Search the Community

Some new point of view : It might be unnecessary to impose a construction-time because ... of how we (might) finance the rockets. We've talked before of whether or not our Space Program should "Grind mindlessly for money", unsurprisingly the answer was a big HELL NO !!, letting two solutions : - Fixed amount of Money being available for each launch. - Fixed Budget being available daily, monthly or else. Anybody can guess that as soon as docking-ring are unlocked, the first idea would allow to assemble an infinite amount of modular spaceship in orbit and ruin most challenges. The "Fixed Budget" idea on the other hand would naturally keep you from launching absurd numbers of satellites, or more than one gigantic rocket per month. The problem : A construction-time could keep you (frustratingly) from using efficiently a fixed-budget (case of warp), without solving the problem generated by launch-money. The solution : Let instantaneous construction as an "acceptable break from reality", as the player can retro-actively explain it by "it was planned all along", "We just happened to launch them at the same time" and "What ?! We stayed withing budget no ?". Plus I'm worried about construction-time requiring further complicated balancing mechanism, like a way to upgrade construction time. We've had our disagreement before and swore to not talk about it again, but I have to say that you are overreacting and underestimate the amount Balancing Mechanic needed to make a game truly interesting.

It's really not, you're just making it so because you took what I said and ran it to the realism extreme. Don't WORRY about all the heat nuances, but instead build a working by-part heat model on simplified mechanics. In the case of what I laid out in my previous post, heat production, mass, size (surface area approx.), critical temp, and heat pump flags. Make use of values that already exist in the stock part cfg files. They both have a mass and a max temp already. If you go talk to Ferram, I'm sure he knows how to get part size for a dissipation algorithm. Next, dealing with time acceleration. Biggest mistake I think is assuming that you have to operate full computational cycles on every pass. Really, this isn't true. You don't have to fool the computer, you have to fool the user. If doing real-time calcs is impossible to enact at timewarp, DON'T enact full calcs at timewarp. All you need to do is give the player the illusion that this is going on. We're not machines... we can't tell the difference unless there's a big error. In this case, every X number of passes, take a snapshot of the vessel's rates of change across all parts. Whatever the change rates are at that moment, you sample and hold. When Timewarp is started, suspend the physics passes on the heat engine and simply pull that data from the rate-of-change snapshot and apply it in controlled passes at intervals YOU set. To error correct, take a single physics check every x hundred or x thousand suspended passes and update the snapshot. Further, to prevent spikes, have a normalizing code run at a desired interval or at start-stop points for time warp. You do this kind of thing with sound engineering to get rid of pops and crackles in an audio feed. Even with the most outlandish designs people make, the a rate of change of a part should and will be predictable for an estimated period of time, time stamp or no. Even if you can't get accurate time stamps, you should be able to identify the largest time interval possible between stamps before the engine absolutely MUST throw one out there. (Otherwise I would assume KSP would just stop working and display garbage.) It should be simple to have the code go 'the maximum possible change in value for this interval is 'Q' no matter what. Anything above Q is flat out wrong. Cap all spikes at Q." However, I'm working with a lot of assumptions and no clue what the code looks like. I'm assuming the code you can throw at this is close to the ability to mess with the engine KSP sits on. (A lot of mods seem to completely overwrite program functionality at the engine level. FAR appears to do that, but the keyword is APPEARS.) I'm not sure what your code limits are in terms of what functions you can call and your limits on what the engine lets you actually do to the code. Perhaps it would be best to PM me, and we can have a discussion about setting up a little proof of concept testing algorithm on the side so you don't have to mess with the KSPI code unless we hit paydirt. I've got to get to bed now though. Written analysis final's tomorrow and I have make sure guys I'm in a project with got the changes I made to the presentation and we have time to finalize...

I like to talk about space, but non of my friends cares. People in my age have small children and need to worry about feeding theyr family not about spacetrawel. Actually when i say spaceexploration amongst my friends, it always ends up with ****storm of complaints about how goverments should spend money on better schools or better healtcare and not on "useless rockets", unfortunately in the end, even if iam space fan, i have to agree with them.

When writing in your journal you talk about an intercept with Jool.

