DMagic

I'm guessing that at default clock speeds this will probably run about the same as any other desktop i3. The real value here is that this is overclockable, something that's not normally possible with Intel's low end chips (which is really sad...). So I'm sure that if you can get a good overclock this will do better than the higher end i5s at stock speeds. The problem is that if you want to get a good overclock you'll probably have to spend a lot on higher end components (mostly the motherboard) and cooling, and you might just be better off getting an i5 and calling it a day. The quad-core chips will almost certainly be better for most other games, and hopefully KSP if they ever update the PhysX engine.

Chapter 1: Radio and Plasma Wave Science Chapter 2: Magnetometer Chapter 3: Telescopes and Imaging Systems Chapter 4: Laser Ablation Chapter 5: Core Drill and Biological Experiments Chapter 6: Neutron Reflections and Subsurface Water Chapter 7: X-Ray Diffraction and Surface Composition Telescopes, making small things look bigger since the 1600s. The End. OK, while small refracting telescopes are fairly simple and common, the kind of instruments used for astronomy research are very different. Reflecting Telescopes The first thing to note about bigger telescopes is that they never use lenses to collect and focus light the way that a refracting telescope does. As a lens gets wider it also gets thicker and therefore starts to get very heavy. For space telescopes this is obviously a problem because extra weight in general is bad. But it also becomes difficult for any system to support all of that weight. A lens can only be supported along its edges, so very large lenses tend to sag a little bit in the middle, affecting the refraction of light. It is also much more likely that large lenses will contain imperfections or tiny bubbles in the glass that distort the light. Reflecting telescopes, on the other hand, use a mirror, which can be supported along its entire back side and is made of a much thinner layer of glass coated with a very thin reflective layer. This allows for much larger and lighter telescopes to be created and is ideal for large space telescopes like the 2.4m Hubble (which is supposedly similar in size and construction to the Key Hole spy satellites, of which there are generally five or six in orbit), and the 3.5m Herschel space telescope . There are several terrestrial telescopes with a single mirror of around 8m in diameter. The support system for the mirror also allows for some rather interesting applications, such as intentionally creating small distortions in the shape of the mirror. This can be used to account for atmospheric distortion in surface based telescopes and greatly increases the quality of the images collected. Mirrors also allow for segmented construction; using several smaller mirrors positioned to focus light onto a single secondary mirror. This allows for the construction of much larger telescopes, as single mirrors become impractical above 5-8m in diameter. This is also, again, useful for space telescopes, as the mirrors can be folded up to fit inside of a smaller fairing then unfurled to create a very large aperture, such as the 18-segment, 6.5m James Webb Telescope. There is one obvious drawback to using mirrors as the primary element of a telescope. In most designs the light is reflected off of the primary mirror and onto a secondary mirror placed directly in front of it. This means that some of the light is blocked by the secondary mirror itself as well as its support structures. This reduces the overall sensitivity of the telescope and introduces some optical artifacts. The braces holding the secondary mirror in place are responsible for the X-shaped, bright lines of light visible in some of the brighter stars in the Hubble image below. The typical, camera-style telescope records images by focusing light collected by the mirrors onto an array of CCD detectors. These simply collect light within some certain range of wavelengths. Through the use of filter wheels, where individual filters that block or allow the passage of certain wavelengths of light can be quickly rotated in front of the detectors, more selective images can be recorded. When color photos from Hubble or other space telescopes and cameras are released you are actually seeing a composite of several images taken through a number of filters (this is why objects might have fuzzy, or rainbow-like edges). These are combined to give either a "true-color" representation of the image, or a "false-color" composite, where several, normally-invisible wavelengths are shown with arbitrarily chosen colors. We could stare at Hubble images all day, but instead here is something from the not-nearly-given-enough-attention Herschel telescope showing an IR view of the top of the Horsehead Nebula, compared with the visible/near-IR view from Hubble on the right. The blue, green, and red colors represent different IR wavelengths, and the pink shows the areas with brightest emissions, indicating newly formed stars. Other Imaging Systems These kinds of large aperture telescopes are common for optical, near-infrared, and ultraviolet astronomy. But there are a number of other types of imaging systems used for observations throughout the electromagnetic spectrum. Radio Telescopes At the low energy end of the spectrum, radio waves, it is possible to build absurdly large telescopes like the Arecibo Observatory with its 305m reflector. Radio telescopes don't require a solid mirror, only a