Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'suggestion'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 117 results

  1. With several colonies throughout the systems, some degree of traffic is... expected? Desired? Required? Sure, KSP doesn't simulate all of Kerbin's cities, populations and industry, but those aren't space assets. KSP 2 is going for space colonies and industry, and if you have those, you've gotta have space traffic. I don't see how it could be fun for the player to run every material and passenger demand in two or more systems, between potentially a dozen colonies. To have no traffic at all seems... sad. The reasonable solution, then, is somewhat obvious, and appears surprisingly simple. The player could design and launch ships with either cargo, material or passenger capacity and enough DV to make the journey between the two or more desired location. If A and B have refueling facilities, then the ship only has to have the DV to get from A to B at worst system disposition, and vice versa. The ship would be deposited into storage at either A or B, and launched to make the journey by the colony AI. It would automatically cross the distance, refuel, deposit/pick up goods and passengers, and travel back. What this gives the game is 3 things. First, it gives a sense of life in the system, like you are not the only thing moving out there. Second, it lets you design various ships for the mission, and demonstrates how real life interplanetary traffic would look and function. Third, it gives some sense and reason to colony growth. In any reasonable scenario, early colonies would need shipments from more developed locations (unless the colonization effort is truly huge). The player could do that themselves, but we have Elite Dangerous and Eve Online for when we want to play space truck driver. The big issues I can see: - Not easy to make: You'd have to make pilot AI that can set up paths between A and B without being insane. - Atmospheric entry would have to be handled with two ships and an orbital station. The space freighter would deliver to the station, then the station would use shuttles and lifters to move the cargo to and from the surface colony. Lots of mechanics there. - Resource demanding. If done wrong, a dozen ships moving across the system could be hard on the simulation.
  2. As a speedrunner, I find it slow and cumbersome to click around so much. Instead, I'd like to select an option in a pop-up window using a keystroke. A simple example is the messages at the start of a fresh career mode telling you about each building the first time you use it. I would like the "Enter" key to select the "Okay" option and close the pop-up. This could be extended to the window that opens after collecting science. "Enter" could select "Keep Experiment", "Delete" could select "Reset Experiment", and something else could be "Transmit Experiment". This is nitpicky, but I think it would be worth adding. An alternative could be using the arrow keys and Enter to navigate the options. This might help with long menus like when right-clicking a command pod. It might be a problem that multiple windows can currently be active at once. I feel this change would be minor, but I think players notice that this is not a feature.
  3. would it be possible to build a mod that allows you to maneuver around your space craft and press the switches as you wish?
  4. I created a feedback report explaining the situation in detail. https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/24853
  5. .jfif is the same as .jpg (.jpeg) and should be supported.
  6. I hope I won't be accidentally double posting this, but I do not remember sharing my idea for a more involved Career/Science System I made half a year ago. The following could potentially be handled as a mod, but I am hoping with some feedback and refinement, it could be worthy of a future update since Career Mode and Science desperately need changes. The following Science Manifesto tackles that, along with changes to the Admin Building and Tech Tree. Copied from a PDF I wrote: THE SCIENCE MANIFESTO: CAREER OVERHAUL SCIENCE TYPES Instead of a generic “Science”, it would be split into 3 science types or “currencies”: Biology, Chemistry, and Material. Different science experiments can provide a varying degree of each. Generic instruments could provide all three, while more specialized would only provide one or two. The purpose of the different science currencies would still be used to unlock tech nodes, which now cost different amounts of each. It could also be used for contracts or for events (more on those later) Biology, Chemistry, and Material Science CHANGES TO EXPERIMENT RESULTS Experiment results are no longer abstracted. You no longer receive a ScienceDef result immediately after running an experiment. Instead, you receive one of two new result types: Data or Sample Data: Functions very similar to how science results are treated now. Experiments