Randox

Don't think he was with squad yet when he posted that, but he seems to be the one making the planets, so it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume we might get something like that.

You could certainly beam a planet into that orbit, and a planet would have sufficient mass to maintain a circular orbit off centre for at least a little while (and by a little while I mean maybe an 8th of one orbit, if it's really really big), but it would pretty quickly degrade into a brand new eliptical orbit which would then probably take a few million years to stabilize. If it was placed poorly to begin with, it would actually turn into a parabolic or hyperbolic orbit before it completes one revolution, and just leave the system entirely. By definition, a circular orbit can only exist if all points of the orbit are equidistant from the center of the sum off all gravitational bodies exerting influence on it, which is roughly the center of the star, or the center of gravity of all the stars in binary and trinary systems. A circular orbit can be maintained on a trajectory where the center of rotation is not also the center of gravity, because gravity will always work to move the center of rotation to it's own center. The only way around this I can think of would be a biunary system with both a magnetar and normal neutron star, and you have a planet made out of a ferromagnetic material (iron being the obvious one). While gravity would be between the two stars, the magnetic interaction between the magnetar and iron planet would easily trump the extreme gravitational forces, and the planet would be able to center on the magnetic force instead of the gravitational force. Of course, in such a system the planet would be torn apart instantly from magnetic and gravitational sheering, right before the neutron stars consumed each other/tore each other to pieces and reformed as a singularity (black hole). And if somehow the system didn't tear itself to pieces, the magnetar and neutron stars would actually rotate around each other, causing the center of magnetic influence to move. This would probably give the iron planet an orbit looking more like it came out of a spirograph. EDIT: Tought about this a bit more, and it probably wont work. Even with all the magnetic force that a magnatar has, I'm not sure it would be able to trump it's own immense gravitational force, seeing as neutron stars and their variants (magnetars and pulsars) are secong only to gravitational singularities. On the topic of .17, I quite like the idea of planet cool aid, though I might have gone for lime green instead of neon red. Minimus and the Mun are already quite dull, so I think it's time to change it up and give us a neon planet. When all is said and done and we have our 8 planets (I think that's their plan), I would like to have 2 or 3 neon planets with neon moons, because we can. The other 5 or 6 can be all washed out, though I hope we get a washed out green planet as well (planet Matrix!).

The lateral forces do seem to be significant. I know my rocket looks like its shaking pretty bad by the time it fails, if I don't scale back the thrust. Also important is that it causes at least my rocket to jump. The g force meter will just bounce between say 1.5 and 2.25 more than once per second, which means very very high jerk values (m/s^3). I feel like it might also be these high jerk values that cause the part to become crushed, and it could probably handle higher g loads if teh rocket was flying smoothly. And struts aren't always the answer. I rebuilt my large rocket to clean up the struts, making an identical ship but with honestly better strut placement, and it could never make it into orbit. Even using more struts, it could never make it, which means I am stuck making modifications to my first version because by some fluke it can actually get into space. I also get sessions where it just keeps exploding, mush sooner than it should, for no reason. When I tried to take a video of it so I could watch a particular failure (one of my fuel tanks always seems to fail before the separation ring, and I want to know which one it is), the rocket flew right up into space at full throttle, taking abuse that should have blown it to pieces. What I want to do is scale up the strength of the ring a bit, but I can't even find that part in the directory >.>

Two real problems. Total delta v is a big one. There is a practical limit to what we can get into orbit, so flying skill to make the most use of your fuel will be important. Might need to do some math while building the ship too (at least for me) to try and totally optimize it). The other challenge would be actually hitting the planet. I am anticipating something like .5 g's at the surface (or less), which will present a very small target that will not be incredibly helpful for slowing down/drawing you in.

I'm assuming that ramming your ship with a kerbal on EVA will impart force, no matter how insignificant. If your just a command pod and chute left (and use your separation from everything else to get you started), a series of EVA's should get you going where you need to go. Another series of EVA's will drop your speed (assuming your going to get picked up) so that you hvae a shot of hitting kerbin. Would take a while, but still probably faster than sending out another ship into solar orbit, especially since your not perfectly circular right now which only complicates things.

not sure which red it is, so I\'ll just post the picture. I like this red: [hide][/hide] Looking forward to something else to land on. Opens up the door to a real planet crawl too where we have to land on everything, then return home. Depending on how much gravity this has, this could add some real challenge.

