Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About Geoclasm

  • Rank
    Needs More SRB...

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I want to build a space center on the Mun! Or on Minmus! I haven't really thought this through - it's mostly a foundation for the idea but here's a roughing - Cost based on various factors : Size/Gravity of the body ( The further the deviation from Kerbin the higher the cost should be ). Distance from Kerbin ( Closer = less expensive, more distant = more expensive ( Mean distance, not current ). Time for construction to complete can vary based on factors. Facility may require engineers while being constructed, and those engineers will be left out of play w
  2. If the designs were stored in the same way that vehicle designs are saved, then this would be no problem at all. Everything that players want to modify could even be stored in a special tier beyond the 1K science tiers which would allow players to design ( modify ) whatever they wanted and save them to that tier. Then, after paying the initial science cost ( and money cost if that option is enabled ) to unlock it, they could use it as much as they wanted could afford to.
  3. Currently, to my knowledge, science has no end-game functionality beyond a resource used in the Strategies to acquire extra money or reputation. I think that it would be pretty cool if we could use science to tinker with the stock parts we have been given, something akin to : Edit engine attribute ( maximum thrust, ISP ASL/VAC, mass, resource burn rate, etc. ) Science/Funds cost of new custom engine could be proportional to how ridiculous you make your engine I.E. - Giving an Ion engine a thrust rate of 300 KN ( or an ISP ASL = ISP in VAC ) with no other changes t
  4. It's kind of a pain to have to set thrust to zero so you can manually adjust each individual engines thrust limiter. I was thinking it might be nice to have an option that would allow you to incrementally increase or decrease each engines thrust limiter via an action group.
  5. Okay to answer this question for myself ( and anyone else who has this problem ) the resolution is N-Fold Ctrl-F within the quicksave file to find your vessel ForEach vessel v.currentThrottle c > 0 : set c = 0 set vessel v.mainThrottle = 0 Save file and perform a quick load and your vessel should have no active thrust on any engine. This solution is offered as is and the provider bears no responsibility if your computer breaks escape velocity.
  6. I have a vessel in which there are parts held in place by struts between a structural vulnerability. I quick saved, then loaded because I am not a smart man. Now the Twin Boar engine plows into the upper part of the vessel causing a catastrophic failure on quick load. FML. The only upside is it's remote-controlled, not crewed, so no loss of life at risk here ( except for robots - robot lives matter ). I'm looking through the rather lengthy quick-save file and it looks like to stop this tragedy I need to set the thrust to 0 - will that work? Where do I need to
  7. Yeah I'd thought about that but it would mean the complication of putting attitude controls and thrusters on the satellite and I'm lazy. So having the Kerbals on board won't interfere with completing the contracts?
  8. I have two contracts for equatorial satellites around Minmus (in addition to a flag-planting contract). Is it possible to do all three in a single shot? (Launch a landing vessel with the two necessary "satellites" attached that can deploy the satellites at their appropriate coordinates, land, and have a Kerbal plant the flag)
  9. RCS are just a design decision. Sort of a "Just in case". Ocasionally you get a mission to adjust the position of a satellite, and since I plan to have these in orbit for a while, it may come up.
  10. This. I think I will give this a shot - it looks the most promising. Thanks for the tip.
  11. Alright thanks. I will look into those suggestions. The main reason I don't want to have a decoupler is not the force they eject with but I just don't want the remains sticking off the probe. At the moment I attached a side-mounted docking port JR and am using a cargo bay with a docking port stacked on two octagonal struts. It's... pretty unwieldy...
  12. Given the following satellite which has no available stacking nodes, and to which I would really rather avoid attaching any decouplers (separators are okay) How can I go about storing this in a cargo bay to get it into orbit? The root is the RCS tank.
  • Create New...