Search the Community

Those USAAF guys had no real choice. Their casualty rates were insane, too. I went to an 8th AF luncheon, and sat with a few old guys. A fighter pilot (P-47) gave the talk that day, and he talked about them all being kids and that they felt invulnerable. He said, "If you had told us at the briefing early in the morning that 9 out of 10 of us were not coming home, we all would have all looked around the room and thought, 'You poor bast*ards'."

I've managed to talk to quite a few, and all of them basically say, "I was just doing my job" and/or something like, "The real heroes are all still there, buried."

None* of them want to talk about it, which means remembering it, when they'd just as soon forget it * - (in general, I'll assume there are exceptions).

And I'm hearing that the second installment will be quite good. ...possibly good enough for my spouse to actually enjoy! I got bored last winter and started digging through this box of old paperbacks in my basement; books I've had (and kept because I loved them) going all the way back to the 70s and 80s. That's ownership; most are reprints of classics, with some like the Julian May (Many Colored Land) series being 'new' when I was reading them. There's a lot in there that did not age well. I'm actually okay with that; my daughter is the only one in the family that really enjoys SF... and she enjoyed watching the show. Plus - I can talk math with her!

@Superfluous J @Hotel26 I don’t think it has anything to do with logic or whether we could build a simulation with our understanding of computers. In my opinion, if there is a simulation it was built by something of such great knowledge and power its actions would be indiscernible to us, just as a fish isn’t really capable of discerning complex human behaviors. But yes, the question of “Are we in a simulation built by ourselves/other humans” can be answered with a pretty certain no. Unless we start getting into questions of whether “we” is literally us, as in I built this simulation for myself but wiped my memory as I went inside. Which isn’t really a question about “are we living in a simulation” but could begin slipping into arguments about solipsism. Pretty much. Insofar as it isn’t a scientific idea but is being peddled as a sort of “higher truth” “within the boundaries of science*” it basically hits all the marks for New New Age theological thinking without the theo. *At least this is the strong vibe I get from such believers who talk about their ideas. EDIT- It should also be noted simulation theory can be an idea held while being religious too. Look up Philip K. Dick’s 1977 speech in Metz, France.

If the weekly reports they're submitting aren't up to your standards, perhaps you should talk to them about their performance, see if you can get them some additional training, or just talk to HR and have them replaced.

we questioned what you know of phisics because you do not talk like an expert. Except for a few throwaway line that do hint at technical competence, like mentioning the physics of two spaceships orbiting each other (without whom I'd just dismiss your claims of MS as internet bravado), most of your messages come across as just ranting about things that have perfectly reasonable explanations. what you described in your first post was perfectly compatible with orbital drift, so the simplest explanation was that you were experiencing orbital drift and had no physical knowledge. even now, you boast of a MS in aerospace engineering but you never correctly describe orbital drifting. Their guidance code and whatever else they covered for their masters definitely won't pertain to the "space" in aerospace if they're having trouble coming to grips with the fact two orbits will behave differently to one another. I think that their qualifications are likely irrelevant to the discussion.

first you said that the acceleration was slow, now you say rapidly. which description is false? keep in mind that ksp has smaller planets with faster orbits, and so the effects of drifting are bigger than in real life. both hotel26 and 18watt already did mention the possibility in their answers. if the two ships are sharing the same orbit, one in front of the other, they can be very stable. if they are one above the other, they will drift away much faster. perhaps. what you described the first time is perfectly compatible with normal orbital drift, now you say that the change in speed is fast. I have experienced bugs with trajectories too, so there may be a bug at work. we questioned what you know of phisics because you do not talk like an expert. Except for a few throwaway line that do hint at technical competence, like mentioning the physics of two spaceships orbiting each other (without whom I'd just dismiss your claims of MS as internet bravado), most of your messages come across as just ranting about things that have perfectly reasonable explanations. what you described in your first post was perfectly compatible with orbital drift, so the simplest explanation was that you were experiencing orbital drift and had no physical knowledge. even now, you boast of a MS in aerospace engineering but you never correctly describe orbital drifting. We who are posting here have years of practice at this game. we do not have a degree, we do not know how to write guidance control code, nor we know about crafting techniques for advanced aerospace materials, realistic aerodinamic models, actual gravitational equations, or a bunch of similar stuff I suppose is studied in aerospace engineering. but we do have a lot of practical experience running orbits, rendez-vous, dockings, transfers. I showed ksp to a friend with a phd in physics - he specialized in particle physics, but he took courses in orbital dynamics - and I was surprised at how much more knowledgeable I was than him. I would bet good money that when it comes to this practical understanding of the kind of orbital operations required in this game, we are actually more experts than people with actual degrees. in this specific field of space navigation, we are even more experts than several people working at nasa, because there's plenty of people who are not working on orbital mechanics but are instead building rovers, improving thermal shields, ruggedizing delicate science instruments so that they will survive space, how to establish communication protocol. Or perhaps writing code. And so we also don't appreciate being talked down to with snarky comments questioning what we know about physics either.

