Gargamel

Maybe I'm the only one seeing this, but how is a member with 1500+ posts a newcomer? Howdy though!

And as soon as you do understand it, it makes complete gameplay sense too lol.

Which is the basis of my argument. If we're looking for the most efficient orbit, it's not polar.

There was a pretty deep thread on this within the last 6 months or so, but I'm not going to try to find it. I have to vote for the third option, but only because I'd rather see more game mechanics improvements first, not that I think it's useless. In the meantime, the alt-f5 combo will let you name the quick save, so you can add your own dates. You can also open up the save file folder and look at the creation date. Yes, they are both poor man's fixes, but it works.

I think you're still missing the point of the replies above. KSP is a game designed for space flight. The removal of vehicles in the air was required for the game play to be smooth and playable. Over time, people started doing the things you wanted to do, and they also ran into the same limitations. So a variety of mods have been developed to handle this issue, and make the game playable in a way it wasn't intended to be. The mechanism isn't broken, it does exactly what it was intended to do. This is like getting upset your car can't go sideways to help parallel park. The base design isn't good at it, but there are features that can be added to make it doable.

Wring again!

2311 Bah no good pics.....

I know steam has a refund policy, you should look into that, as they handled the transaction. But that said, it works for just about everybody else, so we can probably help you get it working.

It might require advanced tweakables to be enabled under settings, but you can right click on the flap after placing it and click "Deploy reversed". It's for those times when the game gets it backwards and uses them the wrong way.

hmph.... that's a new one.. Verify your file integrity through steam, make sure everything there is kosher. I'd also run a diagnostic on your RAM. But those are both Guesses.... I really have no idea. It seems KSP just goes Poof. Maybe some other's will have some ideas...... my goto German @4x4cheesecake?

A polar orbit may or may not give you full coverage of the planet. Given a planets radius, it's rotational period, and your satellite's orbital period, you might end up with your scanner only covering the same spots over and over. You could easily be left with patches that you will never see due to a resonance of the variables. You will have to be within one field of view of the poles though. So if your camera can only see 15' of the planet at at time, any inclination less than 75' will never see the poles. So in this case, the correct answer lies between 75' and 90' (inclusive).

Well.....Guess I was wrong there....

Wrong!

2287

I've been wanting one for a while. The way I RP my game is the same as the OP....

I disagree completely. I am totally against any system other than a single reaction, but I am on a number of other forums that do not have a reaction system, and I often find myself wanting to add that simple little reaction to a post. I could see renaming it from "like" to "react" though. I often just want to use it to acknowledge a post, in particular when someone has answered or corrected one of my posts. Often a written out response isn't necessary, just a simple nod towards the poster will do. But the best solution, IMO though, is just leaving it as is. We're a happy functional little community, and a lot of our culture is based on the single like system. To change it now would alter the way the community works, and I don't think it needs changing. I am for removing the "rate the thread" option though. What one person finds as an idiotic or meaningless post/thread, might have some useful benefit for others, so rating the thread has no real benefit, especially since you can't see it until you are actually in the thread.

How does a better timewarp prevent the need to drop out of warp every 14 days or so to transmit science?

Including the comments above, adding a resource like thorium to the stock game opens up a huge can of worms for other things that should be stock.

Western Lowlands... take me home!!!

We're probably going to need the output.log to help:

Real error that happened to me yesterday: My CNC machine crashed, and it generated an error that it's GPS thought it had been moved, which is designed to prevent it from being exported to certain countries that are on non-proliferation lists. The thing weighs in at a ton or so, so moving it really takes some serious effort. The fix for this error is to enter a specific code, which we did not have, So we had to call in the tech support guy to come fix it. Upon his arrival, he told us the code has be generated by a combination of the geo location data from the GPS, the time and date, and the serial number of the machine. The generating algorithm is only accessible by one engineer in their corporate headquarters. In order for the guy to release the code to the tech, he had to have a picture taken of the technician in front of the machine, another outside the building showing the address, and another at the nearest street. So once he did that, he got the code, and unlocked the machine.

The fourth one is definitely a Zero, and I would say the same for the third, but the wingtips don't match exactly. That's the problem with a lot of artists renditions.

Betcha LGG will get around to updating it soon enough. Be patient, he has a lot of work to do with all those mods he's accumulated.

You'll be less efficient with a true polar orbit, as you'll pass over the exact same spot each orbit (the poles). Let's say your camera can see a 10' field of view, so an inclination of something like 85' will still see the poles as you pass, but you will cover more new ground with each pass. As for efficiency, there will be some orbits that might fall into some resonance with the rotation of the planet, and you'll end up cover the same, or almost the same, ground with each orbit. You'd want to setup your orbit so each pass covers mainly new ground. I have no idea as to the actual maths, but there would be an equation that would reveal the optimum orbital inclination for a given altitude and camera field of view. From playing with scansat in the past, I would think with a halfway decent field of view (10-15'), you should be able to cover the entire planet of Kerbin within a few weeks.

Very cool Snark!