So I built this ship as a prototype for launcing the larger command pod, and when I try to fly it, it does nothing. The tordial engines, and the bottom engine don\'t turn on. After it drops it\'s side tanks, the top two engines work just fine, it\'s just that I\'m not going to get very far with 90% of my rocket sitting on the launch pad taunting me. I am hoping that someone can load it up and either it works just fine, in which case I will assume my client is bugged and reinstall the game, with a very minimal selection of modded parts, or perhaps someone can tell me why the rocket is mostly a large pile of bricks, and I can fix it. Also, yeah, the rocket has no stability control system. Seemed easier to remove it than it is to upload the part I was using. Already ruled it out as the source of my trouble.

Can\'t say I really miss it. I never flew with it on because it was super buggy, and it was way too slow for coasting. Not sure why people would descend from 70km without warping a few times, unless that\'s part of the high precision aiming process. I normally go in and out of x10 warp or higher to keep my speed and orientation under control as needed. I only do maybe the last 30km fully powered, and that\'s more than long enough for me.

Ah, thanks. That should help.

So I tired an orbital EVA, but I only have 2 dimensions to work in for some reason. WASD only gives me lateral movement (no up and down), and if I rotate the camera the kerbal only rotates on this 2 dimensional plane. I can left click and drag to get him to say look down, but as soon as I touch a movement key he reorients back to his flat plane of movement. While I can get a bit of up and down out of this, its pretty hard to control, and almost impossible to stop. The result is that if I drift away from my vessel for more than a couple seconds, it leaves my two dimensional plane and its pretty much impossible to get back to it. I feel like there are controls I am missing, or is this actually how its supposed to work?

I have like 20 screenshots total. And normally I have to launch specific missions to get them, because my natural state of being is ignorance that screenshots are even a thing.

I like to put radial fuel tanks on my second main stage to reduce the height of one of my rockets, and on one of my earlier versions I seriously messed up the staging sequence. I guess I noticed something was wrong right before the radial liquid fuel boosters mounted lower down ran out of fuel (there were 4 decouplers instead of two pairs of 3 like the last one), and I panicked and advanced the stage. Rather than releasing the boosters which would have been bad enough (I have done this a few times, and sometimes they will hit the rocket, other times they bounce and cause it to break up, which is survivable), I released 4 radial fuel tanks positioned above 3 pairs of boosters fastened to 3 center engines. Between the explosions from impact, and the explosions caused as the remaining boosters disconected and aimed their exhaust right into the center stack, the rocket only managed to live for a few seconds after that even as I frantically started trying to advance stages in the hopes of getting an engine running before it failed. I also had a great one with my camera truck, where I stuck the camera out to one side and then accidently drove into my rocket. The truck took out too liquid booster stacks, and the arm impacted through two more and into the center stack (almost identical rocket to the one above). The truck exploded, alone with much of the camera boom. The rocket itself took about 5 seconds to die since the explosions weren\'t enough to take it out. Instead, the top section (everything above the first ascent stage) started leaning, and the ejector broke causing the top of the rocket to fall over on its side, where it exploded on impact with the ground. That explosion took out the rest of the main ascent stage. There was that 1 second \'uh oh\' moment right before I drove into it where I realized I was going too fast and the rocket was right there. I don\'t think even the handbrake would have helped (that probably would have flipped the truck and caused an even bigger, but less comical explosion. I spent several minutes going over the event log after that trying to piece together what exactly happened. I had thought the truck missed, and only the arm had collided, but I guess not.

I have hyper cam 3 (portable). Had to play around with it to get a recording mode that didn\'t turn my quality to garbage while generating enourmous files, but I finally settled on WMVideo9 Encoder DMO outputting to WMV at 15 frames per second with a keyframe every 5. It\'s free, but it will put a little banner in the top left corner that just says unregistered hypercam 3.