Chapter 2: The Ascender Year 1, Day 29 The new KSP has been planning their next move, and they decided to go big or go home. This is the Ascender Capsule, manufactured by AtomicTech, a major contender in the post-war aerospace sector. While the capsule had been a scrapped project from the old program two decades ago, AtomicTech was able to secure blueprints as well as manufacturing components from the warehouse. The Ascender Capsule can hold two kerbals as well as some basic flight instruments. Before the KSP can launch the capsule to orbit, they first have to test the abort system. "John, I think it's working!" "Successful abort system fire! The capsule is still intact." "Let's just drive to the capsule and check it out." "I can't see any damage. I think we're good to go!" Later that evening, John and the growing team of 28 employees held a meeting. "Now that we have a crew capsule, we can attempt to visit whatever the old program left in orbit. The most prominent of these is the Hope Orbital Research Platform. Although the radio equipment used to communicate with the station have long been destroyed, we can try to establish comms to this station. However, we would need to send a crewed vessel to install the equipment within the station." Herbrett blurted, "Why do we have to put the equipment inside the station when we can just attach a utility module to the station on the outside?" Herbrett continued, "We can use those grabbers that you brought to work today, Nathanael. That way, we won't need to worry about whether the station's docking ports still work." John interrupted Herbrett, "Enough talk! Let's get to work!"

Finding Wyvern insufficiently capable of generating Chemicals, I decided to launch an Industrial Refinery module to operate as a dedicated chemical plant. It took 9 days to reach Minmus, by which time Odyssey was finally arriving at Dres. I activated the crossfeed to the landers, giving the nuclear engines access to all the liquid fuel on board. Somehow the crew managed to fully charge the batteries, allowing the vessel to limp in with a constant power drain of a bit over 1 ec per second. With life support shut down and just the inflatable module for habitation, only engineer Ennie Kerman was still at his post. The other two slackers went on strike, if you can believe it. Even with all the LF available, it wasn't going to be enough. Odyssey was going to fly off into Kerbolar orbit. Something to do with a miscalculation over liquid fuel verses liquid hydrogen, which meant the vessel would have less delta-V than expected. To make up the difference, RCS added its miniscule thrust for the duration of the burn, and in fact made the final ten m/s of deceleration that ensured a successful capture. Admittedly, if she hadn't been carrying a 2.5m tank's worth of RCS to begin with, this might not have been neccesary. Talk about cutting it fine! Wishing I'd thought of this earlier, but better late than never. A pair of flat-aspect solar arrays had been sitting on either side of Odyssey's main propellant tank. Their original purpose was to ensure that no matter which direction Odyssey was pointed, it could receive at least some solar power. That meant they were effectively useless extra mass so long as the vessel was oriented to allow its main arrays to point at the sun, which is basically all the time. Ennie Kerman went EVA to move them somewhere more useful. Generating a whopping 3 ec/second, these panels allowed the hydroponics gardens to be reactivated, ensuring that the crew would at least have Supplies to (hopefully) last them until Valkyrie arrives.

I stand corrected. Promise or not, I think it was a bad idea to state that goal. If saves break it’ll look like they failed to meet that goal, and if they have to do extra work or make compromises to stop them from breaking, the game will suffer. Their biggest communication problem is that they talk too much!

it's like 30 minutes into the 0.2 announcement talk iirc.

