[02:57:03] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o Althego' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [03:02:23] hirys [03:39:10] "let's not make this too dark, otherwise something might just pop up." 1 sec later creeper blows her up [03:45:17] she wasn't wrong [03:53:19] hehe anton reporting on thunderf00t's science results [03:55:01] lol again [11:34:47] (local) leet time [13:14:19] . [14:02:17] Its lowest point, below -247 m, is on the northern hemisphere south-west of the large northern crater at 76.63° W and 35.32° N. https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Mun [14:02:27] Does that mean there's water on the Mun? [14:02:47] why [14:02:57] Because there's negative altitude ground. [14:09:27] I assume that you get camera weirdness but no splashed state [14:14:05] supposedly the water presence can be toggled by each body [14:14:22] but duna is suspiciously always above 0 [14:28:32] challenge: find water on duna [15:05:36] WTH are some Kerbals boarding without helmet? https://i.postimg.cc/6tqL9gcn/screenshot341.png [15:05:53] Do they have 100% stupidity? [15:06:43] Ich sollte sie auf den Mond schiessen. [15:11:41] unfortunately in the base game the kerbal stats only change expressions they make [15:12:04] oh wait, no, courage adds to g tolerance [15:12:13] but stupidity, i dont think it does anything [17:54:24] No water on the Mun: https://i.postimg.cc/ZbTKvZpV/screenshot343.png [17:55:17] I guess that answers that [18:42:47] so.. mun orbit done at least.. wish these contracts for above 17-18km would go away, so many of them showed up [18:46:51] supposedly the game léerans your preferences, so if you just dont take them, they go away [18:53:21] And this is why there's something to be said for making the rep hit for rejecting a mission small or 0 [18:55:14] On Kerbnet I found -248 m, but even with lying down I only get -247 m. https://i.postimg.cc/t9tyHwVb/screenshot345.png [19:02:50] lol... [19:03:15] sleepy kerbal, hope ya got a glass protector for the face, mun dust can be rather.. scratchy [19:06:40] I did manage to do two contracts below 18km but they were nearly 1/4 of the way around towards the east of KSC. one set about 45 latitude, the other just slightly north of the equator. built a speedy little 'race car' plane using 3 wheezers. Once it gets up to speed and cruising altitude, its impressive how efficient it can be while do'n about mach [19:06:40] 1.8 [19:08:13] hehe faceplant kerbal [19:08:27] is rejecting the same as never accepting them? [19:08:34] I say 'race car' not because of the speed but cuz of how I did the elevator system. At low speeds, it needs two sets working. High speeds, I deactivate one, otherwise it becomes too twitchy [19:10:17] Althego ya was wondering that too, I don't think so.. letting them expire on their own. probably because you have let it use that contract slot up for so long, not allowing a new ones to generate? [19:10:58] when you decline, it punishes you for swapping it out for possibly a more favorable one? [19:11:09] ... sooner [19:15:10] Oh... [19:15:27] Althego this might be of some use to you, its a few years old though: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/181687-expired-vs-declined-contracts/ [19:17:43] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptor' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [19:19:27] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptop' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [19:19:53] oh.. ugh, suborbital high-g... I did that once, such a ... 'pain'... [19:20:18] exactly [19:20:22] it is useless [19:20:26] it should pay way more [19:20:39] only because the game just takes linear acceleration [19:20:48] and doesnt calculate with rotation [19:20:52] you could just spin it up [19:21:01] but no, put a huge rocket on it, almost empty [19:21:11] easier to do high-g in air, than to build a rocket thing that is light to have a high twr [19:21:12] but still has to hold for x seconds [19:21:24] yes, in air at least you can do it with aero [19:21:35] lol.. so many times I've knocked jeb out by accident [19:22:15] lol.. day 4, contract to get geo stationary sat in eve orbit.. but .. eve window isn't till day 127 or something [19:22:25] actually [19:22:39] you can catch the end of the eve window in the first few days [19:22:51] contract disappears in 2 days, but once accepted