kalor

I usually default to 100, though with a few rockets (like the 1B) I have to set that lower, if I want to have a bit of fuel left to come home with. I might have to try for a historical landing later, or go searching for other crazy ideas we had about mun landings, and give them a go with the appropriate hardware. Gotta love challenges.

My cat likes to co-pilot... errr, jump on the keyboard. Ever seen what happens when every stage of a Saturn stages at full throttle, simultaneously? Sadly, I have... a few times. Yay for escape systems! I think my biggest personal failure was forgetting a heat shield, with deadly re-entry. Unplanned rapid disassembly... check.

Yeah it was correctly updating figures, just for the wrong stage. I'm in the process of deleting all mods, and reinstalling just FASA and the basic mods for me, to see if there was just some junk left over from other deletions and such, or an interaction. If its an interaction, I'll see with what, and post appropriately. If it was junk leftover... well, nothing new there Now to see if I can be as successful in my rockets as they were historically... though I think my Kerbals would prefer a bit more success. Except maybe Jeb. He seems to like things blowing up.

It seems that deleting NP and DMOS worked, I'll try that later also. I have run into a minor parts issue as well, with the Saturn V build. Mechjeb is reporting a total Delta-V of 0 for Stage 3, despite a full fuel load and engine attached. I am about to stage to 3, so I will know for sure momentarily if there is an actual issue, or Mechjeb being dropped on its case a few too many times. I noticed that there are no crossfeeds on the interstage shrouds, would it be correct to assume that none of them allow for fuel crossfeeding? - - - Updated - - - So... I must need to work on my landings. Stage 3 is burning properly... time to inspect the Mechjeb case for damage

Yep, I plan to use that or something similar for the first phase of their training, then a Mun capable trainer to level them up more, when Jeb is away from home Might have to assemble the LEM at that point, though. No point in going if I'm not going to land >.> - - - Updated - - - And yeah the IB was used for a few crewed launches, including launches to Skylab and docking with Soyuz

Haven't entirely decided what I'll use for a launcher yet, but the 1B is most likely. I want to use it as a crew trainer for my non-pilot kerbals And thank you! Since I don't plan on a LEM being attached, I probably NEVER would have tried that attachment plate

I actually do have one other question, a somewhat silly one, but more about building the spacecraft. I am currently building an Apollo orbiter module (more complex craft to come...). I have the CM and shield, the decoulder, SM fuel/etc, then engine. I am looking for what I need to attach the CM and SM to the rocket. Should I be looking for a fairing base, or decoupler, or...? And where would I find that in the parts list? Much appreciated

I'm seeing minor lag sporadically with the Atlas + Capsule launch, mostly when rotating the camera, but also at random. Generally I don't have DMagic hooked up to it, I just installed that last night, this has been an issue for me for a while. I'll try removing them, and NP, and see - I don't currently have any parts from NP attached, but of course that doesn't mean there isn't interaction. I can't recall a lag spike followed by crash, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened. I'll give that a go and play with it for a while, and see if it helps. The help is much appreciated, this is one of my favorite packs out there, and I'm hoping to not have to suffer through lag to make it work - though I have. - - - Updated - - - Awesome, that seems to have fixed (or, at least, VASTLY improved) the issue. Still a tiny bit of lag, but that is likely my machine, rather than a mod issue. No more MET of 2 minutes, and real time elapsed of 4 minutes Thanks much!

One other detail - Win 7, running x86 The folders I have right now are: Toolbar ATM (agressive) BahaSP Deadly Re-Entry DMagic Orbital Science FASA Firespitter JSI KOSMOS Launchers Pack MJ2 ModRocketSys MP_Nazari Nereid (Final Frontier) NovaPunch Real Chute Remote Tech SCAN Sat Smoke Screen Soviet Pack Stage Recovery Texture Replacer Transfer Window Planner Module Manager 2.5.9 When fully loaded, runs ~2GB or so, looks like 1.7 atm. - - - Updated - - - Doing a test right now (that Jeb will love or hate, depending...) with JUST the Atlas setup boosting a capsule... we will see shortly if it is those parts.