No need in billions. Thousands of influential adepts; millions of motivated expendables, ready to self-sacrifice, relevant eschatological discourse, secret plan of eternal life and/or reincarnation. Healthy and worthy like never before. Just the low-level crowd formally belongs to all religious and spiritual groups (and in 99% of cases doesn't know the very word "gnosticism"), following the p.1. The first rule of the Fight Club - you do not talk about Fight Club. No need to affect everyone. The elite is enough. Reincarnation, regeneration, thin plane existence, other bonus options for the chosen. Show them a possibility, then have a deal. P.S. Still insisting that SETI should stop sending their silly pictures, and start translating Marx's Das Kapital at the neutral hydrogen frequency. Let's hit'em first!

Oooohohohoho you know you just activated my trap card. Let's start, in no particular order, might mix and repeat things. All of below has been recorded on 23" 1080p monitor. The clutter. The various windows and instruments take a lot of screen space. This is an issue even on nearly 90% of Steam Survey users who have a 1080p screens. Here's why: Can you tell that there are three other windows hidden behind those visible? They all go over each other with no regard to other's positions, and dragging them around to find the one you need is tiresome. Especially since they are sooooo big while also having a lot of unused space inside, with tiny fonts. And while you can resize some of them, it's not what I'd call helpful: This is the maximum horizontal width of parts manager in VAB. See the issue? The thing could hold two columns and keep twice as much data on the same space. All windows should be as flexible as possible. Inconsistency, that may be long. Because for some reason, of four windows visible here, each one has a different style. The sizes, the fonts, the colors... Even the title bars are different. Some are resizeable, some aren't... And it follows throughout the entire game. On this single screenshot here I can spot at least a dozen of different fonts styles, sizes and whatnot, often within a single element. One piece of the navball has four, can you notice? Then just below that.. The fifth. Aaaaand below the navball... 3 different fonts, 3 different sizes, why on Earth is the time smaller than the altitude? The launch button has three as well, and then there's staging, also with at least three: And the flight report... Why exactly is the right half different from the left? And also, I've noticed... What's with the alignment? Two baselines? W H Y ? And even if the font happens to be the same (I like the smooth one) it comes in at least six sizes. All across one interface. That's not a very unified UI if you asked me. Minor thing but needs noting. Some switches are presented as actions, some as status. I think I'd rather also have a On/Off switch for the engine instead of a button. Engine activated: Green. Or dark if deactivated. Now, the thing I hate the most. Form over function. It's something I've dealt with before with another game (https://www.reddit.com/r/Forspoken/comments/zhdr1m/can_we_talk_how_terribly_designed_the_interface/) although this was a demo prior to release. The thing with interface, is that its most important function is being easily readable and clear to the user. Unfortunately, KSP2 isn't that. Get an average person with glasses, make them sit in front of average-sized screen at perfectly reasonable 1080p with 100% UI scale, and show them one of the fullgame screenshots above. Ask them to read the navball or time to PE or fuel consumption of a Dawn engine without leaning forward. I can't do that. And the new additions don't really help. Here's a real size orbital mode navball sphere: Lots and lots of white lines crossing each other with little to no spearation between them. And it's not the worst part. I zoomed in on the screenshot to take this, but it didn't make anything better - can you tell, at a glance, what's in the circle? I can't. I even went for a comparison with KSP1 and huh, who would've guessed... While only slightly larger (it could've been me, it's an old screenshot) and everything is clear and easy to read. Sorry to say, but KSP2 is a regression. And you had such great ideas during development: It's as clean as day and even has hints where other attitude markers are, it's glorious. And it followed on the entire interface, I believe, even with few hiccups (the LCD font in places etc) it was one of your best yet. Same with VAB. Nice, clean modern design, smooth iconography, perfect for a space age game You even had the same or very similar icons in the interface in the last 4 years, but decided to pixelify them. Shame. Please note I'm not talking about layout - it's fine with me. Forgot to mention that the iconography gets even worse in map/tracking station while zooming in or out... Good luck targeting the moon. Of course, Only fixing the scaling would help, but the smoother icons would look so much nicer. All in all, it would be for the better if the retro pixely style was gone and sent to where it belongs - in the museum. Give us the Dragon, not the Starliner (that never went anywhere) Ease of use. Deleting parts in VAB. There are few days around it, Del button, or dropping them into part picker. However, the dropping, which is what I use the most, comes with one problem. It can only be done in few places: Drop them elsewhere, and you either close the part category, or pick another part. Annoying. Better explanation or refinement of saving system. I got that fairly quickly but there are still many people who don't and have a hard time grasping the idea of workspaces. I know that what you save in VAB is a workspace (read as: a document, and it's what you're opening with editor of choice) and below that a vehicle (a page or paragraph) that you choose to launch directly from launchpad/runway. Overriding saving a document under the same name will make you lose the content saved previously, that's obvious - but not clearly explained in the game when it looks like this Save vehicle, then it shows saved vehicles, but they're not actually vehicles but workspaces... You get the idea. It's all over the place. Now onto the other thing.. That orbital info... there isn't enough info to be actually useful. And I'd rather not switch between seeing AP/PE and inclination/whateverelse. Plus relative inclination to target, angle from prograde... All those need their own space together. But I picked this particular screenshot because it has one problem - the timer ends at 6 hours (Kerbin day). If your AP/PE is more than 6 hours away because you're in very high orbit... you won't know it from there. Also, the window titles.. look like some dev variables. But I think that's it for now. More reading in: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/219151-can-we-talk-about-accessibility/ https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/220482-why-has-the-ui-to-be-so-ugly https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/topic/210240-the-new-ui-for-ksp2-improvements-and-regressions-from-previous-concepts/ (this one is even from before release, right after EA announcement)

