Dangerous_Beans

i am working on a bit science station using the Station Science mod. it currently has living space for 8 Kerbals, a zoology lab and a science lab, expansion plans are for another living module (capacity 12-16), a physics wing with power farm and a separate lab, a communications centre, and more habitation modules. it should eventually have a crew of over 20. the next project after that is the KSS Fuzzball interplanetary mother ship, which i have started building at least 3 times

but do all the other factions declare vendetta upon you if you use it? / obscure joke as much as i hate Eve i don't think i need to destroy it, but it's good to know the option is there.

no you don't build smaller, i recently did a 3 landing Duna/Ike return mission using less of the tech tree than you have. you can build a lander capable of taking every scientific instrument and a Kerbal down to Duna and back to orbit in less than 10 tons using the T1 landing legs (hell, you could probably do it without landing legs at all, just use girders ). (if you like i can post pics of the landers/interplanetry stages i used when i get home) since you have nukes you should be able to do manned return missions to Duna, Jool's moons except Tylo, Dres, and Eeloo. another option would be one way lander probes to pretty much anywhere (send one to Eve, Laythe and Jool, parachutes work well on all of those). or have you done a low altitude Kerbol flyby?

i play with Nova-Punch, so i have a much wider range of SRBs to play with. i use both, if i am building for maximum efficiency i'll use all liquid engines, but in career or if i just want something in orbit i'll use SRBs for the first stage. for instance, the launcher i used for my recent Duna mission used 8 of the long stock SRBs as the first stage, because it needed more dV to get to orbit and my lack of fuel pipes meant i couldn't just add asparagus staged liquid boosters onto the side.

i'm impressed, that is way beyond my landing skills. the most needlessly complex thing i have done was a 5 part Jool probe. it would launch from Kerbin and fly to Jool as one ship, then split apart and fly all over the Jool system. at least that was the plan, in practice the damn thing broke up on launch every time. in the end i launched 5 separate probes and that worked perfectly.

sorry, didn't see your first reply. if you are in LKO and have full exposure then it is probably the mods, i don't use RSS or Remote Tech so i can't help you with those. sorry.

more information would be useful what does the solar panel say when you right click on it? where are you in the solar system? it could be an effect of the mods, or you ship could just be facing the wrong way. solar panels energy generation depends on both their distance to the sun and the angle of incidence to the sun. so a solar panel at Duna will generate less power than the same panel at Moho (as the light is weaker), and a solar panel that is perpendicular to the sun will generate more power that the same panel close to edge on to the sun.

mostly i use NovaPunch parts, but for stock i use LV-909s or the 48-7s where not using the nukes. currently i have 5 ships about to leave for Duna using LV-909s, as part of a personal challenge. no nukes, no fuel lines, no 2.5m parts, and no payload over 10t on the launchpad. so 909s for the interplanetary stage, 48-7s for the landers, and also a 909s for the final stage of the launcher.

i just feel bad having a Kerbal cooped up, all alone, for weeks at a time. how would you feel being stuck in a Mk1 command pod for a round trip to Duna? so i use probes anywhere i can't justify multiple Kerbals and enough space for them to stretch their legs.

i tried doing a single launch and transfer, 5 probe Jool mission, and i was unable to get it to work. the mass wasn't too bad, the problem i was having was the symmetry bug and limited parts available to me at the time. i would recommend designing a probe that will do the work, and then launching 6 of them. by doing 6 separate probes the launchers are simpler, you can go straight to the moon you are interested in, and if the space Kraken decides to eat one the entire mission isn't a write off (my first Eve probe got eaten by the Kraken, while if i had a two probes one would have gotten through). only downside is 6 launches, followed by 6 interplanetary burns and 6 aero braking manoeuvres.

WTF? i'm in favour of our species going extinct, i'm not in favour of murdering people, and i have never heard of anyone arguing that we should kill people. we should go extinct by not creating new people and not by killing people who exist, because this way minimises the suffering we, as a species, create. the ethics of exterminating diseases such as small pox and polio are interesting; i think it's probably kind of dodgy, but it is justifiable on grounds of self-defence. the same argument doesn't apply to alien life living on a different planet, in fact in the situation we are arguing here we are the aggressors and it would be appropriate for the alien life to exterminate us, in it's own defence.

why? or is it just cause you are a human? IMO, terraforming any planet with a biosphere is unethical; other species have as much right to exist as we do, so we shouldn't just exterminate them to make things easier for us. we shouldn't assume that our desire to live trumps everything else's existence. of course those like DaveofDefeat above would argue that competition between species and driving other species to extinction is just a fact of life. so exterminating an entire biosphere to make more room for us is just business as usual, and the alien goo would do it back to us; but "every other species/person does it" is hardly a persuasive argument. so i think if we can't find ways to coexist with other species, then we should just avoid interfering with them. terraforming that involves us supplanting entire ecologies is just the ultimate example of "Humans>Everything else" mentality. which is the best argument i can think of that terraforming will happen. slight tangent: some would argue that the logical consequence of my views above is extinction of our species, which i agree with. humans have a net negative impact on both humans and everything else. the world would be better without us, the best thing we can do for everything's welfare is to go extinct.

it's the final scene of act 1, where Jebediah ascends to low kerbin orbit atop a solid rocket booster, accompanied by the farwel to Kerbin song sung by Bill and Bob. you should hang around for the opening of act 3, the choreography of the 50 probe cores and singing LV-N clusters of the interplanetry ship is a m a z i n g .