I have a row boat, but its not a racer by any means. It\'s still good for bombing around the cove in, normally with a friend or taking the dogs out. Pity you can\'t get a movable seat in a pleasure rowboat though, since that would make the rowing go a bit easier.

This is what I would do. Less math, more edge of your seat panic maneouvers. Ideally, you would actually stop moving around Kerbol shortly before Kerbin arrives, and just hold your orbit using your engine, assuming it has enough thrust and can recycle its fuel fast enough to make this viable (and maybe start running away from the planet to give yourself some extra time for course corrections). If not, your going to be coming in super fast, and your engine might not have enough thrust to make the needed corrections. If you have a small engine attached to your command pod, that might come in handy (more thrust? and less mass). You don\'t need to hit Kerbin directly, but your going to have to be very close or you\'ll fly right by and get tossed into a different orbit and orbital plane, and that wouldn\'t be good. All things considered, your target circle would be about maybe 670-680km in diameter. Any more than 35-40kmkm from the surface at your nearest point, and friction plus your engine aren\'t going to have enough power to prevent a flyby. Or you could take a sane and reasonable approach, and plot an intercept course.

Am I the only one envisioning special components that will be able to handle the substantial pressure and other conditions of a gas giant planet? Perhaps one day, a long way in the future, it will be possible to sent a mission to a gas giant to collect samples, or perhaps to use as fuel for some sort of engine that can be used on super long trips.

I thought we hadn\'t yet figured out how to create a self sutaining fusion reaction yet. So either they think they can solve that, or they are neglecting to mention the power source needed to keep the engine running (also, a self sustaining fusion reaction attached to your rocket sounds like a very bad idea anyway). I mean, its very cool, but I can\'t see it actually working any time soon.

Chest protector is an interesting idea, though I normally operate with natural cover (I generally cover people. I\'m at my prime about 100ft out, so I do a lot of cover fire for the up close people, and defensive fire trying to keep people form advancing on a position), and consequently almost all my shots are to my gun, face/head, hands, and arms. I\'ve also taken a few to the legs. Never been shot in the back though. Around here, there is an epic course that is a \'village\' at the bottom of a hill, consisting of short walls, and a couplemore enclosed rooms, and one tower. The hill is barren until halfway up where there is a \'small\' trench (small here meaning a ditch that is about 4-5ft deep, and a couple wide). Two thirds of the way up is a much larger trench that is more like 6 ft deep, with a ledge on the low side to stand on for shooting. ITs about 4ft wide, and the center has like a net roof with a nice 1 ft slit for shooting through. This trench is backed on one side by a command post of sorts which is a tiny 1 floor shack with windows for shooting out of. Both sides are flanked by heavy woods on the outside, and a bunch of U shaped walls made of branches that are dug out on the back side to provide excellent cover as long as no one gets behind you. Once your at the top of the hill it goes to strait walls with no digging, all the way across and angled towards the 2 story castle that gets used when you have 40+ people on the field. Standard play is that every couple hours the teams rotate so that no one gets stuck with the highground advantage all day, and at the end, they normally have a round in the village alone for anyone who isn\'t exhausted. Wondering how long you played, since in the great scheme of things that isn\'t a lot of ammo. I think during my normal 6 hour day, I always use at least 500, and often closer to like 700 or more. And that\'s semi automatic. If I stay alive for a long time, I can easily blow through 200 balls in an hour though if the other team is making a big push. I always carry a couple canisters with extra ammo to provide reloads for those really good stretches.

Doesn\'t this also hinge on subspace being a thing? The entire principle behind star treks warp drive, aside from the bending of space, is the subspace bubble to get your ship into what is essentially another dimension with different laws of physics. Most FTL drives utilize some other dimension because the assumption is that the universe will not let you exceed the speed of light in real space. And as a side note, the most interesting FTL I have ever seen (because its so different) is Babylon 5\'s, which is just subspace with no warp/hyper/slipstream drive. It\'s like the nether in minecraft. Ships transition to hyper space (might be remembering the name wrong), and continue using their sublight engines. The space itself extremely warped relative to realspace, providing a huge shortcut, but you need navigation beacons transmitting from real space to navigate hyper space.