that generate number values (Thermometer, Barometer, etc.) will create a “Data” result. Data results can be transmitted via the CommNet system Samples: Experiments that collect a physical substance (Drills, soil scoops, gas chromatographs, etc) generate a “Sample.” Samples cannot be transmitted via CommNet, but you can run a second experiment on a Sample to convert it into Data, which you can then transmit. Converting a Sample into Data destroys the sample, leaving only the Data result. One sample could be run through different experiments and be converted into different kinds of data. Here could be some Sample Types: Atmospheric: Air or gaseous substances collected anywhere on a planetary body Soil: Ground sample collected anywhere on a body while “landed” Rock: Geologic sample collected from either specific biomes or from terrain scatters Liquid: Collected while “Splashed Down” Particle: A more complex sample that could be collected anywhere in the solar system. Such as solar wind plasma, Neutrinos, comet tail particles, etc. Samples can be collected and stored or moved. I am thinking is a KIS-style manner, where each takes up space and has mass. Different storage parts could be made to storage different kinds of and/or amounts of samples. Parts could be configured to spawn with a sample already in its inventory, such as to ship experiments to orbital labs (Plant growth, Material bay, etc.) Upon either transmitting, or returning the sample you will receive a science notification. The menu for this can be set very similarly to how contracts are now. An icon on the GUI can be added for science result logs and would flash once a new result is obtained from either a transmitted Data result, or a completed research project (See: R&D Building, Science Teams). It is from the new menu that you will obtain ScienceDef results, instead of when the experiment is first run. SCIENCE PART TYPES Science parts can now be more specialized. Parts could even be used only to collect samples, without providing any data, or to do both: Collector: These parts could run and generate a sample depending on the condition and biome of the craft. The Sample is added to an internal inventory where it can be moved to be worked on. Film Camera: Takes images and generates a “sample” film that must be returned Digital Camera: More advanced Camera that can develop or take digital pictures which are created as “Data” instead Instruments: These science parts take measurements of the environment or craft conditions, which are created as “Data” Labs: Lab parts take an input Sample, examine it (destroying it in the process) and converts it into “Data” that can then be transmitted R&D BUILDING The R&D Building now has four sections instead of the current two: Archives: Functions as it does now (Or can be removed) Warehouse: Stores samples collected during missions that return to Kerbin. Samples can be discarded sold, or moved to the Research Lab for analysis. The Warehouse Inventory can be accessed from the VAB/SPH or nearby in the world (Like KIS) to transfer returned samples back to a craft, if needed. Research Lab: Science teams in the research lab can analyze samples from the Warehouse for a much greater science return than in-situ experiments. You can run an in-depth analysis for each of the Science types (Bio, Chem, and Mat). Each analysis destroys the sample as part of the research, and subsequent runs of the same analysis on samples from the same biome yield vastly diminishing returns and/or take longer. In addition to increased science returns, sample research/analysis from a Research Lab has a chance to trigger an event. Events can be beneficial, detrimental, or preferably provide a number of player choices. For example, a sample from Duna could be found to potentially have micro-organisms. You could have the choice of exposing them to radiation or some other substance. Each choice would have an associated cost and either a randomized result, or a specific one depending on the sample and the Event. Events can be wildly different with different choices, and the percentage of each could be adjusted as to be less randomized. Development Lab: The development lab is the Tech Tree/Technology tab as it is in stock today. A couple of changes are that, like sample analysis, each node takes time to research. The cost of each node will now be one or more of the three new science types; depending on what it unlocks. Nodes for structural parts can cost more Material than other sciences, electrical or propulsion can cost more Chemistry, while manned or life support parts could cost more Biology. Other desirable changes to the Tech Tree system could be implemented here as well. One such change is using nodes to unlocked upgrade technologies and not necessarily “parts” alone. Nodes could even research KSC building upgrades, or Kerbal abilities. A tech node can unlock a part such as a manned capsule. The capsule has built-in RCS and