That isn't good. Unfortunately, until she hits rock bottom and sees the need for help, there's not much those around her can do to help. But there's a little bit of hope. Let me explain: I have PTSD, depression, and high-performing anxiety, and because they are all friends and needed a new playmate, they brought in OCD for giggles and grins. It took me to the point where nothing made sense; I was mad at myself, in the middle of another "life crisis" (I went from one of these to the other), and there was always agitation under the surface. Your sister sounds like she's close to this stage now. I am no expert in psychology, but I can tell you what I went through. Maybe this will help you understand what your sister may be thinking and feeling: The outward anger and hostility were because I felt I should better control things in my life, but I wasn't. Many things I thought were wrong in my life weren't apparent to anyone else but me. And I could not understand how they could feel things were fine when they were not. So, whenever someone would ask me why I was mad, I'd lash out rather than explain what I was going through. Why should I? In my mind, if they could not see it for themselves, what good would it do for me to explain it to them? The outward anger was also driven by seeing other people "happy, happy!" and wondering why I could not be like that. Some folks seem to have the ability to get hit in the face with a shovel (metaphorically speaking), laugh it off, get up, and go about their day, never even bothered by it. Then there was me; I was depressed, and the lack of enjoyment or the joy of a typical day just ate at my very soul. It made me even angrier and more depressed and fed the ill feelings I already had. The outward anger is also driven by being misunderstood by others. A lot of people around me had no idea what I was going through and would often say stuff that I took (because of my depression) wrong. Sure, some of it was dumb statements, such as, "Snap out of it" or "You've got so much going for you." But when you are buried in depression, your perception of those around you and perceptions about yourself -- you do not see it. All you see are those kinds of comments being critical of you. So, you resent the helpful comments and gestures, even those made in good faith. One of the best things you can do is to let her know you're there, but don't push or back so far away you become unapproachable. Buy her favorite snack food, soda, or other trinkets/gifts as an "I care" gift. It will be met with distrust, skepticism, and questions (and probably anger). But keep doing it, make it unpredictable, and be polite. Eventually, she will let you in. It will not be an easy thing to do. Her self-isolation is a part of her pain from the depression. Her acting out towards the rest of the family resembles a hurt animal striking out against its rescuer. For about four years, I volunteered for both the university's and community college's mental first aid team - and I am the faculty member that as soon as there's a report of a student thinking of suicide, I come to talk to the student. So far, there's been three occasions in the last two years to use my training, unfortunately. I'm good at it because I sank to that point in my life in 2004; I was lucky enough that a good friend kept reaching out and didn't back off, regardless of how nasty and mean I got. I am no psychoanalyst, just a guy who has lived that life. Don't hesitate to involve a family therapist, even if she doesn't go. They will give you and your parents powerful tools to deal with the situation.

