[00:01:09] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptop' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [00:03:40] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptor' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [00:07:35] the boat is still going, nice [00:07:38] I had pretty good fun doing my part, dropping refuel pods from planes [00:07:39] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/186186471202357249/673998928668262431/6.jpg [00:18:15] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptop' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [09:05:16] Last message repeated 1 time(s). [09:05:16] https://twitter.com/IanPineapple/status/1224530968503111681 Woah! [09:05:37] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o Mostly_Deddly' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [09:05:42] Action: darsie avoids being tracked by twitter. [09:08:40] Action: packbart uses Cookie AutoDelete [09:24:52] Where's the bot doing the untweeting for us? [09:25:38] In short, SpaceX has asked the FCC for a 6 month test window for a 20 km Starship test flight [15:17:21] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o Deddly' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [15:28:42] Ugh. I'm trying to repair my stuck docking port [15:28:51] the worst part is: This still seems to be true: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/32913-cant-undock-bug-how-to-fix/ [15:28:55] It's from 2013. [15:29:09] hehe [15:34:57] couldn't undock yesterday [15:35:12] had to fire engines and wiggle [15:35:31] so that buf is still around [15:35:34] bug [16:14:18] Althego: yes and sadly it's because of bad design [16:14:53] The problem is that "ships" aren't handled as individual ships, when they're docked, but become a part of a bigger ship [16:14:57] which is unnecessary [16:15:04] no, actually [16:15:10] i read it at some time [16:15:14] they had to do it this way [16:15:18] because it didnt work at all [16:15:24] if they handled them as separate [16:16:36] I guess there would've been a better solution [16:17:09] The problem is not that it has to handle like a big ship, but the way it is treated [16:17:39] when we dock now a ship looses it's name, which gets saved to the dockee node section [16:18:01] and that part is absolutely unnecessary [16:18:21] also having a docker and a dockee is not necessary at all [16:18:36] the ports are symmetric [16:18:45] so no difference between the ships [16:19:02] what do you mean by symmetric? [16:19:08] they are the same [16:19:18] but if you look at the soyuz docking port, that is different on the two sides [16:19:25] so there is a docker and a dockee [16:19:39] yes, ok, you're underlining my point [16:19:59] it's all a bit moot with the vessel naming configuration, isn't it? [16:20:00] But even if they were not symmetric you'd just need to define two parts [16:20:10] that would apply after undocking [16:20:27] and save somewhere that only a docker can connect to a dockee. But this has to be done already, because the smaller docking ports can't connect to the bigger ones. [16:21:16] And then just control everything by the attached node id. If this is non-zero there is a part attached to the docking port. [16:21:29] maybe in ksp 2 it ill be different [16:21:30] -> show the undock button. If someone clicks on it, detach part. [16:21:36] Hopefully. [16:21:53] Somewhere from the dev team here? We need to talk if it's different :P [16:22:23] nah [16:22:44] yeah, the good old days where they looked in here are gone :| [19:53:10] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o Deddly' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [21:42:55] Last message repeated 1 time(s). [21:42:55] Shall I go on on my quest to get ΔV in the topic changed to Δv? [21:45:05] just don't have it accidentally changed to δV ;) [21:48:08] Δν [21:50:56] Yes, go for it! [21:52:27] Δυ you mean UmbralRaptop [22:02:14] <_< [22:10:15] pfff [22:20:43] :) [22:21:38] nice [23:18:32] #KSPOfficial: mode change '+o UmbralRaptop' by ChanServ!ChanServ@services.esper.net [23:38:22] *gasp* it happened! "[1.8.1-1] Kopernicus & KittopiaTech"