forsaken1111

You may want to discuss with magico13, dev for this mod: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92377-0-24-2-Kerbal-Construction-Time-Release-v1-0-2-%289-3-14%29 His mod takes tweakscale parts into account and also maintains an inventory of recovered parts

Have you given any thought to how you will handle tweakscale? It allows you to resize parts in the VAB, dynamically changing their cost and capacity.

I assumed the inaccuracies were due to MJ being bad at timing when to stop the burn. If it's due to maths then I'll welcome better accuracy.

I assume it would simply not have any snacks.

Maybe tie it to a kerbal's stupidity stat? Smarter kerbals more likely to properly ration snacks and eat regularly while stupid kerbals may overeat and have a more random eating schedule

Alright. Thank you for the quick response.

What does this do that TAC Life Support doesn't do?

I believe the Launchpad reconditioning time is configurable in the mod's options, no?

I could be wrong but I believe that warning is because Minmus itself has an eccentric orbit which throws it off a bit.

Stock KSP models the atmosphere as something which could be described as a dense soup. You lose a lot of energy to air resistance. Every part on your rocket causes drag regardless of its shape or whether it is shielded (by fairings for example). This means that putting a nosecone on or something like that actually hurts your rocket performance in stock. FAR actually models the aerodynamics much more accurately, so an aerodynamic rocket will experience much less resistance and thus lose much less energy to air resistance.

Jep. 6 of them just about allows the fusion drive to run without constantly sparking out. I was not able to get the particle collector into orbit using the tiny fusion drive, alas. However... THIS IS THE BEST http://imgur.com/qKnEbN1 http://imgur.com/kSSna3m That turbofan contraption could fly around for ~8 years.

Silly mod is silly. This is an SSTO: I'm going to launch again with a particle collector onboard and see if it can do a refueling mission.

Exactly. So I'd have rocket level thrust with jet engine level efficiency on a plane moving Mach 12 and falling apart due to atmospheric heating and aerodynamic stress. It will be glorious. I'll post pictures.

Now I want to strap a pair of fusion drives onto an airplane and see what mach values I can hit before it shatters.

No worries, this is why I asked for clarification. FWIW I think its a fantastic idea.

Nooo. This would make an awesome first stage for K+ sun mining. Although I doubt it would work for me. Betting aerodynamic stress would tear a ship apart if I tried to use a fusion drive in atmosphere.

Is that the way it actually works or are you suggesting that this should be the behavior but it does not do that currently?

I want to see this. Did you take any pictures?

According to his profile, his last post was 16th June 2014 and last activity 22nd June 2014

Nope. Works fine for me.

I have the latest karbonite. fresh install. active texture management, scansat, part catalog, kerbal engineer, hyper edit, select root and floor it are the only other mods I have installed. You appear to be 2000km from the sun. You need to be 2000m...

Fair enough. I can see you've justified the idea to the point that no argument is going to dissuade you. I like your art, if not your ideas about balance so I'll keep an eye on this from afar.

It just seems a bit off to me to use engines with 'realistic' numbers in KSP's unrealistic scale. If you're using RSS then sure, realism makes sense.

You 'fixed' the stock engines because they're unrealistic while simultaneously introducing silly sci-fi engines?

Shouldn't you balance your stuff against stock rather than balancing stock for 'realism' in a game which is by its very nature unrealistic?