Sufficiently spaced out network of individual habitats and evacuations of threatened ones. I.e. how we manage predictable disasters here on Earth right now. Hurricane heading towards Florida? Evacuate. Volcano getting ready to erupt under Grindavik? Evacuate. Asteroid on course to hit Hellas City? Evacuate. There has been a lot of talk about potential methods to deflect threatening asteroids. The problem is that all the feasible ones have to be implemented a long time before inevitability of impact becomes apparent. That means sufficient funding is unlikely to be allocated in time to be effective. Improving technology will eventually change that, but there is still a long way to go.

My sister's a nihilistic ass who hates anything to do with anything. And she is perhaps the worst person to be in a car with. And I had to be with her for two hours talking about "how we should all just kill ourselves" and "I'm too stupid to get a job". She's NOT stupid, far from it in fact, she just refused to put in the work to find opportunities and now she's taking it all out on us. Not that I can say anything. She yells at me, locks herself in her room, and then comes out an hour later with a phony apology. And then the cycle repeats. Sorry to rant to a bunch of strangers on the internet, I just feel you all are the only people I can talk about this to.

Is it me or does this update feel "Incomplete".There are parts that got an overhaul but other parts that are meant to go with that didnt get the overhaul and now crafts seem like a mess. Heres what i mean: The MK 1 chute looks completly out of place with the pod. Aswell the hammer and flea engine.... (Sarcasam alert) Oh squad i absolutly love how you took 2 unique engine models and made a new one for the hammer and said Lets cut the hammer in half!...Yeah that`s the flee engine we whanted!.....Really squad?The flee engine is literaly the hammer cut in half!. Really this update is really boring and a bit pointless.No one asked for a part revamp.The closet thing in saw that some asked for a part revamp was I that asked for a revamp on the kerbals suit(Which I like how they turned out).But people have been asking for ages for multiplayer....Better graphics....Updates on the console version......new stuff to explore.....more planets.....new game mechanics....you named it.

