• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MR L A

  1. Like I said, squad haven’t mentioned any aero changes for this update and the general consensus is they haven’t made any. As for not updating the KSP laws of physics, I couldn’t disagree more. If squad decides to implement more advanced aero properties like those in FAR or advanced orbital stuff like Principia, they’d be most welcome as they only open up more options for things like ground effects or halo orbits. Hell, even minor changes to aero probably should be made as the atmosphere is STILL quite soupy. I really don’t think Squad should worry about implementing such updates (which I doubt they would anyway) just because a couple of badly designed craft no longer work properly.
  2. The change log mentions no alteration of aero; however, squad have confirmed that the part updates also effect their aerodynamic properties - so I’d imagine the reason your craft is flying differently is because of the parts it uses
  3. MR L A


    The stock 'NASA' flag seems pretty American-style to me...
  4. No, KSP doesn't account for this afaik, and, again afaik, neither does FAR. Interesting work though, now for all the other parts that have been changed
  5. This should be fixed, to a large degree, by using rigid attachment and autostrut in advanced tweakables, should it not? It's been an incredibly long time since I've had any noodle-like behaviour... I understand it isn't perfect still, but "noodle" seems a bit of a stretch these days
  6. Hi everyone I'm putting off my Masters degree work by finally creating my own KSP flag. I've done this before but never really put any effort into designs. Anyway, I've hit a bit of a stumbling block - I want a specific map projection type of Kerbin, known as "Azimuth Equidistant". This is the type of projection used in the UN flag as well as the Kerbalised version already in game. Does anyone know how I might go about obtaining the data required to produce this map projection type for my own use (and how to then make it)? Or have the projection already (I googled it and found nothing)? If I've not been clear about anything, please let me know. Thanks!
  7. Yeah but that's basically GPU acceleration, not CPU multi-threading. They are two very different things - and yeah, of course it's possible, it is just a hell of a lot of work - and not work that SQUAD can necessarily do anything about considering they don't own the Unity engine.
  8. I, too, would absolutely love this; however, I also understand (even as a complete non-coder) that this would be a herculean task that would probably be limited by the work the Unity engine developers have done I'd probably actually pay for that to be an update though..
  9. Is this compatible with... haha I joke, I'm not going to be that guy - though I won't lie, I cannot wait until this mod is updated. Just wanted to say that this mod is the ONLY parts mod I use and I have done so for a fair few years now, so thank you and keep up the good work!
  10. There’s been a few complaints about the new dV burn indicator thingy majig. All of which (that I have seen) also using the nuclear engines... I’d say you were right, there is a bug. I’m sure it’ll be patched soon
  11. This wasn't mentioned AT ALL in the change log (unless I missed it somehow)? Can anyone confirm this? @SQUAD
  12. Entire development of KSP**** That's how Squad works (and, coincidentally, Paradox Interactive - the makers of the only other game I currently play) SoonTM This feature can be turned off though (you have to turn it on by default currently) - so I guess that saves some performance? I mean, as soon as KER is updated, I might as well turn it off as it becomes pretty superfluous.
  13. errr... no, maybe.. what? "thick bottom side" should be going in first/pointing towards the surface... which is pointing retrograde, not prograde, if you go by which SAS toggle forces the pod to keep that orientation.
  14. Yeah, that's something they definitely would have mentioned and wasn't really in the scope of this update... which parts have you narrowed it down to?
  15. Afaik the merch store has been gone for a long time?
  16. I know but last time I checked the mod for MJ does the same for KER too.. despite it already being there. Though I do think it means you don’t have to alter the KER settings if you’re feeling extra lazy
  17. Seems weird... I launch rockets taller than that without wobble all the time :s You can alter the module so it’s on by default
  18. If you use MJ2 and KER for all! MJ can be partless anyway and retain full functionality Also, as far as we can tell so far, there’s not an actual stock readout of dV... just visuals based on it but no actual numbers.
  19. Exactly my problem with them and the reason I don’t really touch them in career mode. You’ve come up with a nice solution though.. must have very little dV using that command pod and with so few fuel tanks?
  20. I think you're forgetting KSP is a game. It isn't meant to be a replica of human space programs. We've already established that Kerbals, in some respects, are better engineers than us. It is meant to be FUN and somewhat educational. It is also a game that practically begs for people to fly those missions that never quite made it off the ground in reality, of which there are plenty that require some sort of rotor. It is also a bit daft to argue against rotors anyway considering the next mars rover with have a flying drone (last time I checked) which uses rotors. Plus, the idea that KSP would have to include "and aircraft" is ridiculous. Have you seen how much work NASA has done for atmospheric aviation? There simply is no space program that doesn't involve "and aircraft" to a (large) extent. It sounds like you want RO, not KSP.
  21. iffy on that one. I, and many others I'm sure, had no idea what dV, TWR or ISP was when I started playing KSP and had no idea that those were things I would need to learn about in order to play. The reason I bought it was because I'd seen YouTubers having a load of fun on it, the demo was also fun AND because it brought back my inner child - the one with the youthful fascination of space, was lucky enough to travel from the UK to Kennedy SC as part of my 6th birthday and at around the same age decided to send a space station design to NASA (via post back then) to which they responded very nicely Also, it appealed to the same part of me that loved Lego and AoE. Sure, there will be a lot of players that already had a great deal of knowledge around rocket science (rather than just a passing interest), but I'm positive there's a huge number that didn't.