FITorion

No random events. Your failure should be the result of your mistake and not a CME frying your ship. But solar wind... and solar sails to take advantage of it would be most welcome. Unless you were very close to the Sun there would be nothing visual to indicate you got struck by a CME. Your ship would just stop working for no apparent reason. Imagine all the whining we'd get on the forum. Now if you were say within 100Km of the sun... then maybe... it'd be cool to have a solar flare occasionally to dodge... But this would be rather unrealistic ... because if you're close enough to need to dodge... you're already fried.

Sky crane for no atmo. modified to have a bunch of parachutes for atmo.

well... That was fast. I'm glad they actually do mean something. In a game like this... if you're going to put numbers on something... I'd have been disappointed if they weren't a reference to something.

0x62656570 and S1 0410 1957 1928 What do you think they mean? If anything? A couple of those could be years... like the birth years of one of the devs parents? and or grand parents? That's my only idea at the moment.

Ok... I'm about 4.5Km toward the mountains from the end of the Runway. No problems so far. About how far were you when you had problems? Or perhaps you could point to the spot in this pic? Like use paint to put a red dot?

I'm trying to figure out where you were so I can drive out there and see if it does the same thing in my game.

I'm still a little confused. Did the kerbals die? Sinking into the ground a little is normal and happens when the displayed surface and the actual surface don't quite match up. This used to be true for the whole planet but has gotten much much better in recent updates. But such things shouldn't kill your kerbals. Can you zoom out in normal view and do a zoomed in map view pic?

This is where pictures and or video would really help. I do not know what you mean by fall through the map. I don't know where you were. Clarification is need. Once you're able to explain what happened then you can post it in the bug report forum if you like. Also some of us might fly out to where you're having a problem and see if we get the same thing... but we have to know where it is first.

RSS has been around for a long time now and I still have no real idea what it's for or how to use it. I've looked it up a few times and always get confused. I tired using one once... all it did was add a bookmark with all the past articles in it and did not live update or notify me when there was a new posting... which is what I thought it was for. I'm also not going to be downloading any separate program. If it's not built into the browser... or maybe a plugin then it's worthless. Also thanks FEichinger. I had no idea there was now a Daily Kerbal forum. Though I'm puzzled why there are not comments allowed... If Squad were just going to use the forum for announcements of articles... the Announcement forum is right there... why not use that?

If it was chute, pod, tank, and engine... And you opened the chute... (which is a mistake I've seen many new players make) Then PART of your rocket exploded. Not all... and not the most important part... the Pod. Career mode isn't done yet. The game isn't done yet. Tutorials and instructions are things you add right before final release. If you add them before then you have to keep updating them over and over again as things change. It wastes time that they could otherwise spend making the game systems that they'll add tutorials for later. In the mean time you have these forums and a wealth of youtube videos at your disposal. The game does have a steep learning curve. I do expect there will be some sort of pop up tutorial later on in development. But your memory shouldn't be so bad that you can't remember where you've been and what you've done... I do think the UI for reviewing stored experiments could use a little work. You used knowledge from the tutorial to make it. There are certain bits of knowledge I expect everyone ... even those who are not fans of space and scifi... to know. Orbits are round or oblong. You need to be outside of the atmosphere. These two things should be sufficient knowledge to make orbit. If they add too much hand holding then the sense of accomplishment and self discovery are ruined. I agree there should be some initial hand holding... The key is striking a balance.

As I remember it... it was always 500m above sea level and it didn't matter if the ground rushing up toward you was at 1Km... and you'd smash right into it. Now it detects when you're 500m over a surface and deploys. It slows you down almost instantly and there's not much difference if any in velocity between when you land and say 400m just after opening. Why would you want it to fully open higher? It won't slow you down more. It would just make the wait to get to the surface longer. If you're having problems with velocity... I suggest adding more chutes...

