Search the Community

I remember reading that an uncontrolled ballistic trajectory would make the first stage impact between 200 and 300 km downrange. I assume that the first flights of a modified F9 expendable first stage will be about trying to restart the central Merlin engine and attempting a soft splashdown in that area. Once they get that figured out, they will start doing tests involving navigation and pinpoint splashdown before going for a full RTLS landing.

Both Orion and Novapunch will lift a 200 ton payload into orbit, no problem. You'll probably need to use a bunch of Quantum struts to keep things from collapsing, though.

Use a simple design and learn how to fly them. Pictured is one of my probe crafts landed on Eve. It is fully capable of landing on Mun, Minmus, or many of the other Kerbal moons on thrusters alone. (Remove the paracutes for those missions. Here is the rocket design that will take you to Mun or Minmus with fuel to spare. Use the probe design in place of the Kerbal command module. The design; Command Module 1. Command Pod MK-1 2. Parachute MK-16 3. Stack coupler TA-18A 4. FL-R25 thruster fuel tank 5. Eight OX-Stat solar panels 6. Set of four quad thrusters mounted on the upper part of the thruster fuel tank. Second Stage 1. Stack coupler TA-18A 2. T-400 Fuel Tank 3. T-200 Fuel Tank 4. LV-909 engine. First Stage; 1. Stack coupler TA-18A 2. Two stacked T-800 fuel tanks 3. LV-T45 engine Booster 1. Four TT-38K radical couplers mounted on the upper T-800 fuel tank 2. Four Rocomax BACC Solid Fuel Boosters 3. A set of four struts to connect each booster together near their base, for stability. 4. Four launch stabilizers On the command module, replace the Kerbal capsule with a Stayputnik, add an SAS controller in place of the stack coupler, add batteries, communication antennas, landing legs optional, and instruments. keep the RCS package and solar cells. The complete package is about 1.9 tons with dual parachutes. The rocket design without the boosters will reach Kerbal orbit easily. Edit; BTY, if you are careful, landing legs are optional. Edit, without the boosters, this rocket will reach Kerbal orbit in any direction.

Bug?: I was trying to dock Buran to the ISS last night and having a devil of a time with the DPAI, which hasn't happened before. The tangential velocity indicator just didn't seem to be working correctly; I'd translate one way and the TVI would go the other way, or it would push rather than pull the CDI, or it would go off the screen to the left, then return from the left, but with opposite y-axis velocity. I'll try to take a look later and see if I can provide more specifics. Question: Regarding the CDI turning red: does this happen when I'm "above" the plane of the target docking port? Suggestions for next revision: - Have the DPAI automatically appear when crossing the 200 meter threshhold rather than having to re-select the target docking port. Or at least give the user the option to enable this behaviour. - Have the range be user configurable. - And it would be nice to be able to switch the CVEL and DST readouts from what they show now to the component of distance and closing velocity that is normal to the target docking port's plane, i.e. the z-axis component. The TVI and CDI give this information for the other two directions. Thanks: Just wanted to say thanks again. If I were recommending mods to a new player, this one be one of the top 5 I'd recommend.

Maybe he is accelerating too much ? I'm used to keep a reasonable TWR ratio (Thrust to Weight), but how much fuel could one be loosing if that person was burning red from 15 to 30 km ? This is the only reason I see for loosing more fuel during a gravity turn than with a straight-up launch. Beerkeg, don't forget that even if you don't reach the Apoapsis as fast as before doing a gravity turn, you'll still use less fuel to circularize your orbit. Typically you need around 4600m/s of Dv minimum to reach orbit. Meaning that in Mechjeb every stages used to put the ship into orbit, need a summed-up Dv above 4400m/s. After that you need 900 to reach the Mun, 200 to circularize, 8-600 to land.

Sorry guys. I think I'm in over my head. XD SOOO isp is more like mpg? And if this is true.... THEN if I have 4 rockets with a isp of 800 I am still using 4 times the fuel... so I would really have a TRUE total isp for the entire ship, of 200. Kinda like you can have 2 engines that get 30mpg but if you stick both engines in the same car your car will really be getting 15 mpg. Am I way off base?

