Hypocee

Just in terms of dreams for the future, I\'m rather excited by the 'Leap', incoming early next year - sub-mm, fast, 3D, ten-finger-and-objects tracker. leapmotion.com

Funny coincidence - Tom Francis of PCGamer UK and Suspicious Developments just threw together a prototype of Lorentz contraction/Time Dilation: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8VooG8MuLWERXE3d3p1SjZKQlE/edit?pli=1 and got pointed to Relativistic Asteroids: http://www.referencegames.com/classic.html

The official name does include an umlaut, which is not exactly the same as either English pronunciation of a bare 'u'. Closette\'s Scottish accent trick is either very close or spot-on a proper umlaut. It\'s difficult to explain pronunciations let alone reproduce them, but from an English perspective you have to drive your throat and tongue through 'oo' like 'shoot' while simultaneously driving your lips through 'ee' like 'sheet'. Good luck spraining your face!

I\'m not an expert, but here\'s what I can say: 1. \'Optimise\' for what? Numerical velocity? Greatest periapsis? Right now nothing exists beyond the mün so there\'s not a lot to aim at. 2. Numerically you can gain up to 2 times its escape velocity (ca. 1400 m/s total?), but it\'s probably not most efficient to try that if you come on a Hohmann trajectory from Kerbin. 3. The only simple thing to optimise is the Oberth effect (effet d\'Obert), which I can\'t find in French. Efficient = fast = low. In theory you would like to do any burns as close to the body as possible.

Yup, to purely rotate an apoapsis you burn radially (in at periapsis for greatest efficiency, or out at apoapsis) so your craft remains at a constant distance and angular velocity until you\'re at the desired angle. You could think of it as 'hovering' and 'pausing' your orbit while you rotate. This is incredibly fuel-hungry - assuming a LKO periapsis, you could need to burn for up to a half hour worst case!

At high velocities ships rotate without input or even overriding it. The direction and magnitude of rotation change from second to second, and are usually unpredictable but can enter seemingly stable oscillation modes. Pod torque input axes sometimes get reversed as well. People have jokingly dubbed this the Deep Space Kraken gripping the ship.

1. Attach at least one RCS fuel tank somewhere in your rocket. 2. Attach at least one RCS quad somewhere in your rocket. 3. In flight, hit the R key to toggle RCS on or off. The RCS indicator will light on your NavBall. 4. Your angular (WASDQE) controls will now make RCS burns in addition to your pod torque. 5. In addition you can make translation commands with IJKLHN.

That would be Gunpoint, by Tom Francis/Suspicious Developments. I\'m following it closely and partway through the latest beta.

There are countless spiraling nerdfests about what\'s 'realistic' or not on a 1200km planet full of green men building 1m diameter crewed spacecraft, but the fact of the matter is that many mod packs are intended to encourage more Earthlike use of many stages than vanilla. There\'s a good chance you just need moar stagiz. It\'s also worth noting that though some care was presumably taken with stock part parameters, they\'ve remained nearly untouched from days before any real balance concerns. Later in development we\'re told to expect many more parts and probably at least one ground-up rebalance pass. As far as orbital dynamics goes, it sounds like you\'re mostly doing things right. Burn as heavy and short as possible, at 180 degrees from your intended apoapsis, as low and fast as possible. It\'s not possible to meaningfully 'slingshot' around Kerbin when starting from Kerbin, but it\'s not harmful either - boosting into an elliptical orbit, then again when you come back 'down' is mathematically equivalent to one longer initial burn.

It is a bug in .13.2, well-known and reverted to .13.1 behavior in .14. http://www.atomicgamer.com/files/95362/kerbal-space-program-v0-13-1-for-mac-free-game

We apparently have a user trying to buy for two months with only one response. http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=6971.msg103141#msg103141 http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=6068 It\'s a bit of a long shot, but could someone find out what\'s on line 9 of /home/kerbalsp/public_html/kspstore/include/checkoutConfirmation.php ?

Well, I originally winced at the suggestion but you managed to pull it mostly out of the Internet Creep Zone by making her sufficiently awesome. I\'d still prefer that Stage Left was looking at her face and how awesome/beautiful/Kerbal/crazy/Jebedinah she\'s being, but making an image I could enjoy out of that is no mean feat. I especially like how square/corner-y her smile is. Was that a deliberate reference to the Trinity\'s corner-filled frowns, or just something you felt like doing?

Super-clever, helpful hack. Well done.

'East' and 'west' rely on arbitrary reference choices...but so do 'clockwise' and 'counterclockwise' In my case at least, 'east' and 'west' always refer to the arbitrary reference frame chosen by the NavBall, i.e. east=90 on the NavBall and west=270. I don\'t think anyone else is likely to have used them differently. Viewed from the north, the most natural perspective, a counterclockwise orbit is indeed the correct choice for lowest-energy transfer and you want to burn at a position 180 degrees opposite Kerbin, as you\'re already doing. I can only guess that you\'re putting too much juice into it. Your TKI orbit doesn\'t have to be hyperbolic to leave the SOI. I\'m afraid I\'m not going to spend time collecting videos for you, since the dozens of threads in this area are full of tutorials.

My goodness. Please be sure to get a job drawing things. If you want to end me you could try to bite off a chunk of Atomic Robo Real Science Adventures someday.

And will not; asking was harmless and it\'s not your fault but please search and read a lot before arguing or complaining, they get brought up far beyond nauseam.

The fun part about orbitals is that they\'re shaped as if the electron was always orbiting at lightspeed, and constructively and destructively interfering with its own wavefunction. So yeah, I can believe that at a certain electric field strength you\'d generate an orbital longer than any simple harmonic of the electron.

Courtesy of Phil Plait the Bad Astronomer, a lesson in rotating reference frames thanks to a hula hoop with a camera in it. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/02/10/a-hoopy-frood/

And tidal drag plus billions of years.

Nope! Gravity conserves energy, so any orbit that comes in from outside the Sphere of Influence will also by definition escape at the same velocity. You always need to make a burn to be captured.

Have you scrolled down as suggested to the pitch axis?

Yeah, steady on.

You can simply add all the forces. I don\'t think that\'s the same as just adding the factors - you may be looking at an arithmetic mean...? Weighted by mass...? Beyond my comprehension.

There\'s force 1 on part 1, and force 2 on part 2. If those forces differ in magnitude or direction there\'s a resultant force 3 on the joint between the two parts. So yes, the overall force on the ship is simply the sum of the two, but if they have different Cds you get moments, tension/compression, excitation and disintegration; 'the ship' is not necessarily the object of interest. Right now everything is entirely transparent to drag - from the atmosphere\'s point of view the ship is an open lattice of dimensionless drag points. HarvesteR\'s taken one or two half-attempts at a decent fairing effects model, but it\'s proven to be highly nontrivial and been postponed until time can be dedicated to it rather than improvised between release-oriented tasks. Either the .13 or the .14 thread\'s got about 8 pages of the latest peanut gallery session somewhere inside

Er. You are aware that there\'s an erroneous extra mass term in the game\'s drag math right now, which makes objects ignore mass - empty tanks and full ones fall the same etc.