lugge

It may be correct from a scientific view, but if you are an engineer it really hurts you: In Stargate (and I guess in other shows too) they can connect their laptops and tablets to every piece of alien hardware and communicate with this hardware. So, what do you do when you are locked up inside some alien spaceship? Yes, connect your laptop to some random cable running through ypur prison cell. This will give you full control of the whole spaceship. This may, theoretically, be possible. However, as I'm working in the car industry it really annoys me when I see that you can connect each kind of hardware, regardless of the communication protocol, the transport layer, hell, even if its some piece of unknown alien stuff. But as Stargate has a good piece of self-mockery, I'm totally fine with it :-) Stuff like in Ant-Man or F&F don't hurt me. This movies are intended to be entertaining, not scientific correct. But yeah, sometimes you just have to facepalm :-)

So, everytime I go interplanetary I end up with some weird orbits around my target bodies. Getting an encounter with low delta-v costs is now very easy for me, thanks to Alexmoon's calculator. I usually do some correction burns during traveling, the last one is usually right after I entered the target's SOI. A small normal/antinormal burn at the edge of SOI brings down the PE a lot. However, most of the time I get a highly inclined orbit. When going to Duna, I usually get almost polar orbits.For landing, thats no problem. But when I want to also visit some moons, then an equatorial orbit would be good. What is the best way to ensure an equatorial orbit on the target body? Where do you have your burns, and what burns do you perform for achieve this?

Hi there, I played hard career in 1.0.2. Yes, it was hard and grindy, but after some time I reached a point where I had lots of money and science and I felt like in sandbox mode. Now, I started a new hard career on 1.1.1 and it feels... well, just grindy. I complete contract after contract and cannot even think of upgrading VAB or unlock Poodle engine and big tanks. In 1.0.2 I managed to unlock everything I need for munshot. In my current game, I feel the only way to get poodle for munshot is by getting a poodle-test-contract. Otherwise, I have no idea where to get 180 science for poodle and big tanks. Did they change the multipliers for hard career? Whats your opinion on this?

We're talking about SciFi, not real physics, right? If you need a plot device for getting some characters to distant stars, just go with some FTL drive. Call it warp drive, wormhole-drive, whatever you want. It is mainly accepted in SciFi media. A FTl drive with no time dilation is easier to accept as your solution, which involves time dilation AND time traveling. When you introduce time-traveling into your universe, you are at the risk of introducing some plotholes. Imagine some hero dying: "Hey why don't they just go back in time and prevent the hero from dying?? Come on, they have a time machine!!!"

I think 2018 will not happen. Maybe the next launch window, who knows. And also it will be quite some time before we see humans on Mars, and they will not go there by Dragon (who came up with this nonsense?) It does not matter if Elon cannot keep his 2018-promise. If it takes some more years, that will be OK. Promises like these let me think he and hs company really belive in their visions and they will do anything to achieve it. If they don't keep their timeline but need a few more years, doesn't matter. Elon never met his timeline, but nevertheless he tried and achieved a lot of goals. That is what matters. I cannot understand why SpaceX is blamed for achieving goals after 4 years when they said they need 2. NASA plans with 10 years, needs 20 and then drops the project. Well, then I prefer the SpaceX way.

OK, KSP starts properly now. Bad thing, I don't know why. I didn't use any of your solutions, I just started KSP via console (start.sh) instead of the link on my Cinnamon desktop. I did this to test if this also crashes my desktop and to get some messages written to stdout. Have to check if I changed something in the settings...

Got another linux issue :/ OK, I'm one lucky guy because my KSP now doesn't crash at startup. However, I now have the issue that some GUI elements are not shown. This affects the - List of Savegames when clicking "Load Game" in the main menu. The list is just empty. - list of logo's for your flag when starting a new Career is empty - Tech tree is completely empty - contract list is completely empty This means, all dialogs where you can choose between some options are empty.A few days ago, I've read from some other guy with this issue, however, I cannot find this posting now...

Hi sal_vager, thank you for your reply. Well, KDE, xfce, doesn't really matter. I just want to confirm that this issue is Gnome-related.But in the long-term, I want to run KSP under Cinnamon, which is my favorite DE. Otherwise, I could just dualboot Win7 as well ;-) I've read a lot on this "crash-on-start"-issue and will try some workarounds when I'm at home. I will share my results when I'm done :-)

Hi Selwonkak, have you been able to fix the issue? I have an similiar issue, using Cinnamon with LM16 and Antergos. For what I've read, unity5 is buggy when used under Gnome. As Cinnamon is some fork of Gnome, maybe the Gnome-issues apply to Cinnamon as well. Maybe I will install KDE in my Antergos (which I really HATE) and check if the same issue occures. But first I will try Harry Rhodans solution.

w00t?

