EpicSpaceTroll139

Ok I gave up on figuring out the thrust and using that to calculate dV. Maybe I could get a mod to measure my acceleration or something, but I'm too lazy to get that. I performed a similar experiment to @Sharpy's EVA experiment, except I put myself at 1000000000000000000000000m = 1000000 Exameters (displayed as 999999E for whatever weird game reason). Out here the sun's gravity is negligible. I'm not sure of the exact value but the gui said "Gav Force (weight): 0.000kN and my orbital velocity read 0.0 at the start. Anyways, I ended up reaching 639.6m/s. Given that the grav force measurement is 0.000kN, this means that I could have had +- (discard the -) 0.0005kN of gravity (most likely less, it might have zeroed out at a lower altitude). Napkin math means this gives me an error margin of 1.067m/s 1.1m/s

I just looked at the kerbalEVA.cfg and the kerbalEVAfemale.cfg in my game (version 1.2). Both say this: "initialMass = 3.125 massMultiplier = 0.03" So if I understand things correctly that gives a mass of 0.09375t = 93.75kg. That's a pretty accurate scale @Sharpy! As far as I can tell the "initial" doesn't mean anything because the Kerbal's mass doesn't change while it's on EVA. They have 5 units of propellant and their "PropellantConsumption = 0.025" which is supported by the in-game resources view. This gives 200 seconds of thrust. (Also supported by in-game view/experience). Their thrust in a single direction seems to be somehow defined by this line "linPower = 10" There doesn't seem to be any kind of obvious multiplier that applies to it, and it's definitely not in N or KN. If we can figure out what exactly the thrust is, we can use F=ma --> a = F/m to find the acceleration, and then just multiply that by 200 seconds to get the exact dV capability. On a side note I also found a rather amusing line: splatThreshold = 150 But they don't go splat! They go poof!

I've been continuing work on my B-52. I'm hoping that that this will be able to keep my mind off the crazy election...

Could there by any chance be something inbetween normal mode and hard mode? Like do it wherever on Kerbin? Limiting rocket cars on Kerbin to the runway makes them impossible to compare to those on other planets, as the runway cuts the run at a fixed length.

I've finally gotten back to work on my B-52. I forget whether I posted my original fuselage here or in the What did you do today in KSP? thread, but I had to remake it, because I had managed to overstress the Fat in BUFF (Big Ugly Fat [not "Fella"]). This is my progress:

turboshaft (tûrˈbō-shăftˌ) n. A gas turbine engine that powers a rotating cylindrical shaft Looks like it fits the definition.

Stock turboshaft? Practical? Maybe for short range, heavylift skycrane purposes, but that's a pretty niche use. Perhaps a more appropriate way to say it is "more impractical than others"

Nice work! Always glad to see a turbohead in training! You might want to try using a wheeled bearing for lower friction. Or even maybe some kind of antenna bearing. @Majorjim! shows how to create thermometer-antenna bearings in this thread. A stronger variant can be created by replacing the thermometers with solar panels (placed on edge, so they form a disk of sorts). You will need at least two of them in line to keep the axle from wobbling though.

I'm all for this. I do rockets as well as and I think most of them are quite reasonable with the exception of the fuel tanks. Why do all the fuel tanks have barrel rims? Heck the medium rockomax tanks look like with a whole bunch of rivets added. Doesn't seem very sleek and aerodynamic. Putting the fuel tanks aside, I don't see what the fuss is. Maybe some more plasma engines would be nice I guess. Eh. Anyways, back on topic. I'm all for these parts, but I feel like what's more needed than new engines is just a general rework of the engine-intake system. Currently I can put intakes on my nose and power engines on my wingtips. This is almost more ridiculous than the old stock aerodynamics.

I was actually thinking of something similar, on the lines of having some option to put a tag on a satellite that says "I do not want this moved." But @5thHorseman is right, this would just be a minor convenience thing. You aren't being forced to accept the contract.

It's definitely a bug. Sometimes I can even trigger it at low speed, bring the car to a complete stop, and it will still proceed to jitter until it either breaks or flips upside-down. I'm currently experimenting with suspension set to zero, and that seems to have gotten rid reduced the destructiveness of the spazzing, but I'm guessing the lack of cushioning will mess me up if I hit a bump at speed. BTW, how's 20G for handling? Edit: Yep! Zero suspension is horrible for those ramps

Yep, I definitely find space stations useful. I use them as fuel depots for reusable landers, temporary crew drop-offs, and for labs, on the occasions that I use them. Which I usually don't do (at least inside the Kerbin system), because by the time a lab has processed what I put in it, that Duna/Eve/whatever launch window I wanted the newly researchable parts for has passed. Meanwhile I could have gotten it back much quicker by sending a science container back home. Of course I'll probably use it when I go to other planets this time around.

I've been working on a lightweight car for this challenge, but I've been running into a bug in which the suspension on my wheels spazzes out after a hard turn, eventually flipping my car.

I forgot to mention I sometimes attach auxiliary fuel tanks inside the cargo bay of some of my planes when I want them to go farther. Since these usually need to be near the COM and I don't want to block rovers from driving out, these usually end up attached to the sides near the ceiling. You are right though, stuff usually gets attached at the ends.

But what's the bug? I haven't noticed anything remotely buggy since they fixed its planet-destroying tendencies. On topic: I often attach antennas, batteries, and other doodads to the inside of cargo bays. I've also seen people attach mining equipment so the doors open on the bottom and the drill down into the ground. But I never use angle snap for these purposes, and see no reason to, so it works fine.

Except that doesn't make sense because the shuttle used the hypergolic propellants MMH and N2O4, not a monopropellant.

I was bored one day so I looked up "rocket game" in search of some arcade game or the like. I found something much better and have been playing since .14.

The regular thermometer has colliders. Why wouldn't the smaller version?

What's going wrong with the resource flow of the claw? Is it that it exists? If so I think that's not so much a bug as a very unrealistic feature. I must admit I still use it though. Edit: @Azimech check your pm

Wait...what? Could you elaborate? If you're talking about rotating your ship, your can just click on the root part and rotate the whole ship by rotating it.

Not that I'm against this, but is it that hard to remember to turn your lights off when closing your gear? Seems kind of like remembering to turn the headlights off on my car when I park it. It is weird that they shine through the casing though.

Lots of words do things like that if you put them into another language. For example "gift" means poison or toxic in German. If a German guy heard that people in some other country "gave gifts to each other on x holiday," would he think "Oh no! They have a holiday on which they commit mass murder/suicide?!"? No, more likely (at least if he's a reasonable person) he'd understand that it was written by people who didn't speak German, and he might take a brief look at google translate and find out that gift in that other country does not mean poison, but rather what in German is "geschenk." I second @ninebands on this. Things should be considered for the language they were written in. Edit: Though considering how many people in this world aren't reasonable, I guess it makes sense... kind of.

*I am Nomad! I am Nomad! Your part is faulty! I am perfect! Sterilize! Sterilize! Sterilize!* In all seriousness though, why? I mean, I didn't see anybody complaining about it. It's just a bit of humor.

Yes! Now I have a financial excuse to perform the submarine visit I wanted to take to some debris that is lying on the sea floor west of the KSC continent. (The debris is the result of a spaceplane mishap caused by me not pausing the game while watching youtube. I posted about it a while back. The kerbals survived). Anyways, I've mostly finished my North American X-15 replica, so now I need to get back to work on that B-52. I'm too lazy to get a better picture right now

I love legos and I wish I could find the KerbalX set, or at least the instructions for it. I've got hoards of legos sitting around in my basement... Unfortunately KSP addiction means I don't have time to make cool stuff with them like I used to.