phoenix_ca

I'd recommend MechJeb and using a combination of the Smart A.S.S. and Translatron computers. Just not the auto-lander. How I loathe the autopilot's behaviour (I find it to be very inaccurate). However, those two computers together give you many very helpful tools to control your descent rate (which I always find to be the most difficult part of landing by hand). Using MJ and some floodlights, it's relatively say to softly touchdown at a location of your choosing, around a speed of 0.1m/s if you wish.

ISA MapSat's KerbalPedia contains geosynchronous orbital altitude information for all celestial bodies.

Simply, you need to offer more Kerbals to the Kraken. It will continue to munch on them until satisfied. When it is finally sated, and cannot move any longer due to indigestion, you will be able to safely land...for a time.

Banned for not appreciating robots who are obsessed with space.

Hmmm, I didn't take into account the duplication that ISA MapSat does. Though it might be possible (if somewhat calculation intensive) to have a Python script load the CSV into a list with lists, search for duplicates, and delete them. The huge problem is that it has to read through the entire file once for every line. It's a real brute-force way of doing it but can be done...I just don't see any point, other than reducing the filesize of a CSV for upload. Maybe I'll write a cleaning script that can do this at some point, when it suits. Python can be pretty speedy, and compiled (well "compiled" in the case of Python) can be speedier, but...yeah. I wouldn't know how to limit the amount of data loaded into memory without digging through some of the GRASS GIS modules to see how they are importing the files in chunks. Since once it's imported as a raster map to GRASS GIS any duplication is moot, it wouldn't help with things like interpolation of the raster map.

I think I've found a successful way to get data into GRASS GIS. It's a little kludgy, but it works. You set it up as a region with an arbitrary XY coordinate system (so all it is is an XY region that can be modified). Then use g.region to set-up the region size, which thankfully, is very predictable here. The values will always be thus: res=0.01 n=90 s=-90 e=180 w=-180 x=2 y=1 Easy peasy. There isn't even really a need to generate a raster map to analyze for region information, since we know beforehand what it will always be. The only issue I've run into now is dealing with these large volumes of data (I had NO idea just how much data scientists can end-up dealing with...it's just a little crazy O.O ). At the settings above, the region is 648,000,000 data points. Presumably that could be the max number of data points for any planet/moon in the game. That...is a lot of data. My Kerbin_elevation.csv takes up 250MB (with r.in.xyz eating around 1.5GB of RAM to import it, for each pass, with 10 passes, meaning if I had loaded the whole thing it'd need 15GB...crazy). So presumably a file that had all possible data points would be, erm...lemme go do maths *pause* Data points in import (i) = 13,303,561 Full set number of points (f) = 648,000,000 i / f = 0.02053018673 File size of imported data set (Fs) = 250.9MB = 2.1047e9 bits So file size of a full data set from ISA MapSat: 2.1047e9 bits / 0.02053018673 = 102,517,333,509 bits = 11.93458837328944 GB Yikes. O.O In any case, the thing I can't seem to do is interpolate from that set, the rest of it. It's not that I can't make it work. It's that it will take a loooooong time. r.surf.idw2 (raster interpolation for scattered data points) works fine, but will take way too long. Simpler to just collect more data. (I started it off on its merry way but the progress bar didn't move, yet it used a single core at 100%, and it's a 64-bit module...yeah...too much data.) And then there's the slight kludge solution of simply rendering the region at lower resolution. >.> Yeah. Gonna be kludgy here.

Has anyone tried using some more advanced software for mapping? Like GRASS GIS? I'm trying to finagle it to accept the data output from ISA MapSat using r.surf.xyz (a module that generates a raster map based on sparse XYZ data points, which is what ISA MapSat generates), but it's kinda wacky. If anyone here has more experience than I using GRASS GIS, some pointers would be appreciated (heck, maybe even a guide...if no one knows how and I figure it out, maybe I'll write a guide, so Mac and Linux users have options).

