ezaroo

As far as I’m aware, Apollo used the Apollo guidance computer (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer) for essentially everything all of the piloting apart from final landing and docking which were done manually. But flying from the CM to the lunar surface and from the surface to the CM was largely automated.

I think the person is getting confused between the console version (update today, dec 5) and the pc version.

Scan it with the robotic science arms from breaking ground to get science points! It’s one of the surface features from BG.

Yep, you just have a lot to learn on orbitals mechanics don’t worry everyone starts the same! It’s not entirely intuitive, go watch some videos by KSP youtubers, Scott Manley has good videos explaining things, they are a bit old now but still totally valid the UI will just look a bjt different. But the short reason is outside of some very specific situations accelerating directly at something is the least efficient way to get to it in space (because you’re travelling in a circular path). To get back from to Kerbin from the Mun you do not want to point at Kerbin from the mun - that will as you noticed leave you lower than the Mun on one side and higher on the other - you want to point the opposite direction to your motion around Kerbin awhile accelerating - this means if you’re orbiting with the muns rotation you want to accelerate prograde on the Kerbin facing side of the mun or if you’re orbiting against the muns rotation you want to accelerate prograde on the side facing away from Kerbin. In both cases you are accelerating 90 degrees away from where Kerbin is. You’ll get the hang of it! And yes changing reference frames can make things like weird but you have continued on the exact same path.

The landing gear is auto strutted for heaviest part and that’s why it won’t move your front landing gear can’t be ahead of the hinge if you want that to be reliable.

Nope! It still saves the status of the helmets when exiting a pressurised pod - I forgot to fix my crew before launching a station module yesterday and when I put Val on EVA To recover her, she wasn’t wearing her helmet... I don’t know if it would auto put them on if she hadn’t been in atmosphere, I’ll test later.

Yep that is the one! I should have done that myself... Thank you for helping to fuel my laziness!

There is actually a video out in the wild (YouTube) of some crazy french chemists from back in the day dumping ClF3 into stuff for fun. Plexiglass explodes... No one is ever going to use ClF3 as a rocket oxidiser any accident you have - even a tiny leak goes from being an inconvenience with a normal oxidiser to being a catastrophic inferno which you can’t extinguish with ClF3. Also it can’t really be “safely” stored yes copper or steel containers which have been pretreated can contain it “safely” - but if the protective metal fluoride layer ever gets damaged (a small bump might do) you suddenly have an uncontrollable fire. Basically it always turns into an uncontrollable fire, it’s just a question of how long it takes. It is fantastically entertaining as a chemical but absolutely useless - though not quite a useless as the fantastically named FOOF (the sound it makes in contact with everything) - dioxygen difluoride. Source: have phd in chemistry and unhealthy interest in things normal chemists don’t want to work with.

Yeah graphics today is about design choice - they can choose photorealism or a stylised approach and both are valid. Would a photorealistic world look good with Karbals? Probably not, you probably have to stylise a bit. Games that choose to go down the more cartoon route often do it for their own reasons rather than because they have to. I imagine KSP2 will be in between, more real looking than what we have currently but you aren’t going to think you’re looking at a real planet. Which is largely what we saw with the cinematic trailer, sharper and more real than KSP1, not quite what other games can produce. But it’s a design choice rather than a limitation.

Be fair, it’s the art book that you can get with the game... But yeah the statement that a space elevator is near future tech is not right, we’re talking easily over a hundred years and I wouldn’t blink if you said 300 for that. It’s scifi tech. There is also no gameplay point to it! You will be able to construct stuff off kerbin including from space colonies, which means there is no practical reason for it.

I had the same idea today! I managed to make a single piston engine with crankshaft to drive a small mass - using servos as clutches and bearings and a hinge as a pivot. The trick to making it somewhat stable with decoupling a support for the drive shaft, without that support it wobbles all over the place and that completely damps the drive you can get out the piston. More than 1 piston is certainly possible, but I tried two and the instability problems double, the bouncing causes the engine to flip directions - sometimes just one piston, and that causes issues. Here is the craft file and a video https://kerbalx.com/ezaroo/Crankshaft https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vc67R3NXEYo