• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,313 Excellent


About DStaal

  • Rank
    Flight Director

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. What are your settings for the Delta V window? (Atmospheric/vacuum, what planet, etc.)
  2. It also has a couple of it's own parts that you can add on to any rocket/pod, in case the pod you want isn't directly supported. One of the USI mods also has some airbags as well, though I haven't used them recently.
  3. This mod is not compatible with KAS versions above ~1.0, when the link structure changed, and won't be updated since the Breaking Ground expansion provides similar parts in stock.
  4. Just to confuse you further - for that specific need there's a third option: (Honestly, this mod is worth it for the construction docking ports alone.)
  5. I remember Calc II from college - or as I liked to call it 'problem solving for engineers': Here's this formula, memorize it, when the numbers look like *this* plug them in *here*. Here's the next formula... I'd liked math until then. (I don't think that is the only - or best - way to teach Calc II. It was just the only way it was taught at the college I was at.)
  6. You mean the Paradox Interactive business model?
  7. What OS? What version of KSP? What mods, if any, are you running? Do you have logs? (And this really should be in one of the support sub-forums.)
  8. I haven't tried it. I'm saying that the [v0.2.2] in the thread title would typically be the *KSP* version, not the *mod* version.
  9. Just to let you know, by the guidelines of this forum your subject says that this mod only works in *KSP* v0.2.2. (I know that's not what you meant, but it's the convention here.)
  10. There was a discussion on it before it happened - it should be here a few (or a few dozen) pages back. Basically: 1. Nertea didn't like the look anymore. 2. They were mostly excess parts. 3. Restock/Restock+ have similar parts. 4. They mostly weren't all that useful, or used.
  11. Digital could be fairly resistant to the error level - but at an expense: It would allow you to *detect* errors in transmission, but *fixing* them either requires always transmitting a large overhead of checksums (which also requires extra processing at the remote end before send), or you have to have the remote resend the image (or some portion of the image) if there's an error. (You could of course ignore errors in a portion of an image if you've blocked your images correctly - which would be how you get the noise pattern in the current version.) Analogue lets more noise get in, but you can still get a fairly useful image even with a lot of noise. Either of these can be alleviated by slowing down transmission of course.
  12. I think the idea of increasing the cost would be that it was being made out of more expensive materials - You could make fairing out of aluminum steel, or you could make it out of carbon fiber, and get the same strength - but the former likely would have higher mass.
  13. Interesting. I'll have to play around with this. One thought: Have you thought about tying the error rate or noise (or both) to the signal strength of the probe? That is: you can send a good camera out, but if you're barely in-network you'll get a poor quality picture back. Then the quality in the part config is the max quality the part can have, under ideal conditions.
  14. TCA does it all the time. Thrust limiters and throttle control. You could probably set something up with action groups and robotics controllers if you want something manual.