willitstimothy

Do orbital rendezvous with debris, stranded kerbals, or other ships. You could also take on challenges such as trying to land a kerbal on Mun or Minmus from orbit using only jet packs. You could go look for monoliths/eastereggs. You could go challenge the Kraken to a duel by trying and succeeding to set up a circularized Kerbol orbit (around a star not a planet) at say 100000 km. You could try doing everything you do in the game with mechjeb without it (if you use it at all - which I don't). You could try writing some nice posts in the forums that don't involve unrestrained passion and written shouting. You could also try contributing constructively to the community instead of fueling the flames of anticipation. You could also try being patient, though that might be too much for you at this point. Good luck with the waiting - get used to it since there is a lot of it in alpha development stage. Welcome to the forums as well, and as this post is edging close to mentioning taboo subjects such as "release dates" and such, please remember that topics and posts of that nature aren't appreciated or tolerated - especially if you've been here long enough to know better.

No, that should just mean, if it is true, that it would librate like our moon does (wobble back and forth, exposing a bit more than half of its surface area to the scorching rays of Kerbol).

It's the heat of the chemical reaction that causes the resulting gases to expand - thereby driving the jet engine (or traditional internal combustion or whatever other fuel oxidizer driven powerplant). Nuclear essentially (simply put) does the same thing - except it doesn't require a chemical reaction - using the heat from the nuclear fusion or fission to heat a gas and expel it through an engine - thereby creating thrust. Alternately you can electrostatically accelerate a stream of electrons or ionized particles to significant fractions of the speed of light. The later would be known as an ion engine and is used on some modern day space probes. The former is more theoretical, but holds the potential of being the only source of thrust that would only consume the mass that it turned into energy - making it the most efficient (mass-wise) possible way to provide thrust. Old CRTs use similar streams of electrons to create images - however since they are essentially closed systems (and too low in power) they do not create any thrust at all. By the way you guys, this is actually the fourth "[uNOFFICIAL/FANMADE] 0.17 Discussion Thread." The actual third one began and was shut down in its infancy at the end of August...http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/18928-Unofficial-Fanmade-17-Development-3?highlight=%5BUNOFFICIAL%2FFANMADE%5D+0.17+Discussion+Thread Just saying.

That "snap" is when the game reevaluates the physics of the spacecraft. It's the same jerk that can take place at the time of launch, as well as during the game from time to time (like when you come out of warp, or when you are launching and climbing and the game's physics reevaluates). It shouldn't rip the spacecraft apart at all - it would just tend to be annoying at times.

As I said, I was not really saying anything by it that I would stand by. Apparently I'm wrong though... http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/15667-Entering-ship-from-Tracking-Station-reverses-non-RCS-controls?p=252454#post252454 Hogdriver's only post in the entire forum. Talk about quiet.

I am not really saying anything by this, but in my mind the name "H0gdr1v3r" sounds similar to "Harvester" in more than one way. There is certainly a lot of evidence to suggest that this mod is fully legitimate and is not a dev creation of mass distraction, but still I find the similarities in both pronunciation and meaning between the two names rather interesting. Just something to think about.

What you're describing sounds like your ship is top heavy (the Cm is too far forward) and does not have enough stabilizers in the form of RCS. Try adding a bunch of RCS thrusters to the top and bottom of your rockets and you might be able to coax them into orbit. Better still would be to redesign your rockets so that the Cm is further back. If it is too far back then your rocket will be super sensitive to inputs (it would be difficult to fly even with SAS), too far forward and it will be unstable and difficult to control in a bad way.

You could find the other video where he accelerates and post the link.

http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/8915-Orbital-Rendezvous-Made-Easy?highlight=orbital+rendezvous+made+easy Yeah he did. Towards the end of the video he accelerates to 50x for a bit. No problems at all. [EDIT] He didn't here, but he does in another video on youtube.

I see giants with little children standing behind them trying to emulate their every move. It seems pretty silly. @Omega500: You're on the right track, with respect to the topics you appear to be fighting against, but insulting other members of the forum - especially new ones - with partially censored profanity is not a good way to get a good reputation around here. @ All Newcomers: You all should really go look at the .15 discussion threads (http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/9094-KSP-0-15-Update) and look at all the junk and sorrow that was posted back then (look at the later pages). The mods didn't have the rules they have now, and the endless waves of junk posts from whining and complaining forum members was sickening. They posted phase completion date estimates back then, now they don't - and believe me the bellyaching now is nowhere near what it was that time around. Hey at least Nova talks to us and shows us tidbits of the game. If someone doesn't release a balloon mod, I think I'm gonna have to start making mods myself so I can make such a mod. It seems to me that balloons would solve many of the problems with launching from the surface of atmospheric planets - as well as exploring gas planets.

