Captain Sierra

@Nertea There was a really interesting post written a few months back in development discussion about adding a shadow shield component for the NTR (and subsequently a radiation system). The common thought there was that while exposed to a "dangerous" dose of radiation, kerbals are rendered incapacitated. Radiation sickness (touristification). Once no longer exposed, they return to normal, based on the fact that kerbals seem to experience no detriments to long term radiation exposure from sitting on Laythe for years on end. Probe cores would suffer reduced or zero functionality, dependent on their level of integrated shielding (the qube having a lot and an octo2 having zero, for example). I'd definitely be interested in seeing optional more permanent consequences (and there's always those sadists who want the threat of death for their intrepid crews) like skill regression, loss of guidance systems (reducing SAS level on probes), science instruments ceasing to function both temporarily or permanently, etc.

Wow. That's .... a departure. Very very interesting looking but also a bit, hmm, unconventional. (coming from someone who has played with partially rebalanced RLA, Near Future, and stock for a long time). Very interested to see how this one evolves.

You know you're a nerd when you can strip a computer to the mobo, CPU and all, and put it back together in under 20 minutes. You know you're a nerd you have more friends on Steam than you do in real life. You know you're a nerd when you make a decision with a d20.

To expand on the previous, roleplay is a difficult thing to moderate, usually requiring a very thorough set of rules. Of important note, this rules set is very different from typical community guidelines. To my knowledge, the forum staff never put this alternate rules set in place, instead attempting to use the normal forum rules. Because of the nature of the beast, this didnt work out so well and it ultimately created a lot of headaches for both staff and community. Rocket Builders was recently removed in part because its premise was used to circumvent the rule. While controversial, that basis was not invalid. Rocket Builders was definitely a place you could see good roleplay, bad roleplay, and in places, downright ugly roleplay. On a related sidenote, there's a sufficient amount of nerds, geeks, whatever you choose to label us, here that its worth soliciting for roleplayers over in off-topic. The mods shouldn't have an issue with that as long as its just seeking players and your actual roleplay is located elsewhere.

You were saying? Image created by TriggerAu.

Outside of new tanks*, all of this can be done via modulemanager work. Granted my modulemanager-fu is rusty. As an interim solution until we get confirmation or denial of this from the powers that be, this could very quickly be hacked into a mod. *A fuel switch patch for stock ore tanks can even solve this problem, allowing it to be tweakable in-VAB. Ideally this would pair with a texture switch but if the goal is get a mod working with zero artistic work, it can be done.

@Nertea Fear not, the demon host Curse is no longer your only option. Praise this community, the KS successor Spacedock.info is already up and running (still some work to restore CKAN linking and other stuff but base mod hosting is fully operational).

The skeletal truss segments are Near Future Construction. A few of the older ones have KWRocketry in them. THere's at least 1-2 other mods there I cant identify, and I think I see a bit of tweakscale usage in the second and third pics on the orion-like vehicle.

Those are two designs that have about as much to do with each other as the wright flyer and a 737. I need to see this thing.

Those are ..... big. Very big.

Okay I was on the fence about using the patch but near-zero heat generation > no spool time. I'll take the limited lifespan if it means I dont need to bring 4 tons of heat rejection out to Jool.

You kind of just stole the show as far as NTR mods go .... I see a lot of Atomic Age lately. KSPX, RLA, and FtMn are all still working IIRC (citation needed on FtMn) but not very common.

I've never assumed these engines were supposed to be cost effective. I care more about raw dV than I do about my space program's budget.

Fuel switching is simply changing some resource values. Throwing a reactor in there is a vastly more complicated partmodule to insert. Its like assuming an auto mechanic can work on an F-18. (Pro tip: he can't) I'm not saying it can't be done, just that its far more complex than you make it out to be. A lot of custom plugin code would need to be written.

I find it decent for parts that dont have elegantly done custom emmissives. However, parts that do have well done emmissives get their eye candy ruined by this.

^^^ This. Rockets represent the primary lift capacity of my space program, but SSTO spaceplanes are far more fun vehicles to fly. I use them mainly just for crew transfer to LKO.

Well ain't that sexy ..... Could probably do with less engines on the shuttle. Maybe just the two RAPIERs and no wing tanks. What kind of engines do you have on the external and how many?

They seem a bit part heavy for their size. The quantity yield of this mining operation also seems a bit low.

I'm more interested in how those things are built ... Time to tear one apart and discover the secret to those gorgeous lines.

Yes, even vets need help from time to time. It probably goes without saying that the phase angles for a standard Hohmann transfer are vastly different than those for a bi-eliptic. The question is: "What should the phase angle be and how to I quickly guesstimate it?" If it matters to anyone, this is for a mission to Neidon of OPM. When the Semi-major axis differential between starting body and target body becomes that large, this kind of transfer isn't as bad as it usually is when compared to a traditional Hohmann transfer orbit.

Finalized the design for the Journeyman probe. That'll be phase one of VENTURE. Yes, there will be gratuitous screenshots from this mission. Journeyman 1 & 2 launch on day 72, bound for Sarnus and Plock-Karen respectively.

I cant see it being too difficult with a little practice of your gizmo-foo.

Given the low fuel density, even the lowest fuel draw cryo engine would burn through it in mere seconds (and that would be with LH2/OX, much higher fuel density). As a formfactor it would be nice to match with the Kandl from Atomic Age, but honestly a better bet for that tiny thing is just a half size of the smallest 1.25m tank we currently have.

I wish I still had a 16:10 monitor .... but I traded it out. It was old, and small (19.5"). I havent done any major upgrades to my system specifically for KSP, but there are a few things I'd like to do. Current Specs: AMD FX8530 @ 4.02GHz, 8 core Factory cooling, not-factory thermal grease Powercolor AXR9 270 GPU w/ 2GB GDDR5 8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz 600W Corsair PSU 1TB WD Blue 2700RPM HDD ASUS Crosshair V Formula-Z motherboard I want to add 8 more GB of RAM, could use a second hard drive (would love an SSD but I need another 1TB for storage first), and am also keeping an eye out to do a chipset/mobo swap. AMD has been great to me but I want to go Intel (mostly for KSP). Quick question: Is it worth getting 8 more GB of DDR3 when I'll probably be going for a DDR4 mobo when I finally upgrade (which is a lot further out than a possible RAM upgrade)?

THis requires KSP to model surface hardness. While something I would full well support, its probably asking too much for 1.1 given how much is already coming. But yes Squad, you should do this.