auto-pilot but both are locked. Two nodes later on the tech tree could then “unlock” the ability for new crafts with that capsule to use each the built-in RCS, or its probe core. SCIENCE TEAMS Both sample research and tech node research now take time and funds. Each active research takes a certain amount of funds per day to maintain research. Providing Additional or reduced funding will affect the time it takes to complete each project. Funding would be managed from the Admin Building, along with any other R&D Policies. Research Projects are done by Science Teams. KSC has one Science Team by default, plus one per level of the R&D Building for a total of four teams at the highest level. A science team can be assigned to either research a sample, or a tech tree node. Starting out, you may have both teams analyzing samples for early science gain, and then switch both to research tech nodes once enough is obtained. MOBILE PROCESSING LABS The MPL and other parts like it will function very similarly to the R&D Building in that it provides you with the same three sample analysis options. Instead of requiring funds, MPLs need to be crewed and provided with power (and maybe eventually life support). Each MPL will provide a new science team. The efficiency of the MPL will be based on the Kerbals’ experience, and the results based on the location similar to stock now. Perhaps MPLs could also research tech tree nodes, especially if the tech tree is expanded. EXPERIMENT RESULT FLOWCHARTS The following are flowcharts to show the process for running experiments and obtaining science. INSTRUMENT EXAMPLE In this example, a simple instrument part is run. This generates a “Data” result, which can then be transmitted via an antenna, or returned for the same science gain. COLLECTOR AND LAB EXAMPLE This example shows a part used to collect a sample which is optionally returned to KSC, ran through and X-ray “lab” experiment, or a centrifuge. You would need to gather three samples with the soil collector in order to do all three options. MULTI-SITE AND MPL EXAMPLE This more complex example shows the many options from collecting a sample physically with a Kerbal and then processing it through multiple different experiments. It also shows a possible Event triggered by running a sample analysis in the MPL. I know it is a lot, but any thoughts or feedback?
  7. I have a hard time deciding which time warp option to use in a given situation. If I need to wait until the next orbit, and the period is about 1 hour, is that "1000x" or "10000x"? I know a transfer to Mun takes around 1.5 days (Apollo 11 took 3 days), and from experience I happen to know "10000x" is okay but "100000x" would zip you right past it. With counting zeroes and the altered time system (6 hours per day, 425 days per year), these kinds of estimates are non-intuitive. I recommend new labels for each time warp option based on how much in-game time would elapse in 1 real-time second. To make them comparable to current options, these options would be: 1s, 5s, 10s, 1m, 2m, 15m, 2h (or 1/2 d), 5d Then you'd instantly know "2h" (10000x) would be suitable for a 2-day journey to Mun, but "5d" (100000x) would be too much. The new maneuver node editor uses this type of labeling in the sensitivity slider. For a game that introduces people to the time and space scales of space travel, time warp should effectively convey the passage of time. (P.S. I also think the time warp options should be re-balanced, but that's a different suggestion.)
  8. Ok, I cant take this anymore, I wanted to build a shuttle, with mostly stock parts, but there is no Glass in the game, resulting in: I can not build this! Thats Why I wrote this, there arleady is a mod for it, but its Dead , And Glass panels are easy to make! Just grab a normal metallic Panel and make its transparency or the like 0.5, alteast more or less. I want a mod for this, but please it should get updated, Or more better, Stock Glass Panes! That would be good for a lot of players, including me. Thats it, I just had to say this, Share your opinions with me. -JordanLOL (a Space nerd)
  9. One thing BetterBurnTime / Basic ΔV / KER / MechJeb / et al are missing: a way to 'reserve' x amount of ΔV to 'burnback'/deorbit/land a stage. So what I am asking is an addon with a small footprint that adjusts the active stages ΔV to reserve a set amount of ΔV to deorbit that stage - that 'reserve' amount would not show up in ΔV burn time / available ΔV for that stage. (In a way , like landertrons are not included) so active stage has 1000 m/s ΔV burnback ΔV is set to 100 m/s ΔV active stage only shows 900 m/s ΔV and any autostage will see only 900 m/s ΔV and stage after 900 m/s ΔV is consumed. stretch would be actually compute required m/s ΔV for destructive deorbit/controlled deorbit/landing deorbit anywhere/
  10. Pease make the previews larger. They are currently small and pixelated,. Why not make a a hover over option with a larger thumbnail?
