Superfluous J

There is a setting somewhere for that in the options screen. I don't know where offhand. You could also edit your SETTINGS.CFG file (in the same directory as ksp.exe) and change KERBIN_TIME = True to KERBIN_TIME = False

One more quick tip, IGNORE THOSE NUMBERS. Except the ap/pe numbers IN THE MAP while you're trying to make your orbit, ignore them all. Just make your circle roughly like their circle and going in the direction of their dots. Seriously I wish that info was hidden, it's caused far more trouble than help.

I actually assumed it jettisoned all the fuel that the engine could use, like some planes do before landing. Never tested it, though. I agree it seems a bit useless

I assumed you were talking about rockets because we're on the Kerbal Space Program forum, discussing alternative ways to build... well... rockets in that game. But I see no reason we shouldn't have procedural parts for rovers either.

Actually that's some of the best fun for me But you have a point about incessant launches to LKO. Each of those 10-minute trips I can cut out is worth 30 in the VAB in my opinion. This is even easier to do now in stock with the "hold prograde" or "hold maneuver" markers. I hear Mechjeb had this already but I never played with it. It seemed to be among the more reasonable things for the game to do for you and am glad it's now stock. I've successfully unloaded and loaded the dishwasher during a Moho insertion burn

I've tried all methods, actually, and the one I like the most is to make each addition autonomous but have all the extra stuff be removable either by decoupling, undocking, or (in the case of small engines and RCS jets) via Kerbal Attachment System.

Then the bug is that that cache can exceed the total available (To Unity 4) memory supply.

Wait, Northstar, your FRIENDS are deciding if YOU are good enough for someone else? I don't think your problem is dating (or not). It's your friends. You don't have good ones.

Having played both Kethane and Karbonite, I always seem to find a spot that has all 3 requirements within what I consider reasonable deviations: Equatorial, within 5 degrees (so a 10 degree band around the equator) High Concentration, the top percentage number. i.e. if there are 6% areas but not 7% areas, I can land in an area that is 6.#% Relatively Level, 10 degree slope or less. From what I've seen of the two maps they've shown so far I don't expect that to change much on default settings.

Using that logic, you could argue that the freedom we have with rockets right now is WAY too great. Really we should just design the payload, and then the game will tell us if we've collected enough surface samples and temperature readings to launch it into orbit based on its weight and dimensions. And hey, why not skip all that and just put it in orbit if we met the criteria?

Currently, the biggest thing stopping them is this huge project they've undertaken, and possibly a fairly new and aggressive release timetable they're under to release that project. Maybe you've heard of it After 1.0 comes out, then I hope the only thing stopping them is the front door to the office. Which will hopefully be unlocked and have a coffee machine right behind it.

Doom2 - - - Updated - - - That was just to test. But Doom2 was the first game I bought for PC, as I bought it with my first PC ever in late 1993. Before that it was an Apple and a Timex Sinclair 1000 On that Apple I had the original Elite which is still one of my favorites ever, as well. Can I also say Adventure on ATARI? That was a great. Still fun today if you can find the ports and clones that have been cobbled together over the years. I have particularly fond memories of Indenture.

I wonder if you loaded every piece of terrain scatter on your orbit (was it equatorial?) so when it had to load it again it was referenced. This would make it not a leak, though still able to easily crash a machine if you have mods installed or jump to several planets in a single session.

IIRC it was a Reddit challenge, launch something to... Mun? Don't remember, maybe just to orbit. Doesnt' matter. Launch it with every single engine facing downward to start.

I would personally love HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of things on the surface of each world, procedurally placed and chosen from a large enough set of things that they remain interesting. These things would have little biomes that gave extra science, or money for surface samples, or .... I don't know. These biomes would literally be "landed on this thing" which could make getting temperature readings... interesting. And all surface survey contracts should be centered on these items, and instead of just taking the reading within 5km of the random point, you'd actually have to nail the item. Oh, and they'd be targetable, once you were within visual range of them.

Ah. I see. You think I want Squad to put this in the game in spite of it being against the core spirit of the game. This is not what I want. I want procedural-everything-that-can-be-procedural to BE the core spirit of the game. Regarding specially produced vs mass produced, the MILLISECOND that a second launch of the same rocket is cheaper than the first, I'll rethink my stance that every single rocket is specially built.

I hate ideas like this. Why should I pay more to work with a more logical setup? I'd be like putting PreciseNode in the game but charging $10 Kerbucks every time you use it simply to encourage us to use the worse way to do it. And in case you don't know, procedural tanks are already limited by tech. You can only make tanks that are about as big as those you'd unlock with each tech tree node.

I gotta say having used the SETI Balance mod for just a little while, I am already having a hard time just LOOKING at the vast array of parts in the VAB in my non-procedural install. I think that once I finish my current YouTube series, I'll never use stock fuel tanks (or SRBs, or nosecones, or...) again.

I've never done it (I have fundamental problems with adding stuff to my ships that makes them heavier with no benefit) but it can't be that hard. Radial decoupler rotated 90 degrees, run the structural panels up from them around your rocket, then add 6 or 8 symmetry and some struts at the top and bam. You could even save it as a subassembly to use on other rockets. Assuming you can launch a ship that has (6 or 8 * (number of panels it takes per side + 1 for the decoupler + 1 for the strut) ) extra parts (and their mass)... go for it.

Hover your mouse over the AN or DN marker. If it says 180 degrees (or close) your orbit is backwards.

The only thing I can think is that the game for some reason isn't accepting the "probeCoreOcto_4294499164" as a valid probe core. Have you tried this with a stock Octo? You don't need to do the mssion. Just use a stock Octo probe core, slap a solar panel and an antenna on it, and put it on the launch pad. That thing that is not checked should become checked instantly if it qualifies. Scratch that. I forgot craft files gave unique number identifiers to parts so they would not be duplicated in the game. This IS a stock Octo. And if it doesn't qualify, I suggest you back up your entire KSP install and start a new one with NO mods, and try then. Because it's almost gotta be some weird mod interaction that's causing this. I've never had this problem.

Many companies close on weekends, and many employees have weekends off even for those companies that are open. It is possible that everybody who has a way of knowing is out until tomorrow morning.

You know what? I was thinking of them wrong. I thought if you wanted to rotate left to right you increased or decreased the spin on the "left/right" wheels, but that's not correct, is it? They're more like gyroscopes, which would eventually spin down. Awww heck I change my vote back to "leave 'em like they are, it's no fun to run out of rotational authority no matter if it's 'realistic' or not."

I will say, these issues would be far better if the contract individually greened everything. Much easier to tell what's wrong if it says: Launch a new probe with an antenna, power generation, and a thermometer.

I like saturation tied not to raw ability but to the axes and directions, with the ability to desaturate them by paying RCS. Maybe you don't even need RCS thrusters for the purpose, it just costs rcs fuel and we pretend there are tiny dedicated thrusters specifically to desaturate the wheels. Also, so long as as you can turn at least 180 in all directions, you literally don't ever need to desaturate the wheels, just be a little smart with how you turn. And of course wheels would saturate very quickly with SAS on when landed, and for that purpose I think there should be a way to automatically turn off SAS upon landing. Or maybe automatically turn off reaction wheels when landed and turn them back on when you take off.