Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


206 Excellent

Profile Information

  • About me
    Senior Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Back many versions ago I decided to take a Kerbal very close to the sun, you know for science. Well this would have been all well and good except for the fact that when the Kerbal went out on EVA it did the mysterious slingshot off the command pod door, and "crashed" into the sun as a direct result. Normally I would have went back to a quick save for something like this, however I did I revert back 8 missions and causing me to burst out into laughter.
  2. While not the smallest you can make I feel this is a fairly clear and versatile craft (pre 1.0 I used this lander for a Duna mission). It can be modified to use either the pair of radial mounted engines or a single engine underneath, I prefer the radial engines in case one of the legs breaks during landing. I actually just took this picture after landing it as a test and the inner ring of tanks is still half full and the mid tank is full, again a modifiable design to either keep the tanks on to refill and land again or drop them giving you a single use lander. You could add some science to this if it were to be used in career mode, however I believe a science jr would be a bit much for it to handle (maybe not).
  3. I wonder if doing 10 man landings would count as a thing. Considering I am overly rusty at the moment this will be much harder than it should be.
  4. I finally got back into the swing of things after a very long and stressful break, now I just need to go to Eve and back in 1.0(whatever version it is). Now to sleep and dream big!
  5. Thanks I couldn't recall the name of it + rep to you sir/madam (since I was getting naughty points back when Val was brought in I better be overly PC about everything).
  6. Oops. I'm a bit late in replying but yeah, you can use this in your series no problem. LOL I am going to try this in 1.0 with some tweaks to the design, although some that I have been practicing with have been very bad floundering flops. I couldn't make the video sadly due to a major pc issue that caused me to reformat the whole thing, but when you have a new design I would love to give it a go again as this one did make it there and back in .90 (I think that was the one I tested it in).
  7. I am looking for a mod that will let me switch the fuel types in the tanks (LF,OX, or mono) without changing out the tanks, this is mostly for an older build that would other wise be a massive pain to tear apart and rebuild. If that is not possible to do is it possible to get the nerva to use fuel like it did in pre-1.0? I know I could drain out the OX out of the tank but to me it feels like the tank would only be half as full, and to me if I can pull it out I should be able to put more full into the same space as a result. The ship flies just fine as is but the fuel ratio is completely wrong since the update, and being the main drive unit makes this even more important to fix. Thanks for any help.
  8. I know I will be transferring my .90 save in order to have something to fall back on if the 1.0 is either unstable or just not fun, since some rockets tend to wobble still the new sheering effect might make it more annoying. Wheels are nice if you like planes, would love to see some rover love but doubtful that will happen. Kerbals are asexual.....and that is all I will say on that. Things that should be in this next version; CLOUDS to add life to the planets (Weather and such would be nice too but just some pillows in the sky is not too much to ask for), storage for rovers, fairing, useful nose cones with fuel, useful adapters that contain fuel, radial decouplers with built in sepratrons, some form of KAS would be nice to work in tandem with the resources, some form of KAC to slow warp down at nodes or events, storage containers to house science instruments (these could be setup on the ground to do readings), more/updated command pod/cans (the two man can especially), and docking ports that have their cross fuel setting set to disable by default . That is just the short list for me of what is missing that should be in the 1.0 release, however if SQUAD will continue to do development after 1.0 to get these in it would be nice.
  9. I know for me personally I have not built many planes because I do not want to, not because I "need" a part to do so. However with rockets we have parts that serve no function at all other than ascetics that need attention, as well as rover parts and ways to pack them on to a rocket are far behind satellites and cargo bays. Not to mention the look alone of the spaceplane crew cabins looks far nicer than the rocket end, granted the MK1(the non pointy one) and MK3 cockpits do still need interior views done yet. Also the plane adapter tanks have fuel in them where as the ones for rockets are still a static part that just adds weight without function, but most of the rocket adapters have this nagging issue. Since the aero model is getting an update these parts, might, make these parts more of a necessity, however they should have some substance that makes them more useful.
  10. There are lots of things that should be added to make rockets more enjoyable and streamlined, yet I have my doubts that those items will be implemented beyond mods. Nosecones that have fuel in them to make them a useful part wold be a nice idea, currently they are nothing more than a part to add to the part count. Containers to store things like; rovers, science experiments, spare parts, and just to make the rocket a bit cleaner. Better landing legs would help with heavy landers/ground bases, rather than making static legs to make up for it. More crew pod/can choices and/or revamp of the ones we currently have, the two man can is kind of ugly IMO. Just a few of the glaring ones, not listing fairing because it has been said to death.
  11. Fix for the poster; ambient light mod will boost the ambient light in the game and brighten up the picture. Fix for the complainer; don't look at the pictures....no one says you have to look at them right. This complaint sounds more like a complaint to have something to complain about, oh wait that is the nature of the forums I forgot .
  12. To me there are more important things that could be done than putting in female character, honestly I thought the Kerbals were genderless to be honest. We get female Kerbals before there are clouds in the sky.....that is still confusing.
  13. I am with 5thHorseman on this, spend the time where it is needed. While it would be nice there really wouldn't be much they could say until it was close to release, unless you want them to make tease posts so everyone and their sister-uncle can speculate.
  14. Criticism is one thing, but anger and vileness is something completely different (IE calling a company stupid). Also if you go somewhere where the food was god awful would you go back repeatedly to complain about it? I know I wouldn't. Yet with videogames it is seemingly different for some reason, almost like they like to complain to complain. I honestly do not see the appeal of first person shooter games (to me they are all rewashes of the same design) yet I do not buy them and go to their forums to complain about it. Even when I played MMO's I would get annoyed with things I felt were wrong with it, however I knew where they were going was not something I would not enjoy so I left it to its own devices.
  • Create New...