Well, the burn went well and it seems the 8 Kerbals on the Gamma ship will arrive on day 381, rather than 511 as in the Flight Plan. I promise, this wasn't Jeb's doing! He wasn't anywhere near the controls at the time, honest! This is teaching me that the Hoffmann transfers aren't as picky as I thought. I needed nearly 200 extra dV compared to the Beta flight, but it's still doable. The Beta mission is currently on schedule for arrival at Duna on day 347, dead on schedule (Darn! Thought I'd gain a couple of days like for the scout )

CHAPTER 21 AEROBRAKING: DUNA *** JEB: Hi Ned. NED: Jeb. JEB: I, uhm, I just wanted to NED: I'm fine, thanks. JEB: Okay, okay. NED: … JEB: Ekhm. Are you sure that y… NED: No. For Kod's sake, of course I'm not. JEB: I'm sorry. NED: He's dead. He's just… gone. JEB: I'm sorry, Ned. NED: They said it's much safer, much more advanced. “Proteusâ€Â, that is. They lied. JEB: It was an accident, Ned. NED: Like Bob, huh? JEB: … NED: You know, for a moment I thought that this is finally over. Pointless wandering in deep space. It's more than 12 months since we left Eve, almost seven since Dres. I thought that when we finally see Duna – I don't know, that it'll somehow help us put ourselves together, you know? JEB: I know. The Red Planet. NED: Yeah. Second manned mission to the most desired target in the whole solar system. And now this happened. JEB: We can't give up. NED: Aren't you the one with depression here? Poor Orsey. And for what? Do you know that he didn't let me finish the repair? JEB: I know. NED: He convinced Bill to aerobrake and repair the cooling system afterwards. Frakin asshole. JEB: Rozer's right. NED: What? What did you say? JEB: He's right. He's a cold bastard, yes, but he's right – we can't risk missing the injection burn because of the engines malfunction. Plus, we'll save more than a 1000 m/s. NED: I'll be honest, Jeb, I didn't expect that. Since when you are so aloof in your judgment? JEB: Since Bob. NED: … JEB: … NED: Frak this ****. Whatever happens, we'll get through this together, right pal? JEB: To the end, Ned. NED: Damn right. You want to talk with Sid? JEB: About Duna? NED: About mission, about KSC. About us. JEB: Sure thing. NED: Let's go then. *** PATLIE: Visual inspection concluded, no damage to the hull. Duna exploration team is ready to go. BILL: Good. Remember to wait for further orders until we complete the aerobraking. Kodspeed. BILL: Your turn, Danrey. DANREY: Copy that. DANREY: LAMGML docked. BILL: Good work. Now help the rest secure living modules, we don't have that much time before the aerobraking. DANREY: Roger. *** BILL: How long, BERTY? BERTY v.2.0.8: Aerobraking will commence in 39 minutes. ROZER: Don't be so nervous, commander. Everything will go smoothly, BERTY took care of that. Am I right? BERTY v.2.0.8: Yes, captain Rozer. Although the window suitable for aerobraking which will result in orbit insertion is very small and is wide only for 784 meters, there is 99,99% probability of successful aerocapture. ROZER: Exactly. We will pass precisely at 10,820 above the surface which will give us periapsis at 446 kilometers after the operation. BILL: I know, it's… it wasn't scheduled originally. And the latest events… ROZER: Aerobraking was optional, commander, it wasn't forbidden. It's necessary evil – we can't risk engine failure in the critical moment. BILL: :sigh: Right. BERTY? BERTY v.2.0.8: Yes, commander? BILL: You said 99,99%. What is this 0,1 percent? BERTY v.2.0.8: Unpredictable variables. Space debris from previous missions. Micrometeorites. Microscopic black hole. Fire on board resulting in hull breach. Unstable crew member sabotaging critical systems while in atmosphere. Sudden change in external pressure. Fusion core malfunction. Various… BILL: Alright, alright, that's enough BERTY. Let's just check everything once again, shall we? *** JOHNDON: H-hello, Mr. Jebediah! JEB: Hi Johndon. Professor Mallock. MALLOCK: Captain! I know that you are extremely busy considering incoming operation but may I ask you something? JEB: No problem, I'm not needed in the command module anyway. JOHNDON: Oh? I was s-sure you'll be helping commander during the a-aerobraking, sir. JEB: Orders from Kerbin. “Unacceptable disobedienceâ€Â. So what is it, professor? MALLOCK: Well, err, I'm sorry, captain. I would for sure feel