exit to the capsule was facing the ground. Poof! a little wisp of smoke and the kerbal was gone forever.

Anyone know why they're waiting until March to change their orbit? Seems like a long time.

Unfortunately, the upper stage is needed to reach orbit. I'm sure I could get it up there without. All it would take is more sepratron spam.

There you go. Considering there weren't really any guidelines or rules, this isnt much of a challenge. Place tank radially on probe, offset tool, orbit. You might want to go read the challenge posting guidelines.

Does it count if I get a probe into orbit on only sepratrons? I did similar to what you did, but I thought the challenge was to take a kerbal.

So...this is just another case of media sensationalism.

Are you planning on adding any story to this, or is it just going to be you playing? If you didn't figure it out, there is an issue with the heat shield that will kill you. Either don't use it (you dont need it where you are in career), or decouple it after you get through the burning effects.

[quote name='A_name']ITT: A bunch of people saying OP is designing and/or flying his rocket wrong, but not bothering to explain WHY or what would be the "CORRECT" way to do it. Just install KJR.[/QUOTE] The "correct way"(s) was mentioned several times. 1. Lower Gimbal 2. Use struts 3. Avoid parts with weak joints [quote name='Jouni']Rockets are made as lightweight as possible and barely strong enough. That's actually not too hard, because the forces involved are not that high by structural standards. We're talking about something like 0.5 MN/m2 at launch, which is similar to the weight of a highrise apartment building. The vertical loads of skyscrapers tend to be higher.[/QUOTE] That still doesnt mean that rockets that bend are a good idea. :P

Thanks for all the replies! I was thinking about trying to use real world throttle profiles in KSP, but it sounds like it would [B][U]significantly[/U][/B] increase difficulty. Just in case I'm feeling brave, does anyone know of a mod(s) that model the inability to instantaneously change throttle and/or minimum thrust rates?

In KSP you have access to instant changes in throttle (x and z). I'm wondering, what are the real world rates of throttle change? I expect it takes some amount of time to go from zero thrust to max and from max back to zero.