Tweeker

That's all very true, but because it is packaged as a single engine, rather than a cluster of 3 on the rear of the shuttle it begs to be compared to the other engines that would fit in the same space. game wise.

I agree with the sentiment, but the shuttle parts are fixed in size, so the engine needs to scale to fit the existing, in game shuttle.

That not really what I'm advocating, all I'm try to say is the Vector is far out of line with the rest of the 1.25m engines, Which by it's shape and attachment node it fits with. If it has the weight, cost, and thrust of a 2.5m engine, then make it a 2.5m engine. Including it as a single engine because it looks right on the rear of the shuttle creates more problems than it solves. It's a band-aid for the fact that SRBs in the game are not scaled to be "realistic" compared to the liquid fuel engines. Kickback is 1/3 the diameter of the Mammoth, and they are supposed to be part of the SLS analogue But the real word equivalent is about 45% of the diameter The thrust is a bigger problem, the SRBs on the shuttle provides about 4.75 times the thrust of each main engine, of course all this has been said before. If building a "real" shuttle is what your after and you base it on the existing shuttle parts which are about 3.75m you end up needing 5.0 meter Main fuel tank, and SRBs that are about 2.25 meters. I think you could call 2.5m close enough. I'm not really sure about what thrusts would work out, but as a wild guess the SRBs would need to have about 2500 thrust each and the main engines would end up closer to 350 thrust each.

I pretty sure I'm not the 1st person to bring this up, but if you insist, The Vector is 5x more powerful than the Reliant/Swivel, an equivalent would be a 100 KN .625 engine. Tell me that doesn't sound OP. It is better than the Reliant/Swivel in ISP.and TWR, but it costs only 3x more than a cluster of Reliants with the same thrust. But you would need 7 or 8 Reliants to do the same job, so the cost is really closer to only 2x This cost doesn't really serve to balance it's high stats, because you need more fuel for the Reliant cluster, about 180% of the fuel you would use with a single Vector. So with the Reliant cluster you end up burning all your cost savings in extra fuel. In fact you can recover a much greater percentage of the rocket's cost with the Vector. Make it a 2.5M engine and you avoid all of this. It slots into the 2.5M range OK, not great, but OK. you can redesign the mammoth to reflect this:

Or you could just charge 50% more for a quarter of a mammoth. If it "really" is a 2.5m engine then make it a 2.5m engine. Otherwise this argument just opens the door to all kinds of other problems, like a 1.25m poodle or a .625 meter swivel.

One thing I see is the ever annoying "just use a mod" argument that is often brought out when making suggestions.

To me this engine is super broken. Not only does it dwarf the existing 1.25m engines, it also breaks the Mammoth, you can cluster multiple vectors to make a 3.75m engine that outshines the Mammoth. . So what to do about it? If you tweak the stats it step on the idea of the Vector being 1/4 of a Mammoth. I really think the engine need to be upsized to 2.5 meters, that would take care of the problems vis-à-vis 1.25m engines. You can still build a 4 engine cluster that is similar to the Mammoth but does not outshine it. But changing the engine size is something that squad will never do. I think we are stuck with this monstrosity. I just wish they had thought a little before crapping this thing out.

I wrote a small mod to do this a while back, It's not really accurate, as the fuel ratios are off, and simulating the temperature differences of the fuels is problematic. But if you would like to give it a shot the link is in my signature.

Quite a landmark.

I want my money back. Part 1 had such promise. After that it was a slow slide into the toilet.

I couldn't agree more.

Yes, something like that, only more developed. Ideally I would think you could chose anything between simply deliver to LKO, and docked with a certain vehicle. With intermediate steps like rendezvous within 1km of target. And of course being able to have craft or parts delivered to orbit with a cost based on orbit and weight.

That bothered me too..... I think what happened is they combined the 2 blow-ups from the book. If I recall he wore an oxygen mask, and the extra oxygen was from that.

First off, Thanks! That's the first feedback I've received so thank you for taking the time. I'd like to say it was an deliberate malapropism, but the truth is I misspelled it when I was first starting the mod. I had florine in the fuel tanks, and the engines trying to burn fluorine. I noticed what I had done, but decided to leave it, as a nod to the fact that the other fuels and ratios are wrong.

