Bobe

I don't know if it's been discussed in this thread or elsewhere, but perhaps missions could result in courage and stupidity scores. A successful mission will increase courage and decrease stupidity of each Kerbal, and an unsuccessful mission the opposite. I think it'd be nice to be able to send Kerbals to be trained, which would make them unavailable for a predetermined amount of time and would slowly improve their "stats". You would only be able to train up to three or so Kerbals at a time and there would be different types of training with varying times and stat yields. I'm not sure exactly what, if anything, Squad intends to do with courage and stupidity as I believe they've stated they won't include random faults, but perhaps they could impact the Kerbals directly. For example, Kerbals with low courage could have a proportionate chance to pass out or have a nervous breakdown during critical events like launch, EVA and re-entry, which would put them out of action and would be unable to perform EVAs or control a ship. Likewise, Kerbals with high stupidity could have a chance to have derp moments where their controls are briefly inverted. This should probably only apply to RCS and EVA systems and would provide a "mostly" fun challenge. These possibilities would make selecting the right Kerbal(s) for the mission somewhat important.

Does it make more sense to launch into a Kerbin orbit with an inclination that matches the plane of the planet you intend to transfer to, or to enter an equatorial orbit and change inclication en route at the ascending/descending node? I imagine the former requires far less ÃŽâ€v, but will only work if you launch during the transfer window, rather than launching and then waiting for the window.

Is there a way to transfer from multiple parts at once? I know you said you don't want to replicate all the functionality of TAC Fuel Balancer, but would this be going too far in that respect? Even though Ship Manifest is meant to be a light weight mod, I feel this is somewhat crucial. Perhaps you could add checkboxes to the parts list so that you could select more than one origin and destination part. Something tells me there is a limitation in the game regarding transferring resources from multiple parts at once, so I would at least like some confirmation on that. Possibly another game limitation, but is it possible to add the ability to click on the part itself while the transfer resource window is open to set origin and destination parts, perhaps even via a right click menu? One more thing, is it possible to disable view zooming while scrolling within the Ship Manifest windows?

It's an interesting thought, but personally I feel this seems more like competitive multiplayer rather than co-operative, with the "victor" forcing the other players to watch. With that said, it could still be a fun way to experience the game with other players, especially if some are more inexperienced. However, I don't think it should be a replacement for a more traditional system where everyone builds and launches their own rocket independently, merely an option if the players choose to play that way.

Do the drills only work if there is enough power throughput, regardless of how much stored power is available? I revised my mining lander by removing the four Gigantors which generated enough power for eight small drill units and a heavy converter. In their place I put eight SP-W panels for some boost power with the intention of using four reactor units to provide most of the power during drilling and processing. The lander also has four Z-4K batteries providing 16,000 e. Obviously the drills have to start extracting kethane before it can be used in the reactors, but they won't dig anything up using the stored power and the limited power from the solar panels. I thought I may have just gotten unlucky and landed in a glitchy spot, even though it was right in the middle of a high yield zone, and tried a few other spots to no avail. EDIT: Nevermind, I just uninstalled and reinstalled 0.8.4 (for some reason I only had 0.8.3) and it's working fine.

Well in the simplest form I would just like to be able to toggle fullscreen, just as Hullcamera uses the + and - keys to cycle between cameras. I don't intend to use it on a second monitor, just to change the main view. Of course the idea isn't to remove the current functionality, so perhaps there could just be a "fullscreen" button in the normal inset window that when clicked obviously changes the main game view to the camera's perspective and displays a different UI window (probably just the normal window but without the camera view).

The greatest possible distance between Jool and Kerbin is the result of combining each planet's greatest distance from Kerbol. Since Kerbin's orbit is perfectly circular, we can assume a point where Jool is at its apoapsis and Kerbin is on the opposite side of Kerbol. At this point, the distance between Jool and Kerbin is Jool's apoapsis plus Kerbin's apoapsis.

I was mistaken, you don't use the semi-major axis, you indeed just add Jool's apoapsis to Kerbin's apoapsis, which comes out to be 85,812,078 km.

