bivouac

This bug ONLY occurs when at the KSC or when you're otherwise in control of a vessel. I can move the camera around just fine in both the VAB and tracking station. I've heard of some people having issues in the VAB, so I want to reiterate that this DOES NOT apply to that issue. Excruciating detail for the devs (if they see this) since this one seems rather uncommon but can be reliably and repeatedly induced if affected by it More or less, the camera appears locked in position once you're on the launch pad, in space, or at the main KSC view/selection menu. (Whatever you want to call it when you click return to space center.) After holding down RMB and applying constant movement to the mouse, maybe once every 5 seconds or so you'll notice the camera move, like, maybe 3mm. That's not an exaggeration. This also holds true when hitting tab and trying to see is mouse-look works. Nada. It's worth mentioning that snap still works just fine. "v" will still snap to the different view angles just fine, but you still won't be able to move the camera. When flying though, if I go into the map view, I can still move the camera around there. Transition back to vessel view, nada. After some fiddling, I figured out what was causing the problem. It's probably worth mentioning that I play A LOT of light sims like DCS and MSFS, and normally would have somewhere in the range of about 9 or more separate devices plugged into my desktop at any given time. I only mention that because the only other people I've found who also experienced this exact issue also have a fairly notable amount of flight sim hardware that isn't of the Thrustmaster or Logitech variety or just a joystick and base. Thus far, I have yet to run into any deviation from that factor. Source of the issue and quick/temp fix: For whatever reason, KSP2 wasn't playing nice with one specific panel. If it matters, it's the Winwing Super Taurus F-18 dual throttle and startup panel. They're attached to each other, but the panel and throttle have their own respective USB ports independent of one another. My issue was specific to the startup panel only. The second I unplugged the startup panel, the camera suddenly snapped into position and I was able to move it freely around the launch pad/KSC view/vessel again. I tried plugging it back in to see if the problem would occur again, aaaand it did. I have absolutely nothing bound to any of my peripherals in the game. I only play it with mouse and keyboard. (First started playing in 2012. Old habits die hard.) Windows reads all of the different devices I have as game controllers and I can say with certainty they're not something that's just emulating keyboard keys/presses. Most other games will read them as a standard joy0_0 or joy2_[whatever button/switch input pressed] , so nothing surprising there. It also didn't matter if the software for calibrating/adjusting the controls was running or not. That panel has over something like over 20 separate switches and most of those are 3-position, so maybe there was hard ceiling for inputs per device. However, one of the other people I came across said that it was only occurring with his Virpil throttle, which is well under that amount. I have a couple of other peripherals that are comparable to the problem one as well (though mostly multi-pos rotary switches rather than just switches), yet there's zero issue with them still being plugged in. Maybe just to spitball a couple possibilities: A) There's some threshold with either a max total number of inputs across all devices cumulatively, or total # of USB devices that once you go over it, the camera is the thing that bugs out for some reason. Might be something stuck in a loop trying to check some input that it couldn't assign but reads as pressed. B) I didn't see any option for it in the settings menu, but if the game isn't blanking out or freezing panel/control states once you're loaded in and in control of the vessel (i.e. - ignoring whatever position they're in until they register a change), there's possibly some combo or specific problem child that the game can't make heads or tails of. Regardless of whether or not any controls have been assigned to that device. In either case, why only the camera is affected when viewing outside in general is its own mystery. Though it's probably safe to say that the KSC view is using the same block of code that the vessel view is using.

I'm seeing the same issue. Other than the gigantic plasma trail, everything else seems to be working just fine with it. I'll admit though that the over-sized plasma trail takes away from the aesthetic of the mod somewhat. Perhaps it has something to do with the way that the stock reentry effects were altered for the latest update? That's a complete guess.

Two download buttons from the host. One download link doesn't work and the other one that actually does work has the zip file flagged as a virus. Is this an overly cautious antivirus or Is this plugin pretty much dead in the water at this point?

Though entirely subjective and arbitrary (pointless really), I feel like there should be some account of total part count at any given time. Treat it like a constant at a single time in the flight. The kraken will attack with or without service bays.

I'd name the asteroid "Pen 15". While I'm sure society would label me as "that guy", my inner 14-year-old would laugh mightily.

This sounds eerily similar to the P vs NP problem.

