nathan1

The bug tracker does not yet have the new console patch version listed, but I've posted two new bugs that I've found there.

I've been using the Simplified control scheme, and it took me a bit of time, but after getting used to it I like it for the most part. I have encountered a few issues, which I've logged to the bug tracker: Controls become unresponsive using Simplified control scheme Camera resets position/zoom in Simplified control scheme Inconsistent navigation in Simplified control scheme "Look around" doesn't always work in Simplified control scheme Missing controls in Simplified control scheme Cannot open radial menu when part action window is open in Simplified control scheme Also, a bit of feedback that is not specific to the Simplified control scheme: Separate axis-inversion

Maneuver Node Splitter

Hey, sorry I didn't see your question sooner. Can you provide before+after screenshots showing how much the predicted trajectory has changed? Also, is this a stock solar system or are you using Kopernicus? A few possibilities that may be causing your problem: You may have an encounter with the Mun or Minmus that throws your final trajectory way off. Be careful to check for that. The final trajectory can sometimes be very dependent on ejection timing (depending on where your destination is and how precisely you want to preserve your planned trajectory), and even if you've planned the original maneuver node well in advance of the final ejection the split can move your final ejection by 10 to 20 minutes. When you make the split there will be a green text alert that says how much time difference there is between the original maneuver and the final ejection maneuver. When I have trouble with the final ejection not lining up correctly I'll use an iterative process of adjusting the final split (i.e. the last maneuver prior to the ejection maneuver) by a tiny amount until the final ejection happens within 1 minute of when it was originally planned. Something like the following: Set up the split how I want and apply it. Take note of how much time difference there is for the final ejection, and see how good the trajectory looks. Undo the split. Adjust the final split by a tiny amount (usually 1m/s) and re-apply. Check whether the time difference is smaller than before, and how good the trajectory looks. If the time difference is more than a minute go back to step 3.

The Earth, Moon, and the Sun all orbit the center of the milky way, so really the moon is in orbit of the milky way, not the sun. I mean, over galactic timescales the orbit of the Moon around the center of the galaxy is nearly indistinguishable from the Sun's orbit.

Yes. Probably, but I've never tried. Monophonic's idea of creating a translation would work, at least. I'm trying to understand what you're getting at... are you asking to unify construction through VAB/SPH and construction through EPL/GC? If that's the case I would think altering EPL/GC so construction time/resource costs are tied directly to the funds cost of parts (and then possibly adjusting the funds costs of parts) would accomplish that. Assuming you are talking about a replacement for KCT (relating to your "simpler alternative to KCT" comment), if you don't require construction to actually take time then I think an important point of KCT is missing. For example, if you have KCT and a life support mod installed then you have to consider what your options for rescue missions are before you launch, but if construction is instant then you don't. I think severely limiting funds from contracts combined with a "drip funds" mod to force you to not just launch all your missions within the first month of your career is a good way to play, but I don't think it really replaces what KCT does. Regarding AltFunding, it currently allows scaling of funds received by time or by reputation. Scaling by building upgrade progress seems like an interesting idea. I still need to check whether AltFunding is working or has any bugs in 1.3 anyway...

I found another Juno picture of Jupiter (this one of the north pole) that includes two different color-enhancements side-by-side: https://images.nasa.gov/#/details-PIA21031.html. It looks like a good example of the kind of difference color enhancement can make. From the description there:

I'm not sure if this is related, but it appears that physics timewarp is too fast with lossless physics enabled. Using a wall clock to compare I'm seeing game-time progress at the square of the warp rate compared to real-time (e.g. at 2x physics warp 4 in-game seconds pass per 1 real-world second instead of 2 per 1, at 5x physics warp 25 in-game seconds pass per 1 real-world second instead of 5 per 1, etc). To test I noted the time in KAC and on my wall clock when I enabled time warp, then waited for 30 seconds (real time), then exited time warp and noted the time again in KAC.

It depends on what you mean by "rebalance." The thread started with a simple question about the amount of fuel in tanks based on volume, and to my knowledge there is not a single-download easy-to-use MM patch that makes the stock parts have consistent balance in a stock-like way (SETI-redesign does not do that. It re-arranges the entire tech tree, among other things).

@TriggerAu I've made a pull request on github to make the length of time a tooltip is visible configurable (there was already a variable for it, but it wasn't exposed in the UI or persisted before).

What I want is a visual-only version of this mod. In other words: All vessels can still talk to each other (as in stock). Only lines between vessels on the same network are shown (to de-clutter the view). Each network has its own color for the displayed lines. The active vessel (or selected vessel in the tracking station) is the one exception: the whole path to the KSC is shown for that one vessel regardless of networks.

@Alshain The patches that duplicate stock structural parts for other sizes (e.g. duplicating the 1.25m 6-way hub to 2.5m, etc) don't update the bulkheadProfiles for the parts, so the parts don't show up correctly when filtering by cross-section.

If you're looking for an example of an atmo curve with tangents, the aerospike has the most complicated one that I know of: atmosphereCurve { key = 0 340 -50 -73.71224 key = 1 290 -21.23404 -21.23404 key = 5 230 -10.54119 -10.54119 key = 10 170 -13.59091 -13.59091 key = 20 0.001 }

Version 1.7.0 is now available: -Compiled for KSP 1.2.2. -Fix for splitting maneuvers that include a normal component. The fix is for a bug I didn't notice before that looks like it showed up with KSP 1.2.0. Splitting maneuvers that only include a prograde component are not impacted, but in 1.2.x prior to this fix splitting a maneuver that includes any delta-v in the normal/anti-normal direction will not work correctly (the inaccuracy increased with the proportion of the burn that was included in the normal component in the original maneuver node). This build fixes that problem.

Jebediah Announces Munar Contest In celebration of almost successfully launching a rocket, Jebediah Kerman has announced a contest to send two lucky kerbals to the Mun. The winners will be launched on top of a Kerbal X for a one-way trip including in-flight snacks. Initial reactions are mixed, as some kerbals are overheard complaining that they "were really hoping it would have been Minmus." Unnamed sources say they are "extremely disappointed" that Jebediah is only using stock parts for the contest rocket: "I've got a really good parts pack, and I'm just not sure why [Jebediah] won't use it." Spirited discussion has also ensued regarding the impact an additional attempted launch will have. One kerbal distressed at the introduction of another launch commented that "if the flight [attempt] numbers get past 5 I'll have to start counting with my other hand, too!" It is unclear how Jebediah plans to proceed if eventual flight numbers exceed the fingers on both hands. Kerbals have only a few weeks to enter the contest, and some confusion has arisen regarding the contest details, but some enterprising individuals have already submitted entries. Allegedly Valentina has submitted a picture of Bob's face for the "comedy" category, which Jebediah has ruled is "not in the spirit of the competition."