CoreI

I think its still part of LZ-1, just a different landing pad. But its fantastic to see that the second landing pad is done, so that's not holding up FH. Today was the third one. The Iridium launch Dec. 22 will also use a reused booster, and the Falcon Heavy side cores will be reused too. The RADARSAT Constelation will be launching on a reused core in a couple years too.

What exactly is an "engine plate"? Will this make the engines look more realistic? Those fairings look really good, as do the RCS tanks. This update/DLC just gets better and better!

Great news! I love the new engine! Will it be possible for engines (or other parts for that matter) to “break” without fully exploding? That would allow challenges like: Make a rocket that can get to orbit with one engine failure. (Rocket must have less than X engines) Also, with these new part failure features, will parts be able to fail/explode in a regular sandbox/science/career game?

Actually, there was going to be an art overhaul for the 1.25 meter parts in 1.2(?). Then it was scrapped. Someone else can fill you in on the details, but the art files for the overhauled engines were released (and the engines receive upgrades throughout the tech tree), and can be downloaded. Someone can probably link it for you. http://imgur.com/a/Ct6HA That engine on the back is a swivel. That IVA and engine looks super cool! I can't wait for this DLC to be released.

Today I attempted to tackle one of my greatest foes! Space Shuttles and SSTOs. I have spent many hours over the course of the last several years attempting to make both of these. I have never succeeded. To be fair, I could make an SSTO easily using whiplashes. Same goes for space shuttle using Vectors. However, I design them for my career game, in which I have neither. Today I succeeded! I successfully created a space shuttle-style craft that could return to Kerbin without burning up (even though I had to extend the landing gear during reentry in order to cause some drag). So, I present to you the...... um... give me sec while I think of a name. Why don't you look at that squirrel next to your computer in the meantime? Vulture! (I'm still working on the whole precision landing thing) It glides beautifully, and the ascent isn't too difficult to pilot. Descent is a little trickier. With this achievement, I will likely have to take a break from KSP for a little while because I'll be busy for the next couple months...

Most likely this. Well then, if that is the case, that opens up some interesting possibilities. Let's assume we can launch this thing into space. In a plot twist, you can use it as a landing platform for a base on the side of a hill? I love the way the mission builder is turning out though! I'm curious as to how rotating a vessel on the surface would work when you're designing the mission, because wouldn't you need to be able to see the craft to know how much to turn it?

I believe, a couple months ago or so, in a devnote they mentioned that these RCS ports would be functional. Anyone else feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Edit: That was the LEM that has the built in functional ports. However, since the LEM ports are functional, I wouldn't be surprised if the Command Module ones are too. Source: KSP Weekly- What A Week! March 17 How are we supposed to access the stuff inside the service module in flight? Does it have doors? (Sorry, didn't refresh before I posted, so I didn't see Roverdude's reply)

Today I continued my mediumly-modded Career mode game. I sent my first manned mission to the Mun's vicinity. Naturally, I went in immediately for the 3-man landing. Because the 1.25m fairing max diameter is annoying, I had to attach the landing legs in orbit using KIS/KAS. Being an idiot, I realized that I forgot a heat shield (the parachutes are in the container). After I had landed on the Mun. I know I might be able to survive reentry without one, but I don't want to risk Jeb, Bill, and Bob. I don't have the cash to put a rescue mission into mun orbit, and my lander doesn't have the Delta-V to get onto an escape trajectory (my descent was terrible. tons of craters I had to avoid). I know I could have accepted a high advance contract, but I didn't like any that were offered, and I like the drama. So, I came up with the extremely original idea of ripping parts off my lander until it is light enough to get onto an escape trajectory (I know, real original). I will then send a three person rescue mission on a free return trajectory to pick up my brave kerbonauts. What could possibly go wrong?

Got here right in time! That LEM IVA looks pretty good! I'm glad to hear development is progressing nicely. It's good to hear that the flickering shadows are being fixed.

I'll try it when I get the chance. Should I also turn off the reaction wheels in the command pods?

First, I have KER and KAC installed. Those are the only mods. I am running 1.3.0, but the station was made in 1.2. The issue I describe below began happening in the KSP version in which the station was started, so I know that's not an issue. Now, let me explain my issue and what I have done to try and fix it. In my career mode game I have put up an orbital station around Kerbin. I attached the first few modules, and everything was ok. However, once it got large enough, it would begin to wobble uncontrollable, and within 30 seconds it had torn itself apart (don't worry, I quicksaved as soon as I saw it vibrating). Here are the solutions I have tried: 1. I exited KSP and got back in. 2. I perused the forums and reddit to try and find a solution, but the only solution I found was to go into the save file and make every part have auto strut. I did this, and when I went back into the game, my framerate had slowed to a crawl. So far nothing has worked, and for now, every time I dock another ship, I keep manually autostrutting until the wiggling stops. That is my current method for stopping the wiggles, but it is very annoying to do, and my framerate is a little laggy. Here's a picture of the space station: I can share a save file, if that's necessary. I just need to know how. So if anyone has any solutions, that'd be great!

