AlamoVampire

i just wish the mainsail would get some revamp love as it so desperately needs it imho. otherwise nice stuff!

I am truly humbled to see a thread of mine get not only nominated but chosen as a Thread of the Month! Thank you all very much!

@miamijuggler I think an SSTO from Eve landed as a starting point is nothing to sneeze at! I have been playing since 0.21 and for me I have not gotten brave enough to try to go further than just touching down on Eve as far as Eve goes at least. Keep up the epic epicness!

First person on Mars and I say: This step is for you the people of Earth. May we never stop exploring!

First thing to flash in my mind at walking on the hull of a ship in space was the scene in Star Trek First Contact when Worf, Picard and that other crew member whose name escapes me atm went eva on the hull of the Enterprise E to jettison the deflector dish before the Borg could establish an interplexing beacon. The idea of doing the same sounds awesome, but for non metallic surfaces like planetary bodies? No. The EVA jetpack is sufficient imho.

Well Steam shows i have just shy of 500 hours in but i got KSP a day or 2 after 0.21 was released and joined this forum a day or two after that.

@Sharpy Dare i ask how many mods it takes to get 7085 patches from module manager?

The most angry I have gotten in KSP? Hmm... Probably when I tried to use the stock fairings when we first got them. They were (i had been using procedural fairings <still do as I find them superior imho> for aesthetic reasons for a year give or take at that point) unintuitive and frustratingly hard to figure out. Kept scaring the cat lol. Decided then just to use what I knew lol.

@GeneCash awesome table! I think antenna stats is a good place for this data. I wonder if we will see it added to the in game one? Side thought are these numbers consistent with all command pods and cockpits or a function only of antenna and data transmission? op 06:40:30

@Lupi Capsule tech is cheaper AND safer as well. Im not saying new aircraft parts should not be added, just not as a DLC thing. My 2¢ ofc.

@klgraham1013 Yes they are a thing, but, are they the CORE of the vessels used? No. Shuttle was by and far away the most and only (buryan <i think i spelled it wrong> the russian knock off shuttle does not count as it flew once unmanned) winged space exploration vessel. Do wings have a place yes. Are wing based craft worth an entire dev cycle for a DLC? In my opinion absolutely not. Not now at least. Again my opinion as far as KSP goes. @5thHorseman You may be right. Whimsy is what KSP is best at

I agree with @Tonka Crash here. I bought kerbal SPACE program. I personally feel that to dedicate a full DLC to pure atmospheric aviation will significantly detract from and be harmful if not be disastrous to kerbal SPACE program. While some DO enjoy making planes, it is not the core of the games given intent. My opinion only.

@5thHorseman I think you might be right on the info vs schedule aspect. Still wonder why not just stick with calling it "Devnotes" though as that to my untrained eye is what these still are. Just my 2¢.

I have just a few things to say. 1. @SQUAD is needlessly adding greeblies to parts that honestly do not need them. Specifically the RBA 02 and the FL-A5 adapter. Usually they are on stations and this rather excessive greebling is a step in a wrong direction. Point 1 is entirely my personal opinion only. 2. More of a question really: Why go from calling update threads such as this thread one thing then at some random (as appears to me) time and make a new thread that does essentially the same thing and call it something else? Seems redundant to me. Just curious. I openly admit I could have missed the announcement as to why. op 03:14:30

No. @Sharpy gives some good reasons why it won't work but I would add that between mods and their dependencies and KSP's habbit of breaking ships with mod parts missing said mods, you also have pure part counts with each part getting its own physics calculations which at some point will slide show your game. My potato for example bogs down at iirc 150 parts <might be off on the exact # but 150 will do for now> and yours may be humming along until say 500. How do we work if your stuff could break my fp seconds to fp year? Sure it could disable physics calculations on my side for your stuff but the instant we dock? Now we are 1 vessel and I get broken by parts count. KSP was designed as a single player game. Was that because of Unity limitations or simple design choice by Harvester so many years ago? Honestly I don't know. Maybe in KSP 2 where it can be designed in at the start, just not here. I think DMP may be the thing you need but I can only suggest. I hope I made sense.

Teehee I think our threads (all the ones dedicated to one aspect or another) success and failure and the inbetween make a wondrous harmony. I am interested to see where our threads go!

I'm confused here. I really am confused here.

There are threads dedicated to many aspects of KSP that range from Your first hour in KSP to what you did today to what made you face palm to missing debris. I would like this thread to be a place where we can share those moments where inspite of things taking a direct collision course for disaster you stood firm and though courage, skill and maybe luck you pulled success out and made a moment a legendary moment. Let this thread stand as a place where inspiration can ignite the imagination!

@squad i really agree with the majority here, this time yall took a huge step backwards. They are going to stand out and are physically identical to the old parts... More greeble isnt always good. This is such an instance.

I realize that the most recent response is roughly 4.5 years old. That being said I think debris near misses are still relevant and can be fun to chat about. So with that being said I would like to dust this thread off to see what shenanigans our debris near misses are upto 4 or so years after I first posed this delightful question. So what are YOUR debris near misses? op 02:38:30

I last tried it back in mid December 2016 I think it was and it was hit or miss. It worked fine before it got renamed into object thrower, after rename it worked 1 or 2 times and gave out like a dead battery. op 23:07:30

@RoverDude if i may ask will the mainsail be receiving a similar treatment? I understand if you cant confirm or deny. I will regardless remain hopeful. Thanks in advance

Would seem I have located at least one of the causes of the initial errors I had questions about in the initial post. Space Y and Space Y Expanded being for 1.4.X seem to have some odd little conflict with 1.5.1 and when Necrobones updates <hopefully soon> the issue should be corrected. I will go ahead and assume that since I did not see these errors with the mods removed and only see them when the mods are there <the ones NOT updated for 1.5.1 that is> that this is mod related. Seeing as stated before this does not seem game breaking, I will consider it a non-issue. op 01:30:30 EDIT: Rather than make a new post, I will just edit this one. It would seem SpaceY and its expansion are the source of my woes. I had to remove them until Necrobones has a chance to update his mod for the current version of KSP. Welp thats that then.

@Mars-Bound Hokie howdy there. I have a solution on how to bring Val back from the dead via editing your persistent save. Step 1: Make a backup copy of the save in question and store it outside your KSP folder. I suggest this as a precaution only. Step 2: locate in your save ANY living kerbal that is available and check for that Kerbals current state. If memory serves it SHOULD be state 0. It has been more than a year since I have done this which is why I am having you reference a Kerbal in your Astronaut Complex as that state is the value you want for our final step. Step 3: Locate Val in your save. If memory serves it SHOULD be state 3. Again I have not had to do this in over a year so I am foggy on the numbers, but I know you want to change her state to match your referenced Kerbal in your astronaut Complex. Once done save twice and reload KSP and check your Astronaut Complex and val should be alive and well. Hope this helps.

Ok, I have an update of sorts, but really would appreciate a second set of eyes going over the output log in EDIT4 above. My theory on the errors I am seeing that it may be a conflict on mods updated only as far as KSP 1.4.X and KSP being 1.5.1 with DLC <not sure if the DLC affects this or not> seems to be holding up. I just pulled every mod from KSP including my 2 saves that have those parts active in them and only spotted 1 error during the initial loading screen. that error was the game crabbing about the steam api <running from the short cut icon on my desktop> and when launched from steam directly even that error went away. I hit alt-f12 and its still crabbing about a missing: MissionScore.cfg or something along that line. I think its just a compatibility issue at this point but thus far does not seem to be game breaking as it seems to play just fine. Any thoughts/confirmations would be greatly appreciated.