halbert5150

Am I the only one that cant get to the account logon. I get a message that its down and preparing an update. I just haven't seen it down this long before.

Is there a known issue with the mk1-3 command pod. It wont load any kerbals when I launch. Rocket launches as if it were manned but no kerbal portraits show up in the lower right and I cant get an IVA view. Im running a fresh 64 bit install with no mods. Thanks, Halbert

Yes I use Raster Prop. I have also used stock KSP to go from launch to orbit, to the mun and back to kerbin. All in IVA but I did have to use the map view once to set up the ejection burn so that I would encounter the mun correctly. So I like IVA as it is but it would just be amazing as VR.

If the game was VR I would spend all my time in IVA. I also think building in the VAB would be amazing if you could walk around the ship your building.

I think KSP would make a fantastic VR game. Just need to add a few things in the cockpit like a screen to show the map view etc. What do you guys think.

When people ask me what KSP is about I tell them, "Its the only game I have ever played that made me smarter."

GregroxMun I know what your saying as a said it was a big ask. On waiting 20 minutes for the system to generate I think it would only have to be done when you first create the save game. Load time after that would be normal. Which I think answers your question Ayylmao. The new planets would only be generated when you create the new profile. You would play with the same generated system every time you loaded that save. But like I said its a big ask. I think there could possible be as much code dedicated to this one feature as there is in the game so far. As long as I'm dreaming though thats something I wish for. Hal

So im on my lunch break and it suddenly donned on me what my error was. I was looking at Math.sqrt() as a mathematical process and so part of the natural order of operations. It's not its a function call. Any programming language is going to do all math from left to right and then function calls from left to right. Which removes the square root calls from the natural order of op. The parenthesis force the compiler to make all the function calls at the right time and then finish up with the math. I didn't do a trace on the program but I know thats it.

I did the parenthesis around r1+r2 first and that didn't solve it completely; although it did have to be used. I then noticed on your spreadsheet example for the final step to calculate dv1 and dv2 was multiplication. So I really did need all of the above suggestions to get it right. So this, Math.sqrt(u/r1) * (Math.sqrt(2*r2/(r1+r2))-1) also had to have this, (Math.sqrt(u/r1)) * (Math.sqrt(2*r2/(r1+r2))-1) added to work right. I think JS was actually doing this, Math.sqrt(u)/Math.sqrt(r1) * ... which yielded .06889 or possibly this, Math.sqrt((u/r1)) * ... which also yields .06889 So Im not sure why what I did worked or what difference it made in the order of operations, but it does work. I also wrote this same program in python and php just out of curiosity with the same .06889 calculated. Then added the same fix and both language versions started working once that was done.

Mun landing: Minmus landing: BAME done! Lets do something else! (this has to be said with a Jersey accent) So awesome. Have you done a successful docking? That's probably where I would go next. The first time I landed on the mun I could hear my heart pounding in my ears. I also did the mun first simply because I didn't know that minmus was even there. I didn't zoom out far enough in the map view to see it. Cheers, Hal

OK you all had good points. I removed the math.abs first off. I only put that in there to test. Its not necessary once the equation is fixed. Secondly r1+r2 did need to be changed to (r1+r2) and thanks to Danny I figured out that parenthesis were needed elsewhere. This is how the correct eq's look. dv1 = (Math.sqrt(u/r1))*(Math.sqrt(2*r2/(r1+r2))-1) dv2 = (Math.sqrt(u/r2))*(1-Math.sqrt(2*r1/(r1+r2))) Apparently javascript was messing the old high school order of operations up, and just doing things from left to right or something messed up like that. So I didn't change the equation much I just got all the parenthesis put in the right place and it works. Thanks everyone. Now its time to work on the page. Im going to add some of the other calculators and then make it look more kerbalish' Thanks again, Hal

So im trying to recreate this tutorial from the wiki. Specifically im trying to calculate dv for a transfer, but I cant get the right values. I have gone over and over the provided equations and I dont get the delta v that the author does. I am building my calculations into a web page that you can find here The calculations are all done in javascript so you can view the source but here are the two equations. dv1 = Math.sqrt(u/r1)*(Math.sqrt(2*r2/r1+r2)-1); dv2 = Math.abs(Math.sqrt(u/r2)*(1-Math.sqrt(2*r1/r1+r2))); prior to these two lines of code im adding Kerbins R to r1 and r2 but that doesn't change the outcome I get. Other then that I think my equations are the same as in the tutorial. Can anybody figure out what im doing wrong?

Got it to work but it was a bit of a hack. I did have a docking port on the top of my lander can and I thought that might be the problem so I re-saved it without the port. It still would not attach. So then I removed the engine off the bottom to connect fuel tank on CM to lander can on LM and it finally did it. So now that the two were merged I pulled them apart, put all the parts I wanted in the first place back where they were, and connected them the way I wanted it originally. Thanks I didn't know that the LAM should be LEM. I guess I should have looked that up on Wikipedia. However I am sticking with the mislabeling and calling it the LAME now; Lunar Aggravation Module Exercise. I hope the rest of the mission doesn't go like this.

No you cant save sub assemblies with a command module on them. The lam has a lander can as its main structure which everything else is attached to. Thats why I was trying to merge.

So im designing an Apollo style mun rocket. I designed the LAM in the VAB first then saved the file. Next I designed the command module to my liking. I put a decouple at the bottom of the command module then merged the command module with the LAM I designed earlier, but I cant get it to attach. I want it to sit under the decoupler at the bottom of the command module. My Lam has an attachment node at the top and the command module has an attachment node under the decoupler. So whats wrong? I even tried going back to the LAM design and putting a decoupler at the top then save it. Go back to the command module and it still wont attach that way.