While it may appear that the difference between the two beams of light are faster than light, their photons still obey the universal speed limit. One photon is not actually traveling faster than the speed of light, it's just the appearance. The effect of what happens because of this is more or less the doppler effect. (Better known as red-shift.) That's the thing about the speed of light. It's value isn't relative to some other singular object; it's relative to EVERYTHING, not just the difference between an arbitrary reference point. (Hence the "relativity" portion of Special Relativity and General Relativity.) This is kind of like the example of two trains passing. If you're in a train passing another train that's moving in the opposite direction at the same speed, it'll appear that the other train is moving at twice the speed. (Lets say you're both moving at 30mph.) This is because of the reference point to which you are basing this experience off of. From your reference point, the train appears to be moving at 60mph. Are you or the other train moving at 60mph? No. It's just the appearance associated with your point of reference. Relative to the system both trains are in, neither are moving at 60mph; they're each going 30mph. Why? They're both basing their speed off of a static surrounding of zero motion: The Earth with which they're riding on. With good reason, we don't include the orbital speed of the Earth on automotive means of transportation. We base it off of a static point for both trains, not just one of them. That's kind of the idea here. Perspective has to be relative to a total system, not just a singular arbitrary point. It would be worthwhile to wrap your head around the fact that absolutely NOTHING in the universe is at a point of 0 cartesian motion. Everything is always in some kind of motion, and there's a speed limit to how fast it can go relative to static surroundings. With light in you're example, the only thing you would perceive would be a color change in the light.

In order to even have access to the mods, you need to already own the game. Youtube on the other hand is accessible to everyone. Free advertisement is a bigger deal than most would believe, especially on channels that get thousands of unique user hits daily from people that don't even play the game) Additionally, it's not like every swinging dick with a KSP youtube video got access. It was a selective process. I guess you could say that the problem with handing it out to the mod'ers would be: who would get it; who wouldn't; and would it be fair for some to get it and others not? It's substantially more subjective. Not releasing it early to those who make mods puts everyone in equal standing. We all have our own definitions of what is useful in the game.

What you're looking for can be found on Khan Academy. It's completely free and he explains things very well. The videos cover everywhere from basic arithmetic is beginner calculus. Additionally, they supply practice problems so you can test yourself. If you're looking for more difficult problems, another guy called PatirckJMT goes over those things more complicated than what Khan covers. The site doesn't have any practice problems, but he gives solid examples. If you're looking for a book to learn the basics of physics, look for a physics book by Resnick and Halliday. The older version from the 60's/70's is superior to the newer more "modern" versions. Reason being, the first edition was written before calculators became a common tool used in mathematics. For this reason, the book explains the concepts in terms that don't look for obscure numbers as answers so much as they do explain concepts. Once you understand the concepts behind the multiple disciplines of mathematics, the rest is just plugging in. For those things ONLY space related, there are a number of publications regarding celestial mechanics that can be found for free as a PDF. Essentially, celestial mechanics is the physics behind planetary travel. Note, however, that virtually every resource you'll find on the topic is going to assume strong familiarization with the mathematics and basic Newtonian physics. Links: https://www.khanacademy.org/ http://patrickjmt.com/

Depends upon the gas and its surroundings. In atmospheric conditions, nanoseconds if not femtoseconds. If literally anything come into contact with it, the noble gas cation will oxidize whatever it touches. (Though probably not another atom of the same species.) It would be worthwhile to not that it's not fairly easy to strip an electron off of a noble gas. Quite the opposite actually. While the methodology may seem simple, the actual process requires quite a bit of energy. In terms of kJ/mol (kilojoules per mole), thermite releases about 850 kJ/mol. Removing an electron from Neon requires about 2000 kJ/mol. Helium and neon for no known stable compounds. They retain their electrons to a rather extreme extent. I've seen He+ and He2+ tossed around in coursework examples, but those are strictly for number crunching. In so many words, it just doesn't happen. Argon compounds have been observed under extremely controlled conditions, but they do not occur naturally (that we know of anyway). It would also be worthwhile to note that virtually every case of a noble gas forming something almost always involves fluorine. Fluorine very aggressively strips electrons from other elements/compounds/whatever-is-around-it. (Please note as well that I'm talking about fluorine and NOT fluoride. One obliterates and the other fights cavities.) It's a pretty weird and unique element, allowing it to bond with other elements that would typically never bond with anything else. Why mention the bonding? Things like fluorine reduce the amount of external energy input required to strip an electron. If we're going to do it using a photons, we'll need to create the same extreme conditions using just light. The energy requirements are a bit... intense. Think of this stuff like a complimentary system. When we put energy in, the additional energy needs to translate either into the system or to its surroundings. When we remove an electron from a system, if it has nothing from which to gain the electron lost, it's kind of on its own in a quasi-stable state. However, if we add an electron, the system can readily eject that electron if there's too much energy in the system. The positive charge exerted by the nucleus would be unable to successfully hold onto the introduced electron. With such a weak grip, the electron will be lost. All of these elements want to stay in the most stable state possible relative to their surroundings. Remove an electron, and it'll hold onto the others more tightly. Add an electron, and it'll interact with the other electrons (causing the electron cloud to expand) and nucleus from its own separate orbital. (Look up s, p, d, and f orbitals. It'll either confuse you more or help you understand better.) Generally, all atoms want some sense of a completed orbital shell. If we have just one electron in its own orbital, the system would become more stable if it got rid of the additional electron. In something like a noble gas, the amount of energy from intermolecular forces and repulsion would exceed the energy required to retain the electron. Thus, it gets ejected from out system. Similarly, this is why things in the first group in the periodic table form cations. There's a lone electron in its own orbital. If you look in a reference table such as the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, there are actual values for all of this and so much more. Is it possible? Absolutely! Is it practically feasible? Sweet Jesus no! HOWEVER! When we start getting into the heavier elements, the sheer mass and charge of the native element may be able to retain an additional electron. Given a huge charge and a whole lot of electrons, the impact from a single additional electron would be substantially less than if we added an electron to a lighter element. The same goes for removing an electron as well. This is why Xenon is kind of an ideal candidate for such things. Radon would be an even better candidate, but it makes the Geiger counter go tickety-tick-tick. Also, there's less of it. Eh. I'm only partially satisfied with this explanation. Let me know if you want more elaboration/clarification.

