Superfluous J

The mods I use (that I've tried) seem to work. And none of them caused me to crash or anything. I just started a new game instead of continuing, so don't know about any old save compatibility issues. Haven't tried tunnels yet. Looking forward to it.

I'm sure there are edge cases, but if it involves building, testing, or piloting a ship under active control, then I'm happy with it. If it involves time warping to get that ship somewhere or do anything else that requires time warp due to limitations of the simulation, I accept it but would prefer it didn't happen. If it involves right clicking various things, time warping until a countdown timer ends, or things like that I'll happily lose them. Examples: Launching to orbit: I will happily do that hundreds of times. Thousands even. That's the game. Time warping to Jool: I will begrudgingly do that because that's a side effect of the simulation. Though if there was a way, I'd love to be able to right click my ship's orbit and say "jump to next SOI change" and have the game just do that. Sending science home and waiting for the transmission: That is boring to me and I wish it wasn't a thing. I understand that in 1 out of every 47 billion (there I go with hyperbole again) cases, you are doing something crazy like diving into Jool's atmosphere and it adds a tiny bit of gameplay to not just insta-send the transmission, but in every other case it just means you have to stop doing the fun stuff and instead sit there and wait. You can't even jump to another ship because the current ship will just stop even trying to transmit until you come back. Here's the funny part: When it comes to scanning and drilling - one of which takes no time and one of which requires waiting "just to wait" - I'm actually cool with them both. It does feel like the mining should take time even though there is no active game playing time happening. Partially this is because - in pretty much every situation I'll ever be in - it will be exactly as if mining WAS instant because I don't set up an all-in-one hopper type ship, I set up a ground base. By the time I visit the base I expect all its tanks to be full and ready to fill up my ship. Scanning, if it was not instant, would not bother me in the least. I've done the Kethane scanning dance and didn't find it grindy at all however I'm happy to avoid it now. I have no problem with all of that. Until I heard it was instant I just assumed there would be some sort of scanning mechanic. After a few minutes of thought, though, I concluded that the benefit (lack of drudgery) outweighed the loss (extra stuff to think about and do with your scanning ship) and am happy with it.

There is no 'none (more black)' option. I've not been to none of those places.

I can't speak for everybody but in my personal case, you presume correct. IMO science should just happen, and the reports should just collect in the pods as you go with some sort of indication that you're doing well. Like the Cities: Skylines "building upgraded" ding and a little "+1 temperature scan" text popping up out of the capsule that stored it. I play this game to fly cool and unique ships around a simulated solar system and get into and out of jams. I don't play it to pan, zoom, right click, left click, misclick, find a way to get the Kerbals feet (seriously. Their feet) close enough to the experiment to grab it, and all that junk. I am likewise glad that I'm not involved in what nails to use when upgrading the VAB.

You don't need 4500 to launch from Kerbin. A mildly efficient launch with a fairly streamlined launcher should be able to do it with 3500 or less. Also, you don't need 3500 to land on Kerbin, because you'll get all that from aerobraking. Same with landing on Duna. Also, you should bring 10-25% extra dV for inefficiencies. As you get better and learn more, you'll need less but I try to always bring 10% and even then - I run out sometimes. That sounds reasonable, without actually building a craft, sure. That's the thinking you should have, yes. 1. Is building a rocket of this type even advisable? 2. Are my dv calcs remotely correct? 3. Are there only two choices when playing this game. MechJeb, and all your engineering questions are answered for you, or stock and it's trial and error, and trial and error, and trial and error . . .

...since 1.0 came out, I assume. Heck, all told I've probably installed it 20 times myself over the years.

The title of this thread is fightin' words. I'm merely responding in kind.

To give us something to (forget to) remove before every launch.

If you're going argue realism, about 75% of the items in the game should be unlocked at the start of the game, and the other 25% are the SLS parts that used to be in the NASA pack but are now just part of the game.

I use them for pretty much everything. I don't always follow them (or even intend to when setting them up) but it's always nice to at least know where to point and about how long (and how much dV) a burn should take. I also stack nodes when planning, though you can't do more than 3 without causing too much wonkiness. The subsequent nodes are more just to make sure I've got the juice to get the job done. Usually, it' something like an ejection burn, mid-course correction, and an injection burn.

