generalmiller

The only time I did worth mentioning was a long time ago when the game was still in Early Access and was I think about a year or two away from official release. I was playing a modded game most importantly FASA, Raster Prop Monitor and a life support mod though I can't remember which one. I was recreating the Apollo Missions and doing about 1 a week with no time warp and only usuing the interior and orbit camera modes, never usuing the exterior just for fun. On the flights especially the Apollo 8, 10, 11, and 12 flights on the long trip to the Mun I'd read a book play another game or something like that while the spacecraft slowly went on its way. And on the Apollo 13 flight I was doing the same thing. Since there's no random failures in the game I figured it'd be just like the other ones so I was kicked back reading a book and watching Netflix. I was a about half-way to the Mun and all of a sudden I hear this huge explosion which was clearly not from what I was watching on Netflix so I pause it and tab back in to KSP quickly. I look out the window of the capsule and everything is spinning like crazy. The RCS isn't working and FASA capsules don't have Reaction Wheels since they're supposed to be somewhat realistic. So I have to use one of the preset action groups to bring up the Munar Module(MM) RCS to regain control and I start clicking through every RPM screen trying to figure out what happened when I notice I'm light RCS fuel and on the next screen oh look the CSM engine is gone!. I bring up the F3 menu to see what happened and see it say that debris from Apollo 8 collided with me. It turns out one of the fairings from the MM covering hit the Service Module while I was happily floating along. The sheer odds of that happening I can't begin to fathom, but it left me without an Engine, it took out an RCS fuel tank, and short on Supplies. So I did the math and realized I'd be short on oxygen unless I sped up. Fortunately I always do a free-return trajectory so after I passed from behind the Mun and was heading back to Kerbin I used the MM decent engine to speed up and make it to Kerbin before I ran out of Oxygen. I ended up using all the fuel in the Decent stage and most of the RCS that wasn't for reentry up making sure they'd get back in time. My Apollo 13 ended up being pretty close to the real one just by sheer bad luck, but it made for the most exciting trip to the Mun yet for me even if I didn't get to land on it. tl:dr KSP made me recreate Apollo 13 even though I wasn't planning on it.

I guess I'm lucky. I'm not having the problems launching that others seem to have. I've been able to launch everything from the titan rockets to the Saturn V without any problems. Is my game so broken that it's working?

This is my version of a B-52. It actually handles really well. It has a slight upwards pitch on its own and it rolls smoothly as well. Yaw is a little bit weak on its own though. It's actually fairly easy to land if you line up well on the approach, as it can't really perform any major last second course corrections due to it's size. Any comments about it or suggestions on how to improve the design are welcome. Also if you want to take it and post pictures I'm fine with that too. The main reason I even built this is because I always like recreating the X-15 program and that needs a B-52. And it's good at carrying air launched rockets because of the cargo bay's size. Action Groups 1:Cockpit Lights 2:Cargo Bay Doors 3:Engine Group 1 (Far Left) 4:Engine Group 2 (Middle Left) 5:Engine Group 3 (Middle Right) 6:Engine Group 4 (Far Right) 7:Flaps (These essentially keep the plane from pitching up and enable near level flight without SAS. They do cause an extremely insignificant downward pitch.) 8:Ladder I have the engines bound to action groups instead of staging so in case of failure or destruction of one group I can switch off the other side to compensate. I've actually tested the destruction of an outer engine group and part of the forward wing on one side and after the thrust is balanced out the aircraft is still capable of landing without too much added difficulty. Download http://kerbalx.com/generalmiller/KSP-B-52

In this instance I'd say it shouldn't be locked simply because this isn't just a regular update, but the actual release. Most digital games usually specify an hour they become available. That being said if you have KSP through Steam it usually updates at 1pm EST.

Dragon do you post in this thread just so you can complain about everything frizzank does? Helpful criticism is one thing, but when your first statement about something is "it's bogus" that tends to make people ignore everything else you're going to say.

I want Skylab some day as well, but he hasn't even finished the Saturn 1B yet much less the Saturn V needed to launch Skylab. Let him finish the rocket's first then hopefully we will see Skylab after that.

If you want a 1/2 sized rocket that isn't tanks welded to the side of other tanks I would suggest Novapunch which has 5m parts.

Thats why I want to know about the Saturn rockets themselves. The S-IVB at 64% is 4.2m which going by the 1.25 scale like Novapunch or KW is closer to 3.75m then 5m parts. But the S-IC and S-II stages are 6.64m and even going by the previous scale are still a massive 6.25m. Point is I'm just curious what the projected size of this thing will be and if it will he easily compatible with stock or other modded parts size wise. I love the Saturn V and couldn't be more excited it's going to be part of what is already my favorite mod.

Are the Saturn parts going to be around 64% size exactly or are they going the 1.25m increase in size route?

At least a good Apollo CSM and maybe the LM. The Saturn V is an understandably daunting project. Also the Saturn I or IB would be a nice to have since no mod has a good way to make the Saturn I's first stage.

That looks absolutley amazing. Now just the Agena and MOL are left from the orginal plan. Any idea what might come after that?