A Subtle Reminder 1987 is, well, it's sleepy. Besides Orpheus 3 at the end of the year, this is a pretty standard 12 months for NASA. Although the importance of Orpheus 3 should not be understated, it is the mission that will scout out Amundsen Crater for the exact location of the upcoming lunar base, which we will talk about shortly. The EERM will be essential for this task, and it will require up to 7 expeditions throughout the planned 25-day surface stay. Once the proper location within the massive crater has been found, ideally close to the permanently shadowed regions which contain water ice, it will be mapped out, surveyed, and will be incorporated into all future planning for the lunar base. Amundsen was chosen as the location for NASA's lunar base because of its (relatively) shallow sides, and very flat crater floor, it also has permanently shadowed regions which, as previously mentioned, are home to considerable amounts of water ice. These favorable characteristics were identified in the early 70s, and since then it has been the #1 choice for NASA. But let's talk about that lunar base. NASA has been "planning" a lunar base since the beginning of Apollo, but a singular design and plan emerged, beginning in 1980. After some delays as Magellan begins to get more and more of the budget for its Martian ambitions, the base is finally a completed design, with funding underneath it and a proper roadmap to its construction laid in front. The base will consist of "common modules" that are linked via pressurized hallways, with each module being outfitted for different purposes. They will be landed by a "sky crane" lander of sorts, the same one that is in the works for the EERM. The base's name has been kept a total secret, for many years at this point. It's a name that has been decided on by both NASA, its Administrator John Young, and the collective Astronaut Corps. But finally, on January 10th, 1987, in a press conference held at Johnson Space Center, the name of America's lunar base is unveiled. Lunar Outpost Virgil In honor of one of the greatest astronauts who ever lived, Virgil "Gus" Grissom, who tragically lost his life in the Apollo 1 disaster. This name pays homage to a man who inspired every astronaut in the Corps today, and a man who John Young himself flew with on the very first crewed Gemini mission over 20 years ago. The name is loved by the public, and NASA further announces that the first module is set to launch in 1988, with Orpheus 4. It is in fact now in assembly at Marshall Space Flight Center and is expected to be delivered to the Cape in the spring of next year. The Space Shuttle gets off to a pretty normal year starting in February, with Columbia delivering a new crew and supplies to Skylab on STS-101A. That mission is also the second in recent years focused on minor refurbishment of the station in its final years, with now under 4 years left until America's space station is de-orbited into the Pacific Ocean. Then in April, the beginning of many joint US-Japan Shuttle flights, Atlantis launches the Sutāraito (Starlight) spacecraft in April. It has been heavily delayed, originally intended to launch in 1984, but it has finally made its way to space. Sutāraito is designed to make observations of star clusters and observe our Sun as well. NASDA remains heavily interested in robotic spacecraft, and potential exploration missions, and they continue to negotiate with NASA on potential joint spacecraft in the coming years. However, in March, just as Enterprise returns from a classified West Coast mission, she is flown back to the Cape just for a little while, to bring all 5 Space Shuttles together as NASA celebrates the 10-year anniversary of STS-1. Reagan gives a speech, as well as John Young, Bob Crippen, and Story Musgrave, who were the crew of that historic test flight. On top of this, the occasion is marked by the opening of the Space Shuttle Pathfinder display at the Smithsonian. The structural test article which performed tests at both Vandenberg and the Cape for the launch sites, and was essential in the development of space-worthy orbiters. It is on display with the prototype Spacelab that was presented to NASA in 1976 by ESA, as well as some components recovered from the S-IC boost stage by a diving expedition. That expedition occurred in 1985, and the Smithsonian scrambled to get them for the display and anniversary celebrations. With some early spring festivities out of the way, NASA settles down for a calm year of Shuttle flights. But meanwhile, it is no standard year for the Soviets. The bear has awakened again. After 10 years of arduous, and costly development, the Soviets have their replacement for the failed N1. This rocket has quite literally taken the Space Shuttle's STS stack, and given it a characteristically Soviet spin, a rocket whose name simply means "Energy" and a rocket that will propel the aspirations of a reforged Soviet Union for the coming decades. All Hail Energiya. But what's scarier, is what it carries on this first flight. In fact, it is so scary, there is an emergency meeting of the top Pentagon and NASA officials alongside President Reagan. A spacecraft carrying a one-megawatt carbon dioxide laser, capable of destroying any US satellite at will. The Soviets call it Polyus, and it has, quite literally, put the US in check. They may not be going to the Moon again anytime soon, but the Soviets are still here, and they're still a threat, and they cannot be ignored any longer. Reagan will get his Star Wars.

I think generally you just have to get into the mindset of an indie developer like Felipe. Just one guy with no big corporation in the back when you talk to the community. I know it's hard but at the end of the day people just want to communicate with people, not some politician talk fluff. That's how social media works. That's why Elon is that popular.

I wouldn't be surprised if they never switch to CBT. I think the current system is good enough for what's needed and it clearly still has room for optimizations, rewriting it would be a big undertaking that might not even bring the expected benefits. Mortoc's essay was interesting but it shows why sometimes it's better to talk less, now everybody's expecting CBT to be delivered any day now and if they decide to drop it, people will be upset.

Why would it have the density of Kerbin? The only reason Kerbin has an absurd density is to give it the same surface gravity as Earth despite its miniscule size. The whole point of a real-sized solar system would be to not have planets made out of unealistic materials or suns that could never sustain fusion. Talk about reality! You're working from the assumption that everything has to be the same as the Kerbol system. Me and others don't—that's the whole point of other systems. In KSP1 you're forced to replace the Kerbol system with a modded version if you want something Earth-sized. For the record, personally I don't care. I see great opportunities for KSP2 for someone to introduce a modded system that has solar-system like properties without replacing what we already have but you're telling me they can't because that would break the rules you have about the Kerbal "universe?"

Well the second paragraph is what is (probably) the most incorrect one and also doesn't go well with your first. Science will surely not just be duplicating what we have in ksp 1, even new parts are very different. Also you talk about months in your first paragraph for the first content update while you talk about years in the second one. So if multiple elements are false, people tend to discard the whole thing even if one thing is true in this. I added the actual quote because you're interpretation of it is probably incorrect and I didn't want people to spread false or inexact devs words. At least now everyone can do their own interpretation. For the first paragraph, I will add that he has maybe misread it (like me the first time I read your message) as in "1 or 2 years" for the first major update.