Tweeker

I was thinking about that, and I wondered if it could simply disappear once it's beyond the physics boundry, and then reappear after it has run it's course. Not ideal, but it would require fewer changes to the game.

An autopilot is a pilots aid, it does things like maintain stability in the 3 axes of flight, maintain a set altitude or air speed. Navigate to waypoints, etc. This would in NO WAY aid the player in fly, or navigating or gathering science. It would be HARDER than the current means of gathering science. Because the player would have NO CONTROL over the probe's flight, other than where it was released. As an example: The Kerbin surveyor, to me launched from a 200K orbit. It would be a "Black Box" unit, all the player could do is turn it on, and collect it later. After being flown to orbit and launched it would 1) make a separation burn, 2) make a inclination change. 3) increase apoapsis by up to 100 KM 4) decrease periapsis by up to 100 KM 5) turn it's docking port north. It would then be up to the player to go and get the probe to earn their science, instead of the current model which is very grindy, and which adds little gameplay to the game. This stands in stark contrast to the Mechjeb, KOS et al, because it doesn't aid the player in any aspect of flying, maneuvering or landing. That is why the distinction between autopilot and automation is important. If you classify it as an autopilot on technicalities then it can easily be dismissed under the "what not to suggest" list. Instead of playing semantics gottcha look at the gameplay enhancements.

I agree, science needs to be less grindy, Fixing this would require at least 2 things, (1) adding more varied ways to get science, for example a probe, or rover that has to be deployed and later retrieved after it runs it course. (2) Reduce the amount of science earned to compensate for the extra types of experiments.

the course corrections would be for gameplay reasons, rather than orbital stabilization or optimization. So that you could not just turn the probe on, orbit right next to it, and recover it. By performing these course changes and going away from the initial orbit the probe creates additional gameplay. Also I think it would dovetail nicely with contracts; take this probe to optimal orbit, release it and retrieve it later. Get science, reputation and cash.

Not offended at all. Basically your control over it would be limited to where it is deployed. There would be an ideal orbit for it to be released in, one from where the course corrections it would make couldn't end up crashing into the planet or shooting into space. Beyond that it would be fully automatic. Turning it off, or controlling it wouldn't be a option, and it would be "unkerbaled" It would fairly small, maybe like a like a stayputnik + some sensors, a docking port, some small maneuver thrusters, and a battery. I think ideally it would need to be a "black box" unit, rather than part that could be built up.

In the strictest sense SAS is an autopilot. Turn your rocket, or airplane to a bearing of 90 degrees, horizontal, and it will fly in that attitude hands off until it runs out of fuel. So while it may similar to an autopilot, I think it is different enough from what squad describes as autopilot to merit discussion. It would not make things simpler, it would be more difficult.

I posted this in another topic on probes, but I don't think the distinction I was trying to make was entirely understood. In the topic people where advocating for some degree of automation of probes. I suggested that a stock probe, or rover might be positioned in orbit, or on planet. Then turned on, it then goes off to do it's own thing. The player would then have to retrieve it later for a science turn in. In my mind this is different from autopilot, which squad says they think would take away from the game. Once turned on the probe acts autonomously, but they player has no control over where the probe goes. This is an important consideration because one of the goals of an autopilot is to fly where you want, not just to fly around. When the probe is deployed it would make a course correction and an additional number of pseudo-random course corrections during it's orbit, so it would not be as if a kerbal could turn the probe on and then wait right next to it for it to finish making science. Instead they would have to go and collect it from wherever it ended up. That would add more variety to the standard routine of go, do science, return. And if I'm honest the rote nature of collecting science is one of the things that could stand improvement. Having a probe that acts in such a way would also mean that the player would have to be careful to deploy it in an orbit that would ensure it would not end up crashing into the planet or shooting off into space. All these point, I think, are strong arguments showing how autonomous probes would enhance gameplay.