Tidally locked means that the body being referred to orbits with one side always facing the parent celestial body, like Earth's moon for instance. I've known that for a number of years. @COBALT: Do you know what libration is without looking it up? I'll give you a hint: it is related to both tidal locking and Earth's Moon. I will say, though, that what I said earlier could be misconstrued to imply that I thought that Moho is not tidally locked, however that which I was actually referring to was Serratus' assumption that Moho's dark side is cool, which realistically it would be unless it had a dense atmosphere (which it doesn't, though it does have a thin atmosphere). According to Nova, the atmospheric temperatures in the game are uniform and noticeable everywhere on the atmospheric planets, and only varying with altitude...which is kind of worrisome to me since that implies that even if I slow down to a zero horizontal velocity and descend with power I'll still encounter entry heat when entering the atmosphere of any atmospheric planet. Oh my... The ISS is always aerobraking to a small extent, which is why it has to be boosted every now and then. Additionally the Magellan spacecraft, Mars Odyssey, and MRO have all used aerobraking to circularize their orbits around Venus and Mars.

Thrusting towards anything in space is one of the surest ways of never getting there. Reason: Your rocket engines(s) are no where near being the only things pushing (or pulling) on your rocket. Fortunately for you, in KSP, there really isn't much other than one thing actually influencing your rocket, but there is one thing for certain and that is the celestial body you happen to be in the SOI of. (Yeah, I know, I ended a sentence with a preposition...) However, that celestial body that is pulling on you is making it so that you cannot easily go anywhere else by simply pointing and shooting. If you want to have a good experience with this game you will need to understand and use orbital mechanics (at least the essential basics). With your orbiting, basically, you need to: Climb high enough - 35-40km is minimum, but I usually aim for an apoapsis of about 70-100km (use the map view and mouse over the Ap marker that shows after you have started climbing) Achieve a proper velocity - A velocity is both a speed and a direction, hence you will want to determine the angle of your orbital plane relative to the equatorial plane (though technically your attitude indicator is relative to an ascending polar orbit), and then burn horizontally (parallel to the surface, or roughly thereabout) until you have attained a horizontal velocity component of about 2200-2400 m/s, or until you have a visible periapsis in the map view and you have moved it above the atmosphere of Kerbin. This simple component-wise procedure should reliably get your working rocket into orbit on every attempt. Beyond this, you will almost always use burns that are in directions that are horizontal to the surface of the celestial body that you are orbiting. In other words: If you want to raise or lower your periapsis or your apoapsis, you will perform burns at the opposite apsis (for periapsis burn at apoapsis and vice versa) that are in the direction of motion (the heading bug, or icon, with the circle and lines on the outside of the circle) or in the opposite direction to your rocket's motion (the bug that has an x on the inside). This is, basically, how you get to places such as Mun, Minmus, or Kerbol. If you want to change your orbital plane, as Minmus requires you to do, then you will perform burns at the nodes of your orbit and the orbital plane into which you are transitioning (currently you have to eyeball this stuff with the map view). To do this, once you have determined where the next node is located you must wait (and hopefully recheck the location of the node) until you are nearing the node. Before you reach the node (well before) you must orient your spacecraft perpendicularly up or down with relation to the orbital plane that you are in (if you are in the equatorial plane, all you have to do is point your rocket North for up or South for down), depending on whether the orbital plane that you are going to transition into will be above the plane you are currently in or below it. If it is going to be above then you need to burn up (North, if you are in an equatorial orbit) and if it will be going below then you need to burn down. When you burn, which you should do at or shortly before the node, you should do so carefully so as to not overdo the changes. If you over, or under, burn then you will need to fix that at the next node (on the other side of your orbit). Do remember that the directions in the above description are with respect to the orbital plane and not the surface of the celestial body. The only time that you should be burning toward an object is if it is a few kilometers away or less (for orbital rendezvous or similar). In such situations you should only use your rcs, and you must be careful to not use too much as doing so may cause you to go speeding by your destination, and thereby wasting lots of fuel and maybe even wrecking your rendezvous altogether.

I don't use it. No it [EDIT: it refers to the unspoken, but alluded to, dark side that is always cool per Serratus's statement] isn't... And such is not even that far from being realistic, given that atmospheric planets with long sidereal periods and high temperatures can have nearly uniform global temperatures. Venus is a prime example of such.

