Omniverse

I'm impressed someone tried it, I would love to see footage

Well good... But that's kinda fast... Do we know of anyway of measuring rotational motion in KSP?

Thats a good point. If there was a mod that displayed information on rotational speed than I would consider screenshots. What do you believe would be a reasonable alternative?

So I saw Interstellar recently. Great movie, I'm sure there are some parts that made some of you guys cringe... but nonetheless fantastic movie. The scene to replicate from the movie: There is a scene in the movie where Mann tries to dock imperfectly and blows the Endurance (big centrifuge style craft) into a rapid spin on a suborbital trajectory. Cooper then approaches the rapidly spinning, damaged Endurance and manages to dock with it by spinning his own craft and lining up with it perfectly enough Cooper then proceed to pull the Endurance out of the suborbital trajectory with just the Lander's thrusters. The Challenge looks something like this: Stage 1: -create a large centrifuge-style orbital ship (note 1) -create a Lander ship -bring them into Low-orbit of any planet with a reasonably thick atmosphere (Kerbin, Jool, Eve, Laythe) Stage 2: -land the lander (or just move it away and come back) -bring the lander back up, spin the centrifuge-style ship to 20+(citation needed) rpm(note 2) and put into suborbital trajectory(note 3) Stage 3: -dock with the spinning ship without slowing it down until you have docked. -bring it out of the sub orbital trajectory with only the lander's thrusters -take video to prove this Notes and specifics: -note 1: it is understood that the mass and size (and naturally, the moment of inertia)of the Endurance is much larger than that of the lander. you get points for replicating this. -note 2: it is understood that because a segment of the Endurance's ring was blown off, it would be nearly impossible to maintain rotational movement along the same axis (aka there would be too much wobble in the dock because te center of mass changed) but for the purposes of this challenge, just dock with a symmetrical craft. -note 3: in the movie the ship and the lander docked after they had entered the stratosphere. you get many points for completing the docking in atmosphere. -note 4: the centrifuge style craft cannot have thrusting or SAS capability once it is docked (because it's supposed to be damaged). I recommend changing the spin and trajectory by means of small solid rocket boosters. -note 5: replicating scenes involving the Ranger docking and being blown off are not required -note 6: I am unsure how fast the Endurance was spinning in the movie, someone please help me define this for the challenge. Also I do not believe even mechjeb can tell you exactly how fast you are spinning, so good luck The community will somehow judge the best Interstellar style docking (I'm just putting the idea out there). Generally I believe credit should be awarded on the following criteria: -reasonable scale and design of the Endurance and Lander crafts -successful initial state (near atmosphere, low orbit, lander separates and returns) -centrifuge craft is spun fast (the faster the better) -centrifuge craft is put into suborbital trajectory (a significant one, landing eventually, not aerobraking) -lander craft aligns with centrifuge craft and spins at the same rate -crafts dock (bonus points if in atmosphere) -lander uses its own SAS/RCS to stop spinning -lander uses it's own thrusters to pull the two crafts back into stable orbit. -video evidence please comment to let me know how I can tweak this challenge and make it better, can't wait to see this one Omniverse

Drats! Oh well... one can only hope I suppose that one day unity will catch up the times Thank you for clarifying this btw... I was planning to buy a Nvidia graphics card from my holiday money on a hunch that all this worked... now I will not waste my money Omniverse

