phoenix_ca

Well that shouldn't happen. Somebody catch that exception!!! >.<

The git wiki is...out-of-date. On a lot of things.

Protractor? Bah. KAC transfer alarms. Done.

Thing is, I'm working from the point-of-view here that it's not worth waiting, since the mod doesn't give you any reasonable options other than using a single device to scan a (relatively) small area. Which is why I say, forget about it. Mod the files, turn-down the scan rate to something much faster, and be happy that you can warp at reasonable speeds. Note that I tried exactly what you suggested. In low orbit around Minmus, at 100x, it was still missing tiles. Majiir: What about emulating ScanSAT and computing the position of other vessels in the same SoI with sensors on them and using those to scan concurrently? Because while this is perfectly fine from a standpoint of doing a single scanning mission at a time, and nothing else (to avoid missing a burn or something like that), it really breaks-down when one say, adds KAC and starts running lots of concurrent missions, spending a lot of time away from the single scanning satellite. That way, at least we'd be able to add extra vessels to scan faster, instead of using MOAR TIMEWARP, the difference being that the latter can much more easily get in the way of doing other things in KSP other than scanning, while the former much less so.

Calm down. It'll be fixed when it's fixed. Sirkut basically had the rug pulled out from under him with 23.5, turning everything upside down, shaking all the parts out, and leaving him to pick-up the pieces. Hopefully there aren't major changes that do this to IR again in future, but this kind of thing in inevitable when the game is under development. Actually the legality of that is more about what you do with it and less that you do it. I haven't read through the EULA in it's entirety (bad me, not reading every contract ten pages long we have to agree to now to use anything...goddamn 21st century), but I'm pretty certain that it includes a clause about not reverse engineering the software. Most privately owned software does. That doesn't stop you from doing it, and it's not illegal to do it, but it is in violation of the EULA, which means that Squad would thereafter be under no obligation to provide you with any copies of it, regardless of your paying for it. But no, reverse engineering software (or hardware for that matter) is generally not illegal in and of itself. What you do with it after could be though, like reproducing the software or hardware, branding it your own, and then selling it. Then you're actually doing something that most nation-states have a law against. But there's no criminal or civil law (usually) against a private person (or group of people) taking apart something just for the sake of seeing how it works.

Well it is an alpha. If they spent time documenting everything KSP might never get finished. >.<

Nope. It is a much suggested feature that scanning not take longer than it does to make fifteen thousand soufflés by hand with one oven, but alas, I've read before that Majiir is against the idea. I can't remember clearly though. Your best bet is to do the following: 1. Forget about the 1m scanner. It's useless. Since what matters is how fast the probe crosses the terrain (short orbital periods are better), the "advantage" of the 1m scanner being able to scan higher up is self-defeating. 2. If you're comfy with config editing, change the scan rate of the scanning parts to 0.1. That way you should be able to get complete scanning done at higher warp speeds (the scan rate is measured in real time, not game time). 3. Cry because it's still going to take a good long while of leaving KSP on high time warp doing absolutely nothing. Or really doing nothing if you actually are playing the game and have Kerbal Alarm Clock set to pause so that you don't crash a probe into Jool or something like that. Yes I sound overly negative. But the scanning is, in my opinion, the most hair-pullingly annoying part of what is otherwise a really decent mod. A lot could be learned from ScanSat on this.

The wiki says fusion fuels should be swappable at any time. Did you turn the reactor off?

Slap a box on it then and shove a few spare parts in it? I'm not seeing the problem...

Could you please add to the part descriptions info on how many Kerbals the recyclers and filter can support? Looking at the part.cfg for each is a kinda roundabout way of doing it. I can tell that the small ones can support 8, while the large ones support...8.4? Is that right? It seems kinda off that the ones that are substantially larger only have a 0.4/day advantage. In any case having that info in the description would be far more useful than it being solely in the part.cfg.

You can "repair" them with KAS though if you brought spares. Unrelated question: Is there any way that it might be possible to link the strut points in the editor? I'd like to have quantum-strut-like functionality but without the very magic-y behaviour of quantum struts (really I just want a way to tie-down things in a spaceplane on launch, or even things on fairings and the like, but then be able to remove it all with EVA once in orbit).

