Starwaster

Ok, good point. I don't see the OP having posted anywhere since June 4th. Given copywrite restrictions enforced re: editing parts for re-release by third parties, let's put our minds together and make some ModuleManager patch files?

They don't NEED a 0.21 update. They're just parts, and the format for parts did not change transitioning from 0.20.x to 0.21.x

wow just had a waking nightmare reading this thread... a nightmare involving driving a rover on Gilly... (just had my first successful landing there... probably would have gone easier if I'd had more than 8kg of left in the tanks for rcs)

I'm tempted to use the rescale option on these maybe 30 times larger or so.... And build the Valley Forge! now someone needs to model three robotic helpers, different colors...

What are you putting in there? The following should do it: MODULE { name = MechJebCore } Or if you have ModuleManager installed, stick the following somewhere in your GameData folder as a *.cfg file. Really doesn't matter where in there it goes or what it's named as long as it has .cfg as an extension and it's located in GameData or a subfolder. @PART[cupola] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[landerCabinSmall] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[Mark1Cockpit] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[Mark2Cockpit] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[mark3Cockpit] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[Mark1-2Pod] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[mk1pod] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[mk2LanderCabin] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[probeCoreCube] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[probeCoreOcto] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[probeCoreOcto2] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[probeCoreSphere] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[probeStackLarge] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[probeStackSmall] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } } @PART[seatExternalCmd] { MODULE { name = MechJebCore } }

Yes, except that as of 0.21 SAS is now better at those things than Mechjeb is. Mechjeb has some basic, fundamental issues with attitude control that just aren't being addressed, probably because nobody seems to actually talk about what the problems are. If you ever watch Mechjeb's inputs at work, ask yourself...is that how *I* would be flying my ship? If it is then you're going to wear out your WASD keys in short order.

I made copies of each of the part *.cfg files, added _decoupler at the end of the part's name property in the file (just for uniqueness so that KSP can tell them apart) then put this in each PART MODULE { name = ModuleDecouple ejectionForce = 250 explosiveNodeID = top } Now I have decoupler versions of each ring and fairing base...

boy this needs to be in the stock game...

Yeah, pretty much. There is a way to mitigate the issue, a bit. Cut thrust so forward acceleration ceases, then eject them. With KW fairings I've had slightly better results if I bind the fairing decouple to action groups instead of staging, but that might just be a placebo effect. (I mention KW because it's an issue with just about any decoupler sort of part but mostly with the fairing type objects)

I'm trying... I'm trying REALLY hard to derive some comfort from that but it's just not working...

That was my reply, let me compliment him the way I whats (sic). ok?

I have a similar situation with launches, but not (as near as I can tell) as bad a problem as you have. My problem is that if I do a launch with a viewpoint too close to the rocket I start imagining that I'm a technician who somehow got caught clinging to the spacecraft during launch because nobody noticed me there and I couldn't get to safety in time. If that happens.. what the HELL do you do??? I can only imagine that the only action that offers any hope of survival at all would be to leap from the rocket before it climbs high enough that death becomes 100% certain. But if you're leaping from something as tall as a multistory rocket, what are your chances of survival? Better than 100% I would hope but still pretty slim. But what if you were so petrified with fright that you couldn't even bring yourself to let go? To leap? Both scenarios scare the crap out of me...

QFT Me: "Jesus, MJ, what the hell are you DOING??? Do you see where our periapsis is going? Are you TRYING to get us killed??? MechJeb: "I'm sorry, Starwaster, I want you to know I still have the greatest enthusiasm for the mission."

omg are you crazy??? that looked perfect!

Like an interstage? Yes, I think that's what the inline fairings are...

procedural fairings!

missed this earlier but on the subject of gyros, it's not necessary to have them integral to each module. the ISS does indeed use these for attitude control but it's a single module with 4 gyros mounted to one of the trusses. we really already have what we need, stock, as of .21 IMO just saying. and glad you liked the pics, I'd love to see it make an appearance finally, does anyoune know if there's a modelling path possible using XSI for importing?

I read some interesting reasoning as to why certain spacecraft dispensed with airlocks in favor of cabin depressurization-EVA-repressurization airlocks are massive and weigh far more than just carrying surplus oxygen to repressurize with....

0.21 saves can be imported. You are given that option when KSP detects older saves.

How about: Without fairing With fairing (note the cool lighting strips along the frame...) Fairing (frontal) Looks cool with wheels mounted on it!

Based on what exactly? Why not use the Apollo data? Or research how it's handled on modern space flights? Research the International Space Station. 100x???? That's pretty arbitrary and unrealistic. I mean, if you wanted to make the oxygen resource more massive I could understand that; unless my math is wrong the amount of oxygen consumed in kilograms is pretty low (nearly 100 times less dense actually...). But leave the rate of consumption alone, let that be equal to the amount of oxygen being used by one Kerbal in an hour, the way it's calibrated now. Also, recyclers shouldn't take so much energy. The power is mostly just for fans to move the air around.

I stand by my statement, insofar as it has bearing on spacecraft parts and whether they stay cool by virtue of 'space is cold'. In point of fact its 'near-total lack of mass' is WHY it won't cool your spacecraft down. The denser a medium is the more effective it is at transferring heat to or away from anything you need heated up or cooled down. This is why you can put your hand into an oven set to 400 degrees Fahreneheit for short periods of time with no lasting effects but if you put your hand in water that has been heated to 212 degrees Fahreneheit (i.e. boiling) you will be suffering second degree burns.

There's a plugin for that. It's called 'Actions on the Fly' I love it. I've used it to bind problematic parachutes that kept wanting to trigger on re-launch of a tail lander and I needed to bind a 'cut chute' action. Also used it to bind parachutes that I didn't want to trigger through staging and I needed them for emergency aerobraking. Use it all the time, though the right thing to do is to remember to do it in VAB so it's ready every time you launch that vehicle, but if you forget.... AOTF is there.. Works in 0.21, too.

They edited his posts and removed the links. Should they do more?

I'm sure you would be dead every time. However, if you have TWO different people, they're not likely to die at the same time like clockwork. IMO, it's probably a time acceleration bug. Meaning that the hourly check that's supposed to happen, didn't. I don't think time warp is supposed to prevent that sort of thing but I think sometimes it does. Either that, or like I/you said, statistical fluke