deepspacecreeper

good enough for daily activities, but the integrated graphics makes the computer slow when playing games, especially KSP how much is it? btw i found a computer with similar specs but with a geforce 840m graphics card.

Hello guys, i have a personal website, and i have a question here: how to redirect to a certain html page [noparse]www.example.com/xxx/abc.html[/noparse] when [noparse]www.example.com/xxx[/noparse] is entered? when directory /xxx/ entered, go to abc.html when just example.com (no directory) entered, go to another page i specify thanks very much!

Well talking about clock rates, i notice the 3rd generation core i5 i7 have quad cores (some) and higher clock rates, while the 4th generation cpus have lower clock rates and dual cores. I tested the stock Kerbal X on a recently bought macbook pro (someone else's), and it works really well. the mac has a geforce 750m and a 2.8ghz dual core.

Hi, i am recently considering a new computer (laptop), which has decent specs for gaming but not too expensive. Acer V3-572g-54s6 Core i5 4210u (1.7ghz 2-core) Geforce 840m (2gb mem) 8gb ram around $600 Can this run KSP with >25fps? Could anyone give me some advice on this? Thanks very much (& fly safe)!!!

Could you please post some pics? or give me a download link to your save file (find it under game directory\saves\your save here\persistent.sfs) so i can check it out? if you are in solar orbit, congrats. saving your crew needs highly advanced skills (orbital rendezvous and tons of fine-tuning), and may use up most of your fuel.

Check out my thread, my first and only successful spaceplane (not rly ssto, check out to see why). 2t to Kerbin orbit or 5 passengers (not counting pilot Jebediah).

Im sorry about the wrong values that I entered (anyone noticed?), but it should be fixed now, and the values above is now right.

I kinda played with SRBs after accepting a suggestion of "using SRBs instead of asparagus" because "it was cheaper". I tested that myself. I slapped 8 Kerbodyne SRBs (0.23.5) onto a liquid core, and also did an asparagus config without the SRBs. Currently I tested 2 payload ranges. Results were: (Payload/With SRB cost/Asparagus cost) 30/50000/90000 60/157000/180000 From this experiment i conclude: SRBs save you a lot of money. But I thought of the reliability of SRBs, especially when decoupled. There is a bug which will cause the boosters to crash back on the liquid core, even with seperatrons. Asparagus staging helps you keep the rocket small and structural issues minimal, and you dont have to slap 8x2=16 SRBs on a single 3.75m core stage. But it is more expensive compared to a SRB+LF rocket.

saw someone playing the demo (steam version) Then I decided that was interesting, and got addicted to the demo. When I bought the full version, it was shocking: much more content than the demo has. More fun. WOW. bought it 0.21 and it was $24

Kerbin. A place Kerbals will always call home even if they travel to the edge of the Kerbol System. Same for Kerbals. Kerbin is their true home. Even if the universe is their home, they were all born in Kerbin.

All Hail Scott Manley! In a Kerbal's eyes, he is an immortal that all Kerbals bow down to. He is certainly my favorite KSP youtuber. Well, Nassault makes great cinematics. I love those.

Occasionally the immense amount of thrust from huge launchers will destroy the launchpad at launch and the launch has to be aborted, freaking out Bill and Bob. Jeb is still laughing with his famous smile. Check out my signature for their facial expression. Then the Kerbals at the Administration Building frown: "We will have to pay for that again. Too bad it's Wernher von Kerman's day off."

According to this picture, capi3101 fixed the TWR bottleneck and designed a 150t launcher with a relatively low cost and the rocket does not hit the bottleneck and waste the rest of the delta-V margin. I use 4700m/s for each launch (not 4500 cause I get very bad results by hand) and according to the picture, the rocket has some safety margin for me to deorbit the core stage, and theoretically I think I can make it. Not only thanks to capi3101, but also thanks to EVERYBODY who gave me suggestions and explained why my rocket was expensive and TWR bottlenecked. I learned a lot from all of you who posted in this thread. Thanks again and "fly safe". :cool::cool: Thanks for the suggestion. made a 60t rocket with 8 srbs and costs 20000 less than a rocket I designed with liquid fuel boosters. Then I realized when I decouple the boosters and fire sepratrons, the middle engine blows up. Then... It worked! the sepratrons fired and the boosters seperated and the middle engine was intact. Back to my 150t. I deleted the nosecones because of his suggestion. I also considered spaceplanes but I thought it would be more difficult to design and in some way not as reliable as traditional rockets. I only use SSTOs for lightweight probes and crew ferrying to/from space stations (like the one I made, link at signature). Nope, Ruedii.

