Kowbell

What exactly is graveyard orbit? Or, more specifically, WHERE is graveyard orbit?

In regards to the very little thrust, do you mean so little that, even at full blast, it is weaker than the force of friction caused by the particles in space? Reading that Wiki article, I see that GOCE was really low in orbit, meaning resistance was higher, so it'd have to push harder. But in higher orbits - say, even, Geostationary/synchronous - would it not be possible to use an extremely weak ion engine which lasted for many years, perhaps decades? Or is orbital decay not nearly as much a concern that high?

Hi all. As I was watching the THAICOM 6 live webcast today (congrats to SpaceX), I pondered orbital decay for a second. Let me preface this blabbery and discourse with the forewarning and acknowledgement that I do not know everything about physics; indeed, I know not too much more than the "average" Joe - or, Jeb, I guess - who plays this game. I have looked up some information outside of KSP about astrophysics, orbital mechanics, and the likes, but I don't know everything. Which is why I inquire. (From what I understand,) Orbital decay is the acting of particles in the "vacuum" of space on an object in orbit - say, a satellite. Because the continued force applied, the velocity slows more and more until the orbit coincides with the atmosphere - that is, where the atmosphere is thick enough to cause enough friction to make the satellite get really, really hot, eventually to the point where it asplodes, certainly rendering the satellite useless. My question is, instead of using the occasional rockety burniness to fix the orbit to keep the very expensive, very heavy satellite in the target orbit, as I understand is usually done to space stuff which they want to keep in space, why not use consistently an extremely-high efficiency, extremely-low thrust engine - say, something along the lines of an ion engine? Or is KSP's rendition of ion engines markedly different from current real technology, in the attempt to make the gameplay more fun and simple? If so, why not use some real world equivalent that applies such a minute, carefully calculated thrust as to provide a force that combats the force of the particle friction? What say you to this?

Definitely didn't do science or career mode. Not like I've been waiting months or anything for it. That was a fib, I did science and career mode.

No, you could attach the SRB's with radial decouplers and perhaps I-beams.

pat, don't look at it like that. Look at it like we're already too far, and the only way to go is down. All great empires fall to changing culture/static government, foreign pressure, weak leaders, and poor fiscal responsibility.

Every song by Muse Nirvana's Nevermind album Corridor Digital's video soundtracks

You poor, simple kerbal...

Currently only a: Intel Core i7-3770k 8GB Corsair VENGANCE DDR3 1600MHz RAM WD Blue 500GB (That's all I wanted) 7200RPM HDD Intel HD 4000 Graphics (which only struggle on KSP and GTA IV) All on a (tiny) 19" 1440x900 monitor that has trouble comfortably fitting KSP on the screen and, due to age, is deteriorating and an extra 17" 1280x1024 monitor which was one of the earlier personal-use LCD monitors and is showing its age as well. Still waiting for multi-core support. Saving up for MSI GTX 760 2GB GDDR5 2x ASUS 23" 1920x1080 monitor An extra 1TB HDD Two 128GB SSD (which I will RAID 0)

If organizations like SpaceX - yae, even NASA - tried to kickstart, I'm not sure if they'd reach the goals, but I'd surely sacrifice my bit to see mankind explore even further.

Took more reference pictures for a super-sick, entirely CG video I'm doing for KSP, and sent off a refueling tank that will refuel my fair-sized Jool-system explorer, which sadly lacks the delta-V to do any worthwhile research or return home.

I imagine that a) When the update releases, we'll all be too giddy to actually care because we finally got and update - and no less, update .22, and Modders will pretty soon categorize their parts themselves because they all love us and have big hearts, and it will all balance out. Plus, I'm sure I'll love my old saves as much as my new saves, and will gladly switch between sandbox and career modes depending on what I want to play.