So, I did some testing. I screen captured two clients simultaneously in hopes of then editing it together, but that seems like too much work right now so here's the best parts of the session in pictures. Hopefully this will give people a better idea of what state the mod is currently in, and the devs some pointers of what could use some work. Note: I completely understand that the mod is very very very early in development. My testing is not extensive, anecdotal at best, but I just wanted to share because I thought it was pretty amusing. The setup - Windows desktop, running both the server and a KSP client (username "Jo_PC") - iMac, running KSP client (username "Jo_MAC") - connected via LAN, ~0.6ms ping. Initial Testing - Oddly enough, when first logging in you'll see Jebediah at the center of KSC. During login he seems to be used as a focus...? Even if you recover him, he will re-spawn every time someone logs into the server. Seems hacky. - Otherwise, logging in, syncing and chat all seem to work fine (well, it's a clean server, wonder how it'll handle with dozens of flights): - The screenshot sharing feature is awesome! I can totally see myself using this to let a friend sit in on a particularly hairy launch/landing/crash (MAC sent screenshots, as seen by PC) Vehicle Test setup - So I decided I'd build two small rovers to test how well syncing and docking work. (Mac rover has orange parachutes, PC has blue) - When you log in you will not be able to see other players until you are outside of the 'safetyBubbleRadius, which by default is 40km from KSP I think. When inside this radius your status is "Preparing/launching from KSC" - with some tweaking I figured out that with a value of 1500 (1.5km I think), you end up outside of the bubble right when you drive backwards off the beginning of the runway, far more convenient for testing than having to fly 40km each time: Vehicle Testing - With both rovers spawned (first MAC, then PC), and rolled out of the bubble, neither client could see the other one's Rover: (MAC left, PC right) - PC client was the first to jump out and check the tracking station, which only showed the PC's rover. - However when choosing to continue the flight, the MAC rover now appeared to the PC client (but MAC still couldn't see the PC rover) PC Client's View on left, MAC's on right - Only after the MAC client also went through the tracking station (where it also could only see its own rover) did the PC's rover appear in the world - Movement at this point didn't look too great. The position of the other client's rover seemed to only update about once a second, so there's a lot of jerking around when you watch another client's vehicle move. - I then tried to see what would happen if I drove the MAC rover back into the 'bubble'. The MAc client could still see the PC's rover's movements outside the bubble, but on the PC client the mac rover became Desynced and roll back down the side of the runway before even reaching the top: - The PC rover on the mac client then also desynced when it reached the bubble. - Even after escaping the mac client and using the tracking station to recover the rover, the desynced MAC rover on the PC's client remained. SUGGESTION: maybe instead of desyncing, could it be possible to ghost other vehicles while in a safe zone? so you could see them, but not interact with them. Other weird issues I had: - On multiple occasions a desynced version of the MAC rover would remain in the PC client's world, which would be visible even after escaping and continuing the flight on the PC's client. - On one occasion the PC client's 'Space Center' Button on the 'Game Paused' menu just flat out would not do anything for a good 20 seconds. ended up driving around for a bit and trying again later, which then worked. - On one occasion the PC client's framerate completely tanked from the normal 50+ to about 10. two desynced versions of the MAC rover were visible, but that was after they were visible before without any performance impact. Recovering the vessel (the PC rover) and launching a new one fixed it. - After several times exiting to the tracking station and restarting flights, both MAC and PC appeared once again in sync, however when I then used the tracking station to continue the MAC flight and the PC rover was nowhere to be seen: - I then click 'Fly' and suddenly out of nowhere: 7 WILD ROVERS APPEARED! - The PC client is completely oblivious to this until exiting to the tracking station and then they appear there as well. Docking Testing - So among the crazy random rover party, I finally had the bright idea to let the two rovers have a tender moment and give docking a try: - It took a good 6 seconds for the other client to register that the docking shield had been opened (talk about performance anxiety) - Since it's documented that only one player can control a vehicle at a time I was curious what would happen when you dock two vehicles controlled by two players. Well When I drove the MAC rover into the PC rover, this is the last frame the PC client saw (notice the note in the top-left corner) - ... Followed by a good two minutes where the PC client was stuck "synchronizing universe": - I ended up having to use the Space Center option on the pause menu. - On the Mac Client's side, Everything went according to plan, although it must have been one hell of a docking given that for a moment the PC Rover's Status is listed as "Exploded At Kerbin"! - The last thing I did was check the Tracking station with the mac client: The Rover seem to be multiplying... and now they weren't going away anymore either. Aaaand that's it for now. I havn't even had a chance to test how the mod handles time acceleration. Overall, there's definitely a ton of promise, but also a -ton- of work that needs to be done. Given that my connection here was probably as ideal as it could be, the glitchy movement of other vehicles, continuous desyncing and a few unrepeatable crashes my windows KSP experienced which I didn't mention above (I'll dig those logs up later), It still seems a long ways away from really being useful for things like collaborating on a ship in space. It seemed hard enough for things to remain synced on the ground.