I don\'t normally get so much as cravings, as the exact opposite (aversions), but I think its working the same way. Mostly I notice it between meat and vegetables. There are days where all I want is a huge salad, and other days where I have less than no desire to eat anything meat (and cheese, I always like cheese). Once you discount foods that contain addictive substances, and foods containing components that would naturally be quite rare in the wild (resulting in us being programmed to get as much of these things as possible regardless of how available they have become, which is a problem with certain fats), your taste and desire for foods should be changing based on what your body needs at any given time. If you start to run low on something, you should develop some sort of desire for foods that contain that substance and/or an aversion to foods that don\'t. Your taste perception also changes. The easiest way to experience this is with sodium levels (electrolytes). For the very brave, salt water (not very much salt, just a tad), and for everyone else Gatorade will do, should taste pretty bad if you\'ve been lounging around all day. If you go out and run a couple km, it will probably start tasting pretty good by the time your done, because now your body needs some salt. So it just retools your perception of taste to make whatever you need more appealing.

I started off with Magic Carpet Ride - Steppenwolf (from star trek first contact of course). Normally though, I just play my favourite list on Youtube, or I listen to hybrid (I choose noise album). Off my favorite list, I\'d pick these as my top 4 launch songs right now, in no particular order. And an honorable mention to Bumpy Ride by Mohombi, which would be number 5, but my post is big enough. I should make a launch playlist. Might pick some different songs.

So the first thing I did was build myself a camera car. Eventually, they can be used to watch launches, but I thought I might do a close up inspection of my Mun rocket, so I drove off the launch pad, got my rocket out, and swapped back to the car. I moved my (fairly large) arm out to one side, to reduce the chance of doing a wheelie/stoppie, and I\'m driving up to the launch pad, and all of the sudden, there is the rocket, and I realize I can\'t stop fast enough. So I try to go around it, but after looking through the failure logs, it would appear the cart drove right through two of my LFE boosters, and was shortly incinerated by the heat. Meanwhile, the arm was sticking out the rocket side, so that collided with two more boosters, taking out several fuel tanks as well, and possibly damaging the main stack. The impact to the main stage was enough to wobble the rest of the rocket far enough that it snapped above its tricoupler, and toppled over as well. All in all, it took only about 5 seconds for everything to blow up, but it looked very cool. Then there was the 15 seconds of my sitting there wondering if this was a thing I really did (I also killed 6 kerbals ) Not my best moment, but again, it looked really awesome 8)

My rockets normally carry an RCS tank and 4 or 6 thrusters bellow their lander, but its really just for emergencies, and a habbit from some of the previous designs that didn\'t handle so well, and needed RCS during takeoff to help them fly strait. I still feel better having it though, so I normally keep a tank around, even though on most missions the thrusters never get used. My landers never carry them though, although I do like the idea of using them to help keep lateral velocity in check. Might be a bit easier to manage than tilting. My rockets can turn just fine though using their SAS modules, which are capable of providing easily enough torque. Now, depending on the mass of your ship, and where the unit(s) are, its not going to be super fast, but its normally enough. My only vessel that uses considerable RCS is my orbital interceptor pod, which is essentially a flying RCS system. It has a real engine to handle orbit changes, but for the actual interception, I need the full 6 degrees of freedom and the fine control of an RCS system.

Just gave this a spin. Aside from the awesome visuals and potential awesome picture taking, this is also a really neat way to examine the structure of vehicles under load. I knew my main rocket had a wobble, but its something else to have a few cameras up close, fixed to some of these parts, looking at your entire rocket sway and shake. It would be very neat though if there was some ability to swivel the cameras, to get some better angles. I think I might go get myself some robotic arms, so that my rocket can do a sort of safety inspection. Oh, and a cool thing I am enjoying is having cameras on lower stages, so that you can get a totally new vantage point not just watching your pieces fall off, but watching your rocket fly away. I also managed a particularly spectacular one where I let my boosters ram my rocket at low speed, and ended up with 5 cameras on 4 different pieces/groups of debris.

So many broken machines ???