I gave this a try, editing the config file for an lv-t45 to reflect some of the ideas, 3 different tunings, gimbal, no gimbal etc. It made a small, but noticeable difference in gameplay, and I found the variation to be quite interesting. I think this would be a great way to add a lot of variety to the parts pool, with out to much extra complication, or bloating the game excessively.

Right now the only equipment kerbals have is the RCS pack. It would be nice to have different equipment to choose from on missions, for example. Jet pack parachute and so on.

I think also you could tune the engines to their intended uses for example: lvt-37 base : ground isp 300, Vacuum isp 380 lvt-37 Ground tuned : ground isp 320, Vacuum isp 360 lvt-37 Space tuned : ground isp 280, Vacuum isp 400

Gimbals could be done this way as well. that would allow the lvt-30 and lvt-45 to be merged into a single engine, then they would be diffentiated by what options are turned on as tweakables in the VAB. Then later in the tree there might be a +5% or +10% thrust option, or a sea level efficienty boost. so you would have: LVT-37 thrust 210 weight 1.3t LVT-37 +10% +alternator +gimbal thrust 210 +10% = 230 alternator +.15t gimbal +.1t total weight 1.55t I think this would add a lot of flexibility to the career mode, be fairly simple to implement, and it could reduce the number of parts needed in the game to show progress and variety.

I modded a stock part to include an sas and reaction wheels. From time to time the reaction wheel show not enough power, and they stop working, but there is plenty of power left. Am I missing something?

so volume 0 is the main frame so to speak, and volume 1 is the ships memory Thanks, that helps a lot. is there a way to copy from volume 0 to volume 1?

I just started with KoS, I'd like to know if there is a way to save your program so it can be used again on subsequent launches without having to retype. I've looked, but I can't seem to find it.

NovaPunch has some good stuff in it, but it's rockets are over powered when compared with stock designs. They have better TWR and ISP, which in and of itself isn't so bad, but in career mode they often over shadow their stock analog because they appear on the same node, or before.

I mean being able to toggle it on/off, thrust limiter on; 6% thrust; thrust limiter off, full thrust. For example. That way you could have full thrust for braking, and partial for landing. It's not such a big deal with single engines, but when you have multiples it is much hard to reset the limiter in flight.

It would be nice to be able to toggle the thrust limiter, on/off or throttle it up/down it would be very useful on landers for example.

Refueling may not be a fun task, but it is a break from the science farming.

I don't know if I agree with the argument that it would keep people from trading ship, I mean right now the tech tree keep you from being able to build some ship if you haven't unlocked radial decouplers, or 2.5M tanks So I think this idea would make a lot of sense if it was integrated into the tech tree, for example maybe when you unlock electrics you gain the ability to add an alternator to an engine, as a tweakable. It adds a little weight, and fuel consumption. The same thing could be done with RCS, SAS, and sprinkle a few buffs and add-ons around the tree.

No so much an autopilot as an on switch. You hit the GO! button, the probe flys, (or drives) away, an you have to come back and get it later on. You don't really know where it will end up so you can't just wait right next to it. After the a set amount of elapsed time you need to go recover it, and you have a whole new type of mission.

Both of these are great arguments for time based experiments. Also adding another way to get science allow you to taper off the science generated by similar biomes on the same body. Which is more important at this time? The first surface sample from the moon, or the sample from the 8th biome? Wouldn't it be better for the game if the 8th delivered a fraction of the science? Adding scanning/surveying results in a different mission profile than what is now the routine, land, do science, return. An additional wrinkle is perhaps automated probes. For satelites you set the orbit, click the GO! button, and return in X number of hours\days to retrieve and return the science. For rovers once you hit the GO! button they Rove all on their own, and you have to retrieve {or rescue} them from where ever they end up. That creates yet another type of mission.

I'm try to come up with a Metric to evaluate rocket engine, And it would be extremely useful to have way to make precisely timed burns, for example burn 60 seconds from a fixed start. I'm sure there is a mod to do this, but I have no idea what it is. Any help would be greatly appreciated.