My first kethane lander was a self-sufficient mining, processing and refuelling station, although it weighed in at roughly 40 t. It worked perfectly for non-atmosphere worlds, able to return half of its original yield to Mun orbit having used the other half to produce more fuel to burn. Naturally it was more efficient on worlds with lower gravity. I then experimented with KAS and separate smaller modules to create an actual mining operation, but after numerous frustrating glitches resulting in pipes and landers being sent hurtling into space, I gave up and returned to my trusty heavy lander. It just seems far more convenient and economical to have one mobile drilling station than having multiple landers. I eventually built an actual refuelling station that is sent to orbit a single world. It handles storage and processing, and provides docking capabilities for multiple ships. The original lander is then used as a ferry between the surface and the station.

You can determine the largest distance between any two bodies orbiting a common body by combining their semi-major axes. The semi-major axis is the greatest radius in a body's orbit. However, it's a bit more complicated to determine when the two bodies will come into alignment to achieve that distance.

Two ships will only ever be attached by one pair of docking ports. My assumption is that the two large ports on the side were never docked, they just happened to be pushing against each other. After undocking and pushing away, it's possible that the parts were actually inside each other slightly, causing them to pull apart. I don't know what you're planning with that thing, but you may want to rethink your design on a fundamental level. That upper section weighs about as much as one of my large rockets prior to launch.

What would it take to turn the Target Cam into a standalone mod that allows you to view in fullscreen (like Hullcamera VDS) with a separate GUI for the options and info? Could Lazor somehow be integrated with Hullcamera to combine Lazor's tracking system with Hullcamera's part models and fullscreen views?

I actually really like that idea. It would be so much more interesting to gather specific data (you wouldn't just put a biome scanner on the probe) and then analyse different combinations of data to reveal anomalies.

I would also love to have mapping functionality implemented in this way. In the orbit view there would be a small UI switch to cycle between the map overlays: raw (optical data), topographical and biomes, maybe even infrared/thermal.

I've found that after undocking a ship, MechJeb sometimes freaks out and decides to control it from everywhere, resulting in the ship trying to move but remaining stationary. Once I manually choose where to control from it "unlocks" and moves properly.

I know, but in the end I just wanted to get the point across that they break easily.

That would be nice, but I think it would be best if it was a still image. Depending on your machine, the load time from the VAB to the launchpad can be only a few seconds, so a whole animation, even if were just a pre-rendered video, would be wasteful.

Well that's embarrassing. I was clicking the lights button at the top of the screen thinking it did the same as L (for some reason I don't use L for toggling lights).

Are there any plans to actually implement lights in Kerbals' helmets to match the current texture?

I'm talking about unmanned rovers. Even if it were a manned rover and Kerbals could repair panels, what would be the point if it broke every time you accelerated?

Obviously solar panels are not meant particularly durable, but I feel like they might be a bit too weak when exposed to a small amount of drag within an atmosphere. I'm referring to their use on rovers, not ships. Assuming an angle of attack of 90°, an SP-W solar panel breaks apart at roughly 8 m/s on Kerbin, and almost instantly on Eve, maybe about 2 m/s. The atmospheres of Duna and Laythe seems to be low enough that the panels will not break given the top speed of a conventional rover. Is this realistic (by KSP standards that is)? Does it just mean that extendable solar panels shouldn't be used on rovers on Kerbin or Eve? The reason I used SP-Ws in the first place was because I couldn't find enough space to attach enough OX-STAT panels. I was originally going for a Curiosity design with twin RTGs on the back, but they shifted the centre of mass too much.

I don't think that's bound to happen. That's just the consequence of using a small docking port to join two large ships. However, if both ships have SAS modules, try disabling torque on all but one. Having multiple reaction wheels active, especially on opposite sides of docking ports will result in severe wobbling as they act against each other.

It's not good practice to save payloads as subassemblies, since they only have one attachment point which is the root node of the craft. Instead, save the rover as a craft and save things like rockets as subassemblies. Then, in the most basic configuration, you can put a decoupler on the top or bottom of the rover and attach the rocket to whichever side you like.

The second time I launched, without making any changes, it loaded fine.

That's not really a reason to restrict functionality for everyone. The numpad with Num Lock off rotates the camera, but I usually have it on, so it should be a perfectly viable set of keys in that state.