The Lone Wolfling

Dislike: 388MB runtime. But there's no real way around that other than rewriting it in another language. Would it be alright for me to have a go at porting it to Python? Like: pretty much everything else. Well, yes, but it would still be nice to have! The thing about ascending/descending nodes is that they provide another data point as to if you are on the right orbit, assuming that you aren't using MechJeb or something similar. Another suggestion if you get those implemented is a mouseover showing time to each of them - that way it again gives you another data point as to if you are on the right track. If it's possible to use the data cursor, pre-populate the data cursor with the "best" datum. Otherwise, I'd suggest adding it as a box to the departure burn calculator - "Optimize delta-v" or something similar. Or alternatively, have it pre-populate the departure burn calculator with the lowest global delta-v. Perhaps as an option? Yay, yay, and yay. Yay! I'd prefer both options, actually. Departure delta-v is good for fly-bys and aerobraking, total is good for most other missions. EDIT: Also, see below: o.O

I am aware of this. However, currently there is no way to automatically select the best global trajectory, and trying to select it manually by trial and error gets tedious, especially given the gradient issues.

I was aware of that. Sorry, it probably didn't come across as such. I tend to fail at communicating seriousness or lack there of over text media. FIFY

Yes I have. They don't really fit in better, though - they have the same "gleaming white" texture. They fit in with KW rocketry quite well, but that's not what I'm looking for.

Apoapsis, periapsis, ascending and descending nodes (All for the transfer orbit). Possibly also something showing where the target is on the initial burn. And maybe a "side-on" view, where the origin's orbit (Kerbin in this case) shows up as a horizontal line, and you can see the transfer orbit and the target's orbit. Also, I finally downloaded the runtime, and this tool looks great! Another feature request: could you add a way to search for the best departure time given a target arrival time? And/or a way to find the earliest arrival time possible given a certain amount of delta-v? And/or a way to find the best global delta-v. Also, it would be nice if the tooltip pre-populated the departure burn parameters. One final request for now: would it be possible to either define a custom color gradient for the porkchop plot, and/or compress the low end? Currently the center of the porkchop plots are one big blob, even when there's a significant difference (.99 - 1.9km/s for departure delta-v to Duna, for example.)

I said no lithobraking! (I also said no MechJeb.) Try using Jeb and Bob - "Lower!" "AHHHHHHHH!!!!!".

Vaguely, and anything I don't know I'd be willing to learn. (I managed to get a cube into the game. Beyond that, haven't tried.) As I said, any help would be appreciated. Looks good - not particularly stock-like currently, but that could change with texturing. (I do like the arrow toward space, though.) Yes, but when you want to play as close to stock as possible, with FAR, you need fairings, and there aren't any ones that look good with stock currently. i.e. This. I've seen and played with TAC before. Great mod, and it can dump fuel now? News to me - The older versions couldn't (or at least I didn't see how). Also, I'd really prefer a part to dump fuel over just magically "fuel disappears".

Three requests: First, I use FAR. As such, payload fairings are basically mandatory. Unfortunately, the KW rocketry ones don't blend well with stock textures. Could someone do a stock-like retexture of them? (Actually, unfortunately KW rocketry prohibits redistribution. As such, although a retexture would be nice (I could contact Winston and ask for permission to redistribute), I would also appreciate a payload fairing model.) Second, as I use FAR, most of my spaceplanes can't really land with a full fuel load. As such, I've been using a modified Linear RCS port as a impromptu fuel dump (ModuleEngines; Isp 10; Thrust 1; fiddled with numbers to make it use some electricity as well (for the fuel pump)). I would appreciate a stock-like texture/model. (Something along the lines of this, just the nozzle.) Finally, I've been working on a plugin for a basic modular SRB. As such, models/textures for a stock-like SRB nozzle, center section, and top would be appreciated. (Picture chopping the stock large SRB into quarters - nozzle, center x2, and top.)

I, for one, would prefer if it was full of Oxygen. Maybe make it heavier and/or decrease the amount of oxygen storage to counter? Yay! Thanks. Easier in what way? Glad to be of service! Finally, a feature request and a part request: It would be nice if cabin scrubbers could be assigned to action groups. (Currently the air intake and recyclers can be, but not the cabin scrubbers.) Also, it would be nice to have a hydroponics module that is efficient and lightweight (although bulky), but requires sunlight. Picture a large cylindrical balloon with soil inside, and the top half transparent. (top half as in sliced longitudinally). Maybe even inflatable?

Or alternatively, just use the modular fuel tanks mod to avoid duplicates entirely.

Most of my craft land at about 90m/s. That being said, I really need to learn to use flaps. Also, most of my craft are designed for high supersonic (mach 4 or so). Could someone do a tutorial on proper flap placement and/or usage? I, personally, wonder why the craft I build as jokes fly perfectly while more airplane-like designs fail miserably. Does this include attachment nodes below engines?

That being said, that's above the highest point on the Mun, so I'll give it to you.

It's OK, but you won't get a great score. I might add a category for lowest periapsis though. (Also, apoapsis and periapsis, not apogee and perigee. Apsis is the general term; gee is only for Earth.) EDIT: I added said category.

