razark

In regards to a boot script/autoexec, I like the idea of being able to specify one in the VAB description, and failing that, falling back to a boot.txt on Archive. I wouldn't mind seeing a way to preload programs at design time, so that you can automatically have that set of software on Volume 1 when you go to the pad.

He had a question about this particular mod, and this thread was a perfectly appropriate place to ask, and useful information was exchanged. Reviving an old thread harms no one.

I'm sad that it took 36 posts to get to that one.

The hatch/ladder angle has never bothered me. The only time it matters is if I have a Hitchhiker tank beneath it, and in that case I just rotate the tank to match the capsule.

Let's be honest here. When do KSP Legos come out so we can play with them?

COBOL? BASIC? Assembly? INTERCAL? If those are the other options, C based syntax would be fine. (Actually, kOS reminds me of my early days mucking with BASIC. Even if it still doesn't hava a GOTO statement.)

Of course they can't, and if you give me some time to get through my coffee, I'll come up with some silly reason to back that up. Ok, why transmitted reports provide data that cannot be gotten by returning it: Jeb lands on the Mun and finds an interesting rock. He reports back to Mission Control, explaining everything he sees about the rock and the area it was found in. The geologists in the back room are listening in, and are able to ask questions and provide suggestions of what else to examine, which will provide a fuller picture of the context of the rock that Jeb brought back. There you go. There's a situation where transmission provides data that _cannot_ be gotten in another way, and it's something that happened during Apollo. I'm not sure there is a way to make the science system work in a way that will make everyone happy. There's multiple ways the game can handle science, and Squad will need to pick one and we'll live with it, or they will need to give us some control over how science happens so we can each set things up in whatever way makes us happy.

You go to the Mun, and you find a rock. Taking it back to the lab will tell you about the rock. But describing where you found it, what else was nearby, other types of rocks in the area, etc. provides other information that you aren't going to get by examining the rock itself in the lab. Of course, that's what EVA reports are, so back to the question: What can you get only from transmitting? All I can think of is "artificial game balance". Perhaps that's enough of a reason for some people. Some information does makes sense to transmit, such as EVA/Crew reports, instrument readings and so on. Transmitting data from a surface sample just doesn't make much sense.

Please let us know if you try it. I took a look at the first page of the Orbital Manufacturing listed below, and it looks a bit more involved than what I'd like right now.

What is the currently working version of Orbital Construction? I haven't messed with it for a couple of versions, so I wanted to try it again.

I've been using it. Haven't had any issues.

Seems to be working.

We appreciate it.

How many complete launch to explosion tests were conducted of ICBMs? I know of only end to end test (actually an SLBM), but I think it would be hard to label it "futuristic" in any way. Not to my knowledge. Partial vacuum testing was achieved, I believe. The fact is that the program was canceled (for political reasons, not technical ones) before a launch was undertaken. The treaty banned nuclear weapons from space. NERVA was an engine, and was no more a weapon that the nuclear power sources used on many spacecraft since then. See Kosmos 954 and 1402. Anyway, this is a bit off topic.

No, but it was designed, built, tested, and very well could have been used decades ago. The hydrogen bomb was designed, built, and tested long ago, and never used. Would you classify it as a future technology?

Not really. It's 40-50 year old tech that's been demonstrated as working. It's simply that no one uses it. Steam locomotives were built at one time, but no one uses them now. That doesn't mean they're a future technology. It's just an unused technology.

I think that with Kevin missing for a month and a half and a new KSP version, it's probably time for someone to take over and create a new version. IIRC, the license allows this.

Please post the commands you are using, and the response that kOS gives you. Screenshots might be good, both of kOS and the directory structure. Explain in detail what you are doing, and the response you get from the system. What is the filename of the file you are trying to use in the archive?

I've been playing with this mod since it was released, and I still forget the closing period quite often. This has happened more than a few times: "I'll just fix this one bug. It'll take me five minutes." Five hours later: "Is that the sunrise?!?"

Are you typing print "hello world" or print "hello world"[b].[/b] ?

I have a pretty major complaint about this mod. You've entirely ruined the screenshot thread. I look at what should be amazing pictures, and all I see is a lifeless looking Kerbin. Thanks again for all the work that's gone into this.

What have you tried? What happened? What didn't happen that should have happened? What have you tried? What happened? What didn't happen that should have happened? We don't read minds. "There was an error." is a useless bug report. Provide as much detail as you can. From what you've posted, there's nothing that we can tell you.

I'm fine with them announcing a release date, and then not hitting it. Crap happens. You plan for a target, you work for it, and sometimes, you miss when an unforeseen problem happens. Not that they should push out 0.23 and say "Next update due on February 30th!", but when they are pretty close to it, tell us a prospective date. And if they miss it, well, it's because they're trying to make things better for us. As long as they say "Yeah, we missed it, but it should be good to go in a few days", then that's good enough for me.

No source on this, but I remember seeing it as well. Basically, any new planets added would not simply appear, but would need to be "discovered" before they show up on maps. I assume not showing up would also include the science. Any word on the observatory that I've heard about? My guess is that it would be linked to new planet discovery. If this was the only thing in the update, I would still be happy.

It will be released exactly at 00:01 CST, 18 December. (Just keep telling yourself that. Then you won't be worried and disappointed. In fact, you'll be surprised when it's released earlier than that.)