L6[02:48:03] <raptop> ;outcome add You become fluent in PowerPoint.

L7[02:48:04] <LunchBot> raptop: Added outcome: You become fluent in PowerPoint.

L8[02:48:18] <raptop> This is of course, a bad result

L9[02:48:22] <SporkWitch> pretty sure that's a bad outcome

L10[02:48:24] <SporkWitch> lol

L13[04:07:12] <bees> raptop: You try putting racing stripes, R-Type stickers, and a fat exhaust on your rocket to improve performance. The end result is, naturally, yet more orbital debris.

L14[04:27:50] <raptop> !outcome add You suffer terminal acronym poisoning.

L15[04:27:50] <LunchBot> raptop: Added outcome: You suffer terminal acronym poisoning.

L31[10:34:21] <FLHerne> !outcome add Scientists propose creating cats that glow when exposed to radiation, to warn kerbals away from the crash site.

L32[10:34:21] <LunchBot> FLHerne: Added outcome: Scientists propose creating cats that glow when exposed to radiation, to warn kerbals away from the crash site.

L33[10:34:51] <FLHerne> !outcome del Scientists prop

L34[10:34:51] <LunchBot> FLHerne: Deleted outcome: "Scientists propose creating cats that glow when exposed to radiation, to warn kerbals away from the crash site."

L35[10:36:10] <FLHerne> !outcome add To warn future generations of the crash site, your scientists propose breeding cats that glow in the presence of radiation

L36[10:36:10] <LunchBot> FLHerne: Added outcome: To warn future generations of the crash site, your scientists propose breeding cats that glow in the presence of radiation

L37[10:36:54] <bees> .

L39[10:37:58] <darkie> .

L40[10:58:47] <darkie> There is radiation everywhere.

L41[11:00:14] <darkie> like gravity radiation

L43[11:01:31] <darkie> If you wave your hand, there's gravity radiation, AKA hand waving radiation.

L45[11:14:55] <XXCoder> ;missiom

L47[11:14:58] <XXCoder> ;mission

L48[11:14:58] <LunchBot> XXCoder: You do an aileron roll! Wernher Von Kerman yells racist remarks over the radio. You file a complaint with HR.

L49[11:15:08] <XXCoder> uhh ok

L50[11:15:58] <darkie> Wernher von Kerman

L51[11:18:40] <bees> XXCoder: You try to make hot tea in zero gravity. The mission is a success, but your efforts went unnoticed: everyone was watching a cool new TV show.

L53[12:06:44] <Althego> must have been the expanse

L67[15:13:54] <Althego> kikkerikii

L70[16:20:33] <darkie> .

L71[16:20:49] <Althego> peko

L72[17:11:07] <raptop> 兎！

L73[17:11:31] <raptop> wait, pekora isn't streaming

L75[17:11:40] <Althego> no, i just said that to the .

L76[17:11:48] <raptop> ah

L77[17:17:04] <Althego> hehe verybody is dunking on the rx 6500 xt, completely deserverd

L78[17:27:35] <SporkWitch> it's an ATI GPU, their drivers have always been shit, and that hasn't changed since AMD bought them

L79[17:28:22] <Althego> SporkWitch: you are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute

L80[17:28:41] <SporkWitch> I couldn't figure out the seashells and needed TP

L81[17:28:42] <raptop> huh, the bot didn't ping me

L82[17:28:47] <Althego> me neither

L83[17:28:58] <raptop> anyway, yadda yadda kids yadda forum rules

L84[17:29:02] <SporkWitch> clearly the bot agrees that one s-bomb is allowed in the PG13 category

L85[17:29:06] <Althego> the problem is no with the drivers, it is genuinely bad

L86[17:29:26] <SporkWitch> really? usually the hardware is competitive, it's the drivers that make it suck

L87[17:29:34] <Althego> like in martian, they had one, and that happened in the beginning when the ship left

L88[17:33:08] <Althego> "AMD RX 6500 XT is Worse Than 2016's GPUs: Benchmarks vs. GTX 1060, 970, 960, & RX 580" title by gamers nexus

L89[17:34:53] <Althego> only 4 pcie lanes, which cripples it in pcie 3, lacks hardware encoding, and performs very weakly in everything

L90[17:41:00] <SporkWitch> wow, that IS garbage lol

L91[17:42:10] <Althego> nvidia wasnt excactly playing by the rules by its latest low end releaise either

L92[17:42:24] <Althego> but we are used to that now

L93[17:43:19] <SporkWitch> i can make some allowances for the explicitly low-end models; they're literally about making things available and cheap, but unless ATI/AMD changed their naming conventions, XT is not their budget line

L95[17:45:18] <SporkWitch> if i remember right the reasoning for the "XT" moniker is literally "eXTreme," as in the high-end

L100[18:34:21] <FLHerne> currently, "XT" just means "faster than the same number but without 'XT'"

L101[18:46:35] <Eddi|zuHause> why is it, between the spark and the terrier engine, i get so widely different dv values with the same amount of fuel?

L102[18:47:06] <Althego> mass?