Thanks for the advice. My core stage only has 1 S3-7200 and -14400 each. :0.0: (Both Bill and Bob come in and scream in agony as x4 engine explodes, and they reach for the abort switch, but stopped by Jeb ) Well maybe I can half the amount of RCS in the big tank by tweakables (i added RCS to compensate for sluggish steering). I think I should switch the mainsails for the KR-2L, like you said earlier. May solve the problem. When I have time I will try to modify my rocket again: -Mainsail below boosters --> KR-2L -Tweak fuel level to 90% -Change S3-7200 in core 2nd stage to -3600 (again, note that I only have 1 -7200 and 1 -14400 in the core) -Play around with the fuel levels further -(seperatrons, tweak RCS level, struts and other small tweaks, only for final rocket)

Sluggish steering.

I quickly slapped together a rocket that uses dual clustered mainsails and no nosecones. Results in a vF 150,000 drop. Well, I'm still experiencing the TWR bottleneck when all boosters dropped. Talking of TWR, there was a slight sacrifice when using mainsails (from 2.0, 1.9, 1.7 to 1.8, 1.7, 1.6). Why the TWR bottleneck? And the cost is still high, 400,000 vF. Same dropbox folder, added the modified craft files. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/50e9xria8jo8s5j/AABfvADOV0v9h6AnJxBHG7Hia?dl=0

Thanks for the advice. i am thinking of switching the KS25x4s in the boosters to dual clustered mainsails (with cubic octagonal struts). Yeah, they cost 10000 for 2 and have an equally good Isp, but slightly lower TWR. Do you think this is possible? cause without part clipping you can't fit two 2.5 engines below a 3.75m tank.

Well my most common payload is around 25t. For Mun missions the rockets payload for LKO is 60 to 75. ARMs which involve moving around e type asteroids need the largest rockets ever created, to haul that asteroid grabber into orbit. This is why i designed this rocket.

Link added. you have to copy and paste the link cause i am doing this edit on my smartphone.

Hello everyone, This is my 150t (max.170t, i will explain why) rocket launcher. But I think this thing is so cost-inefficient compared to Temstar's Zenith Supernova. My rocket costs 500,000 vF while his costs 250,000 vF (0.24 or later). The only advantage my rocket has over his, is the part count reduced by half. I know that my rocket designs will never compare up to his, but I just want to learn why is my rocket so expensive. My rocket uses 6 asparagus boosters and the core stage is a 2-stage design. The entire rocket uses 0.23.5 NASA parts. When it brings 150t to LKO, it hits the TWR bottleneck at 1.1 right after all asparagus boosters are jettisoned. When I add another 20t (total 170t), the TWR goes down to 1.03 and hits the delta-v bottleneck (just enough fuel for deorbiting the 2nd stage). The download link brings you to a Dropbox folder which includes My 150t.craft launcher file (made as a perfect subassembly. Thanks to Temstar again.) The picture below Temstar's Zenith Supernova subassembly (for conveniency, remember this is an unofficial download link for that craft. i own no rights to it.) Could anyone tell me why my design is so expensive? https://www.dropbox.com/sh/50e9xria8jo8s5j/AABfvADOV0v9h6AnJxBHG7Hia?dl=0

KVV is not my #1 but it is a must-install for me. One of my top 5. KW, MJ and KER and KAC are the other 4.

The Y-wing is cool never found y-wing replicas on the forums Plz update ur crafts for 0.25, i rly wanna play them but i didn't keep old copies of KSP (i use steam)

Very great manual which explains KSP aerodynamics in a simple way for spaceplane novices. There is one point about Centre of Mass and C-o-Lift: For some aircraft, especially for those with their wings in the middle of the plane, when the fuel is drained, the CoM shifts back and forth. I will try to find the midpoint of the CoM and position my plane's wings.

This spaceplane looks so futuristic and sci-fi like! I like the look of it and how you angled Kronal Vessel Viewer (i use this mod too but it stutters) to take those "sketches".

Thanks for the advice on how to use it!