The game requires a basic knowledge of orbital mechanics. Something anyone who has even a little bit of interest in space technology should have already sought out. From that starting point you can learn the more detailed ins and outs through the game. But it also requires a bit of imagination and a daring spirit to attempt the missions out to the Mun and beyond in order to really get the quantities of science to unlock the higher tech level parts. The real world in way more complicated... and this is about as simple a simulation as it's possible to get. Career Mode is a Tutorial at this moment. It's easier than Sandbox. It's way easier than the real world. I'm sorry if you think it's too hard... We can try to answer your questions but in the end you need to have the determination to learn or we can't help you.

Could you describe it for those of us who have never heard the term?

Why? It'd be exactly the same as having those flights unmanned. You can of course choose not to use it as you like but it seems to perfectly fit the desire for test flights that don't risk your kerbals lives. It's all in how you look at it.

While I'd like it if there was a less massive "lab supplies" part or something to refresh the used parts... I think shipping up whole new goos and mat labs will be the way it's done. I have already made in my game a "science package" subassebly composed of 1 mat lab, 2 goos, temp, pressure, gravioli, and seismograph with 2 docking ports. I can attach this to my lander and have that go down and do the science and then shuttle it back up to be transferred to the Kerbin return ship. The only problem was the inability to transfer the reports and samples stored within the pod. Fortunately that's changing.

There's this button... called revert to launch or VAB. This fills the function of unmanned test flights to work out bugs in the design.

While that one actually did do a little science... It is again far below KSPs probe cores in terms of capability. The only things really that could in the least bit compare in the early space race would be Lunahod and the orbiter I forget the name of that we sent to the Mun. And yet still neither of those had the advanced AI that the KSP probes evidently have. KSP probes are more akin to modern probes like New Horizons or the Mars rover Curiosity. And even those get programmed instructions sent to them and aren't autonomous like KSP probes are. Now if you wanted to add a new part to use for sounding rockets... I'd be for that... but the current probe parts in game are more advanced then we've even yet made in reality.

And what science did it do? It sent a beeping radio signal. That's all. In game terms it was a piece of debris. No way of controlling it at all. It does not compare to probe cores.

We'll for your first... If it was your way then it wouldn't be very historically accurate. We sent men first. We didn't have the computers to send probes first. We had ground tests too ... and fatalities during those tests... I don't think not having probes at the beginning is in any way wrong. But I wouldn't mind having multiple tech trees. Rockets, Planes, Rovers, Probes Then you could put your points where you'd like. For your second. It's coming. Probably in .24 as .23 seems to be devoted mostly to further refining R&D.

I wonder what Mu meant by "enables the fabled ‘tweekables’" Does that mean tweekables will be in .23 or that they'll be ready to be added at some later date? It sure would be nice to be able to start with the landing legs down... or the brakes on... or empty tanks in the payload section... or rover wheel engines disabled so they aren't sucking up juice during accent...

Ah! I kept refreshing the main forum page expecting there to be an article to pop up... and checking their twitter to see if there was any announcement there... I never scrolled down to see the blogs section... And yeah it seems .23 will be a further refinement of R&D and we'll get more of those performance enhancements they've been working on. Maybe there will be a few other creature comforts thrown in there to. I don't think we'll be getting the money or missions systems in .23

He did? Where?

Actually that somewhat matches reality. The Temperature drops with altitude until you reach a certain point where it starts climbing again. Then once you actually get into space the temperature is dependent on if you're in direct sun light or not. Also the area around the Sun is hotter than its surface by several thousand degrees.

http://kerbaldevteam.tumblr.com/post/65574326046/the-daily-kerbal-first-edition Well since the KSP weekly thread got locked for going "Off topic" when we posted links to this... I take that to mean The Daily Kerbal is seen as a separate and distinct thing. So... Lets have a thread to discuss this new thing. Will it in fact be daily? What sort of content will it focus on? Since this one contained content that normally appears in the KSP weekly... what will happen to KSP weekly? Will it stay the same or will the dev update section be gone or change or be replaced with something else?

it hasn't done that for me. I had to go back to the tracking station and return to get it to come back so I could take a reading.