This...well let's just say I'll be happy when some more realistic aerodynamics are implemented. Long-and-pointy design will win in KSP at that point. Right now it's still...flat? Those things shouldn't fly. Everything about them says intuitively to my brain "this thing is like trying to push a massive sail directly up; it shouldn't work!" >.<

Indeed, so it's a good idea to put a craft of 5 Kerbals in orbit to act as a "control centre" for your rovers. Though really, that delay ought to be reduced. There's "realism" and then there's "so realistic my primate brain is bored n; OOOOH, a muffin!" Since the real rovers of today have on-board computers that allow them to complete reasonably complex tasks themselves, we can give more general directions that they will execute without requiring input from us (which would take what...8-minutes round trip on Duna?). We tell it to go somewhere, look at that rock, take some pictures here and there and there, shoot the rock with a laser and analyze it, scoop some dust here and analyze that, etc. It doesn't need step-by-step input, and that automation is the only feasible way to deal with the communications time-delay. It does all that on it's own, solving basic navigational problems and avoiding trouble on the way (these rovers could easily handle a "whoooops, massive hole here that we didn't see earlier...right, I'll go around that" moment).

Meh. All depends on what you want. Having buttons and lights gives it a more technological feel, I think. I wanted to try to capture a bit of the planets' and moons' beauty too.

I haven't the foggiest idea as to what you're referring to, but try mapping the planet with the ISA MapSat mod. Enable anomalies display and you should be able to get an idea of where something is (a very good idea, I dare say).

Oh good gods. (Edit: Signs of the zodiac. Sorry, brain was way ahead of my typing.) My interest dropped rapidly at that point. The question is, as always, relative to what? The Sun? Your chair? The centre of the galaxy? The centre of the universe? Jupiter? Alpha Centauri? Since the video doesn't even establish the goal, that is, relative to what, what's the point? They also use miles/hour, not the SI standard. Sooo...yeah. I have no idea what the point they were driving at was. O.o

And again, the point stands that it's only in XP, 2000, and 2003, that you get PAE. Vista and 7 aren't listed in your link. (There's still no point to getting more RAM to run KSP if you have at least 4GB and only run KSP. So...I don't see why this debate is relevant. Intriguing, but tangential to the thread.)

If by that you mean planets that are not immediately available to be flown to, but can be discovered and then explored, then that's planned.

After seeing this signature but being a bit disappointed that there wasn't options for just Kerbal orbit, Mun landings, and Minmus landings. So I decided to make my own version. Suggested usage: Apply a corresponding layer only when you've landed successfully on the planet/moon (don't care if it's manned/unmanned, just as long as it isn't a pile of debris; though obviously just an orbit counts for Jool and Kerbol ). It's a bit arbitrary, but it gives everyone a standard so that we can infer correctly when seeing others' signatures. Like the other signature, it works by adding the corresponding layer to the base. Also included is an all version as I used some blending filters on the lines/links, the all version provides is better-looking than all of the others combined over the base. Note that while I feel it's now ready for release for use, I might still make a few tweaks to it later. Base Laythe Bop Tylo Vall Jool Ike Duna Mun Minmus Orbit Kerbol (Sun) Moho Eve Gilly Base Image Complete Image (All Destinations) Download Link

Squad has plans for inter-planetary flight, and the Sun's SoI is huuuuge. It may be that in future an actual comet or two, without the spawn-despawn kludge, would be possible (making a realistic comet, with a tail that is created by the Sun's radiation, and diminishes-to-disappears at a certain distance would probably be possible, but likely require some hard-coded stuff from Squad). And in any case, eventually we should be able to add our own planets and thingamabobs, so...yeah. Even asteroids might be possible (actually, I'm fairly certain they want to add those too).

AA will always kill frame-rate, anywhere. It's one of the most computationally intensive tasks you can ask of a GPU. Thankfully, I can run KSP at 8xAA with no issues. :3 (At least no issues caused by the GPU. The CPU remains a serious bottleneck, and I have no hope of seeing that problem go away without multi-threading.)