Hello, (warning, the following is theoretical...leading up to a question) So KSP runs on Unity. The Unity engine uses Nvidia's PhysX feature to do physic calculations in the game. usually, the PhysX used by KSP can be run thru any CPU without issues. Unless, a Nvidia graphics card with a PhysX PPU (physics processing unit) is installed on a computer, in which case, the PhysX calculations done by the CPU are reduced and given to the PPU... this causes a significant increase in performance because it takes a load of the CPU, especially when there are multiple objects loaded in space (like if you have a multi-million-part space station). I am a hardcore AMD user and and even hardcore-er KSP player (this game is incredibly, everyone here knows that).... so I went looking for ways to optimize my game even further and possibly use hardware-based PhysX in an AMD system. I came across this thing called hybrid PhysX. which allows a computer with AMD main card(s) to use an Nvidia card just as a sole physics processor (so basically, its putting in another graphics card to use solely for physics calculations). more information found here:http://physxinfo.com/wiki/Hybrid_PhysX This would allow the Hardcore-est KSP+AMD users to buy a chap ~50$ Nvidia card (even a plain PCI one can work, not even PCIe) to use PhysX and enhance the game to even further reduce the stress on the CPU. my question is... would this work? -is the unity engine benefited by PhysX hardware components? --if yes, does KSP allow the same use of hardware-based PhysX to lighten CPU load? ---if yes, is there any easy solution for AMD users to use PhysX on a different core or somewhere that doesn't interfere with the game performance? ----if no, would hybrid PhysX work with KSP/Unity to achieve the desired result?(and i understand this part of the question is better asked on the PhysX forums) -and yes, I am overthinking it slightly... but until Unity goes 64-bit i'm optimizing everything I can. -if there is any documentation on KSP's use of graphics features (like PhysX) i would love to find and see that... Thank you for your time, Omniverse

)))Hardware side: Ram: unity is a 32 bit program(so far), so KSP is only able to use about 3.5 gb of ram when running. Mods can cause you to approach this limit and crash the game. Ideally, you want over 6 gb or ram on your system, so you can always have at least 3.5 free for the game. higher quality/speed ram doesn't hurt either. CPU: unfortunately, KSP only uses one cpu core, if you have a multicore system then KSP will only run at the speed of one of those cores. Notably, newer intel cores (i3,i5,i7) seem to do pretty well, but AMD core work great as well, just watch out for the turbo-something feature in phenom cores which interferes with KSP somehow. Graphics: Nvidia and AMD... take your pick... either is fine. if you have an amd board you might benefit from crossfire slightly, likewise for Nvidia's Sli. )))Software/In game side: there are several optimizations you can enable, for the best performance set the shaders and shadows stuff to 0 and reduce the texture quality. -reducing the texture quality will significantly improve the fps in all situations (also, for unknown reasons it decreases the initial load time) -set debris to 0 -other small setting changes )))mod-based performance enhancements: -"Active-Memory-Reduction-Mod (TextureCompressor)" this mod compresses textures in the ram after they are loaded, making the game less unstable when a lot of mods are installed, granted you can load the game. -texture reduction packs for B9, KW, and Nova Punch parts these will make the textures in the respective packs slightly less detailed and save you A TON of ram space, highly reccomended

Great mod, super helpful. I was wondering if you considered potentially integrating some other lightweight features like a basic calculator or something. Just a thought. Thanks!

@Lack after consulting with MechJeb's GitHub about the issue. A new Dev version of mechJeb has been made to fix the problem. I can confirm this works with your awesome delayed thrust engines. download able on MechJeb's dev builds here: http://jenkins.mumech.com/job/MechJeb2/changes Also I keep forgetting to say keep up the good work

please read up before you point fingers at people mods KSP is run on unity's game engine unity's game engine is a 32 bit program (the 64 bit hasnt been developed yet) 32bit programs can only use up to 4gb (actually 3.8ish) of a system's ram you cant put too many mods in KSP or it will crash because the game will exceed that

Thanks, I hadn't realized the engine did acted that way. I will try it out. I pointed the issue out on MechJeb's github and they'll get to it eventually: https://github.com/MuMech/MechJeb2/issues/242 and yes, the over heating is quite the humbling feature, I wasn't aware that adding grills could cool anything however.

Question, I'm having issues with the larger nuclear engine and MechJeb. it seems under most circumstances that the engine's thrust cannot be controlled by mechjeb unless an engine of a different sort also accompanies it... is this a bug with LLL or Mechjeb? Thanks, also do you have a github for bugs?

Usually the ksp Weekly would have come out by now... I'm pretty sure they see what's going on