safer if you were there. JEB: Your question? MALLOCK: Oh, yes. Ahem. Do you by any chance happen to know what exactly are we going to do in the following days? I know that there is scheduled robotic exploration, as well as landing on Duna and this fascinating moon, but what then? Will we abort the mission and come back to home? It will be such a pity. JEB: I'm sorry, professor, I'm in the dark as well. We'll just have to be patient, I guess. BERTY v.2.0.8: Attention. Aerobraking will commence in 15 minutes. Please proceed to the acceleration couches immediately. JOHNDON: We b-better go, professor. Are you coming with us, captain? JEB: Not really. I want to take a closer look at Duna from the secondary command module. MALLOCK: Ah, yes, of course. It'll surely be magnificent view. But is it safe? Acceleration will be equal to more than 1g, after experiencing microgravity for so long it can be problematic. JEB: Is aerobraking safe? MALLOCK: Err… JEB: Relax, professor, I was joking. I'm used to high accelerations. You better go now. MALLOCK: Ahem. Yes, yes. Goodbye. JOHNDON: Take care, c-captain. *** BILL: Incredible, truly incredible. And to think that it has been 12 years since “Jingwei†landed here. BERTY v.2.0.8: Aerobraking will commence in 30 seconds. ROZER: All systems nominal. SAS operational… should we turn on the RCS too, commander? BILL: Not now, we don't have much monopropellant. Alright BERTY – the ship is yours. BERTY v.2.0.8: Affirmative. Aerobraking will commence in 5 seconds. BILL: Aren't we in atmosphere yet? BERTY v.2.0.8: Affirmative. â€ÂProteus†has entered the atmosphere. ROZER: It's too sparse to affect the ship, that's why we're going so close to the surface. BERTY v.2.0.8: Increasing friction and pressure. BILL: 1g. Long time no see. BERTY v.2.0.8: Heatshield's temperature 500 degrees. Warning. Vibrations in hull detected. Five seconds to periapsis. BILL: Bumpy ride. ROZER: Commander, I think… BILL: What was that?! BERTY?! BERTY v.2.0.8: Master alarm. Assuming direct control. Initiating RCS. BILL: BERTY, report! BERTY v.2.0.8: Ship covered by heatshield in 79%. Heatshield's temperature 700 degrees. ROZER: BERTY, how long… BILL: Holy frak! Frak, frak, frak! ROZER: …would it take to leave the atmosphere? BILL: Can we loose control of the ship?! BERTY?! BERTY v.2.0.8: 1 minute and 45 seconds. Yes commander, there is a chance of catastrophic unscheduled rapid disassembly estimated to 8,54% and falling. BILL: What can we do?! ROZER: Calm down, commander, BERTY is in control. BERTY v.2.0.8: Yes. My reactions are infinitely quicker and more precise than these of any pilot. Please try to relax. Leaving the atmosphere in 60 seconds. BILL: Heatshield? Structural integrity?! BERTY v.2.0.8: Heatshield's temperature 200 degrees. Structural integrity unknown, damage assessment in progress. BILL: Frak this… ROZER: Shall we proceed with the operation? We still have to match the orbital planes with the Payload. BILL: Yes. The sooner we start damage assessment and repairs the better. I assume the engines are operational? BERTY v.2.0.8: Affirmative. “Proteus†has left the atmosphere. Elliptic orbit achieved. Shall I switch to manual control, commander? BILL: No, BERTY. Execute scheduled maneuvers. I need a brake, I'm sorry, Rozer, stay here. ROZER: Err. Yes… sir. [ *** BILL: Alright. Report, captain. ROZER: Sir. We've achieved stable equatorial orbit above Duna in the same orbital plane as the Payload. LAMGML “Beta†is waiting for orders. All we have to do is to circularize. BILL: Good, good. And what about the damage? BERTY v.2.0.8: Collecting data in progress, commander. Visual inspection is advised. No damage to the critical systems detected so far. BILL: :sigh: Aerobraking is safer than orbit injection burn, right Rozer? ROZER: Sir, with all due respect, it is. We've achieved our goal and we're ready to proceed according to the mission plan and by using aerocapture instead of the engines we minimalized the risk. It was the right thing to do. We're in orbit and the planet is waiting. BILL: :sigh: Yes, Duna. Alright, it did appear to be a better alternative, I'll give you that. ROZER: I think we can agree that it could've been much worse, commander. Aerobraking was a right decision to make. And despite this minor accident, everything went almost perfectly. *** MISSION STATUS ***