  11. Pretty much this: https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/24221 I'm sure that I'm not the only one experiencing this, you can pretty much see this on every stream on twitch from time to time. I'm not the expert in Unity, but is there really no way this can be done? I highly doubt that.
  12. I would love to have the reflective stainless steel look of the SpaceX starship in the game. Implementing that would be quite easy, as the "textures unlimited" package shows, simply set all surfaces except windows to full reflection. It looks cool and would add a completely new look to parts without any additional design work. Here is a look at a plane of mine in stainless steel:
  13. I put it in here (instead of the general suggestions forum), because it is an expansion specific suggestion. I think it is not only useful, but absolutely necessary, to implement some kind of slider where you can adjust the time intervbals in which you get notification messages about new science points that are generated by your ground experiments. At the moment I have 3 ground experimental setups running on Mun (in order to fulfill a Goo Experiment Contract) and get spammed with messages informing me that the experiment added around 0.033 - 0.007 science points to my science point pool, especially when using time acceleration and IMHO this problem could get solved via 4 ways: Add in a global time interval slider (or buttons) where you can adjust the global time interval for messages by ground experiments (say 10 minutes to 24 hours) Add in a local time interval slider to each experiment control station, in order to adjust the time interval to all experiments controlled by this station Add in a point threshold, so that messages from ground experiments are either sent out when 10 minutes have passed, or when at least 1 full science point has been generated by the experiments ... whetever comes later (At least) Add in a "Delete all Messages"-Option to the Message box, so that you can clear the message box of all messages with one click and don't have (after an interval of time acceleration) to manually delete 100-200 messages one by one I for my part would definitely favor solution 1 ... but actually, the nature of the 4 solutions would also allow them, to be intermixed with each other
  14. So I was thinking about this today, partially because I had an abort situation earlier and I've been messing with the Robotics. Action Group delays to create sequences. I personally don't like spamming the Spacebar after an abort. Say a slider to add time to certain actions such as: Action Group Timer+0, Escape tower fires/ Capsule Decouples, AGT+5 Escape tower ejects, AGT+10 Drogue Chutes deploy, AGT+15 Main Chutes Deploy. Also with the new robotics, say you want to deploy a solar panel, however you have a delay between the hinge and piston deploying it, you would be able to bind it to a delay.
  15. after i see the cinematic trailer it was realy cool to see the new spacesutes, but after install the DLC i was disapointet becouse all kerbals had that orange elite spacesuit, so the blue non-elite spacesuite is missing here the cool trailer again: at this point i prefer to have a spacesuite for each proffession (pilot engeneer scientist tourist) a simple icon on the helmet to identify in eva will be nice, atm its needed a texture replacer mod, but at least a mod support for the coat hanger will be awsome
  16. Hi there, my suggestion is to add the module ProbeControlPoint to the MK2 Command Pod from Making History, but you get the MK3 pod that have one very late and its a 2.5m part, to have one earlier and smaler will be nice. for a 1m part i suggest a seperate "command" module that have 1 seat fits nicly underneath the MK1 pod only for the ProbeControlPoint, so we have a ProbeControlPoint for every size.
  17. In the current base game, a lot of the Contracts we see relate to testing out different parts. Yet, these parts are infallible no matter how much they are tested. I am proposing that all parts in Career mode exclusively be given a reliability rating, like 90, 80, or 70%. This value determines if a part is to fail, however, with increased testing and flight-proven success, that rating increases. What are your thoughts?
  18. We've all done it, we're loading up a vessel on the runway and we get called away so we leave the game. When we come back, our plane is either in the field off the runway, down near the end, or worse, in the water, sometimes with broken parts. So my suggestion, add a button that lets you deploy the brakes in the hanger, or change the default to brakes are deployed upon loading. And I know you can just undeploy the wheels in the hanger and the plane would sit still, but I've had stuff break a few times when making the plane stand up from the ground. Also, there's a chance the kraken could strike and make the plane bounce 25 feet into the air before falling on it's side and destroying a wing.