Um...what? That's what all this testing is about...fixing IR so that it works with 0.23.5. Speaking of which, sorry for not posting but I haven't actually found anything that hasn't already been covered. >.<

Interesting. Not how I'd go about it (anything I do will probably be huuuuuuuuuge just for the sake of being huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge and awesome by being so big and having its own plane and crazy stuff like that), but cool. Question...is there any point to putting two generators on a reactor, one on each side? Say one for charged particles, one for thermal production?

Unfortunately that assumes having the tech tree completely unlocked, or being in sandbox mode. Personally, I'd love to see some grand-tour missions that use fusion tech at most... I wonder if anyone's done that. I've put any plans of that on hold for myself; not keen on trying until Infernal Robotics is fixed.

Well as I said they should be there. I think they're mostly (if not all) under Advanced Construction.

*blinks* Using Git to do version control instead of trying create your own scheme from scratch was smart thinking. I kinda scratched my head at why Git was a dependency until I realized what you were doing. Actually, I'm quite glad this exists. Having a craft list that gets longer and longer because of new versions is somewhat annoying. I assume that because it doesn't have any plugins, it will stay current, so long as Squad doesn't change the folder structure for saves and craft files.

For 1, you want the most ISP possible. That means in a best-case scenario an AM reactor and plasma drive using liquid fuel. But you could just as easily use the game's default ion drive. A thermal rocket motor wouldn't be a bad choice either. I point those out because plasma drives are an ultra-pain-in-the-ass without gigantic amounts of power, often producing less than that of a stock thermal nuclear rocket thingy of awesome. LV-N...or whatever. For 2, uhhhh...are you landing it? Because then you should be thinking about high thrust rockets (thermal turbojet thingy might do), and a lot of chutes.

Um...so...what exactly do these values in the config do? name = Default shockwaveMultiplier = 1.0 shockwaveExponent = 1.0 heatMultiplier = 25 temperatureExponent = 1.03 densityExponent = 0.85 startThermal = 750 fullThermal = 1150 gToleranceMult = 3.0 I want to turn down some of the settings so I can push an SSTO a bit faster in atmo (the heating effects starting just above Mach 2 and being pretty extreme is just a little silly), but I'm not sure what to change. None of that seems to be commented or documented (unless it is in some post buried in this thread O.o ).

They should be in the tree. And if they aren't, just use sandbox. This is NOT a release you want to use in an actual game you care about.

You can't have a satellite in GEO over a pole. It would have to be a statite, and would expend a mountain of delta-v every day to stay there. O.o You could have a geosynchronous satellite though. Is that what you mean? As for getting things in the right position, take a look at my sig. The same principles can be applied to other inclinations and orbits, though unfortunately, once you get into inclined orbits you will also need to take into account launch times. Unless you go for equatorial, have all your satellites up in the same orbit with perfect spacing, and then burn to plane change at the same longitude for each satellite. That'd do it nicely. It'd be far from the most efficient way to do it, but requires the least amount of work and calculation on the player's end. Not something one would do in RL with satellites around Earth, but KSP is software. Who gives a damn about wasted fuel in KSP? O.O That's a lot of acceleration. Before 23.5 I bet that kind of ship would rip itself apart. O.o

That's my approach. You lose some power because you're bouncing it around so it travels farther, but usually not enough to matter.

Aspect angle between the transmitter and receiver matters. That's quite a task. Radiation doses are a ***** to calculate correctly. Modelling it effectively so there's a real and predictable difference between getting a bunch of radiation in a short period and the same dose over a long period of time sounds like a difficult task. For one, it can't be modelled perfectly based on real life; people would almost certainly have problems understanding it and predicting the effects. And if you were to model it accurately, you need to also be measuring absolute exposure in Gray, as sievert is intended only to measure the health effect of small doses over a long period of time. High Sv levels near a reactor don't actually make much sense. One would be more interested in the absolute dose over such a short period (for practical purposes one can often calculate that dosage and then treat it as if it were all given in a single dose). And all that is already hurting my brain. Good luck Fractal.

Have you tried tweaking the cfg files? It sounds like that might be something easily rectified by adjusting the rotateAxis and translateAxis values, respectively.

THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO WORK? BAH! *RAGEQUIT* ... Kidding. Kidding. I'll go see how I can break it. Nice filename, btw.

That'd be fantastic.