Superfluous J

Random thought, Jen(ediah?) Jeb is the online name of a Minecraft programmer, his wife's name is Jenny. Other than that I got nuthin.

While the Transfer Window Planner doesn't have a setting to do flybys, flybys are the same as transfers without the 2nd part. You can still use the tool and just ignore the total dV and look at the dV to eject. If it's not actually the lowest at the same place it should be close.

Sadly this man knows nothing of marketing. Not only does he not put the link in his posts, he doesn't even put it in his signature! Compatibility Popup Blocker

Not a planet, but if you are REALLY good at rendezvous (because it's more of a rendezvous than an intercept) I believe Gilly is the single lowest dV target out there. A quick handwavy calculation based on the numbers in a dV map tells me it's about 900dV less to get to Gilly and return to Kerbin, than it is to get to Duna and return to Kerbin. This is assuming you aerobrake at Eve to get to Gilly, at Duna to land there, and at Kerbin when coming home to the greatest effect in all 3 cases.

This part of the discussion is over. Kerbals are gendered and the ones we see are male. The developers will be adding females but haven't gotten to it yet.

You can also go to them in the tracking station and delete them. I do this for anything that will obviously crash eventually or be thrown out of a planet's SOI, or is orbiting the Sun. You'll never encounter them accidentally and they sap up precious clock cycles on your computer.

Weird. I disagree with you on at least 2 points. First, it's not a flame war. It's a (mostly) reasonable (though heated) discussion about a proposed game feature that a lot of us feel will not only just not add to the game, but will actually detract from it. Second, I play career almost exclusively (I only use Sandbox to test things and most of the time I don't even do that... I just make sure i have backups of my persistence file and then rely on reverting to VAB) and I was against this. I don't see why anybody who only plays sandbox would care what happens in career mode. I see Maxmaps' retraction not as losing a feature, but as retaining one: The feature where you can watch my videos, see the ship I used, build that ship, and do what I did. There will be no "Weird. He got into orbit just after dumping his launch stage and I can't get that far even though I'm doing it EXACTLY the same way." We've gone over the arguments for and against far too much in this thread so I won't rehash it, but thought that aspect (We *WERE* losing something) was worth reiterating based on your comment that you are losing something because of those of use who voiced dissent.

Sorry, no. We've already discussed that you can't use skills to violate the laws of physics. The laws of conservation of the sar-chasm are immutable.

Wow 50 pages before I can catch up and post again. Good job by the Squad team for realizing the problem and addressing it. Looking forward to what they do instead. And congrats to the community, every single person who participated in this thread and did NOT get heated. It's a rare thing on these Internets to go 50 pages without resorting to spitting bile and lobbing vitriol bombs. We all get +1 to our Internet Discussion skill.

It's the future. Nowhere in the episode did they say they used conventional means to get the shuttle up there. Also, the shuttle was not central to the plot like the breaking of the laws of gravity and conservation of mass are. * You can't just create or destroy mass. SOLUTION: The creature channels mass through hyperspace or a wormhole.

I actually saw that after I posted. I could only make it through about 10 pages before voicing my opinion You can push the thrust beyond its limits. You cannot push ISP beyond its limits. You CAN seemingly go below it by screwing up.

The only way this would work is if "actual" ISP of a craft is the ISP you'd get when you multiplied what the part says times the maximum benefit you can get from the pilot. Any lesser pilot futzes with the controls in unseen ways that causes the end result to be less efficient than that "actual" ISP. I'm actually cool with that, but be up front. Your Level 10 pilot isn't getting BETTER efficiency out of the rocket. Your Level 1 pilot is swerving left and right violently during maneuvers, causing the effective ISP to be WORSE. So the ISP listed in the VAB should be perfection, and to start your Kerbals should do worse than it. And even then it's bleah to me. I don't want it.

Read the print on the strategies. It says you get X science points per Y funds, or Z rep. Then look at the contract and see how much funds or rep you'd get. Do that math and you'll see why you get so much science.

Agreed in principle but It's never a bad idea to at least use reality and what we know as a starting point. It also is never a bad idea to make it possible to get manned missions to reasonably work.