  19. Now, I know a lot of us (including me!) want to see a little more life on kerbin than just the space center. I think this could be achieved by introducing a new terrain scatter: a small neighbourhood, which would spawn on flat ground a bit like the trees but in clusters. I don't know if it'd be possible to make them light up at night? If they did, it'd make some pretty cool city lights from orbit.(perhaps toggle-able for potatoes like my laptop) I have seen the mod Kerbal Cities Pack before, and I think it's a good idea, but I think we need them more spread out, like the terrain scatters, which is what led me to this idea. Other possibilities for new terrain scatters would be farms and forests (basically a massive clump of the tree scatters) to make Kerbin seem like an actually populated planet rather than a space center and some trees. Ok, so I don't really know how this would all work, how hard it is to create terrain scatters or how laggy a terrain scatter as large as the neighbourhood scatter I'm suggesting would be, but that's my idea. Tell me what you guys think! (Also we'd probably need scatters to have colliders for this to work)
  20. There's a definite lack of Russian engines in KSP. Apart from the Kodiak and Cub there aren't really any. That's a shame because Russian engines are some the best looking and best performing of all. Here's a few I think would make great additions to KSP. 1. RD-170. This is the most powerful rocket engine in the world, and it baffles me how there isn't an equivalent to it in KSP. For thrust we could be looking at around 2300-2400 kN. Size would be 2.5m. 2. RD-180 This would be a varient of the RD-170. For thrust, it would be between 1300-1350 kN, this would give it enough thrust to lift an Atlas 5 replica. Size would be 1.875m, this would mean it either is exclusive to MH-owners or would need the introduction of a stock adapter. 3. RD-191 The third and single nozzle varient of the RD-170. It's thrust would be around 600-700 kN at a size of 1.25m. 4. RD-0120 This won't be a seperate engine but a varient of the Vector to give it some more visual variety. 5. NK-33 The engine that was supposed to launch cosmonauts to the moon. How this isn't in KSP yet astounds me. The thrust would be around 600-650 kN at a 1.25m size. (Yes, I know the picture is of the AJ26-58) 6. RD-58 This engine was made to be used on an upper stage of the N1 and evolved version were to be used on the Buran spacecraft. This would be a low-thrust, high efficiency upper stage engine. Around 50-75 kN thrust at a possible 0.625m size. 7. S5.92 This engine is currently used in the Fregat upper stage. It would function as a great, small upper stage engine. Thrust would be around 20-30 at a 0.625m size. 8. RD-0210 It's thrust would be around 200-250 kN at a 1.25m size.
  21. I’m not sure how this is handled on PC, but on PS4 (and presumably Xbox), trying to control slider values is difficult, at best. The most obvious concern is precisely adding/removing fuel from tanks. Not only matching liquid fuel and oxidizer, but precisely controlling them as needed. I’ve got in the habit of just fiddling until it “close enough”, but that isn’t really ideal. Today it’s an issue of fairing sides. I don’t want “5.15” sides (why is this not whole values anyway?). But in all of these sliders, you can’t even reliably force a max or min value. Clicking at the very ends don’t necessarily push the slider there, and dragging doesn’t guarantee it either (maybe positional polling on sliders is really, really slow?). You can hold L1 to gain finer control, but it really just slows down movement. I’ve cranked my cursor speed down to 20, and while the cursor itself moves more slowly, the accuracy of the value is no different. It would be nice if L1/R1 and maybe even L2/R2 were modifiers for values. While holding X on the slider, holding L1 and moving slows it down like it does today. Holding R1 and moving changes the value in whole number steps. L2 and move changes in 0.1 steps. R2 and move changes in 0.01 steps. Or something along those lines anyway. Lastly, tracking across the screen would be nice. Once you leave the confines of the slide area, even while holding X, control tracking ceases. For consoles, or controllers in general, this is poor UX. Once X is being held on the slider itself, horizontal tracking should continue across the screen.