L103[18:47:47] <Eddi|zuHause> total mass is 4.7t vs 5.0t, but dv is 1400 vs 400

L104[18:48:57] <Althego> quite high difference

L105[18:49:46] <Eddi|zuHause> 2t of that is fuel

L106[18:50:07] <raptop> Doesn't the terrier have like 40% higher Isp?

L107[18:50:33] <raptop> huh, no

L108[18:50:43] <raptop> Maybe this is an atmo vs vacuum thing

L109[18:50:56] <Althego> that must be it

L110[18:50:59] <raptop> Uh, can you show the craft designs?

L111[18:51:14] <Althego> if you leave the calculatoir on default it uses sea level

L112[18:51:17] <raptop> ^

L113[18:51:36] <Eddi|zuHause> ah right

L114[18:52:05] <Eddi|zuHause> now the difference is 1700 vs 1600

L115[18:52:18] <Althego> as expected

L116[18:53:55] <Eddi|zuHause> so the spark is unusually effective in both atmosphere and space?

L117[18:55:52] <raptop> Yeah. Though less so once you get to somewhat larger craft

L119[18:59:34] <Eddi|zuHause> the KER window needs separate body/atmosphere settings for each stage...

L121[19:02:28] <Eddi|zuHause> 1100 dv is plenty for returning from a mun landing?

L122[19:03:03] <raptop> Yep

L123[19:03:39] <raptop> Might end up with 200 m/s to spare if your return is efficient

L124[19:24:18] <SporkWitch> Eddi|zuHause: you mostly just need sea level and either vacuum or or just before, so you CAN display two (one using stock value in the staging view, one in KER). I generally find that's sufficient, but I also build standard lifters for given payload mass, so I'm also generally not having to worry about getting to LKO, it's the rest of the mission that I need to plan

L125[19:43:37] <packbart> I usually calculate 600(ascent)+300(return) m/s for the mun landers. that's enough even with circularizing the mun orbit first

L126[19:44:26] <SporkWitch> Eddi|zuHause: if this your first landing? Many consider minmus to be the easier first destination due to its lower gravity, and it's hard to disagree.

L127[19:44:29] <packbart> launching from the surface at the right-ish moment allows for a more or less direct return burn, saving some fuel

L128[19:46:22] <packbart> the first part adds 900(transfer)+300(capture)+800(landing), again some optimization would merge capture and deorbit burn

L129[19:47:51] <packbart> the trickiest part is making sure that the launch booster does not end up as debris in Kerbin orbit ;)

L133[19:53:23] <raptop> Say, 0.5 atm for the lower stage of a 2STO, 0.2 atm for an SSTO

L134[20:10:40] <darkie> My handwavy rule is 3000ish m/s vacuum dv for 2STO.

L135[20:11:10] <darkie> It's what the dv maps use, only they use 3400 m/s.

L136[20:11:20] <darkie> I've got to orbit <3000 m/s.

L137[20:13:07] <darkie> From Kerbin, ofc.

L138[20:16:03] <Eddi|zuHause> @sporkwitch it's been a while...

L139[20:21:14] <darkie> Minmus has lower gravity, but the approach is more complex. With enough dv Mun may be easier, but the landing will be faster.

L142[20:57:33] <Eddi|zuHause> so weird when your maneuver node gives you 3 consecutive mun encounters

L147[21:00:28] <SporkWitch> Eddi|zuHause: you might have stumbled across, or got close to, an aldrin cycler, which IS possible to achieve in KSP: https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Tutorial:_Earth-Moon_Aldrin_Cycler

L148[21:03:24] <SporkWitch> basically, Buzz Aldrin came up with a type of orbit called a "cycler," in which you have a stable orbit that regularly cycles you between two points, in this case, earth and moon, with minimal deltaV required to maintain this stable configuration.

L150[21:05:36] <SporkWitch> the idea is that instead of needing to get your payload all the way to the moon, you only need to manage a rendesvous with the craft in the cylcical orbit

L151[21:06:42] <Eddi|zuHause> i'm not convinced i have a use case for that at this moment :p

L152[21:06:59] <SporkWitch> wasn't suggesting you did, just explaining what you encountered :)

L153[21:08:33] <SporkWitch> also worth looking into what's called a "Free Return Trajectory." Basically, you have a single burn in Earth (or Kerbin) orbit to get you to the moon, this orbit will swing you around the moon, and the resulting change to your orbit puts you on a return to Earth (or Kerbin), potentially not even requiring a deorbit burn.

L154[21:09:16] <SporkWitch> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTB27qWSIt4

L155[21:09:20] <Eddi|zuHause> yeah, but that won't help me when i plan a mun landing

L156[21:09:23] <SporkWitch> (KSP Munar FRT tutorial)

L157[21:09:39] <SporkWitch> it can, actually, if you have a separate lander

L158[21:10:47] <SporkWitch> (sweet, that tutorial even mentioned exactly that: the apollo missions used FRTs)

L159[21:15:06] <darkie> Free return ideally includes reentry.

L160[21:15:22] <SporkWitch> aye

L161[21:16:02] <darkie> Realistically some fine tuning with RCS.