Well it's hard to know exactly what the OP meant by staying in a place relative to Kerbin, because even that can be interpreted in a number of ways. Relative to Kerbin's surface or center? Relative to it in relation to another celestial body (e.g. the sun) or not? Too many variables, need more data.

What in the world are you talking about? If you have Vista/7 and 4GB+ of RAM, it'll work. You've got the right version. They both come in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, crammed on the same disk.

That's rather subjective...Here's something the empirically beats yours though.

It's my hope that space travel will be, as it certainly has shown itself to be thus far with the ISS, a unifying endeavour. It's something that we share as a species; the borders, territorial disputes, none of that seems to matter in the face of the stark realization of just how small and insignificant we are in relation to not just our own solar system, but the galaxy, and the universe. The scale is immense, and we don't even register. There are Russians and Americans on the ISS, two nations that were bitterly divided between each other just a few decades ago, now bound together in the common purpose of scientific endeavour, discovery, and exploration. I think that the tentative treaties we've made banning weaponisation of space are the first steps in shedding our intolerance of each other. Even war now seems to be less and less justified by developed nations on nationalistic grounds. It wasn't "we're going to invade Iraq because we are a greater nation and deserve to do so" it was "well ****e, things are really messed-up there, these people seem to be oppressed, and we should go there to spread the ideals of freedom". (Note that I'm talking about justification here, not the real reasons and motivations behind it.) I doubt hard-line nationalism the likes of WWII to justify a global conflict would fly very well; there seems to me to be far too much freedom of information via the Internet to allow it (and this is but one of the positive reasons for maintaining this information flow on the internet as it is, and very strongly fighting against attempts to limit it). Naturally, for several of these reasons, I am concerned about China. However, I hope less that "they'll come to see that we're right" and more that we can find common ground through which we can pursue our mutual goals of bettering ourselves and our societies. Space exploration is a wonderful place to do this, as it is something truly common to our species. (Several partners of the ISS wish to invite China's participation, but current US law prevents them from collaborating with China; I for one would welcome China's participation. I'd love for them to join us on the common venture of space exploration and scientific discovery.)

Meh. We'll figure something out. If we don't kill ourselves and our civilization, we're going to space. That much is practically a given. Just how we get there is still up for debate, but we'll go there eventually. We must if we wish to survive.

That's definitely a fair concern to have. Upon consideration, I find I share it. Though that also reminded me of something. You know what's a good show? Castle, because every time there was a ghost, a haunted house, a zombie, a psychic, or a tarot card reader predicting events, it always turned-out to be not magic. And Beckett is a wonderfully skeptical character. (I can't even recall an episode where there was that ugly allowance for the possibility of such things being real and the narrative left hanging. No, things get tied-up and guess what, the psychic is a fraud, the guy claiming he has all the answers is a charlatan.)

I hate Minecraft. I love Minecraft + Tekkit/Technic. The only reason I bought the game was those mod packs, and I won't play on a server without them. The base game is incredibly banal and tedious, with incredibly little complexity. To me, that proper mod support has taken so long in its development is an "oddity" to me. Minecraft...is a game I want to love, but the only way I can come to like it is with a whole lot of customization with mods. That, and there's the sad downside that MC is fundamentally limited in some ways because it's written in Java. The cross-platform compatibility that provides is great, but it's added some more obvious limits on graphics performance. Hell, I still can't run MC with AA turned on, and in a game where nearly everyline is orthogonal, that's pretty darned annoying and noticeable. (Curse you ATI/AMD and your crap OpenGL support.)

The geostationary orbit altitude of Kerbin is 2870km (displayed as 2.870Gm by MechJeb). Getting a satellite up there in a stable circular orbit will mean it's orbit is geosynchronous (it's orbital period is equivalent to the rotational period of Kerbin). Having it also at an inclination of 0º means it's geostationary (it's always above the same longitude and latitude of Kerbin).