Quick question, mostly to see if its only me (or the list of mods I am using) or if others are noticing the same thing. The parts run great, work wonderfully, and add a lot to the game, first. Thanks much for the great mod. However, it seems like the Atlas tank/decoupler/engines setup introduce some pretty heavy load or lag... I'm not sure why, or even 100% that it is THOSE parts for sure. However, when I launch a craft with them, I notice a pretty severe lag, until that stage decouples, and a couple seconds after, when everything returns to normal. If nobody else has noticed this sort of problem, no worries, I'm sure there's some conflict or something in the mods I'm using (quite a few ), and I'll see what I can come up with.

The temptation to add "High Speed Dirt"... just to play it in the space plane hangar. So I know this is definitely still being worked on, and lots of time needed to do that. But... 1. Any chance of a GUI'd music player, capable of playing any songs from the music directory, or a directory created for that purpose? 2. If the answer to the above is yes, what are the odds of integration into something like RPM? It would be incredibly awesome to let Jeb rock out, without having to A/T out and run a playlist Forgive my asking if either feature is already available... I am currently loading the game... yay for compressing textures as we speak

I see both sides to this. In some ways, it seems backwards. In others, exactly as it should be. I would like to see a Final Frontier like system in place, that actually impacts what the kerbals do, what they want for pay, possibly even going so far as to change their stats a bit. A kerbal that has survived a landing on Eve and made it back is going to be less terrified of a relatively easy and simple Kerbin landing. I'd also like these stats to DO something. What effects could courage and stupidity (or lack thereof?) have on gameplay? Maybe less brave Kerbals introducing errors (+/- small inputs for pilots, small chance to fail in repairs for engineers, a small penalty or possibility of failing to complete an experiment, for scientists?) into thei activities, and less stupid kerbals balancing that out, making the controls more precise, etc. The way I see it, as it stands now, this really isn't an experience system, anyways. More of a personal milestone per kerbal system. You don't gain more EXP by repeating a mission, which for game purposes, is okay-ish. But you can't tell me there is nothing left for a Kerbal to learn from a trip to the Mun after the first one, surely? I would like to see more of a diminishing returns system for the experience, so that each time they do it, they learn less... but are still advancing. Obviously, this requires changes to the core of the system, but I think it would be a good series of changes. I really like the idea of more than one field of each category, and each Kerbal having SOME skill in them, even if it isn't much. It adds a bit more depth to them, particularly if they can grow and get better in each field. This gives more of a reason to keep the most valuable Kerbals safe, and yet, to place them into danger whenever possible Overall, I think the system is okay-ish. As long as more is coming, to add more to it. As it is, it is a mediocre function in an otherwise great game.

I would say right click the node. if it says "decouple node" you should be good!

This was a really cool book series. Might give this a try at some point, but I'm working on my own personal challenges atm... later this week though... awesome lookin stuff so far though!

The KSP physics I was referring to wasn't really physics, i was tired and used the wrong word... meant the on-rails aspect. And I see, reagarding the way the on-rails works. The way I had understood it was wrong, and that makes much more sense.

Kerbal physics interfering with nifty ideas *shakefist* Oh well. T'was a thought Edit: Interesting though that it lost the displaced orbit once it lost focus... I most not understand the "on-rails" phsyics I've been reading about somewhat properly? I figured it would maintain the orbit it was placed in, barring any encounters.