metallic mesh, making construction of such large devices much simpler. It is also possible to combine observations from several telescopes to increase the effective resolution. The Very Large Array uses 27 25m dishes that can be independently moved and have the resolution of a 36km diameter dish (though not nearly the sensitivity of such a large dish). High Energy Telescopes High energy photons require some very different techniques to capture usable data. X-rays cannot practically be focused by any standard mirror or lens, they would simply absorb or be transparent to X-rays. Something called a Wolter telescope is used at these wavelengths; these instruments use mirrors at very low incident angles (normal telescope mirrors/lenses are set at nearly 90o to the incoming light) to reflect x-rays to a single focal point. Because these mirrors can only reflect X-rays at around 2-3o they have a very narrow field-of-view, but by combining several mirrors can still produce very valuable data. Gamma Ray telescopes don't really have any method of focusing or altering the path of gamma ray photons. They instead rely on mathematically reconstructing the path of the photon as it passes through several layers of the detector. They have very low resolution but a very wide field-of-view. Spectroscopy Unlike the camera-like telescopes discussed above, there are a number of spectrographic imaging systems designed to give a more detailed analysis of the distribution of wavelengths recorded in an image. Rather than collect an entire image, possible using filtered light, these instruments look at a limited segment of an image while separating the incoming light into its component wavelengths. As an example, the Cassini Visual and Infrared Mapping Spectrometer (VIMS), one of the instruments that my imaging platform is based on, uses several spectrographs to collect visible and infrared light. This system uses a narrow slit to only allow a thin line of light to pass through. A diffraction grating then reflects that single strip of light, separating the component wavelengths like a prism, which then fall on the detector. This essentially takes a single column of light and creates a two-dimensional image, recording how much of each wavelength is present in each row of that column. By sliding the slit one step to the side (or moving the mirror to accomplish the same effect) another image is recorded, after repeating this several times the entire field-of-view is captured, creating a kind-of three dimensional recording. In one dimension you have each row of light, from top to bottom, in the second you have each column, capturing the entire field of view as it passes in front of the diffraction grating, and in the third you have the entire recorded spectrum of light for each row and column of light. These kinds of data allow for a very detailed look within a range of the electromagnetic spectrum. In particular they can be used to identify the surface or atmospheric composition. Elements on the surface will absorb and reflect certain wavelengths of light dependent upon their composition. Elements in the atmosphere can block or allow the transmission of light as it passes through. A particular method for studying atmospheres is to conduct solar or stellar occultation observations. The imaging system is first pointed at the sun or a bright star. As a planet moves into view its atmosphere will begin to come between the imager and the star. At first only the thin upper layers are recorded, but gradually the deeper layers of the atmosphere pass between the two. Data can be collected throughout the atmosphere, allowing for a recording of each layer's composition based on the wavelengths of light absorbed or transmitted. A similar technique is used for studying events like the cryovolcanism on Enceladus or the composition of Saturn's rings. The two images of Enceladus below demonstrate this: the first clearly shows geysers erupting from the surface, the second shows Saturn's faint E-ring backlit by the sun (this isn't exactly a solar occultation, because the sun is actually behind Saturn); the ring is probably generated by the materials being vented from Enceladus, the bright object visible in the middle. This image reveals the many layers of a small segment of Titan's atmosphere taken during a close encounter by Cassini. Spectroscopic images will reveal the composition of each layer of the atmosphere by recording the wavelengths of light absorbed and comparing that to the known behavior of compounds that could be found in the atmosphere. Next time we'll look at some of the rover-based instruments and how they work.

Since this seems to be for a partmodule, did you activate the module? OnUpdate and (I think) OnFixedUpdate only run when the module has been activated. Normally this is through staging, or just putting this.part.force_activate() in the OnStart code.

Yes and yes Using the Module Manager configs included in the download you can scan for resources in the same way that you would use regular SCANsat sensors; background scanning works and everything is persistent. With Kethane type resources you can also use SCANsat to show only what has been scanned using the regular Kethane sensors. By either removing the Module Manager configs, or simply not activating the SCANsat module on the sensors, SCANsat will be used to passively show existing Kethane scanning data on your maps. For ORS resources you must use the included Module Manager configs to record scanning and to see any resource data on your maps.