Welcome Jack! Nothing wrong with sucking at this game I know I still do after some ~200 hours of play.

This new update has prompted a nation to attack me and he has taken 200 km² off of me. I request any form of assistance that one can provide at the current time. Any money or oil given to me I shall repay as soon as possible. Thank you in advance. Edit: The war has stopped only after a loss of 800 km², one third of my GDP and 30K of my men.

Cheers, Hal. I'm currently looking at this http://www.celestron.com/astronomy/celestron-astromaster-130eq.html telescope which I've seen for approximately $200 which is within my price range, plus a couple of filters/ lenses/ etc. Portability's fairly impotant to me, as I live in a high-rise in the centre of a fairly large city and my car is parked a distance away, so whenever I want to do anything apart from viewing the Moon plus the half a dozen other bright objects visible through the light pollution, I'll have to lug the equipment across town and drive out to the hills. I'll have to check out Nightwatch.

Are we playing the same game? or am I just that bad at the game? I can get any probe or small 1-man lander anywhere. Getting one of those orange tanks (full of fuel) is not possible, I've never ever been able to do it. Re-fueling ships mostly have around 200 units of fuel in em. When I watch someones KSP video, it feels like they have alot more fuel in their tanks. I see people make giant replica ships and getting them to orbit and it wouldn't even take off for me. That launcher does not get me above 60k, trying different gravity turns, letting MechJeb try again (useless as always), no luck. I think my best option would be to just not try doing stuff I want to (Mun Base) and just do what I can do (Space Trash)....

I had built what I considered to be a good "mothership" or "core" for sending probes, landers and other things off to the planets. It used a large spherical tank (mod), four nerva engines and various docking, power and science devices such as an ISA mapsat dish. Full, the ship weighs about 230 tons. Standard practice was to launch a fueless core (much much lighter) into orbit and then run fuel up to it. The large spherical tank holds about 7 orange tanks worth of fuel and the refueling ship I was using could reliably supply about two orange tanks worth of fuel each flight. I decided I wanted the turn-around to be faster between the launch of a core and the start of a mission to the planets! I started simply by seeing what would get the core off the launchpad "with some attitude" Eight orange tanks with mainsails. Then I did the same for the "Tanks, core and mainsails" package, working my way down, stage after stage. Lots of struts, lots of moving of various engines and lots of messing with staging as you might imagine! And oooh... the spectacular failures.... Finally... success! A ship which would reliably put over 200 tons into a 100km circular orbit, fueled and ready for whatever I wanted to dock on top of it. I've flown the core from Moho to Eeloo. Here is a picture of the final launch "package" in the VAB. It seems pretty stable on the way up, but I would be a bit scared to fly it without mechjeb. So the only mods used were sphereical tanks and mechjeb on this thing.

I been able to set up nuclear engines to operate on different fuels in VAB, but once set they can't switch in flight. IRL yes a nuclear thermal rocket engine can be designed to operate on a variety of fuels, but probably could not switch post manufacturing. For example H2O and H2 have very different properties such that being able to switch in flight would present all sorts of problems for pumping, the fuel element coatings, etc, etc. CH4 and CO2 present problems of carbon soot build up and then there is the problem of free oxygen and highly corrosive environment that fuels like CO2 and H2O could present, H2 present problems of metal brittleness and reducing environment. Fuel rods would need to be coated with or made of reduced compounds (metals) for H2, NH3 and CH4 but would need to be made of or ceramic oxides for CO2 and H2O. A pebble/dust bed centrifuged reactors could get over some of these problems by removing structural strength of fuel elements as a concern: as the fuel is then held in place by centrifugation rather then mechanical strength making opening up a larger variety of fuel element types and coatings that don't need to be strong and could operate with a wide variety of fuels. I would also like to go back to the point of hydrogen richness of LO2/LH2 engines. The modern Centaur RL10 engine operates on 20.3 kg LO2 and 3.5 kg LH2 per second (according to wiki). That comes to a stoichiometric ratio of 2.72 mol of H2 per mol of O2, ideally the ratio would be 2 for 100% combustion, so the left over H2 makes the combustions H2 rich, in total assuming 100% combustion only 4% of the exhaust by mass is the rich H2, with a outlet temp estimated at 3000 K that 4% has an ISP of 946, the rest has an ISP of 439: total 459. That is pretty close to RL10 measured vacuum ISP of 464. In short the realistic amount of ISP improvement from running hydrogen rich verse pure water output is ~20 s. So a rule of thumb we could go by is that a nuclear rocket operating at the same exhaust temp as LO2/LH2 (~3000 K) rocket should be 20 ISP seconds less then the LO2/LH2 rocket. We would need to bring up the temp by 300 K to make up the difference. 3500-3800 K is probably be best we could expect from even a drum reactor without going with a liquid core drum reactor: that would come to max theoretical ISP of 487 and 1050 for Water and LH2. A liquid core (drum) reactor is claimed to be able to get 1350-1500 ISP with hydrogen which would be a outlet temp of ~7500 K which I don't believe because even tungsten boils at 5800 K. A Gas Core though operating at 25,000 K with an ISP by my rough calculation (assuming nearly complete dissociation into protons and oxygen) of ~3900 for LH2 and ~1660 for H2O. I would like to see these options beyond just a NERVA facsimile in KSP (centrifugal) particle core reactor with ans ISP of 1050 using LH2 and a thrust to weight ratio twice that of the ingame NERVA (centrifugal) liquid core reactor with an ISP of 1450 using LH2 and a thrust to weight ratio similar to the ingame NERVA Gas Core reactor with an ISP of 3800 using LH2 and a thrust to weight ratio of say 1/4 that of NERVA and rapid use of nuclear fuel as well as some kind of means to prevent us on or near Kerbin because of all the nuclear waste it would spit out. I guess all of these could be on a tech tree from NERVA solid core reactor and up. Of course my favourite nuclear engine is nuclear salt-water rocket a continuous nuclear explosion engine that make Orion look stupid! Using dissolve liquidized nuclear fuel in water and making it go super-critical in a rocket chamber, adding alot more water to cool the chamber and as propellent mass average exhaust temps of ~200,000 K an ISP of over 6000 is possible (and that is using water!) Such and engine would also have incredible thrust. Of course ingame such an engine would need to be incredible expensive, big and prohibited from operating anywhere near kerbin or any other planet that could be habited without a space suit (and radiation shielded suits) because this engine spews radioactive waste.

