Gargamel

Pssssst.... If we want to continue the discussion about quitting smoking, we could start a new thread.... I'd have done that already for you guys, but you all insisted on mixing in discussion about woodpeckers and blizzards, so a new thread would have looked really weird if I had done it. I'd encourage anybody who made long or heartfelt posts to copy/paste them to the new thread...

I believe that I have read that the stock Jool system is highly unstable, and would result in a couple of the moons getting flung out, and the remaining ones falling into resonant orbits. .....Hey just like the video shows.... Although if the simulation continued, I wonder if Vaal would have been recaptured.

And a thread to post them in.....

I was working as a paramedic, and one of my partners was really excited that the neew HP book (#5) was coming out the next day. He and his wife (a PhD English Professor) were attending some event involving the release. I chided him for probably the same reasons you have, but after some discussion, he convinced me to give the books a read. They are a surprisingly enjoyable read, even as a grown adult. When book seven dropped, we ended taking the squads, en masse, to a book store to pick up our own copies. There's a pic somewhere on my FB of 4 ambulances parked side by side, and all 8 crew members have their heads buried in the latest HP book.

Well, since the thread got bumped, and likely to bring in some more comments, I've updated the OP as requested.

Sometimes Input locks get hung up from a variety of sources. Alt-f12 into the cheat menu, somewhere (I forget where) is a tab for "Input Locks", then click the "Clear Input Locks" button. That should fix the problem. If not..... well...... try that first.....

I'm not sure, perhaps somebody else will know.

Moved to tech support, modded.

The questions you routinely ask make me wonder if you need to be placed on a super villain watch list or something. I would think (as shown above) the dv calculations would be fairly trivial. What is not trivial is figuring out a way to expend enough energy to move that mass that much.

I don't know if this will actually effect the loading times or not, but you can filter by type. At the top of the tracking station window, you can click the asteroid type button, and it won't show those. But like I said, I don't know if it doesn't load them, or just doesn't show them.

I wonder where you got that name from...... ( @Just Jim). I want to see video of this little thing in action. The potential for local biome hopping from a bigger rover is pretty neat....

We're pretty sure it was the Console Mun base, but funny list none the less. This.... This I would love to see....

While "there's a mod for that" is frowned upon in these types of discussions, KAC will fit the bill nicely for this until it becomes stock.

And another.... 'Earth' sized this time. https://www.iflscience.com/space/nasas-new-planet-hunter-has-found-its-first-earthsized-world/

For future reference to anybody who finds this thread, we do have a sticky describing the various ways to legally download previous versions:

Moved to Tech Support Modded.

Moved to Suggestions. And you ask for realism, but offer up interplanetary bases?

All right, enough bickering people. Let's keep it civil and on topic.

It's pretty frequent with me. But it depends on system specs really. KSP is pretty resource heavy, and anytime you load in a new vessel, it, well, has to load. That takes some time. One simple thing you can do is watch your part count. Get rid of unnecessary parts that don't actually do anything to help your craft complete it's mission. The fewer parts you have on a vessel, the less time it will take to load.

I thin you mean 0-180, but I get your point. But I don't understand needing a N/S runway to do polar launches or recoveries. You can take off with your plane, heading east, then easily turn north, and then accelerate to orbit. And landing isn't the hard part of a polar orbit, it's landing in the right spot. On an equitorial orbit, you just have to wait till your in the right spot E/W to do your de orbit burn, and then you can correct a bit once you hit atmo to land on the runway. But on polar orbit, You have to wait for both your N/S position along your orbital path, but you also have to wait for the orbit to pass over the KSC, and these both have to happen at the same time. If you get these two things lined up, then turning a plane to land on the runway is trivial. I'm not saying I don't want a N/S runway, I think it would be cool, although for me, I think a 30/210 runway would be more aesthetically pleasing. I've just seen a few people (more than just you that I have quoted, @Aeroboi) saying it would be required to do polar launches, when it is not really even a factor.

I believe somewhere in the thread I made allowances for pics that represent the number without showing it, or in your case, show an NGC item. But seeing how the pictures are getting a little tiresome with the repetitiveness, I'll add something to the OP. 3613

We will unlock this thread, only if there are 20 replies, in this thread only, asking us to unlock it.

I don't think this is a SAS problem, more of the vectors create such a huge offset thrust when gimballed, it would be unreasonable to expect some reaction wheels to be able to hold it.

Well, running with that type of logic, even assuming it fixes the wheel collider issue to start with, it would require a number of rover bases of different sizes and configurations. I've made 4 wheeled rovers, 28 wheeled rovers, and everything in between. I've put wheels on boats, just to get them to the water. I think in this case, adding a premade rover base design, would cause more issues (limiting designs) than it would solve.