Not sure where folks keep getting this idea, but no, that is not the case. Its closest analogue would be the inline docking port. If I extend the airlock, and a piece of debris not attached to the vessel is in front, does that debris get pushed away? Or does the Kraken attack? Overall great news. I personally haven't downloaded the 1.3 prerelease yet, but I am excited to try out about the performance improvements when it is fully released.

Night has fallen on Minmus... While Madra Kerman visited the local taverns, she found out that local legend has it that the Kraken can silently slip down the slopes of the mountains at night and eat any landers too close to the edges of the flats. Madra hopes that 500 meters is far enough... Sleeping will be difficult tonight. As you can see, I plopped a lander on Minmus to farm money as contracts for 'get science from Minmus' flow in. The tourists on board didn't read the fine print that says "This vacation is not bound by any time constraints. The Space Program can bring you back whenever it chooses. No refunds."

I shall reserve judgment on the UI until I see it for myself. I'm still undecided as to whether I like the break from the traditional (light blue and rounded corners) style. We'll see. The plot thickens... With these even-more-massive parts, will we be getting a 3.5 meter capsule? Because I feel there is a need for it now, and there will definitely be a need for it once the rocket gets 5 meters wide.

Not trying to get this thread off topic, but a Kerbin RISK map needs to be a thing. A&A is of course my favorite as well. I'm trying to make some stock hinges so that my Falcon (7?) can land without falling over. I'm thinking about trying to use Airbrakes to make larger base next time. *shown with regular legs

I'm certainly an engineer. I often run my experimental crafts through trials on Kerbin in my experimental sandbox save before actually launching and using them in my Career save. I would say I also fall a little into the scientist category because I like to make sure I have just enough Delta-V. However, I don't tweak each launch to fit the payload. I go for a ULA-style approach: several iterations of the same rocket with different numbers of side boosters and different lengths upper stages. I must have two dozen versions of my Hyperion rocket.

Sweet! The capsule looks great! I love that the RCS Ports are actually RCS Ports. Reduced part count for the win! I can't wait to see some sneak peeks of the Expansion UI.

What lessons can be taken away from catastrophic failures? How about redundancy! I often pack my ships with redundant engines, and now I suppose that will be put to use! I like adding the part failure feature to KSP, because it adds realism with being too hard. I'm not sure how close to finished the expansion is, but (I'm not asking for a date) will 1.3 and the expansion be released at the same time, or one released after the other?

What category would an X37-B style launch be under? I'm working on one currently that blends the Falcon 9 (recoverable first stage) and a NERV-powered spaceplane? In case you don't know what X37-B is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37

You asked the wrong question. The question is, what would my dog do? Case 1 (Dog is inside during landing): Well, my house would have one less door, and earth would have three less kerbals. Case 2 (Dog is already outside during landing): I'm sure that my dog would happily run up to them wagging her tail, and I would be slowly sneaking into the kitchen (knife rack) just in case the kerbals turned hostile. I don't know why, but my dog is super aggressive when she is inside and someone else is outside; but if she and the person are outside, she is very happy to go up to them and request being pet.

Is it confirmed that the KSP Vostok will be weighted to one side? Because even if real Vostok was weighted asymmetrically, is KSP capable of supporting non-center CoM? I personally love the idea of a capsule rolling if it lands in the wrong place. It adds a bit more realism while not making the game super hard.

Judging judging by the relative size of those RCS thrusters, I'm guessing that the Vostok fits onto a 1.25 meter stack, correct? Also, is that small black cylinder on the top right of the pod part of the capsule or a different part I never use? Overal, good stuff! I'm glad to see development moving along at a nice pace. Can't wait for Asteroid Day to be integrated.

In my career game my mission control stopped offering contracts. Fortunately, i have fixed that thanks to this reddit post https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/37x63q/psa_if_youre_finding_the_10ish_active_contracts/. However, now i am being bombarded by ~50 contract offers. Is this because my reputation is ~50? Or is it because I raised the contract limit to 30? If I am being offered so many contracts because of my raised limit, how can I bring the number of contracts being offered in mission control down a few notches to feel less cheaty? Thanks in advance!

Fantastic news! I love to see development moving at a fast pace. Those new retractable rover wheels look great and I love the idea of having them retractable. Is it possible to see pictures of them next to the other rover wheels for size comparison? On another note, I have scoured SQAUD's image on the mun for anything not mentioned by anybody else, and I found something! On the rover (sorry, I don't know how to post an image into my post), look to the bottom left of the kerbal's head and just to the right of the battery. What is that box-shaped thing? A new RTG? A new probe core? I don't think it is part of the new rover base, because it has a different coloration.

Yeah, I got a little scared there. I don't remember ever seeing that happen there. Although, if that left (from the webcast PoV) grid fin had given way and fallen off, would the rocket have been able to land? This may be the case considering that the Falcon 9 was built from the ground up with redundancy in mind. SpaceX has claimed that one engine can go out and the mission could be fine. But does the same apply for grid fins?