I would expect that the cost would be equal with what you might be paid to fly a similar mission, with a similar time window. The cost would increase as you add complications, for example, wanting a jumbo-64 in LKO in a month vs a year.

Updated to version .010a, added a 3rd engine, switchable between 2 different modes High thrust, low isp. Low thrust, high isp

I had a thought today, why not have a system where the player could pay kerbucks to have things delivered to orbit, or farther out. a simple example would be fuel, If you want an orange fuel tank delivered to LKO you should be able to issue a contract for bid, and then select from 5 or so different contractors to deliver it. It should be fairly simple to add a system to calculate the expected cost to put a known mass in a certain orbit, beyond this there are multipliers for more specific place ment such as: rendezvous (match orbits with target) dock with and also multipliers to do the contract faster. beyond Kerbin SOI it would be slightly more complicated, as you would have to factor in launch windows, but it should be do-able. Beyond delivering fuel you could also have craft or subassemblies delivered. Or to have things recovered, probes, landers or kerbals.

I notice no one has chimed in with anything definite on the subject of liquid water on Eve so I'll wade in, From my youth when we would can a lot of food in the fall I remember my mother's pressure cooker, it was set for the standard pressure, 15 psi, this is psi absolute, so 29.7 psi or basically the 2 atm at the 6 km high mountain on Eve As I recall the pressure cooker would not boil until 250F this translates to 121C, so the mountain - top colony would be right at the boiling point of water, essentially the water would boil in the day and condense at night. That's about the limit of my "top of the head" knowledge, but a little digging turns up this: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/boiling-point-water-d_926.html At sea level, the pressure is 5atm or 5.065 bar & 150C. Checking the chart, at 5 bar water boils at ~ 153C So once again just under the boiling point, but at the risk of sounding like a broken record the water would boil off in the noonday sun, and you would get a hot hard rain or dew in the darktime. Interesting weather for sure.

I can definitely see OP's point, and I agree 100% . While there have been features added the game as a whole hasn't evolved much beyond build rocket/fly rocket. EVA and probes are one place that the game play is sorely lacking. There are few reasons to take more than a couple steps from any landing site. There is no reason, other than to rescue missions, to ever spacewalk. There is very little (gameplay) reason to use rovers and satellites. Allowing engineers to strut spacecraft, making repair and resupply missions for orbital stations would enhance EVA Having surface constructables such as a habitat, or lunar observatory, would diversify the experience on the surface. Requiring surface samples be of certain "quality" would encourage EVA exploration, and having certain tasks that kerbals couldn't do such as core samples would encourage building rovers. Most all of the updates have been more oriented towards adding parts or administrative simulation. EVA has been neglected for a long time.

I think the thing that made it stand out so much was the fact that they stuck to the rest of the book so well. It not like the climax needed more, maybe just to be cut and shot better. Thinking about it there was other they transferred much of the friendship between Beck and Watney to Martinez .

Just got back from the 8:00 PM showing, It wasn't bad, followed the book fairly closely. There where a few parts where the glazed over events, shortened or omitted others. But for the most part it wasn't too bad for a Hollywood translation. One thing that bothered me was that they re-wrote the I mean seriously, what difference did it make for the captain to go EVA to catch Watney. And having him cut the glove was rather stupid too.

I could definitely see that, the thing is this feature would take so little to implement, and it could be done in a way that didn't clutter the UI anymore than it is already. Just make the additional gauges swap with the VSI. Most of the time I don't have much use for that any way. Being able to scroll thru 3 or 4 other gauges at that location would be great.

I was playing a probe only playthru, and as I went to land on the moon I realized, probes have no IVA, so I can't switch to IVA and see the radio altimeter. It made landing quite a challenge. I've said it before, but I'll say it again, there really needs to be a RAD ALT display in camera mode.

There where many factors, The design of the engine was over complicated, Some of the construction techniques where primitive, for example the turbine blade where made by folding sheet metal, and then soldered into the turbine wheel. Much of the German development effort was focused on bombers, and the me-262 had to be developed in this role. While the axial flow design could attain a high EPR it was much more prone to compressor stalls and flameout. The engine used in the plane, the JUMO 004 was not as advanced as others such as the BMW 003

The me-262 was kind of a glass sword, the engines had a life expectancy of 10 to 25 hours. With the average being 12. By comparison the Whittle engine would run 150 Hours between overhaul