air805ronin

With patched conics you always have to be under the influence of a sphere of influence, so you'd be circling that imperceptable body in an orbit which would be very against the concept of Lagrange points.

I haven't been able to find the post I remember discussing "why patched conics?" but I have found a couple links: What patched conics are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patched_Conic_Approximation the Harv article regarding updating patched conics prior to the manuever system being added: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/entry.php/138-Mid-Updates-Update-Patched-Conics-cursor-finding! This is a good example where you can see the entire program is based upon functions designed to use patched conics, including our ability to predict where we will be (which was key for manuever nodes). These would have to be rewritten (and who knows how much time involved) in order to update this all to use 2-body math. Useful link for all of Harv's blogs: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/blog.php/4-HarvesteR edit: Do a search for "Patched Conics" in the search bar and you can see all the threads on the subject and search for yourself. I'm reading 3-4 right now but I'm at work.

edit: I pretty much agree with Arq. How long do you think it would take to recode KSP to change it from relying on Patched Conic mathematics and instead do 2 body mathematics? I would imagine the change and ensuing bugs are an excellent reason to stick with patched conics. Because it works well enough for the game to simulate the illusion. Would we prefer that time be spent adding new content to the game or rehashing something that is working fairly well now? I know I would prefer new content.

Sorry my whole post was wrong. You don't really need math at all. You really can just keep trying things and get almost anywhere in the game.

If I were to have a demo I would not do anything from start to finish because someone already mentioned the downtime involved. Instead I'd show the construction and launch of a small rocket. Then I'd cut to a satellite in orbit around the Mun and show how manuever nodes work. then I'd cut to a lander orbiting one of the planets and land that sucker. if there was time left I'd cut back to the spaceplane hanger and show off a plane. Maybe have a prepped save with a docking scenario ready to go? In the boring moments when waiting for something or doing a burn, talk about the game. mostly it will talk for itself.

Really, once they added the manuever node system to the game, the true need to do any mathematical calculations at all went away (except for possibly calculating the delta-v you need for a rocket to reach somewhere (and maybe come back, if you're nice)). Now the only thing I reference is Olex's transfer window calculator to find out the angles between planets I need for a cheap transfer. Really though you can hit most planets if they're even remotely close to those angles if you play with the manuever nodes, it is just likely to cost more fuel for the transfer. Before the nodes I used to have to do the math and then hold a protractor to the screen. If you don't install a mod that can tell you phase angles on the fly I would still be using a protractor. But with a phase angle mod and manuever nodes, there is literally nowhere you cannot fly.

If you consider your work bad, I'd like to bring some of that to my work. What do you eat for breakfast? What can I do to be more like you? Much love Mr Kerbopalous.

Its like when you're driving down the highway. The truck next to you is going 75. You're going 70. Relative speed is 5 m/s from one perspective.

Seconded. This is the exact build for my current Munar I and Minmus I landers. I usually shed the transfer rocket while landing, so I end up with a TON of fuel to get back to Kerbin. Except now I have some solar panels for...you know...torque.

Since he said manuever nodes I think he's including the rendezvous in with the docking. To which I say, it certainly is possible, but it isn't easy. It will involve math. There used to be a table on here showing the kinds of burns needed to transfer between different orbits. Basically you'd wait till you're X kilometers apart and execute a specific burn. Even that involved checking the map to see where you were in relation to the other spacecraft.

My first response was basically, "Why didn't he heed the warning? Ok, well...you're going to see why." Your response make me want to give a full response. Do you really want to know why multiplayer is not going to happen for a long time? Because the developer said they want to focus on their development roadmap. They have hinted that it may come in the future as an expansion, but in the meantime they plainly request that people not bring it up because it starts some of the worst kinds of thread. The special snowflakes in the world don't care and bring it up anyway. Its a pretty common thing for people to have the lightbulb go on and suggest something they think would make a game immensely better. "Wouldn't it be cool if we had a persistent server where everyone could log in and launch and every is flying. When you go to the map screen you see all these ships flying around!" It is a cool idea. It would be fun to be piloting ships with friends. But bolting it onto a game designed for singleplayer involves challenges. For instance, Unity uses scenes to handle what is displayed. Right now the game is coded around having a single scene and moving it around to where the user changes it to. Since I don't know the backend, I don't know how hard this would be. others include: how do you sequence who gets to take off? Will we have multiple space centers and go to the first open one? Still many have what seem like completely logical offers coming from people, ala using the sleep method from Minecraft. This is fine and all when it comes to Minecraft where generally everyone goes straight to a bed once nightfall hits. I don't know about you but I hit timewarp all the time just on a trip to the Mun. I did one last night and warped probably 8 times. What if you miss a critical burn during my warp time? In Minecraft the sleep cycle moves the world ahead to dawn. No one can interrupt it. Thats why they make everyone agree to it. Will you have a way to be able to tell how long someone's warp is going to take? All of this requires intense discussion and scrutiny because multiplayer games have to be handled completely different from singleplayer games. Parts of game engines can be reused, but in general it requires a LOT of coding to make it work. The fun part of these threads is the number of people who don't have a clue how things are coded in the background (myself included) and proceed to wax philosophically about how it worked in one game and there has to be a way to make it work in this one. TLDR: I for one think we should respect the developer wish to develop the main game first before tackling multiplayer. Therefore we should also respect the wish to not bring it up in threads all the time where people get into heated discussions.

I think you'll find the answer to your questions is that any thread that brings it up will proceed in the exact same fashion yours is about to.