Oh it works in stock all right. It might not be so practical because it makes things really hard to control, but it's fun to play around with. The one thing it's actually useful for is very small probes with little torque. I launch those little things from a cube sat carrier and it puts little satellites in a pretty good orbit two at a time with no need to control them. If you want to be able to actually steer it I imagine you would need a plugin, otherwise your inputs are mostly just cancelled out. And the problem with launch stages is that it might be difficult to get it spinning fast enough to really help.

I think that above some certain height (160km for Kerbin? that's where the performance hit from the terrain settings cuts off) it switches to scaled space, though I could just be making that up.

I've never actually tried it using a world position instead of lat/long, but I assume it should work assuming you calculate the correct vector. CelestialBody has a lot of position vectors, one of which probably works. Also note that it doesn't return height above sea level, merely height above the center of the planet. CelestialBody.pqsController.radius should give you the height of sea level (or "sea level") above the center of the planet, so you can use that to figure out the actual terrain elevation.

You need: Vector3d rad = new Vector3d (Math.Cos (lat) * Math.Cos (lon) , Math.Sin (lat) , Math.Cos (lat) * Math.Sin (lon)); double elevation = b.pqsController.GetSurfaceHeight (rad) - b.pqsController.radius; The lat and long must be converted to radians. pqsController.GetSurfaceHeight returns the elevation above the center of the planet, hence the radius subtraction. You can see the full method here: https://github.com/S-C-A-N/SCANsat/blob/master/SCANdata.cs#L68-L76 Quite a few mods use essentially the same method.

Map persistence is not at all reliant on data transmission. I can see how a lack of persistence might screw up science collection though. This is a fairly significant problem. The first thing you should do is completely delete SCANsat, re-download it (you might also want to try the latest dev version, at the top of the release page on GitHub), and re-install it. If it's still a problem the next thing to do would be to start a game, do some scanning, and save. Then open up your persistent.sfs file and search for SCANcontroller. It should show up looking like: SCENARIO { name = SCANcontroller scene = 7 .... With a lot of entries below that. Scroll down a bit to check for: Progress { Body { Name = Kerbin Disabled = False Map = Followed by a whole bunch of gibberish. That's where the scanning data is stored and if it isn't there you have some very strange issues. It's a bit hard to look at the string following "Map = " and say for sure whether a planet has actually been scanned, but a scanned planet should have a longer string than an unscanned one.

Science data shouldn't be affected by either of those two mods, RPM and RemoteTech (transmission is another matter, but that wouldn't change the values shown in the experimental results window). Check the debug window (alt + F2) the next time you try to collect science. It should have two lines related to the science value for the scanner type and the planet showing how much science is remaining and how much the current report should be worth. The RPM issues are likely due to incompatible versions. For the latest version of RPM, v0.17, you should be using the SCANsatRPM included with that mod, not the one included here. What problems are you having with 'saved maps'? Do you mean your scanning coverage is not being stored, that you have to re-scan a planet? That would be a much more severe problem.

SM won't see it because it's looking at ModuleScienceExperiment.GetData() and .GetScienceCount(), instead of IScienceDataContainer.GetData() and .GetScienceCount() (and it's not using IScienceDataContainer.DumpData() either). So it won't be able to see anything generated by my parts.

That is, unfortunately, not the latest version of SCANsat. Get v7rc2.5 on the previous page, or at the top of the GitHub release page. Use the version of SCANsatRPM included in this update, not the one included with RPM. v7rc2.4 will not work with v0.17 of RPM, only SCANsat v7rc2.5 has been specifically updated for RPM v0.17. For SCANsat v6 the version of SCANsatRPM included with RPM should work (this version nonsense shouldn't be a problem for that much longer). Your version of Kethane is also out-of-date and won't work with the SCANsat overlays; for that you'll need the latest version: Kethane 0.8.6 (this won't have any effect on SCANsatRPM or RPM). I'm not sure what this means. Do you want to display some kind of grid on the SCANsat map, presumably one different from the current grid? Or do you mean some different kind of map projection?