  22. KSP Wishlist (Parts only) These are all the parts that I would love to be added into KSP at one point or another. Yes, I know there are mods that add these, but I simply like it better when these things are Stock so that they won't break with updates, I never have to worry about managing my mods everytime and that I don't have to worry about mods becoming outdated or discontinued. Please leave feedback or your own suggestions on what things you'd like to see. Parts: *Requires Making History DLC Engines: Paid: · Merlin 1-D equivalent with Vacuum variant · BE-4 equivalent · Raptor equivalent · Rutherford equivalent with Vacuum variant (0.3125 meter size) · RL10 equivalent · RS-68 equivalent (Maybe the Mainsail could be altered to fit this role) · RD-170 equivalent with 4, 2 and 1 nozzle variants · GEM equivalent with editable nozzles (change angle) · RS-88/SuperDraco equivalent with Launch Escape Mode (Full thrust regardless of throttle) · Turboprops and helicopter rotors. Free: · Rework of the ‘Thumper’ to equivalate with AJ-60A with editable nozzle · Variant of the ‘Puff’ with an inline-mount and higher thrust · 1.875m SRB with segmented variants (You can choose how many segments you want it to have)* Command: Paid: · Dragon 2 capsule equivalent · CST-100 Starliner/Apollo equivalent (Basically a flatter version of the Mk1-3 Command Pod) · New Shepard crew capsule varient · Passenger plane cockpit · New 0.3125 meter Probodobodyne probes for very small probes and landers Free: · Mk1-3 Command Pod with Silver/Shiny metal variant · Mk3 and both Mk2 cockpits with heat shielded bottoms Fuel tanks: Paid: · New 0.3125 meter size tanks with White, Black, Silver and Orange variants. Also with RCS versions · New 2.5 meter Liquid Fuel tanks for planes Free: · New 2.5 and 3.75 meter tank variants in full White, full Black and Gray/Orange (plus a higher quality 3.75 meter standard variant and Orange variant) · New 1.25 meter tank variant in full Black · New 1.875 meter tank variant in full White and full Black* · 0.625 meter tank redesign and more length variants. In full White, full Black and Silver/Grey variants · New Mk2 and Mk3 tanks with heat shielded bottoms · Redesigned smaller RCS tanks to match the larger ones Command and Control: Paid: · Low profile RCS blocks like the ones used on Falcon 9 · Larger RCS blocks · Larger place-anywhere RCS thrusters Free: · Redesigned reaction wheels Structural: Paid: · Strut-like adapters between sizes · Structural tube adapters between sizes. i.e. hollow adapters · 0.3125 to 0.625 meter adapter Free: · Redesigned Girders and I-beams · Structural tube variant in Black, Orange and Grey-Orange · Struts that snap on both ends Coupling: Paid: · Multiple size docking port, can dock both normal and Jr. ports · Strut-like decouplers for 1.25, 2.5 and 3.75 meter sizes Free: · Redesigned, animated docking ports like the ones used on real-life spacecraft · 1.25 meter engine plate · New engine plate variant in Black Payload: Paid: · 1.25, 2.5 and 3.75 meter cargo bays Free: · Mk3 and Mk2 Cargo sections with heat shielded bottoms · Redesigned Payload Fairings: Slimmer design that’s hollow. Think of it as a Structural Tube with Fairing capability Aerodynamics: Paid: · Grid fins · Slanted nosecone in the style of the Atlas V SRB’s · Large FAT-465 Aeroplane Main Wing for large planes Free: · 1.875 meter nosecones* · Wing pieces with heat shielded bottoms Ground: Paid: · Landing legs in 3 variants. Falcon 9, New Shepard and New Glenn styles · Sideways retracting landing gear with shallower bays · Large, open structure wheels like the ones seen on that Batman-style Mars rover concept Free: · RoveMax Model S3; basically a larger S2 like the Mars 2020 Rover wheels. Thermal: Free: · Tiny Radiator Panel · Black variant of heat shields Electrical: Paid: · Electric Servos. Can be used in 3 separate way. 1: Can be setup to work as a fin, wing sections can be connected that will act as wings/fins. 2: Can be rotated on command using the UI or Custom Actions and 3: Can