I have installed 4 mods thus far: mechjeb: installed for about 30 minutes. Did two flights. Have never desired to really use it again. flight engineer: used it for the last 3 updates to get information on my ships, mainly the stats chip. orbital construction: back before docking I used this for about 5 days, when the mod let a delivery happen within a few kilometers of distance. Was really cool and I think a valid idea for being integrated into the game. Basically you haul parts and fuel up to a ship or space station, then you can construct an item in the VAB and teleport it to that space station. With some real polish it could be a cool tech unlock in career. Being able to build things in orbit without paying the gravity well cost to launch it whole, you can focus on some interesting designs. ISA Map mod: Totally used this from 1.5 to 1.9 as a way to give purpose to my flights. Verdict: I simply prefer stock right now. I enjoy the piloting. I like the stock parts. i enjoy the game and find it relaxing. I do not look down on anyone who uses mods. To each their own.

I figured the kerbals think in a very binary way. So when they have two cabinets labelled food and not food, things they know are edible are put in the food one. The other storage is like my kitchen junk drawer where you can find batteries, toothpicks, yarn, string, glue, christmas bows, catnip, a screwdriver, teflon tape, keys to ??, wall hanging stuff, and everything else I can't remember at all.

I laughed because I figured you were being sarcastic about the whole SAS thing. That said I think the new system protects people from accidentally ending flights a bit better. Thats great.

Yes, it was a place holder. However, there were many many people upset at accidentally ending flights. Its a large part of why many were excited about it. I pretty much read everything HarvesteR posts, oddly enough. It won't kill kerbals if you end the flight landed on Kerbin. Instead it will recover them and bring them back to the Space Center. I've never lost a kerbal from ending a flight on Kerbin.

That's what he's saying. The end flight option was removed by popular demand due to people accidentally ending their space station mission. Now you have to go to the tracking station at the space center and select "Recover Ship" to end a flight.

I'm very happy for you that you've discovered the joys of flying manually. I love to fly manual (and have yet to use mechjeb after letting it stabilize one orbit when I first downloaded the game). I probably fly a lot less missions than most people, but I still enjoy even just getting into a stable orbit. edit: Please note that I'm not making a comment about mechjeb. The lesson of your story, to me, is that you used Mechjeb to understand what you should be doing and now its prepared you to learn how to do it on your own. This is something many people point out is a major plus of mechjeb, that you can use it as a learning tool...

No. Wrong. On steam, as pointed out by Tiron, you go to properties, beta tab, select "last stable version". On the store, go to the download page. You'll see the last stable download as an option. Edit: Skunky beat me to it. Just like a pirate.

Sorry didn't mean to derail your thread. In my defense, you website said a login is required for all software downloads.

Funny, having looked at your website I see various red flags that would keep me from using your software. Requiring an additional login to your site, saving credentials to spaceport, etc. Just things I don't like and don't want to put up with for some additional conveniences (to many things I already have scripted). When it comes to third party mods and applications written to support or change my game experience, I like the idea of having source code available so I can see what is happening in the functions you write. That way I can make sure there is no transmission of anything I don't like. do I read the source code for every mod I've ever installed? No. But I've only installed 3. As a guy who has written lots of scripts and code the very idea of TRYING to protect my work seems silly to me. I can't afford to hire a lawyer if somene releases an altered copy of something I've written. I doubt many mod makers could. Seems almost silly to try when the work isn't monetized. And no, I haven't written a mod for KSP. I have modded, and I script and code at work.

I think that kind of result in this thread is almost expected from the subject line, and I agree with you. I tried to be fairly objective in my post and was just kind of waxing poetical with the imagery of the marble pedestal. He is not that bad at all.

I'll do you one better, the KSP forums are generally better than Minecraft, Euro Truck Sim 2, and Prison Architect. All of which I've spent time reading in the last couple weeks, and all of which are being added to currently and developed. There are different weaknesses that can be encountered, all of which I don't think we suffer too much from. I think we are blessed with a great forum experience. We also have super nice people, moderators, and devs. Minecraft - The huge established user base suffered from the same white knight/black knight issues we see occasionally in our big threads, but magnified and much more hostile from both sides. The sheer amount of forum content reminds me of the WoW forums in that there was just information overload in a given day making finding worthwhile content much harder. When people complain about our forums putting the dev's on a pedestal I just want to point at the giant marble obelisk, reaching so far into the sky you must squint to see Notch sitting atop it. He casually eats a bite from an apple, smirks, and drops the remains into the crowd below who fight to be the one to take the next bite. Eurotruck Simulator 2 - For such a fun game and a decent size install base, the official forums are almost dead. If you want to see forums that actually get posts you have to hit up the steam forums for the game. Even the steam forums for the game only gets a handful of posts a day. Prison Architect - If you think the various outcries over recent patches are full of people airing their grievances, you should see whenever a new alpha drops for this game. I've never seen people be quite so angry or violent, and think they might want to shiv people after playing the game.... so many people are scared of the game being ruined by the devs or worse being abandoned... we get the occasional thread that just blows up, theirs seems be to be 2-3 a week. (a fun drinking game would also be to see how many threads say the game is too expensive in an evening)

I added more weight after reading the last thread. Same amount of reaction wheels as the smaller craft. Its not as fast to kill rotation now, but can still work with more manipulation. I'm beginning to think the problems people are having could be bugs, high expectations of perfection, and possibly not using enough reaction wheels. i think a lot of people will enjoy it more given more experimentation and vehicle redesigns.

I haven't played in a couple months, but I fired it up tonight and built a brand new orbiter craft to try out the new SAS + reaction wheels. Main column had the main SAS unit with the built in reaction wheels. One tank, one battery, on engine. Two radial tanks, engine, and reaction wheels at the top. Lines feeding fuel to keep the central line topped off. Rock solid holding my heading up, even through my gravity turn. Executed the gravity turn with the SAS on, which was nice, because it totally let me! It slowly drifted after I let go but did kill the turn. Flipped back and forth between the game window and this browser while reading threads. Held my heading every time.