I think your last paragraph hits on it perfectly. Water as a propellant is really no more than a curiousity in KSP unless it actually becomes part of the game to the point that you can mine water (or ice) and actually use it as a resource for your ships. Also necessary things for it to become meaningful is that we need to have costs and budgets implemented. Then, when you're low on funds, your deep space mission is struggling and then it starts to get meaningful. But one thing that has to happen (game standpoint) is that we need to be able to reconfigure engines outside of the VAB. The NERVA has the advantage that you can realistically pump a wide variety of things in there that you couldn't do with a chemically fueled rocket. (at least I don't *THINK* you can just chuck water in there... that's not going to work) I've got a config that I'm playing with that I can share where I've already implemented quite a few propellants. Water's in there but the rocket isn't set up to allow it to be configured yet. (not hard to do, just haven't gotten to it). In fact I pasted it in a message a few pages back but that one is a bit broken. I saw the neofuel site, that's one of the sources I was investigating; that's where I saw the lower values in the 200 range for isp but I thought it was for a hotter reactor. I was reading up on it again and they're assuming a reactor of only 800K. I'm not sure why unless there's a performance hit for heating it up too much, which you alluded to above. Which runs counter to everything else I've read on the subject, which says you want to heat it up (your nuclear propellants) to the point that it disassociates into its lowest molecular weight gasses. (so, not even steam at that point).

Using current technology we can't go that fast at all, voyager is acctually travelling slower than earth orbits the sun (hence it acctually gets closer to use for a few months of the year). NASA's Solar Probe+ will exceed 200 km/s, but that's using the Helios style sundiving strategy (only much much closer)

I am not quite sure if I understand deorbit mechanics or aerodynamic impact correctly... but as I see it there is a kerbal answer and a earth answer In Kerbal Space, I often use the kill all orbit speed and then burn my way into atmosphere almost straight down. Doing this at Kerbal I still end up hitting the 1/2 atmo barrier at over 500 m/s, sometimes without drogue chutes the regular chute die or rip off if I am going too fast. This means I still need a heat shield for re-entry at Kerbal, but I can usually get down to around 200 m/s at Duna - no heat effects but chutes fairlure is still a concern In Earth space it translates to almost 4500 mph hitting the 1/2 atmo point... I am pretty sure hitting that air density face first would crush you craft like a beer can hence the angled approach. Stone dropping on Mars would have similar effects. thundering down through the atmo so fast would damage or destroy any craft we've sent, and the chutes would prolly fail once deployed. I have not the math to figure out what vertical acceleration would act on the craft if you burned off all the lateral movement and hung the ship in space then let it drop. I do know that acceleration toward the ground would be a constant until atmo started to act as a break and even then acceleration would still be positive until terminal velocity was achieved. Also the fuel needed to stop even a small craft .... say a 4.5 tonne lander would be big, and leave little for the decel towards the surface. Maybe with very high altitude drogue's.... 1/4 km diameter canopies that release before the thicker atmo hits... might make it work tho. Alacrity