China has no plans to land anything on the Moon after Chang'e 6. Any talk about crewed landing is by individual companies or engineers, with no government backing.

When you talk so much at school about the Chang'e 3 mission that your APUSH teacher calls you out on it, or when you have the phase angles and delta-V requirements for Jool, Eve, Duna, and Eeloo written on a sticky note on your computer.

You could talk me into a longer runway-- it's on the short side of real world runways, and the ones the shuttle used were the longest in the world. That said, all of Kerbin is scaled down from real life and our jet engines have way too much thrust for their weight anyway, so I can see a few reasons why it's balanced as-is. Honestly, I think the problem here is stock landing gear, not the landing lights. I really hate when people come to my favorite games, complain that they're too hard, assert that they're doing everything right, and expect the game to change to accommodate them. There may be reasons to change the landing lights, but "they make it too hard" is a terrible one. They're just one of the many (and more literal) obstacles between your spaceplane and space.

A healthy human being should be able to enjoy all those things. I myself talk about space and things that interest me from time to time but most often i listen and participate in the life of others. Just keep it balanced and watch that you don't concentrate to much on your own interests when you are around others or else you might even make them more uninterested.

I'm so happy im not alone! every my friend say:KSP WHAT THAT SH** of GAME WTF ARE YOU STILL PLAYING THAT SH** YOU ARE A RETARD!!! I think they are Still Homo Erectus. I even can't think about it if i say Duna they say: what a spoon in an as*?! So im bored if i say inclination they say BORING! No one likes it. But it's not strange because they and me are 11 or 12. And they only talk about *******(Uh i mean puberty things) I'm bored and i have friend old 14 years and he is the only one in his class to know who is Stephen Hawking or Michio Kaku. Bad life

Hello, At one point in time there was talk about setting up a repository of code for the users to view / share / learn from. Was that done? Thanks for any info / help. Looks like I am finally going to have time to properly play / test this mod. Again, thanks.

You can but some programming will be required since all the planets are currently hard coded. I do have an idea and will talk to Krag about it.

To avoid the risk of that you should probably talk to SQUAD. If they say yes, I should probably make about 20 feet empty space on my walls.

The colors on Joker seem a bit weird I think it would be nice to tone down the color variation. But other than that great mod and I heard you talk about having to restart in .21 because squad completely changed how planets are made am I right?

All the talk of probe experiments is making me want to try doing this. So I'm trying. No promises that anything will come out though.

I love this idea, and I think it'll work pretty well. Remember, there was talk not too long ago about KSC buildings being destructible; I wonder if the same system, when it's done, could be implemented for bases. As for using it to pillar into the sky, perhaps only rooted parts or parts under a certain height above the ground are taken out of physics, so parts built upwards actually would have physics (and would require a good base and strong supports to be built to any decent height). Overall, I think it could work =3

Get some sleep. That habit has to be broken now if you don't want serious medical side effects. My suggestion, turn off the computer approx. 1 hour before going to bed. Then read/ study/ take a shower before going to bed. If you still can't fall asleep and your mind is still active, try counting backwards from 300 by threes. If that doesn't work, learn how to count to 300 in another language and count back from 300 by threes in the language of your choosing. This should calm your mind down if not put you to sleep all together. If that still doesn't work, talk to a doctor. He/ she will likely either tell you to use melatonin (do NOT use it without talking to one, I am NOT a doctor) or write you a prescription.

Haven't been doing much on it lately, but I did manage to overcome an exploding in the track problem. As kerbtown doesn't look like updating any time soon, I've been thinking of other ways to link track together, using bits of code from from KAS and P-wings, though I have yet to talk to the guy who made P-wings. Hopefully I'll be able to get some help with that, as I have no experience in doing that kind of thing. I'm also planing on remodeling the train bogie, as the current model is not that well made. But probably won't get back into it until some time in the new year.