stays for 22y.. [19:25:15] first time looking at the alarm clock thing, it just tells first opening of planetary transfer? I was more used to the color graph from the one mod, though I never actually used it. [19:25:50] porkchop plot or whatever it is called [19:25:55] ya [19:26:04] i usually used this https://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/ [19:26:05] what day does eve window close? [19:26:45] ok.. let me check [19:29:48] plot not showing anything close to a few days into game that is eve-transferable [19:30:06] it shows blue up until day 40 or so [19:30:20] not the best, but still the end of the first window [19:30:49] what settings you using? [19:32:27] doesnt matter. time of flight about 170 days, from 0-40 days for departure date [19:33:55] I'm just seeing pale blue close to 0 day.. not the dark blue [19:34:03] yes that is the end [19:34:12] if you look at the blue thing further to the right [19:34:16] it ends in this pale color [19:34:25] still ebtter than not being close to the window [19:35:44] 4300m/s vs ideal 2200.. mmm.. [19:35:53] depend on what you take [19:35:58] if you choose ballistic [19:36:01] it is way less [19:36:12] also possible aerobraking [19:36:36] it is not too hard [19:36:49] i could launch probes towards eve in early career with the most basic stuff [19:37:00] they never arrived though, because the tree is finished way before that [19:37:26] lol [19:37:31] casual play [19:37:50] accepting pays 173k [19:37:56] completing pays 511k [19:38:10] fail is 193k [19:38:12] juggling 15-20 missions in parallel is anything but casual [19:38:42] if it wasn't a geo stationary.. maybe I"d go for it, but this early, not in the mood [19:40:13] then there is the matter of my com system.. can't reach there yet. [20:19:29] huh, tonight a zombie will invade holo-en [20:34:08] JVFoxy: oh, apropos nothing, there's a discussion in the forums with workarounds for getting an LV-T45 [20:34:20] (Select by manufacturer, tech level, etc) [20:40:32] @raptop huh? [20:40:39] alright.. cool? [20:40:56] wait, was that a different person troubleshooting that training mission bug? [20:41:04] (yesterday) [20:42:22] I just remember someone came in and asked why they couldn't find the LT-T45 during training session 6. Found what the issue was but wasn't sure how it could be fixed. I think the script only goes as far as setting the game up, then its something more internal from there [20:44:08] if there's another working on it, cool? I wasn't aware [20:45:26] It's not a *fix*, but it means that the mission is completeable [20:46:00] ok.. how'd they fix it? [20:46:45] 'Advanced' categories, and select parts by either manufacturer or tech level [20:46:56] And so you can find it under jeb's parts, or tech level 2 [20:47:24] search? [20:48:40] oh I see [20:49:08] wonder why the old one is showing up there and not the main list. Does advanced bypass the hidden? [20:49:09] Uh, if KSP would load faster I could get a screenshot [20:49:14] AFAIK, yes [20:49:37] I know in older versions of KSP, I did TL shenanigans and the like to end up with 2x RT-5s, Mk1 pods, etc [20:50:15] shows up in engine modules [20:51:17] but not in fuels [20:51:29] unless fuels is just tanks [20:51:47] I think fuels is for parts containing some amount of fuel [20:52:04] so intakes will show up there as well as tanks [20:53:37] resources, more for the source and holding than parts that use it.. ok I get it [20:54:32] anyone updated that person's post for the workaround, on the forums? I don't have access [20:55:19] Yeah [20:55:36] Anyway, check out the 2x LV-T45s in sandbox: https://photos.app.goo.gl/hv78pdAu3e8bw31K8 [20:56:34] ah there, found teh post [20:57:10] ah [20:57:17] now I'm wondering... mk3 pod.. [20:59:12] wait... wut..? [20:59:18] lol, how many MK1 pods are there? [21:01:41] ok old 3 crew command pod ... no more huh? When they changed it, I wasn't sure if one of my designs was able to work with the lighter weight. I do know it did mess with placements of certain parts. [21:04:41] ya.. looking at old mk1-2... likely something to do with the far side window placements [21:09:23] lol ok.. one that does get me a bit though, the fact the Mk1 crew pod can't be attached radially.. [21:47:22] I had a fun dream where I was in a capsule falling to earth and it landed softly in snow [21:51:11] sandbox, are you a funky potato [21:51:30] uh?