Anquietas314

Ah, yeah I assumed from "but when I tested it on the runway and stored it" that OP meant they'd removed the experiment. Slight oversight on my part . There is also a mod that can automate that process. I can't quite recall the exact name, but 5th Horseman uses it in his 0.90 Bases series (recommend watching the first (couple) episode(s) for a demonstration)

Check what the report actually says. My guess is both were "Kerbin's shores". Tanuki seems to have slightly derped on placing the shores biome on Kerbin - in a few cases (notably at KSC) it extends ridiculously far out to sea, but I guess it's not hard to see what the intention was: "shores" includes some of the water too.

This is a mod that backs up saves. It looks like Jeberetary is no longer maintained, although it may still work fine.

You can't quite do exactly what you're after, but if you click the little arrow in the top left, that'll open advanced mode with which you can add custom categories, which allows you to have 2 level categorization (e.g. "Space station parts" { "solar panels", "docking ports", etc }). The UI for it is a bit clunky but hopefully that'll improve in future versions . You add parts to the categories by first creating the category, then going into the standard parts list and clicking the little + icon that appears in the top right corner of every part... one at a time. It's quite tedious, but fortunately you only ever need to do this once. If memory serves, the information is stored in GameData/Squad/PartsList/PartCategories.cfg (can't check for sure though )

You can only store one of each (experiment type + biome + situation) combination (in a capsule). So, for example, one of "Mystery Goo observation while landed at Kerbin's badlands", but you can easily have, for example, a "Temperature scan from space near Kerbin" and "Temperature scan from Kerbin's upper atmosphere" at the same time. You can store multiple copies in a science lab though, which is the only stock part (aside from possibly Kerbals themselves) with that capability. I believe there's also a science storage mod (among others) that allows you to store science in specialized containers though (disclaimer: science titles recited from memory; may or may not be correct)

I'm not really sure where you are supposed to ask forum-related questions, but this looks like the best place.

Was that in surface mode or orbit mode? The 2400m/s speed limit applies to surface mode - you can't go as fast on turbos going west as you can going east (in orbit mode).

Pretty sure this is the wrong forum to ask, but go to Settings in the top right, then Edit Signature on the left hand panel. BBCode and so on works just fine Here's mine for reference:

I've also seen posts with issues, however I've successfully built a few MK3 planes that worked just fine, of a similar size to OP's. Most of the people who are finding issues are reporting that the parts just break easily compared to other parts, not that they completely fail to hold together. I'd post a screenshot but the computer with my KSP install died. The backup (a chromebook) can't play KSP .

There are several life support mods that add food/supplies. TAC-LS is a popular one (Thunder Aerospace Corporation). I haven't encountered one where food is called snacks though, but no doubt one exists

Shouldn't the optimal altitude for satellites be the one that puts either (some small distance above) Kerbin's poles or the other satellites in the cluster at the upper limit of the range of the antennae? Depending on what you're optimizing for; poles if you're going for coverage (requires more satellites) or satellites if you're going for minimum number of satellites (3 if you have enough range). Obviously you still don't get full coverage of the planet's surface, but you will have coverage anywhere in a reasonable orbit. As a specific example, at Kerbin for maximum coverage you want each satellite to be able to reach, say, 100km above the north/south poles (to allow for low polar orbits without having satellites in a polar orbit). If your satellite range is 1600km, assuming Kerbin doesn't get in the way, you want the satellites to be at an altitude of sqrt(1600^2 - 700^2) - 600 = 838.74km (rounding down).

Sadly, no. It was basically a minimalistic ship with the mk1-2 capsule, heat shield (for "emergencies"), decoupler, 2.5m reaction wheel, warp drive, hydrogen tank and the 2.5m nuclear engine from FTT (disabled during warp, obviously ). It was just to try out the drive. I would post screenshot/logs etc, but my computer's cpu fan died a couple days ago (shortly after my last post) and tbh, I'm not going to replace it since the failure left the 9 year old hard disks intact and I'd like to keep them that way until I can replace the rig . For the moment I'm stuck with a chromebook

That's "flight planning". You need to upgrade the tracking station and mission control to tier 2.

