Tweeker

This more than anything. It is what prompted me to make this suggestion in the past. Either a toggle, or throttlable thrust limiter would be great.

I've seen the on screen RA suggestion, but not one for swapping the gauge in the top of the display.

How about strutting? It would be helpful when building stations, and assembling ships.

It would be nice if the gauge at the top of the screen could be swapped from the VSI to other gauges, like the radio altimeter by clicking it, like the speed changes between surface, orbit, target.

What are the stats of the poodle in this mod, so I have a better idea what you mean? I'm not sure about this, I see the theory, but I don't think it holds up in practice. If this was really the case there would be gimbal-less Mainsails and Skippers. I think it is much more that the LVT-30 Is a hold over from the early days of KSP.

Part of the consideration should be what role do you want the engine to play. In the poodle VS the LV-909 for example they really fill different rolls. they both have the same VAC ISP, but the poodle seems like it should be used as a last stage lifter. Whereas the LV-909 seems like it should be an orbital maneuvering engine. If use a poodle to change orbits you are shorting yourself about 2 tones of fuel VS a LV-909. To make the poodle better fit in it's roll as a final stage lifter it really needs more thrust, as opposed to a better TWR. To take it beyond the range of a cluster of LV-909s it needs at 400-500 thrust, and a slightly better TWR. Another example of this is the LVT-30 & LVT-45 they are basically clones of each other, either one of the needs to go, or they need to be pushed farther apart so they have more of a Mainsail/Skipper relationship.maybe something like: Tons Thrust TWR SEA VAC ISP ISP lvt-30 1.1 150 13.90 280 370 lvt-45 1.6 240 15.29 300 350 That sets them far enough apart in thrust and ISP that they have their own apparent roles.

I'd like to see surface samples changed to require maybe 3 or 4 different sample from a few miles apart to get the science payout, instead of 1 sample from the bottom of the ladder, and right back into the lander.

I'd love this, it would be great if a set of buttons (+/-) popped up at the top of the screen for each axis, and being able to zoom in on an encounter. It's very fiddly having to adjust the node, then hover over the encounter, and compare and see if you improved you encounter.

an example: lvt-30 early wt thrust sea isp vac isp 1.3 200 300 350 modern wt thrust sea isp vac isp 1.25 215 320 370 early wt thrust sea isp vac isp 1.2 230 330 380 There is no model that exist solely to be made obsolete, instead one engine improves as you move up the tech tree.

Maybe not so much a model that is made obsolete, but a nerfed version of each engine, and the normal one. or if you want to get fancy a nerfed, an normal and a buffed version, with sandbox having the "full" version.

I'm not claiming to be somekind of KSP savant, but I've recently taken to skipping both minums, and mun landings altogether. Last night I started what was supposed to be an unmanned carrer mode, but I found that by the time I had unlocked the stayputnik I was already flying beyond kerbin's SOI, and this was using only mystery goo for science.

I don't really think that it would step on the NERVA's toes to add an early version, with smaller thrust, and lower ISP, it would just show good advancement. I don't think that pushing it up the tech tree one tier is unreasonable, either as it is pretty much "the keys to the kingdom" as far as being able to get anywhere you want in the solar system.

Adding life support, and reducing the number of kerbin/mun/minimus biomes would go a long way. Science is too abundant in the kerbin SOI, and being able to send 10+year interplanetary missions with no drawback really takes away from the need to use probes. I find the idea that money will fix it all to be a bit of a cop-out. The science rewards for sending a kerbal to orbit the moon and back are far greater than sending a probe, and by the time you unlock the stayputnik you are already able to send missions beyond kerbin soi. So sending probes seems like a real step backwards.

I think a sample scoop would be a great idea, It would level the playing field quite a lot as far as probes vs manned Surface sample are one of the major science payouts for a mission, and not being able to get them with a probe really de-incentivizes using them. for example on a recent mission to Duna a surface sample return was worth 240 science. and from EVAs and crew reports you get an additional 310 science, even more if you finagle an ike encounter.

I had originally thought about this. If you drop the poodle to 1.5t you end up with a TWR of 14.95, this makes it very similar to the LVT-30 & -45 lvt-30 1.25 215 17.5 lvt-45 1.5 200 13.6 poodle 1.5 220 14.95 I think that by raising the thrust you keep the poodle from competing with these engines, otherwise it is a better choice to use an adapter and a 1.25m engine. Honestly this is what keeps me from using it most of the time. Many times I've built a rocket and find that the last stage before orbit needs alittle more punch than the poodle offers. so I end up with a cluster of MK 55s or 2 lvt-30s on the side.

I would also like to see an engine that slots inbetween the upper end of the rocket engines and the nuclear engine maybe an early version of the nuclear, with ISP in the 600 range and the LV-N pushed up the tech tree one tier.