be set to continually rotate at a given speed. Come in a variety of sizes. These will consume Electricity based on the amount and speed of rotation. · Electric hinges: Can be opened and closed on command either with the UI or Custom Actions. Come in a variety of sizes · Medium deployable solar panels in the style of Orion, Dragon and Soyuz · Round, deployable solar panels in the style of Orion · Round solar panels in the style of CST-100 Starliner · Massive solar panels like on the ISS Free: · Redesign of RTG · Redesign of deployable solar panels · Option to limit Solar Panel rotational range, Communication: - Science: Paid: · Camera; Can be placed onto any craft. It will photograph whatever it is aimed at and can send those images to the Tracking Station Can be used while in orbit around a body to record it’s geography and create a map that can be used to find a suitable landing spot. It will only record a small section of the surface at any time, so making a complete map requires a polar orbit and time. Maps can be uploaded to the Tracking Station from the craft Utility: Paid: · New 2.5 meter Crew Cabin for planes · More powerful Launch Escape System in the style of SLS/Soyuz Free: · Smaller radial parachutes · Redesigned Mk16, Mk16-XL and Mk25 parachutes so they look better New Mechanics: · Fairings are now solid and stuff can be attached to them. · Fairings can now partially be deployed from any chosen point upward. Players can now choose what part of the fairing separates and what part stays. It is also possible to have the top portion of a fairing stay attached to the craft, see the Launch Escape system of the Soyuz for an example.
  23. Don't you think it would be cool if you could repair your space station in first person? I really want to see first person while EVA'd.
  24. Here's what's wrong with the Thud: Its Isp is good for atmospheric, trash for vacuum (so it's an atmospheric engine) It has higher drag than a radially-mounted hammer with an aerodynamic cap, so it causes a lot of drag in atmosphere It's 0.9t...but you need at least 2, so it's more like 1.8t with double the thrust. That's as heavy as a Poodle, and much heavier than 1.25m engine options. With the Making History DLC, it is massively outclassed by the Cub (especially for landers), an engine with 5x lower mass, but only 3x lower thrust, and +5/+5 Isp, with the only downside of only one axis of gimbal. While you effectively need 4x Cub minimum...that's still less mass than 1 Thud (of which you need 2). Because of 1, and being radially-mounted, one of its niches is to be an early TWR booster...but the Spark outclasses it at this, and 2 means that it's probably better on drag to have radially-mounted tanks with caps and clustered Sparks on the bottom than to use Thuds. It's obvious intended asthetics, and one niche where its radial mounting and gimbaling should make it great, is as a shuttle OMS. The terrible vacuum Isp holds it back, however, and this clashes with its other main use being atmospheric. That drag needs to be fixed. Beyond that, I don't think it needs touching (and shouldn't be buffed much overall lest it become OP) for atmospheric use, since nobody really asked for that to begin with and not everyone even plays Career. The Cub also makes more asthetic/historical sense anyways. As for vacuum, I think the obvious thing to fix would be the OMS use case, to make it actually do what it looks like it should do. The two problems here are its mass and vacuum Isp. I think both should be about in line with 2 Thuds being only a bit worse than a Terrier. It also should be slightly worse than the Skiff, as that engine's pretty good and there should be a slight penalty for radial-mounting. Thus, the stats change I recommend is: 0.9t, 275/305s Isp -> 0.6t, 270/325s Isp.
  25. Hi, we all know music is one of the worst features of the game. In fact, many players (including me sometimes) play without any music neither sound. But more flavor would be added to the game if each celestial body had its own music,..