Ah... I was reading a short article about displaced orbits, but I missed a detail they mentioned... using hybrid solar sails to maintain the orbit... sad :< An interesting article, nonetheless, if anyone cares to take a quick read. Pretty short. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100726094749.htm

Is this possible? What I am looking for isn't even really the geo-stationary orbit so much as orbiting on the "horizontal", IE the same direction (or opposite) that Kerbin is travelling, but I want to do it further in the "vertical", or, in this case, closer to one of the poles. In the case of earth, this would be equated to travelling the same direction as a GSO, but doing so over Canada, rather than the equator. (And yes, I do realize that it isnt possible at this point to be stationary, I'm more concerned with the change of plane) Any thoughts, or advice on how to do it properly? I've tried with MJ, but I just end up with an inclined orbit, rather than parallel to the equator.

If you want to see why orbit first, take two trips. With the first ship, aim for say, Mun. Burn for a direct ascent past atmosphere, then make your manuever and burn to the Mun. Record how many units of fuel were left. With the second, aim for, say, 85 KM periapses (hopefully apoapsis is close!), then time your manuever for the Mun. Try to set your closest approach to the same as the previous attempt. Record your fuel remaining. I can tell you now that the ship that made orbit first will have more fuel. It is a much more efficient way to start a trip than burn direct to. When you make orbit, then manuever, you are making use (for better or worse...) of the forces acting upon the ship, (ie, the "lateral" movement across Kerbin's equator), using them to send you in the direction you want to go, rather than saying "second planet to the right and straight on until we get there." The principles are the same with a properly executed gravity turn. Force is being applied in the direction that is needed in the end, rather than making the effort to completely change the direction of travel.

I would like to see a permanent dock as well. I've kind of thought of a way to go about it, but I don't know if it is feasible in KSP, due to unity and the way loading/unloading is handled. My thought is that once two docking ports are connected, and the user decides to make them permanent, it could be flagged for a replacement part (possibly on next craft load, or even game load) with a single structural part instead of the paired docking ports. It may/may not reinforce the structure, but, at the very least, it would be a single part instead of two, and part reduction is always handy!

Woot. One of my favorite mods of all time

I was hearing an odd version of "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot" at first... about two or three lines. Hmmmm. Might have to give that a go... "Swing low, sweet orbiter, comi..." yep. To the drawing boards! Great artwork, by the way!

That's my thought. I mean, seriously. What challenge do you put forth to someone who has visited all the bodies in the solar system (at least once), has multiple bases, no more science to complete, and maybe even has completed a grand tour? The only answer that comes up in my mind is... see if they can do that in another star system

I have a very, very rough orbital autopilot done, but the circularization sucks a bunch. Last time it was 1.3Mm Ap, 77KM Pe. Now I'm working on a circularization script to run after the orbit is made, to get it at least somewhat closer. With the rotation frame, you mean as in turning the ship, IE, "turn left"? or "turn 10 degrees *direction*"? Also, is there the ability to write things to a text file somewhere? I would like to try to make a flight recorder of sorts, but not seeing any kind of file IO ability anywhere.

Ok, after playing with this some, I love it. I've done nothing today but start working out an auto-launcher When I meant printing out memory on the selected volume I meant on the volume in game Part of the script I was writing was a sort of POST, much like a home desktop goes through. Mostly, just to see what I could do with the language and interface, and a "memory test" was one of the components I was looking at. Mostly for in the future, as programs become more sizable, determining when I need, in script, to start unloading/moving files and such between banks. So far, realisitically, all I have accomplished is the flashing of lights, lowering of gears, and a straight vertical lift to escape velocity. But... that beats the first try, which was smashing into the ground. Hopefully with a lot of (bugging of better scripters!) I mean help, I will get better One question I have, as I can't seem to start a turn. Do I have to UNLOCK steering, in order to LOCK it to something else? Can't get the autopilot to do a gravity turn to save my Kerbal. EDIT: Ok, now I am confused. In launch 1, I did NOT unlock the steering, and it just flew straight up. In launch 2, I unlocked the refinement turn... one at 40KM altiitude, but left the initial turn, at 7KM altitude locked. In this launch, BOTH turns were made with no issue. Nothing else was changed within the code. I'm curious what I missed?