20 girders total length, or from the fulcrum? edit: this sounds pretty cool, hopefully i will have a chance to give it a go.

can you get him out with his jetpack? otherwise it'll be a long uncomfortable wait until the rescue mission gets there.

i was going to suggest you could use "reagents" as the resource, but i kind of like how you have done it now. there is only so much you can do with what you pack in initially, eventually you need more pipettes or a new strain of bacteria, so they have to send up more resources. and you can't fit all the big complex equipment and co-authors needed in the space station, so you have to return the samples so the scientists on the ground can have a look. edit; besides, the ground staff aren't going to help you unless they can get their names on the paper, so they are not going to let you submit the papers from orbit. i'll give this a try when i get home, it looks really good.

#1 isn't really accurate. firstly you need to consider performance per clock, a modern processor is going to outperform a 5 year old one even at the same clock speeds, because the modern one is more efficient. secondly, you need to consider turbo and or overclocking. a core i3-4340 is a dual core at 3.6ghz, while a core 4670k is a quad core at 3.4ghz, so by your logic the 4340 is better (dual core, and faster base clock speed). however, when you consider that the 4340 can run at 3.8ghz with turbo, and 4.2+ghz with overclocking, the 4670k becomes a better choice (assuming you are willing to spend the extra cash). you want the fastest cpu (within buget limitations). dual or quad core is irrelevant, the unused cores will just shut off. also, there are multi-threaded applications that are 32bit. 64/32 bit relates to the memory address size, so limits the usable ram, while single/multi-threads is the number of cpu cores it uses (in my dreams KSP is a 64bit multithreded application, along with dwarf fortress. and i have a ducati panigale superleggera. and more kittens (i'm dreaming, so i may as well run with it)). the rest is good advice.

i think Taki117 has it. so currently the games goes: deploy parachutes, check; stack decoupler, check; shutdown engine, not attached; radial decouplers; not attached. i would do: liquid engine shutdown, radial decouplers, stack decoupler. parachutes as manual.

compared to the actual software testing i have done at work, i have done nothing. plus i was under no obligation to send or tell them anything. so while our feedback is probably useful, calling us testers is a stretch.

i like this suggestion. can we also have more null values? currently i can't take a pressure/temperature reading of deep space, but why not? it's kind of nice to have it confirmed that there is bugger all there. these sorts of readings are often quite useful.

i think they are fine the way they are; the development of powered flight was mostly about improvements in metallurgy and machining, powered looms helped the development of computers. developments in one area often help things in completely different areas. generic Science! points are easy to deal with, and it helps keep the open feel of the game (i don't have to fly planes to research planes, so i can do what i want and still move up the tech tree).

my kitten has doubled in size every year (for the past year). i don't see why that will change. so in 5 years he will weigh ~300kgs! we'll have to rename him Clifford! @JebidiahsBigSister, i think it's more that we have paid for a license and get access to the current development version, rather than paid to be testers. i have played a lot of KSP, i haven't done any testing.

that baffled me too, but thinking about it, it's probably ok. the goo is up in space, in a protective case, so it gets quite cold (though slowly). then you reenter, and get the pretty flames, but the atmosphere is pretty thin and the protective case would shield the goo from most of the heat. so the outside would be hot, but the goo inside is still cold. if you look at the xkcd what if for dropping a steak from orbit (http://what-if.xkcd.com/28/), he says the outside would get charred, but the inside would still be rare. i think it's the same thing here. so it think the goo being cold might be accurate. (or possibly the goo just likes it r e a l l y hot)

i sent up a crew return shuttle to recover three Kerbals i accidentally launched with a rocket. unfortunately i was slow in starting to decelerate for rendezvous, and i managed to clip the Kerbals' vessel with my shuttle at about 100-150m/s relative velocity. the Kerbal's ship broke in half, with the crew compartment tumbling off into space, but the kerbals' crew compartment and shuttle survived intact, so i was able to transfer Jeb et al and return them to Kerbin alive. i'm really not used to my orbital rendezvous being that accurate.

does that mean you can do it by air-hogging and flying really high? get in a stable flight at 25,000m, and just drop probes on parachutes?