It should work with the latest dev version. I need the versions for all three files, SCANsat, SCANsatRPM, and RPM to know for sure what's going on. If you're using the latest dev version of SCANsat v7rc2.5, then the KSP.log file would be the most helpful.

Does anyone have any idea of what kind of license this is using if any? The reports are submitted by community members, but I don't see any kind of disclaimer about ownership of said reports, so I'm guessing it's all technically all rights reserved (in which case no one should be allowed to distribute the file). But if the reports are not restricted can someone else just host it? I've seen people re-post the file multiple times without anyone complaining, so it probably isn't an issue. Even if hosting it is done separately from actually adding and editing entries it seems like it would be appreciated. This should also really be converted to a module manager cfg to avoid the necessity of replacing stock files. This would be a simple change, just a few lines for each of the 10 or so experiment types.

Looks great, that's fine with me to use it. No idea. That depends on when 0.24 is released. If it isn't next week I'll probably have time to make the solar particle/space dust/asteroid dust collector. I've finished most of the coding work to get multiple use parts like the drill working with a standardized part module and I have a pretty good idea of how I want the part to look and animate. It shouldn't take long to make the model and texture.

That's fantastic. If I spent a week working on it I don't think I could come up with something so clean and well made. I assume there are specific dimensions required for company logos (the official ones all seem to be 256 * 160, the same as flags), which this could easily be modified to fit. I'll definitely use it for that if possible and also use it for screenshots, forum threads, etc... Thanks a lot sumghai. Edit: Starstrider, I finally got around to testing your module manager configs. Everything works ok. In the next update SCANsat modules will automatically be added to the Anomaly Scanner and the new Multispectral Imaging Platform instead of using the old clunky method of adding or replacing parts. The Universal Storage parts will also configure themselves automatically so that they will be hidden from the VAB and the R&D center if you don't have Universal Storage installed.

Like most science experiment mods it might kind-of work, but not properly. BTSM has lots of conditions that must be met to conduct an experiment, this mod will ignore all of that when starting the experiment.

You want Unity 4.2.2. Later versions might sometimes work, but tend to have problems with the new animation methods. It's not strictly necessary to install PartTools 0.20 first, it just makes it a little bit easier if you don't know exactly where to put the files. If you install 0.20 files first then they should be in the right location and you can just overwrite them with the 0.23 PartTools.

Nope, I don't have any surface sample experiments. I do have three parts that conduct experiments on the surface, but none of them is the same as the standard EVA Kerbal surface sample. I had no plans for replicating the Kerbal experiments, but seeing as how most of the other mods that do that are either dead or abandoned (is there any other source for Science Revisited? all I see is SpacePort) maybe I'll rethink my position.

Is your PartModule attached to the magnetometer? If not then it won't be able to find the module. You'll need to use vessel.FindModulesImplementing<DTMagnetometer>().First(); Another problem is that the field is a string, not a double/float. You'll need to convert the Bmag value back into a float before you can modify it.

Anyone using SCANsat v7 should be using the latest dev build, version 7 rc 2.5 (which hasn't actually been added to the first post). Do note the instructions however, the folder structure has been changed so you should delete any old versions. It was updated to explicitly support RPM v.17. I also added the KSPAssembly and KSPAssemblyDependency lines so it should be a little less picky about file locations. Whenever I get a chance I'll look through Mihara's SCANsatRPM pull more carefully to see about getting everything working right in a single .dll.

You might already be aware of this, but it seems that the stats graphs loop around at the start of the month.

This sounds like what happens when two mods are adding science experiments with the same experiment ID. This was a problem with an older version of Yogui87's Lionhead Aerospace probe and lander pack, but the latest version fixes it. That would be the first thing I would check. It's also possible that some other mod is causing the same problem, or that there are duplicates od the mod somewhere. Let me know if you do find another mod using the same experiment IDs as mine. That's definitely the plan for this part; it will allow for collections in space and while near an asteroid. It will probably work similar to the drill, allowing for multiple samples to be collected from a single part. The experiment could then be reset at a lab or brought home for a much higher science return.

I think not having commenting available will alleviate most of these kinds of issues. It seems fairly unlikely that mod creators will make overly offensive mod descriptions.

Yep. The if statement is the initial setup, the else statement is presumably used in case any extra game scenes need to be added in later versions.