All I want is a single probe core in the beginning and there is no good reason not to have one added. The argument that they went for manned before unmanned and don't know how to make an unmanned rocket doesn't make sense as all the basics and technologies for an unmanned craft would have already been created for a manned one. Gyroscopes, small mechanical motors for said gyroscope, and radio are all the basics for an unmanned rocket and all three would already have been created anyway for the manned one. And if we go buy the kerbals supposed technological development cycle the tech tree already shows that they are going from smaller rockets to larger rockets. And if they are doing that they would have started off with unmanned simply because it would have meant a smaller starting rocket to test and learn from. Now understand I'm not saying they could not have a charge ahead to a manned flight mentality, it would make sense though given what little we do actually know of them. But baring a few instances like Wan Hu, which would have ended just as badly they would have to actually test and learn. As for the lack of need for electrical power with a manned capsule. I admit that is true and it makes it easier for the newer player to build and go. Long term though tutorials will be a thing for new people to learn from and the current scenarios are essentially a simplistic version of that already. But the scenarios are still a ways away from being truly comprehensive or being able to impart many of the needed skills for this game. That's why I'm not saying the Capsule should be removed simply that a probe core added. The kerbals obviously believe they're far enough along to start a space program all I'm saying is that they could just as easily put a probe core on top instead of a capsule as they would already have the necessary know how and technology. Just as a new player or one that doesn't care about casualties could easily put a capsule on top and those that do care or just want to could put a probe on top. The general idea from my point of view is give the player, new or old, a choice between the two at the start.

The arguement that unmanned is harder than manned control makes no sense. First off using our history as a comparison, since it is the only measure we have, unmanned rockets predate manned rockets by over 15 years. It is easier to design a small probe than a manned capsule due to the technologies going into it. Capsules are harder to make in that they have to actually carry living beings and all the things we need to live from oxygen to warmth. And going by Kerbin's atmosphere and tempature at the KSC they need these things as well to an extent. Obviously they don't need constant resources from a gameplay perspective. Now that does not mean I am against having the capsule as a start piece, but that at least one probe core should be able to be a starting piece as well. While the point of Kerbals perhaps not having as much care about life and limb as we do in reality is true. Ultimately we are the rulers of their little world in our game and should have the choice as to weather we want to risk their lives or not from the start. For the tl;dr crowd give us just one probe core to start. Also I apologize for my numerous grammer errors, but my tablet is exactly cooperating.

A pioneer who once flew to the heavens returns to fly them forevermore. The clock has started Aurora 7. Godspeed Scott Carpenter.

After months of playing KSP I'm finally planning of going on my first manned interplanetary mission. Partially because after my Mun base it seems the next logical step and because of Scott Manley's recent trip to Eve inspiring me. I've launched plenty of satellites, landers, and rovers to other planets successfully in my current save and others so I'm confident in my ability to get there. I've already started planning the vehicle to get me there and the two cBBp Dragon CSMs to get the fourteen Kerbals aboard. I've already decided on taking two small rocket powered UAVs to see Duna from the air. I've also decided that at least two Kerbals will remain with the interplanetary ship. It might be unnecessary, but I don't like the idea of leaving the ship empty. What I still haven't been able to make my mind up on is how I'm going to land all the Kerbal's on Duna and Ike. This is where I'd like to know any of your opinions on the matter to maybe help me decide or point out any pros or cons I might have missed. Side note I use mods a lot to keep things interesting for me and all these plans involve liberal use of parachutes for the actual landing. Option 1 Have four three man landers. Three for Duna and one for Ike Pros All landers are the same so COM on the main ship will be easy Can explore three different places on Duna Will be able to be relatively small Will have twelve kerbals exploring Cons Requires four separate landings and returns All the rovers I have stock or mod are designed for two COM with one rover would be a problem and two rovers would be unnecessary weight Option 2 Have three landers. Two four man landers for Duna and one two man roverless lander for Ike Pros Only three landings and returns Can explore two places on Duna Rover balancing wont be a problem with two per Duna lander Cons One lander is different throwing off the main ships COM unless it's docked center mass Two less kerbals on the ground then option 1 Option 3 One massive 3.75m 8 man lander probably two stage either designed myself or built off of Frizzank's Big Gemini if it's released in time and one two man roverless lander for Ike Pros Only two landings and two returns Rover balancing not an issue with four of them evenly spaced Would not have to worry about Delta V and might have extra fuel for return to Kerbin Cons Can only explore one place on Duna Two less kerbals on the ground then option 1 Massive heavy lander making actually landing and maneuvering possibly challenging Lander is so massive it absolutely has to be centered on the main ship Extra option for options two and three Have another roverless Ike lander, but use it to go to somewhere else on Duna. Probably one of the poles. This would eliminate the main ships COM issue and have the two extra kerbals actually doing something.But it would mean an extra landing and docking. Personally option 1 is my least favorite mainly because of the rover issue. Much like the Apollo Program weight is a major factor for me and carrying either an extra rover or dead weight to counter balance seems wasteful. But I decided I'd put it up there to see what anyone has to say about it or any insight from those that have already under taken this venture might be able to offer to help make up my mind. Also if there are any glaring grammar issues I'm sorry. I only had two hours of sleep and I'm not doing so great right now.