Click the little gear in the upper right and choose "View the album on imgur" If I'm going 200 m/s, it takes 100 seconds to go 20km, that's usually plenty of time to turn around and slow down. And the 100x rule basically keeps the rendezvous 100 seconds away for the whole close. As I approach, I slow down to keep the target about 100 seconds away. My rendezvous usually take 5-10 minutes total. It's certainly possible to do it more slowly. The 100x rule gives me a not-too-fast-to-be-uncontrollable but not-too-slow-to-be-boring sweet spot. (Lately, I've actually been doing them 2-3 times faster -- keeping the high velocity until I'm under 5 km or so.) If you look at the "Getting quite close" image, you can see "pushing" pretty well. I've aligned the ship's heading so that the retrograde marker is between the heading and the anti-target marker; the three form a line with the retrograde marker in the middle. When I engage my engines, the retrograde marker will get "pushed" away from my heading, toward the anti-target marker. (This happens because of simple vector addition.) When the retrograde marker is directly on the anti-target marker then my prograde marker will also be directly on the pro-target maker and my vessel will be travelling directly toward the target. The "Approaching the target" image shows "pulling", but it's harder to see because the prograde marker is close to the pro-target marker. For "pulling" prograde, you still want to set up the three markers (heading, prograde, pro-target) in a line, but this time you want the pro-target marker in the middle. When you fire the engines, the prograde marker will get "pulled" toward your heading and hopefully onto (or nearer) the pro-target marker. Nicely done!

Actually the ISP I listed was assuming a reactor temperature of 3200k (solid core, NERVA style). If you have some data that says you can get a higher ISP with water than 400 I'm interested in seeing it but compared to other articles I've found it's a pretty generous rating. Mostly everything I've seen on the subject of using water as a propellant in a nuclear rocket cited an ISP of no higher than 200. It's just not a very efficient propellant at all. It's something you'd use in a pinch, say if you were landed on Mars and the mission plan required you to harvest your own fuels from the environment. Something you'd use because you COULD Not because it were desirable. Honestly I'm not sure how to go about calculating it from scratch myself but I trust the 412 number because I trust the source. Project Rho. There's a wealth of rocketry related information there and I find it to be generally reliable. Sometimes annoyingly so

200, wow that is indeed low poly. I can't fathom which computer couldn't handle the 2600 poly version though. A lot of stock parts have more I believe. Some of my models easily break 6k on the complex large engines. You truly are a master of optimization. And your textures are gorgeous. Keep up the amazing work.

I have the RS-25 down to 2600 poly's and the low poly version I have at about 200 I believe maybe less. here is the 2600 version model

Shalidor: the unit for parts at the pad is 5l (200 per m3, 400/t of craft (excluding any stored resources such as fuel)). The problem is in the new pad's storage capacity. I'll be working on a new update with all my tweaks included. I hope to get it out in the next day or so (it seems skykooler might be away for a week or so).

How many parts? I get detectable lag before I get to 200 parts. The choke point is the CPU - it doesn't matter what RAM or graphics card you have, the lag is mostly the result of the single threaded physics calculations.

Hi, i love this plugin because i think a life support is currently big lack of KSP. I just started to make more fancy parts for storing, creating etc..... I have some questions: 1) can i have permission to continue? (question for original autor) 2) is there a interes for my parts? 3) can author help me with creating of parts, i am absolute newbie with creating a parts (just good blender artist). This is a photosynthesis module. * contains 8 tubes with special alga "Algae Kerbae" wich makes O2 from CO2 and Light * can create up to 200 units of Oxygen_TAC per day when fully sun illuminated (for 8 kerbalans) * contains also artificial lighting wich helps witch produce enough light for 50% of performance when module is in dark but consume lot of energy (maybe about 300 units/min) or add 25% of performance. this is just desired features for this module, nothing works now, i just need some help Well i want to make some other modules like half size of photosynthesis module, water cleaning module in vary sizes (consume energy and waste water => produce water), orbital garden module (consumes lot of energy and waste => produces food). Well.... maybe there is more posibilities to enchance TAC life support.... for example, harvesting sources on planets (water one leythe), then from water can be produced oxygen and monopropelant (in real on ISS is produced oxygen from water and waste product is H2 wich can be used as propelant). Chears, Jan (sorry about my horrible english)

Steam says 110, but I've played since Januaray, so probably 200 hours, which really isn't a lot .