What's the rocket's thrust-to-weight ratio? With FAR you should have much lower TTW in general, I've found. Rockets are often aerodynamically unstable to begin with, and if it's traveling too fast through thick air good luck controlling it. Also, your center of mass might be too low.

You'd still have to worry about life support if things became uncontrollable when life support dies. Also, I'm asking as an option, not as the default behavior. But I see your point. That's what I'm doing now. It's tedious though, as it requires doing it to each and every air intake. Also, bug report. If you go into the escape menu, until you quickload parts don't consume resources, and rates show NaN. Perhaps a division by zero error?

You've said you've given up on using other fuels with RCS thrusters. Could you instead have the plugin convert other fuels to monoprop each frame? (Actually, it would have to be more along the lines of this: Drain all current monoprop; keep track of amount. Convert other fuel to monoprop. Fire RCS thruster(s). Restore monoprop fuel. )

Could you make an option where Kerbals without Oxygen / with too much CO2 just become uncontrollable? (Like they go into hibernation or something.) I like the mod but at the same time it means that most of the time it's pointless to try to send a rescue mission - if something goes wrong that's it. Also, could you add an integrated air intake to plane cockpits (or engines, or air intakes, whichever)? Or alternatively have the plugin not consume oxygen in oxygen-containing atmospheres? Finally, you have a typo on lines 201/3/5 of IonCrewSupport.cs: resoucreReturn should be resourceReturn.

This challenge is fairly simple: Lowest orbit around the Mun wins. Contest is split into two sections: lowest apoapsis and lowest periapsis. However, you have to complete a full orbit without lithobraking (and/or lithobreaking!). Hyperbolic trajectories need not apply for lowest apoapsis. Note that the highest point on the Mun is 3340m. Stock-only. Exception: Kerbal Engineer Redux is allowed, though MechJeb isn't. Please post at least 3 screenshots of orbit in-progress, and a screenshot of the map screen showing apoapsis and periapsis. (If there is interest, I may extend this to other atmosphere-less bodies.) Leaderboard: Apoapsis: 2579m X 2698m - NinjaOx 2656m X 3081m - frash23 2760m X 3099m - frash23 2973m X 3124m - Spartwo 2715m X 413,084m - Skyhawk Periapsis: 2579m X 2698m - NinjaOx 2656m X 3081m - frash23 2715m X 413,084m - Skyhawk 2760m X 3099m - frash23 2973m X 3124m - Spartwo Failures: 1900m X 413,084m - Skyhawk 2442m X 5171m - Mr. Shifty 2106m X 2913 - TheBobWiley

You could do this with attachment node trickery. The stock docking ports have an attachment node above them - if you make the escape tower have a recessed attachment node, it would fit over the docking port just fine. I'm more interested in a escape tower that allows for a parachute. And, for that matter, a parachute that allows other things to be attached above it. If it had an integrated stack decoupler it could kill two birds with one stone.

Sorry, looks neat, but I'm on a slow connection - I'm not going to download a 388MB runtime solely for a tool that I can approximate elsewhere.

A request: could you add a fuel dump part, preferably one that works with the Modular Fuel Tanks mod to be able to dump different fuels? Currently I'm using a modded copy of the ant engine (very low ISP, very low thrust), but it would be nice to have a proper part. Also, looks great!

Does anyone have any suggestions as to what conversion ratios / power usages I should use with this in advanced mode and Kethane? I think that cryogenic fuels should use more power / produce more heat on conversion (as they require cooling to cryogenic temperatures), but I have no idea how much.

Can you post the mission files?

So, some calculations. Power usage is 10/h + 5/h * crew capacity, i.e. 15, 20, or 25/h. Oxygen usage is 1 * number of kerbals, i.e. 1, 2, or 3/h. CO2 generation is the same as oxygen generation. Most pods can survive for 100h. Exceptions are the lander cans (150h) and cockpits (50h!), as well as the hitchhiker container (500h!). Time to lack of power is as follows: Cupola: 13.3h Mk 1 Lander Can, Mk 1 & 2 Cockpits, Command Pod Mk 1: 3.3h! Mk 3 Cockpit, Mk 1-2 command pod: 6h Mk 2 Lander Can: 5h Hitchhiker container: 10h What does this mean? Basically, as follows: If you're doing anything more than building something to rendezvous with a space station, you'll need some sort of power storage or generation. Almost anything will do, however. Even the flat solar panel is overkill. (Theoretically, you could keep 90 hitchhiker containers powered with one solar panel, or 360 kerbals). Beyond about 100h, you'll start needing extra oxygen. As far as I can tell, you should put in a LS-19A if you have any more than a LS-O2A tank, and you should replace it with the LS-32C if you have beyond about ~5000 oxygen. (Although note that the LS-19A can only supply 2 kerbals). (A LS-19A effectively doubles your oxygen; a LS-32C effectively triples it) Also, a tip. Put a LS-IA on your booster and it will refill the tank in the LS-19A/LS-O2A on your ascent.

Remember, drag in KSP is unrealistic. It has a mass component, whereas real drag doesn't.