A multi-billion-dollar project which follows a cancelled multi-billion-dollar project which is lacking a manifest (other than 3 test flights)... well, I would call that thing obsolete. (obsolete like in: no use for it). But we had this SLS topic quite a few times, lets keep it out of this thread. On a personal note, I would appreciate it if you turn off the full-quoting. It makes threads confusing and people have to guess which part of the post exactly you are referring to. And, back on topic :-) ISS will not be brought back to earth, at least not as something you want to show in a museum. Not possible at the moment, and if it were than there would be no money. The same applies to the "bring it to a higher orbit" solution. I hope they can maintain the ISS a little bit longer. Maybe they realize that, with the current world economy, no country can fund a station like this on their one. Well, I like ISS. The longer I think of it... Lego should make a model out of it! Like they did with the shuttle, which is my favorite Lego, albeit the failed shuttle concept ;-)

Well, I guess SpaceX has thought about their launch site. This is a multibillion-dollar-decision, one does not simply make such a decision in 5 minutes. When they came to the conclusion there is some benefit... well, I guess there is. Streetwind has mentioned some: I guess this is for their long-term-plans. Elon has huge plans with Mars. I'm not saying he 's gonna see his plans come true. But wheter he succeeds or not: he's trying and he needs the infrastructure for this.

For me, ISS is a remainder of a glorious era of spaceflight, gone a long time ago. If ISS is gone (and it will have to go, read the thread) we will likely see no such things in this century anymore. It's like the cabability to go to the moon, the capability to do manned spaceflights (only one country has this capability anymore). Hell, we even cannot build new spacecrafts because they are getting obsolete before they are even finished (Constellation, SLS...) All gone. Sorry for the negative vibes, but I see no glorious century of spaceflight, and when ISS is gone mankind will stay on good-old-earth for quite some time. We have other problems to solve there and no goverment will have the money to fund a manned project just for fun. But, I do like the scheduled unmanned missions. At least a small gleam of hope :-)

Yes, I tried at KSC. My problem was the modules would sunk randomly to the ground. I understand that a housing module is more heavy than a connector-tube-module. However, I even had problems connecting two housing modules with the exact same design. I drove them together, dropped the rover and the completely-the-same modules were standing in front of each other with connectors in different heigths!! I was very liquided... However, landing on a specific spot on a moon was easy for me, I found some really good videos showing target-landing. This, and my favorite craft, the SKYCRANE :-) OK, back to my question, will 1.1 change the way the legs are working?

Ah, thank you. I see, I mixed two topics. One is about general TWR-behaviour. The second one is about the bad ISP of the Tuds, resulting in fuel waste. Didn't think about that. Greetings,

Hi there, I'm waiting for 1.1, currently I'm in an half-a-year break from KSP. My latest goal was to set up a Minmus base made up of several modules for living, power generation, ISRU... The modules would have been connected with tubes. All modules and tubes were planned to have landing legs. Then, a small rover could drive beneath the modules and carry them around and let them connect to each other. Well, wasn't working. The different weight of the modules made that the legs sunk. Thus, the connectors were on different heigths and wont connect. I didn't use 3rd-party-parts. Will this be possible in stock 1.1? I've read there will be some overhauls with the legs.

Excuse me Sir, but why is this? As far as my understanding goes: higher TWR -> better acceleration -> faster escape draggy atmosphere and high-grav ground levels Lower TRW means you have to stay longer in the atmosphere soup. But I often read a huge TWR can be bad, but why? Some say 2 is a good ratio to go, but why not have 3 if you can?

Well, maybe you should just switch to another, more scientifc forum instead of a video game forum?

I watched the conference and the launch on live stream, very well done! However, is there a video with the "highlights" like stage separations and transfer burns?

What about SLS? SCNR ;-)

What the f... did they smoke? Didn't they learn from the we're-about-to-conquer-solar-system-70th-hype?? Well, I'm glad "my" space agency has ambitious goals. But, well, they overshot...

You don't say? ;-) Well, thats what our media was saying, not me...

And even if you would: is Orion capable oft doing a propulsive landing on Mars, ascend and going back to earth again? The magazine showed a SLS/Orion-only design... Funny thing: today there was a TV show, one part was about Elon Musk. Well, he created SpaceX as a competitor to NASA...

Some glossy in germany (cant remember the name of the magazine) I read yesterday was about "NASA sends humans to mars". They wrote the landing is planned for 2039 like this was a given fact. More funnier was the used spacecraft: SLS block I with a Orion capsule. Well, have fun on your journy to Mars... I'm still thinking about writting a letter ;-)

When you have your 1895-space-object and your 1905-man-in-space, THIS WILL have an impact on WW1 and WW2. The events and technology would have been a game changer, changing all 20th century history. I do not say there would have been no major wars. But they would be drastically different, maybe shorter, maybe more loses in WW1. Maybe different allys. Depending on who won the space race. Consider this: if a huge ICBM, maybe even nuclear, had burnt some cities in WW1, there would be no WW2 because the cold war would have started right after WW1.