swjr-swis

Yeah yeah, it's nice. Now back to that decoupler...

You do realize that what you're suggesting to do ends up being a curve anyway, right? Except now instead of aiming for a known and (relatively) easily pre-calculated target, you're trying to aim for a target that keeps moving at an increasing then decreasing speed, right up to the moment you arrive. Insane, perhaps. Also the only possible way to get even close to an actual straight line trajectory (as straight lines go in a gravity-controlled lightspeed-limited universe).

It's a good idea, but 2 subfolders wouldn't even get me started. No limit, at least not up to whatever the OS imposes.

Start by getting to orbit. As I hear it told, that's already halfway. (Tip: do a search for 'delta v map'. Also: https://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/ ).

My favourite feature of KSP2 is the use of reasonably-sized fonts and the REPURPOSING OF THE CAPSLOCK KEY. ... My TWO favourite features of KSP2 are ...

Hmm... that's no moon...

IPS: *annoys people by burning their eyes and wasting screenspace to cater to all the latest mobile 'responsive design' fads* Also IPS: *includes attention-grabbing features that are physically impossible to use on mobile*

Been seeing this on and off too today. imgur is even worse though. Starting to feel like some massive DDOS attacks going on or something.

I can't clearly see from your screenshots what parts or tech nodes you have available, but with what I think you have, I would do something like this: https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/UmbralRaptor1 This is all tech level 4 or less. Single Juno as engine, two Mk1 pods (mono drained), a single LFO tank (Ox drained), and a service bay containing the science instruments you mention. 22 parts in all. It can cruise at around Mach 0.9 at 8-8.5km. Control surfaces have been tuned down to respond gently. Part count allows to add a parachute in the service bay if you want some safety margin in landings, but it doesn't really need it. I also have a variant with 6 parts more, which uses two extra mk0 nacelles on the wings for a 3x Juno configuration that can cruise at Mach 1.73 and 14.5km and can get anywhere on Kerbin with fuel to spare. 28 parts total. It's basically this same plane with just the two nacelles added in mirror symmetry, vertically centered and horizontally one fine notch behind CoM center.

Quoting this for truth. This is my personal stance on the matter as well. I am entirely self-educated in electronics, just enough to be dangerous I guess. I've taken it upon myself to keep most of my devices running well beyond what was clearly the intended lifetime of them. Often involving disassembling non-user-serviceable parts, soldering irons, inter-continental part orders, and -sometimes physical- firmware replacements. The sole reason I advice more cautiously here is that the description paints a picture of uhm ... sub-optimal voltage/current stability... let's put it that way. If that is a constant for too long it becomes more a question of which internal component will fail first, rather than IF any will. If I had it my way, we'd all be thwarting this imposed consumerism by learning to self-service, maintain, and upgrade our devices into pseudo-eternity. There could be an entire industry around this, if we'd just choose to do so on a fundamental level.

While there's still a thread open on the subject: has anyone else noticed a disproportionate delay in opening the notifications menu (the bell icon top right)? Before the upgrade it was an immediate thing - now I have to wait up to several seconds after the click to see the dropdown appear.

I see the source of confusion now. 'PC' = power connector/cable. And I think you mean soldering instead of welding, which makes a lot more sense. The glue ... well, in this particular context just not a good idea. The mechanical wear and tear on that particular connector require different material. It's not a solution for your current situation, but it's something I recommend everyone thinking of buying a new laptop: (1) get yourself a second power supply/adapter, right from the start. (2) Unrelated but for much the same reason: get yourself a second battery too; and put them both away until the inevitable moment the primary ones of those start failing. If you treat your laptop with any kind of care, those two are the parts that by far and wide will be the first to go bad, and by the time they do, it's generally hard to find replacements anymore because 'obsolete' and 'replaced by next model'. Sadly this usually leaves people with a piece of equipment not being of much use anymore, when it could well have given another few years of service. Lenovo isn't an exception - it's a general problem with the industry that they design/build/stock with a much too limited lifetime in mind. Laptops in particular, being both expensive and inherently un-modular, are a major offender in this. /endgripe The laptop isn't much good if you can't power it anymore, so I understand the tinkering as a workaround, but be mindful of the possibility of damaging your laptop: the discolouring you mention to me sounds like the result of sparking - I've never once seen oxidized power connectors before. Sparking, or even simply an unreliable connection, of the main power supply = bad news for any kind of electronics. As inconvenient as it may be I strongly suggest waiting for the replacement to arrive, rather than risking the laptop itself.

First of all <deep breath>: *which* cable? Also, how would a broken cable need/benefit from "welding" and/or "glue"?? And... what kind of glue (that could have any kind of useful function for a broken electronics cable) ... *melts* when heated??? I... I have questions. o.O Something you might want to try, often being the biggest cause of laptop heating when using KSP: in the graphics settings of KSP, set 'V-Sync' to 'Every Second V-Blank', and lower Frame Limit to 60 FPS (better yet, edit the settings.cfg and change it to 'FRAMERATE_LIMIT = 30'). KSP is not very demanding on the graphics level, but it defaults to no limit on the frames it will crank out, which counter-intuitively results in the graphics chip -even an integrated one- to work at full power (=heat!) the whole time. Limit the frames, and you'll be surprised at how cool your laptop remains when running KSP.