KSC Switcher appears to totally erase all in-flight flights upon exiting and/or entering a game, killing all Kerbals not in the Astronaut Complex. This occurs in an otherwise totally stock KSP 1.0.2 with only KSP Switcher 0.2 installed. Below is the output_log.txt from a session where I started a new sandbox save, put a stock ship on the launch pad with Jeb, Bill, and Bob in it, then went back to the space center and exited the save. The load summary screen said 0 active flights. Loading the save, there were indeed 0 active flights and the 3 astronauts were listed as MIA in the astronaut complex. If I load an active save, the same thing happens but immediately upon loading. The save will list - for example - 5 active flights but upon loading they are all gone and the Kerbals in them are dead. [defunct site link removed by moderator]

Hohmann transfers meet the target 180 degrees away from where you start. It's how they work. Burning to slow down in a high orbit is inefficient, though. You want to come in low and burn at your very low periapsis. Or better yet, aerobrake. To hit a high orbit I bet you want to aerobrake somewhere in 22-23km range. Put your periapais about 22.5km and let air resistance do the rest.

You want to get to Duna in 2 *DAYS*?

I suspect that simply adding a few orbits won't be enough for most people who don't like the current system. Cool to hear about SCANsat though. Integration with the stock overlay would be awesome!

That's all m4v is saying...

I've seen none. I kinda wish that 50% or 10% or whatever of tourists join the space program and bring their XP along with them. Alas, I've yet to see one.

I'm surprised that nobody has cared enough to make a mod to do this. I know there's ScanSat, but I mean a mod to simply* turn the insta-scan into a you-must-timewarp-for-no-good-reason scan. * CAUTION: non-programmer using the word "simply" do describe how to implement a feature

Just wait a while before posting. I don't remember the time but it's not that long. 15 minutes or something?

Don't worry, they're doing a full optimization pass for Beta 1.0 Unity 5.

I think this thread is important. It shows those who want to put the work in and do the testing how to get x64 running. With any luck, those are the exact people who won't run into every mod thread in this forum with "ur mod sux u bork mah game" posts when the fault is actually theirs for using something that is known to be buggy. Squad didn't drop 64 bit support because it was buggy. They dropped it because the mod using community as a whole couldn't handle the responsibility.

"Gratuitous" in common (American at least) speech means "excessive." "Unwarranted" implies that. It also tends to imply that the excessive unwarranted thing is done for fun or dramatic effect. I assume "Gratuitous Re-Entry" would be a mod that would make re-entry be crazy with flames and maybe simulated little explosions and whatnot. I don't know, because according to a very quick Google search I conclude it does not exist.

I'd have to see the pictures, but I think MathmoRichard means that the dotted one's brighter spots are not in the same place as the lines or splotches. If that's the case, it's a bug, I think, though I've never seen it myself.

Lose the side boosters. They are giving you WAY too much thrust. Just don't use them at all. Compensate by replacing the swivel with a Reliant, and relying on pod torque to do your gravity turn and 4 of the tier-1 fins (the really cheap ones) to keep the rocket straight. Having all your authority in one place (and slowing down!) will eliminate the wiggling. I can't stress enough to DO YOUR GRAVITY TURN. You are going way to high way too fast and wasting way too much fuel fighting gravity and then adding sideways velocity that you should already have. By the time you're 10km up, you should be at LEAST at the 60 degree mark. By the time your apoapsis is at 50, you should be SIDEWAYS. You did well keeping it straight, and turned well as the air thinned, but early on you need to be more aggressive. But not too aggressive EDIT: Sorry I wrote all that after watching only the first launch. The 2nd and 3rd launches were better, but still lose early thrust (and that weight) and turn earlier and more slowly.

The center of mass of your rocket is too far backward in the final stage. Try a Terrier in the final stage. Also, just a couple general tips: Those radial engines are not pulling their weight. Either you've trust limited them or they're really bad in lower atmosphere (I don't remember now what their Isp curve is). Replace them with something better (solids, perhaps?) Your gravity turn is all but nonexistent. By the time you're at 10km you should be 45 degrees over and you should do that tilt smoothly. Also? Thank you for putting up a video. It makes troubleshooting these kinds of issues very easy.