Jump to content

Explain that to the insurance agency


mikeman7918

Recommended Posts

The point of the game is to explain it in such a way (even if it's not true) that the insurence agency will cover the expenses involved. No insurence agency would eve cover something if it's intensional.

It's the security guard's fault, not ours.

You land the Kuriosity rover too hard and break a wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our wheel supplier, Kerbal Motion LLC, said that the maximum impact speed with the wheels was 20 m/s. It was only reasonable to assume that that was rounded, how were we supposed to know that 24 m/s was too fast? After all, in their ads, they rounded down the electricity consumption as well.

Your probe lander lands in a dark valley on 67P- I mean Gilly and runs out of power before you can act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

our engineer Don used discount batteries from a nearby drug store due to budget cuts and our the guy that was suppose to operate the RC controller to land the probe was out sick so Don had to pilot it too

an astronaut fails at docking with a space station which causes the station to explode which thus contributes to kessler syndrome

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to modify this forum game to include a reply from the insurance agency before the usual stuff. People keep on posting explanations like "I did it on purpose" and "that was intentional because [reason]", and no insurance agency would cover something that you did on purpose. Look at page one for more details on the rule change.

Why would we insure it if it was intentional?

What! I didn't know that we were using the metric system.

You accidentally slingshot a rover into interstellar space.

Edited by mikeman7918
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(You know what, I am going to just post another example of how a post should be after the rule change. If you don't like the rule change, please tell me.)

So you messed up your units? We will cover that.

The autopilot messed up, not us.

There is a computer virus on your navigation computer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'd believe you if you said it was human kerbal error, but TECHNOLOGICAL error? That just doesn't happen. If you want us to cover that, at least be honest.

But that ad Billy-Bobdrin clicked said it would give us a free street rover!

An airplane landed directly into the spaceplane hangar. Neither the plane nor the hangar were intact afterwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was Billy-Bobdrin surfing the web on a spacecraft navigation computer? You have computers all over the space center, and there is no reason that he should have used that one. No coverage for you.

The airplane pilot thought that the SPH looked like a landing pad.

Your huge unmanned cargo rocket exploded on the launch pad.

Edited by mikeman7918
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should really hire more competent pilots, then. Not a single fund for you.

It would appear that the launch clamps were faulty and pumped oxidizer into the already partially filled (or still partially empty?) liquid fuel tanks and vice versa.

Eve's ocean corroded our Eve probe's ocean composition measurement instrument before it could take measurements of the composition of Eve's ocean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We won't cover that. The engineers should have quadruple-checked it.

Eve's oceans are highly acidic and melted the instrument. We were not aware of this until we touched down.

The SSTO ran out of fuel coming in to the runway and overshot and splashed down, destroying the plane and killing the pilot(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

We won't cover that because technological error does not exist.

The stupid engineer was smoking a cigarrete in the fuel storage before we put up a no-smoking sign.

Your ship full of kerbals runs out of fuel, putting them on an elliptical orbit around Kerbol, with no hope of rescue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should've put up the sign before filling the tanks. Not covered.

Environmental activists demanded that the NERVA's reactors be replaced by chemical engines, so we did that, but we didn't have time to put in more fuel and were on a tight schedule.

A probe core has gone sentient and was so lonely that it directed the probe back to Kerbin, making mission success impossible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Ignoring the above post, has nothing. Also, read the original post so you know all the rules, there are three parts, not two.)

We won't cover that. No drinks in mission control.

We don't control those things here at the KSC. Ask the government.

Your lander's instruments malfunction, and the ship crashes into the Mun, killing the two kerbals onboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...