Tanks of liquid Nitrogen or Helium would work just fine for maintaining low enough temperatures for at least a while. All I'm really talking about is the need to cool the ship for attempted landings on Moho.

Sure, solid, high density, solid state, and fully impervious to crushing pressure pods that can be dropped through the atmosphere to the liquid "surface," i.e. something not at all far from resembling a large bowling ball. It really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to make unexplorable worlds for a game, unless there is a way to at least partially explore them, and to make a gas giant impossible to explore is one thing, but to make a solid rocky planet unexplorable is quite another thing entirely. Besides, a cooling part is not at all unreasonable. It would simply be another consumable such as fuel or future life support systems that would be rather easy to implement. It's just a matter of smoke and lights really, to paraphrase c7.

I don't know. I think landing on Mun and Minmus (at separate times) during EVA using only thrust packs was pretty cool. Just so you know, for Mun I had to set up a circularized orbit below 10k, then slow down with the rocket to roughly zero horizontal velocity, dump out my frightened kerbal, speed up to orbital velocity with my rocket, and then switch back to my kerbal for his landing. Minmus was easy to land on in Eva from an orbit though.

Alright so, I see that it is said (somewhere) that the thin atmosphere of Moho (I liked Charr better too) will burn us up if we enter and stay in it. Thus, I would have to assume then that, unless Squad is throwing an insurmountable challenge at stock users, we may be getting some sort of cooling parts (parts that contain supplies of refrigerants or cryogenic liquids such as liquid nitrogen or helium) for maintaining workable temperatures in our spacecraft while in high heat environments? I am also kind of wondering whether Charr...I mean Moho, will have permanently shaded polar craters or not? How are we going to land and EVA and build bases on it otherwise? Please do tell me if I have committed unforgivable sins by posting such things.

Only Titan and Triton have "significant" atmospheres. The rest of the moons that have atmospheres, have atmospheres that are so trace (thin), that it may as well be a vacuum (Triton is not far from this). Those atmospheres have masses that are roughly equivalent (our moon's for instance) to the same mass (+/-) as a semi truck - spread out over the entire planet. They would be of no use for aerobraking maneuvers for landing or other purposes.

If they can - they must, for this news is to dreamlike to pass by.

If they can make Mun arches, I don't see why they can't make caves.

I was visiting an aircraft carrier recently, and I saw this written on a plaque on a wall in the ship. "A Chief is always right. He may be misinformed, inexact, bullheaded, fickle, ignorant, even abnormally stupid but never wrong." I thought it rather relevant to how a few of us seem to be perceiving the mods/admins lately (I don't). The fact of the matter is that the forms are owned and run by Squad and the mods, not us, and they have every right to rule their own towns and homes. Some of us may see that which is going on as unjust or whatever other negative adjective we can imagine, but we have to keep that to ourselves since the forum isn't a democracy in which we are allowed have a say in what laws are good or bad, just or unjust, worthwhile or silly. If you want to say stuff or do stuff your own way, you have to get out from under Squad's roof (posting in forums) and stop driving on Squad's streets (forums) and go elsewhere. I don't really want any community members to respond to this unless they feel that they have to. I just want you all to get a better perspective concerning what you may be thinking or even saying.

No, what it would do is make it so that with enough nosecone parts one could make a ship "fly" indefinitely without any engines in an atmosphere. However, in terms of the effect that a real nose cone would have, the effect of using a negative drag coefficient would be to reduce the drag of the ship as a whole, thereby creating the intended effect without having to rely on the complexities of actually simulating all the possible drag models of every part.

...Just assign them (allow them to be assigned) negative drag coefficients and it will work just fine. It will give you a similar result with less complexity.

So, wait, did .15.x slow down for you, or was it fine performance wise? The reason I ask is that .15.x was nearly unplayable on my semi-gaming computer, and .16 is smooth as silk. What kind of laptop do you use? @Tigga I believe air intakes add airflow for atmospheric engines, so they aren't really useless. They really should make the nose-cones have negative drag or something though to make them semi simulate their natural purpose.

You know, I kind of wonder if maybe Nova has been playing with the colors in the images he releases to fool us into thinking this very thing. He is the great distractor this time around after all. He has posted pictures, and even managed to keep the discussion thread away from taboo topics, like well THAT combination of words that drives the mods (and devs) to a dangerously near ballistic state, by using suspense and sneak peaks and very grainy images to keep us all guessing and distracted. I've gotta hand it to you Nova. You're the best thing since not posting ******* ****s.