Perhaps this belongs more in the realism overhaul, but it would be nice if Nathan or someone could talk to Krag so we can publicly distribute a config file for RSS so we can have Saturn and Neptune. I know there was one on reddit (which I'm using) but that's not very easy to find.

You ask me how different structures can be possible, I show you. That news is just 1 month old. Scientist said that would open a new branch on physsics that they dint know.. You just read it and you already have a posture and an opinion.. seems unserious but nevermind, the answer is: "we dont know". But it does not matter what you was talking about, you answer me according to my definition. So you can not change it now. I said: If we take life like any kind of replicant that evolves, then is difficult to imagine a place where life cant exist. then Skyler4856 answer me: the center of a star I respond: Haha, yeah, that seems challenging. But.. who knows.. then you answer me: No. Not possible. Life requires pretty low entropy and any part of any star is highly disordered. There is zero (0) chance life could exist there. Also I mention conscience just like a possible consequence of the complexity. I dint said that it needs to be included in my life definition. But this show us how difficult is to define life. What if we compare a Coral with a virtual conscience? One seems only a rock the other may be indistingible from a human. You said that a Tapeworm it does not have a conscience.. I am agree. but where you cross the line? Life as we know it is just another equilibrium state of matter. What if that substrate matter is just information that we process like matter? This is not easy to understand, but the last advances in quantum computers and links between the thermodynamics laws and the information theorem points in that direction.There are also real experiments about this conexion between matter and information. If you want convert lets said a O2 molecule into bits. You need know the state of each subatomic particle with its spin and other atributes. Then you would realize that the amount of information that you need is X bytes. If you erese that information with a super efficient quantum computer you would measure the same amount of heat released by the operation that you would experiment if you convert that O2 molecule into energy. Search about the Holographic principle if you want to know more. there are not alive if you follow which definition? You have the life definition from the biochemistry point of view, the physiological, religion, genetic, thermodynamics and metabolic point of view. One of the most used is the thermodynamic definition, just becouse is based in one of the stronger theorem that we got. But we still dont know what is life and when draw the line. So we dont have any real definition yet. Abour selfish genes... you need to said just "genes". Selfish genes is just the name of Dawkin´s book. A recomended read if you ask me. About memes, if their enviroment grows, then in theory there are no limit how complex they can be. I am agree from the biochemistry point of view. It does not work, you can imagine what would happen if relativity would still work inside; ignoring the quantum theory. That is what all scientist do when they talk about wurm holes, FTL, black holes, etc. They ignore quamtum mechanics concecuences. And in those frames of reference they need to be take it into account. In the paper I guess you dint read the part when it said: "To clarify this possibility we suppose that BH interiors are described by the Kerr-Newman metric" EDIT: sorry, i will answer you later BRDAVIS.. a storm comming.

Then again, you are using tilting engines from the B9 pack, while we are talking stock with additional engines just for vertical flight, and in that case jets become prohibitely heavy, and even rockets are a burden for high gravity places. Your craft would be best compared to a tailsitter, and then it's perfectly doable, as you say. But not what we talk about. Rune. I have my own B9 VTOL cargo SSTO, BTW .

You could also try something else: ask them if the have any restriction on the payload(apart the size and the weight of course) but don't talk about the bus. Maybe they think that you aren't serious because you asked them if they would launch a bus. Also,providing a link could be a good idea but I doubt that the person who answer the mails will take the time to follow the link. Even if he did, I would be surprised if he take the time to read the posts; however, if we are lucky, that person coupd be a KSP player!

When they talk about fuel removal in Fukushima they are referring to the 4 spent fuel pools, not the 3 molten cores. The fuel rods in those pools are undamaged.

What is the KSP effect we talk about, how stages kind of compresses during launch or re-ignite? Or telescoping where the bottom stage pass trough upper stage blowing both part up.

Just a little poll, i wanna see where people come from. Please don't talk about how one country is better than another, we're all equally awesome here. Sorry i couldn't include some of the smaller countries, the poll options only allow for 10 choices. If you are from a country not on this poll, don't be afraid to post where you're from.