When I click "disable" in the manager, it straight-up deletes my mods. If it is supposed to move the files to the --MODS-- folder, it's not doing it on my machine. either I'm doing something wrong or something with my machine is preventing it from functioning properly. There's no The mods are either enabled, or if I try to disable them, they're removed from the list and the gamedata folder. I've tried running the MM as an administrator and enabling the folders to read/write rather than just Read-Only.

Beyond evaporation, the surface tension of water (or soapy water for that matter) wouldn't be strong enough to contain the gas in a vacuum. The bubble would burst from its own internal pressure independently of evaporation. You would need to use a liquid with an unusually high surface tension to maintain the bubble. What you would want to check out would be a material that can maintain a liquid state in a vacuum. Phase diagrams are useful for this kind of information. Essentially, you want something that stays liquid in the presence of a vacuum, regardless of temperature. If the surface tension is strong enough, evaporation may be negated.

This has been fantastic. I've started using this in conjunction with MechJeb to begin plotting and analyzing fuel consumption as a function of roll angles for achieving orbit, accounting for various vessel mass. Pretty much, this is exactly what I needed. I'm sure there's some equation (or series of equations) for this which is well known in engineering, but for now, figuring it out myself and deriving relationships is enjoyable. (As an presently unemployed analytical chemist, I'm thoroughly geeking out over this. Ah... Data.) One big question: Is the y-axis on the display simply for in-game aesthetics, or does it have an impact the output data in the .CSV file? I haven't tinkered with it yet as I'm trying to keep what I currently have consistent. (400 x 400 @ 1s intervals per datum.) It can take up a bit of the screen for larger graphs.Also, as an idea (request), would it be possible to allow for size of the in-game graph to be independent of the x and y limits set for data recording? A 600 point x and y axis is rather large on the GUI. All I'm really interested in is collecting the CSV data for excel. Perhaps there's a hotkey for the output that I overlooked, as I know you can set start and stop in the VAB.

The idea behind building hype is to secure R&D funding. Get people all excited so they throw dollars at you. (Or at least show progress and potential.) (I know you're being facetious, I just feel like answering. ) The amount of Xenon gas you would need to do that would be... A lot. It's over $100 per 100g of the material. While that may not sound too bad, we need to consider that it is considerably heavier than most other things. The further down the periodic table you go, the heavier you get. The differences are not subtle either.

Short Answer: It's very reactive and predictable. Long Answer: While not a rocket scientist, the chemist in me feels compelled to answer. This has everything to do with the formation of aluminium oxide. We utilize it as a propellent not just because it's flammable, but because it has a MASSIVE enthalpy of formation, ∆H_ƒ. That is, when we form aluminium oxide from pure aluminium, the process of forming the product releases a whole lot of energy. Uranium was mentioned in previous pages as a propellent, but its efficiency and I_sp would be mitigated due to its intense mass and the fact that its enthalpy of formation is weaker than that of aluminium by several hundred kJ/mol. With that being said, using aluminium allows for a lighter fuel that releases more energy than would uranium. I really can't understate just how heavy and dense uranium is. Consider that you average golf ball weighs just over one and a half ounces. That same gold ball made out of uranium would weigh just over one and a half pounds. If we use a heavier material to generate thrust, we subsequently increase the amount of thrust needed to propel the rocket. By using a lighter material, we can produce that same amount of thrust and use the saved weight towards a spacecraft rather than fuel weight compensation. It was mentioned that aluminium may, "react violently". That's precisely what you want when making a rocket engine. A lightweight substance that combusts/oxidizes predictably. Remember that essentially, all rocket engines are doing is regulating a controlled explosion. (Which is why they're extremely dangerous to fly and operate.) You want your fuel to produce a violent reaction for thrust while maintaining a predictable nature. While other materials can be used, we should also think about that cost of those materials. Aluminium is hands-down one of the single most abundant elements on the planet. It also happens to make a decent rocket fuel. Think about it like this. You would be paying 90% more money for a 10% (or less) increase in propulsion/efficiency. The cost-benefit ratio tips towards the cheaper material.