In the settings (I think right click the toolbar?) there is an option to turn the huds off. I did so, as I couldn't find controls to move them.

This question is very hard to answer. To very broadly wave a hand a it I'd say it's usually a stage or two to the upper atmosphere, another to almost orbit that is dropped to eventually "burn up" in the atmosphere (or actually if I'm using DRE), and for mun/minmus one stage to get there and land and another to come home. For further objects, it's usually one stage to eject, two more to slow down and land (if airless, otherwise that's free) and one or two to come home (usually 1. I think I'd only use 2 from Moho). I'm too lazy to add those up

I don't think it's necessary to have an orange suited female Kerbal but it wouldn't bother me if there was one. If there is, I think she should be Sally. Not for Sally Ride, but because the name goes very well with Jeb, Bill, and Bob's names. "Jeb, Bill, Bob, and Valentina Kerman" just doesn't ring true in my ears.

I really don't think we're talking about the same thing. I can get a 1500 ton asteroid in an equatorial orbit around Kerbin for the same fuel on the launch pad it would take to get an orange tank into that same orbit. How? Get that orange tank into orbit with a command pod, claw, and some nuke engines and then use it to go capture an asteroid. In fact, the orange tank would be overkill, I could probably do it with half an orange tank. And once I got the asteroid into orbit, I'd have a ship that could go get another one, and that ship would be CONNECTED TO A REFUELING STATION. It does not take dozens of orange tanks to get an asteroid into LKO. It takes a lot of dV, sure, but 99% of that dV can be done with aerobraking and Mun gravity assists.

These are stronger (if you use the strong ones) and don't require EVA. They also (unless you have KAS installed I guess) aren't attached and detached, you place them in the VAB ahead of time, for planned future connections once (say) you're attaching the parts of your station or interplanetary ship.

Okay so Infinite is a bad idea, but a class E asteroid is about 40 full orange tanks in mass. Let's say you can get something like 1/4 of it in resources (just handwavy here). Is it better to get the asteroid or launch 10 orange tanks? What about a Class X asteroid that is 1000 orange tanks in mass, or 10000? I can tell you I'd rather figure out how to wrangle one of those than I would launching a couple tanks worth of fuel over and over and over and over ... etc.

Nobody was around 100 million years ago to see if the moon was there, and they surely weren't here billions of years ago. There is nothing to say that the Moon, a 4.x billion year object, wasn't placed in orbit around the Earth 100 million years ago. Now the gravity thing was wrong, as was the whole violation of the conservation of mass. And if you'd made it to the end you'd have probably had trouble with the whole "how babies are made" handwaving. However, that doesn't change the fact this this was one of the best episodes of the season and I personally suspect I'll remember for a very long time the climactic scene when three disagreeing people (one of them a child) literally held the fate of the entire human race in their hands, and had no clue what decision to make. Doctor Who isn't science fiction so much as social commentary and Human drama hidden as a fun little show about people running around avoiding monsters.

Not if an asteroid has 50 orange tanks' worth of fuel. Or is an infinite source.

You make valid points. I never thought to compare the numbers. You can modify most any aspect of snacking in the config file. In particular, the density = .001 and the unitCost = 1 in the resources.cfg. In the patch.cfg you can edit the number of snacks per module. And finally if you dig you'll find snacks.cfg that has how many snacks are consumed per meal and how many meals there are per day.

If you go to each asteroid and refuel, and then go on to your destination then yes, this is a horrible idea. If you capture an asteroid and bring it into LKO and make a refuelling station out of it, then any non-jet-engined SSTO with a docking port becomes a SSTA(nywhere) because it takes about as much dV (or more) to get into orbit as it does to get anywhere else. And once there, you can again refuel at the captured-asteroid-fuel-depot you smartly put in orbit there.

For me personally, Xenon is not necessary. I've never used ion engines for anything other than playing around and have no real plans to use them. The only thing they're good for IMO is one-way probes and by the time I unlock them, I'm not using one-way probes. But monoprop? Moho, yes! It's not as good as fuel and oxidizer but I've never played a game with Kethane installed where I didn't at least convert SOME of it to monoprop.