Have you shared this idea with NASA? Seriously though, I like to envision some guy in a lab coat with glasses walking into the oval office talking to the president while he's facing the other way in a spinny-armchair, saying "Mr. President, if we send this probe to Mars' north pole, we will collect enough science points (Science bucks? Science cash? Science shekels, maybe?) to build the world's biggest rocket EVER. Plus, we would have enough left over to create satellite dishes that replace North Korea's news stations with slideshows of kittens!" Then, it cuts to the president (who has a biomechanical arm and one red, glowing eye) saying, "Do it." Then some guys at NASA jump up and do a sick high-five, and it cuts to a montage of spaceship building, launching, and orbiting, a big rocket, and a Korean family gathered around a television, watching slideshows of cats, all while Danger Zone plays in the background. Now just right a four-hundred page college dissertation about it, and hope it gets through to congress.

You don't. To do .mu's, you first export your blender file as a .dae. You then open up Unity, install the Part Tools for Unity (I can't seem to find the link, will someone post it?), import your .dae file, and export it from there. See this for a more detailed explanation: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/40178-Part-Tools-0-20-Blender-Unity-and-KSP

Baha! Thank you. That's the ticket! All problems solved, bless you.

Thanks for those links, but they lack an explanation on the "thrustTransform" part. Where do I get that? Is it part of my mesh when I export, is it a component that I can't find?

Thanks for the explanation, that make sense. Could you direct me towards some sort of tutorial - or perhaps, your own brief oration - that explains how to do transformations? I've searched the forums, the wiki, the youtubes, and the googles, but to no avail. And while we're on topic, does anyone know a good way to generate bump maps? The google is not helping me with that question either. Have mercy on my soul, I'm new to add-on development.

Great googly moogly, this is the best addon I've downloaded for Blender 3D. The access to the color schemes and the ability to see how the models are done are the best possible resources for modeling/texturing. This is going to make all of my stuff look soooo much better. I can't thank you enough, good sir. Note: This works with the most recent version of Blender, and every .mu file.

I'll look up how to do the jettisons and whatnots. But why is the engine bit not working? Is that because of the jettisons?

Looks righteous. If you need help with it, or simply don't want to do it yourself, I'll gladly help with any modeling. I use Blender 3d, and not sketchup, however.

Good day all. I am creating a probe + itty bitty fuel tank + itty bitty engine + telemetric instrumentation combination, simply because I can/want to. I can not seem to get the multiple MODULE{} bits to work, however. Whenever I load the part, it simply does not register any of them, excepting the proby command module bit and the telemetry. I believe I have seen these before, but I can not find anything explaining how to execute this kind of procedure. Right now, I have the modular bits arranged as following: MODULE { name = ModuleCommand minimumCrew = 0 RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 0.05 } } RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge amount = 150 maxAmount = 150 } RESOURCE { name = LiquidFuel amount = 90 maxAmount = 90 } RESOURCE { name = Oxidizer amount = 110 maxAmount = 110 } MODULE { name = ModuleEngines thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform exhaustDamage = True ignitionThreshold = 0.1 minThrust = 0 maxThrust = 55 heatProduction = 600 fxOffset = 0, 0, 1.25 PROPELLANT { name = LiquidFuel ratio = 0.9 DrawGauge = True } PROPELLANT { name = Oxidizer ratio = 1.1 } atmosphereCurve { key = 0 450 key = 1 220 } } MODULE { name = ModuleReactionWheel PitchTorque = 0.5 YawTorque = 0.5 RollTorque = 0.5 RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 0.03 } } MODULE { name = ModuleJettison jettisonName = fairing bottomNodeName = bottom isFairing = True jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1 jettisonForce = 5 jettisonDirection = 0 0 1 } MODULE { name = ModuleSAS } MODULE { name = ModuleEnviroSensor sensorType = ACC } MODULE { name = ModuleEnviroSensor sensorType = PRES } MODULE { name = ModuleEnviroSensor sensorType = GRAV } MODULE { name = ModuleEnviroSensor sensorType = TEMP } I don't know too much about .cfg alteration, so pardon my novicity. Have mercy on my poor soul, and explain to me how to overcome this conundrum. It is for science! EDIT: I forgot to mention, the engine can be activated, and it will drain fuel/overheat, but I experience no acceleration. Also, is it possible to combine all the "Toggle" buttons for the sensors into one?