I've been thinking a lot about probes and what it would take to make them useful. I tried using remotetech, as I have seen several people talk about it. I found setting the relay network interesting, but there was still no reason to use probes or satelites. I think that part of the problem is that it is just as easy to send a manned mission and you get more science for that same mission. I think that adding life support would help with this by de-incentivizing manned missions.

In response to this someone said: I think that to make the poodle stand out it's thrust needs to be in a different range than the lvt 30/45 something above 300 at least. otherwise you are better off using the lvt 30 or 45, as they have the same thrust, more or less and a better TWR. As far as the ISPs of the rockomax engines I think they could do a better job differentiating the engine's rolls. as it stands the ISPs are: Poodle 270 390 Skipper 300 350 Mainsail 280 330 This is fairly good, but I think it would be better if the ISPs where Poodle 270 390 Skipper 285 360 Mainsail 300 330 This makes the Mainsail obviously the best choice at sea level, the mainsail takes over at mid altitudes, and is worse at sea level than the Mainsail ate sea level, and the Poodle in vacuum. The Poodle stands out as the best choice in vacuum.

I have noticed that I rarely use the poodle, I hadn't really given this much thought until ARM came out. Then I started a new career mode, and noticed that the LFB KR-1x2 effectively eclipses the mainsail. This discussion seems to be well under way on it's own. While thinking about this I got sidetracked thinking about the poodle. The poodle's real problem is it's low TWR. It is currently in the bottom 1/4 @ a TWR of 9.0 In most any application any other engine is a better choice. 2 Mk 55's make an excellent substitute having better thrust, & lower weight. The problem is made worse by being right in the middle of the 200-250KN pack. to really set the poodle apart it needs to be buffed to: 550Kn and 3.5 tons. This puts it right in the middle of the pack as far as TWR @ 16.01, and the thrust is in between 2 & 3 LVT-30 or LVT-45 I think this would put it far too close to the skipper's envelope, however, so the Skipper would need an adjustment to: 900KN and 5.5 tons. this would keep the skipper's TWR the same, and place it in between the new poodle & mainsail. Or you could adjust the skipper to: 1000 KN and 5 tons. This would have the same benefit of moving it's envelope away from the poodle, and also place it's TWR in between the new poodle and mainsail. Giving a nice ramp up as far as the 2.5M rockomax engines are concerned. poodle 16.01 skipper 20.38 mainsail 25.5

I have noticed that I rarely use the poodle, I hadn't really given this much thought until ARM came out. Then I started a new career mode, and noticed that the LFB KR-1x2 effectively eclipses the mainsail. This discussion seems to be well under way on it's own. While thinking about this I got sidetracked thinking about the poodle. The poodle's real problem is it's low TWR. It is currently in the bottom 1/4 @ a TWR of 9.0 In most any application any other engine is a better choice. 2 Mk 55's make an excellent substitute having better thrust, & lower weight. The problem is made worse by being right in the middle of the 200-250KN pack. to really set the poodle apart it needs to be buffed to: 550Kn and 3.5 tons. This puts it right in the middle of the pack as far as TWR @ 16.01, and the thrust is in between 2 & 3 LVT-30 or LVT-45 I think this would put it far too close to the skipper's envelope, however, so the Skipper would need an adjustment to: 900KN and 5.5 tons. this would keep the skipper's TWR the same, and place it in between the new poodle & mainsail. Or you could adjust the skipper to: 1000 KN and 5.25 tons. This would have the same benefit of moving it's envelope away from the poodle, and also place it's TWR in between the new poodle and mainsail. Giving a nice ramp up as far as the 2.5M rockomax engines are concerned. poodle 16.01 skipper 19.41 mainsail 25.5

As part of the career mode it would be nice to see some static things you could build, such as upgrades to KSC or a moon base that could be built in stages. For the moon base this might entail hauling a number of containers of "parts" to the build site, and waiting while construction occurs. The base might then have a few different upgrades. For example: a parts recovery facility that could collect & refurbish landed parts. a VAB that would allow parts brought to the moon to be built into new spacecraft a refinery or fuel storage that would allow these craft to be refueled It would be interesting to unlock things other than parts in the tech tree.

Not just bases, but also stations, rovers and probes. I think one way to make bases more interesting is tie them to earning science. Maybe come up with some more long term science experiments, such as gathering core samples, or servicing, IE repairing, and restocking rovers while they gather science.

Thinking about it further the failure mode of the test part should be somewhat random, other wise it would be too easy to revert to launch and redo a different way to avoid the fault.

It is a real shame that many good ideas are opposed almost as if by reflex. I can definitely see the appeal of having the part you are supposed to test be faulty. It is after all in testing, IE not perfected.

Thank you. I've got a 600 ton space station that I might actually get to orbit now. Defueled it is only 80 tons, doesn't collapse under it's own weight and survives launch. Time to start polishing it up for orbit.