Thank you (and the contributors of the other styles) for this. I need to find some time to re-tinker one of these to fit my particular predilections, but at least I can have the forum open long enough again to actually read a thread or two.

Tip1 : include a Surface Scanning Module in your craft. At the start of your flight, right-click and pin the PAW of that part. For minimal extra weight and cost, you get a live display of the current biome. Bonus: it also shows the exact LAT/LON, updated live as well.

I would really appreciate knowing who exactly thought it was a good idea to make everything on a page blend together to the point of making it near impossible to discern where a field or UI element ends and the next one starts. Basically, the exact same atrocious error made the last couple of updates, but then another degree worse. I'll do the same I did last few times: I'll give it a week or two before I revisit, and hopefully by then someone has come up with a half-decent complete style replacement so it becomes somewhat functional again. Otherwise, I guess I'm done with this forum. You know you're doing a good job reworking your website when the first thing half the visitors do is go look for ways to revert/undo/work around the new appearance. Whoopdee doo.

That kind of noodly flexing would definitely affect performance. I've only seen that kind of thing in 1.3.1 when trying to take high G turns with big non-autostrutted wings. But I did fly Krazy1's original once it was shared, and it showed no such flexing.

Ok clear. That equalizes things a bit more between spaceplanes and rockets, at least for that part. If I remember correctly, the last time this specific objective was called for in a challenge, they added categories for trying to pick up the same payload and bring it back again, also without refueling (as a separate leaderboard). Might be interesting to compare how the game progression influences the results - back then it was done in 1.0.5, with significant differences in aero and engine performance.

No, most definitely not negligible. There is a significantly higher fuel expenditure at low altitude and speed. A good bit of fuel will be expended in an actual effort to fully break and accelerate again and/or to touch down gear safely, which can easily make or break a craft's ability to get back into orbit a second time. My opinion: I think in this type of challenges touch and go shouldn't be allowed - it favors spaceplane entries over rockets, as rockets still need to lose/reverse all their speed while spaceplanes get to keep a good chunk of momentum. If you still want to allow it *and* accept still screenshots as proof, a bit of allowance is inevitable - gears/wheels being in the state they are it's very easy for a craft to bounce before you can hit the screenshot key, whether in horizontal or vertical landing. But to be fair to all, the screenshot should be close enough to show an actual touch down was at least attempted.

A few things I notice now that I've had the opportunity to test this and compare it with my rebuild: You need to balance your plane to get much closer to 0 degree AoA (fuselage, not wings) in cruise. Right now, it is at around 0.8-0.9 degree. This sounds small, but it makes a big difference - Mk3 body drag gets very high very fast when off prograde. For comparison: mine flies at about 0.03-0.04 in cruise. Main thing to change to achieve this: move CoL closer to CoM than it is now. AoA on your wings is more than it needs to be. It does achieve what you have in mind, make it cruise higher, but at the cost of a good bit of speed. You need speed more than altitude though (and towards the end, you really don't want to be flying too high and risk flame outs). They are mostly identical beyond that. I used smaller elevons as canards, but then I used bigger landing gear. I really think the above, and particularly point 1, is what makes the big difference.

If you hover your cursor over the top right corner of the image, you'll see a widget appear, with the option to 'Copy' the image link. To the right of that you'll see a small arrow down. Hover over it to get a small menu, you'll want the option 'get share links'. One of the link types is the BBCode.

It was mod-moved after OP.

I don't see why one should exclude the other. Just add another slider/toggle to the graphics settings page, and everyone can tailor their game experience to the capabilities of their hardware. Doing anything else is simply choosing to limit your customer base. Ultimately it's the devs' prerogative to cater for less customers, but then accept it is your choice - don't go putting the blame on customers for not having your particular choice of equipment.

Well, I had to make up for my previous oversight, and I guess a slight matter of honor was at stake. But no, I did not do this 7 hours straight... I paused the game after every lap to get a break and do other things, including sleep, food, and other trivialities. That session ran for the better part of two days. The roll correction was... highly annoying. It meant I couldn't leave the game window running in the background while doing other things, like I did the previous run. And time warp is not recommendable in this challenge - it affects fuel consumption rate negatively. The previous sounds weren't ideal either, I'll agree. But for some reason these ones just seem to drill into the skull after anything more than 10 minutes. Ugh.

I think clipping in the build of replicas specifically is completely accepted. The limited library of parts we have, and the complete lack of sculpting tools (possibly with the exception of creative uses of fairings) means there's really little other way to closely reproduce the forms and lines of the RL counterparts. And due to the way stock aero and physics works, once you go that route, you're almost forced to also use clipping in other ways to get a reasonable performance out of the replica. Building replicas is a form of art all by itself. Getting the right visual is paramount. Getting it to perform is a second consideration, but a definite bonus. Clipping, in any form, to achieve either is pretty much a tool of the trade.