SAS on or off didn't make a noticeable difference, and I don't have MechJeb at all

The spinning in my case occurs during warp. Naturally that means you don't go in the direction you intended

I'm mostly inclined to agree, but the rotation thing is just plain irritating . I don't suppose you know if there's anything that can be done to work around it, besides getting far enough out of the gravity well? No amount of SAS/torque etc seems to work

I never said anything about your code, but given how many mods have been abandoned by their owners and picked up by someone else, it might be prudent to at least make it readable (to other people) . Assuming of course it isn't already readable... (Added bonus of readable code: if you forget what the bit on line 362 of file blah does (spoiler: you will. I guarantee it) you don't have to spend an hour or two trying to figure it out ) About the free time/inexperience part: sure, but the process of learning how to implement something should normally improve your coding practices

When I tried to use the drive, I found that it only did that if you had it at (or near) full throttle while you were aiming roughly at something massive (like Kerbin/the sun for example). I'm not sure if it's a bug or not though. I have another issue as well; for some situations using the drive causes the ship to rotate for no apparent reason (in particular while deep in a gravity well). Is that intended or is it a bug? The mods I had installed (most via CKAN) during testing: Blizzy's toolbar USI Tools Active Texture Management ART Better Buoyancy Community Resource Pack Deadly Reentry Enhanced Navball Extraplanetary Launchpads (regolith adaptation) FAR Firespitter InFlightWaypoints IntakeBuildAid KAS KER KIDS Kerbal Stats Infernal Robotics ModuleRCSFX Precise Node ProceduralDynamics ProceduralFairings RealChute Regolith RemoteTech SCANsat Stage Recovery Stock Bug Fix Modules Texture Replacer Trajectories KAC Alternate Resource Panel Transfer Window Planner TweakScale USI Exploration Pack FTT Karbonite KarbonitePlus Sounding Rockets USI Survival Pack Alcubierre Warp Drive (this one) Vanguard EVA parachutes There's also an occasional issue with the Navball, but that could be something completely different Issues aside, I do love the mod

It doesn't have a GUI button, but the standard(ish) shortcut ctrl+Z does work already. It tends to lag pretty badly though. Redo is either Ctrl+Shift+Z or Ctrl+Y (in the middle of flying a spaceplane, can't check ). A GUI button for that would be nice though

Actually, jets do gradually become worse as they run out of air. The flame-out happens after that reaches a critical point (10% of required intake air for turbojets).

Nope:

9 years ago DDR2 ram was pretty much the norm, having been around since 2003. DDR3 was released in 2007 - just over 7 years ago. The ram I have is dual channel DDR2-800 (400mhz, at least according to my BIOS) which at the time wasn't that uncommon either. In that case, can I have your current one?

43km seems a bit excessive, especially if you're assuming full throttle; I'm sure I don't need to tell you you can very easily keep accelerating at that altitude with 10% throttle on very badly starved engines. If that's the case, 1.33 shock intakes per engine at 43km is pretty reasonable - that should be roughly 1 intake per engine at more like 35-38km. Otherwise, good work

My guess is it's "name.GetHashCode() % 3" with some class assignment for 0, 1 and 2. That's usually how you implement something like this based on hash functions. The GetHashCode() function is C#'s standard hash function, which is "implementation defined" but returns an int based on the input. For strings (e.g. names) that's usually written in a way that makes the hash code change by a large value for a very small change in the input string (changing one letter, adding a letter, etc). This page has several examples of string hash functions written in C. If that is how it's done, it'll be pointless building a list of names with their class assignments - it will probably be different on each platform, possibly including different versions of .NET on windows.

Here's one for 0.25, but it's still pretty much the same in 0.90. The only real difference is that now we can build bigger spaceplanes (with difficulty).