BudgetHedgehog

SurfaceLights by Why485 was only available on Spaceport, but I've uploaded it to Curse. So I'm guessing that would be Crippled. Also, RLA Stockalike has a mirror on Curse, so that can be put in the Crippled section (I think).

There's already Dragon/SpaceX mods, I'd give that a miss totally. What problems did you mean with the flag decals? I haven't noticed any.. Keep up the good work!

And make sure your TWR doesn't go above 1.5 or so (lower at launch, like 1.2 or so) under 30km.

So bearing in mind the bug that Biotronic found with 1.8 or whichever TweakScale version this was updated for last, how safe if is it to use? How far off is a 1.9-supported version?

Model is based of the real positions of the planets and should be the more accurate. However, it only lasts I think 40 years. Formula is based off 'according to my calculations, the planet should be.. here' - it assumes zero eccentricity and possibly inclination so is less accurate but lasts longer than 40 years.

That appears to be just a MM config to add the SCANsat module to all capsules. I use something similar in adding the BTDT Scanner to all command pods (including probe cores): @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]]:Final { MODULE { name = SCANsat sensorType = 32 fov = 1 min_alt = 0 max_alt = 2000 best_alt = 0 power = 0.05 scanName = BTDT scan } } Thanks to GavinZac for this. As for installation instructions, just save it as a cfg file anywhere in your Gamedata folder. I originally wanted just the MapTraq part, but the BTDT is more useful (and with Near Future reactors, electricity isn't an issue). EDIT, yeah, it's just a MM config: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]] { MODULE { name = SCANsat sensorType = 0 fov = 0 min_alt = 0 max_alt = 0 best_alt = 0 power = 0.05 } } Which, to be honest, isn't the best one I've seen. Looks to be made for an older version of MM though, but yeah, all it does is, instead of right clicking the clunky MapTraq scanner to open the map, you right click the command pod/probe. EDITE THY SECONDE: From memory, there's plans to make the MapTraq part a lot smaller and more GPS looking but as for the other, I don't know. Not sure what you mean by comically oversized though, most of them seem to a reasonable size for what they do.

Correction: ours actually works correctly And what does 'fault detection' mean? Thanks again for updates!

Yaaaaaay, updates! And just as I'm setting out for Duna Thankfully, I have the 88 on like, every craft so I should be safe. Thanks man!

For rockets, the ideal ascent is a launch TWR of about 1.1-1.3 and keeping it around that through the lower ascent. If you go too fast, you're pushing hard against high drag atmosphere that will flip/break your rocket. If you look at it, it makes sense - say you're travelling straight up but are tilted over 10 degrees (through engine gimballing/SAS etc). You have a wall of air hitting the side of your craft at 200 m/s or whatever which creates instability/failure. Either it pushes your craft over or your craft can't take the stress so it breaks. Anyway, a launch TWR of 1.2, start pitching over about 70 m/s. I say pitch over, but really, it's just a tap in the direction you want to go. As a rule of thumb, never pitch more than 5-10 degrees off prograde initially. Above 30km, you can start pitching/turning more aggressively, but still, be careful. As for the actual ascent path, for a low TWR craft, the Time To AP should be around a minute and for a higher TWR (1.7+), from 30-40 seconds. Try and follow the stock shape (be pitched over 45 degrees at 10km) but really, it depends entirely on your individual craft. I usually keep the gradual turn going until I'm pointing just above the horizon at around 35km. I keep this attitude until the AP is where I want it, cut throttle, point prograde and coast. Might need a few nudges to counter drag, but you'll likely be coasting for about 5 minutes. Once at AP, a circ burn of usually less than 400 m/s is needed, but again, it depends on your craft. Sometimes, I've only needed a burst of 30m/s at AP, other times, I've needed 500. A constant thrust ascent is doable, but very difficult. For planes, as others have said, make sure the CoM is slightly ahead of the CoL. Don't overspeed low in atmosphere or you'll have a high dynamic pressure which is what tears you up if you turn. FAR has a few flight assistance toggles that can help you - DCA, or Dynamic Control Adjustment, will limit the input so you don't overturn your plane. However, in doing so, it does limit what the plane can do and doesn't let it get pushed to its boundaries (which is sometimes needed, at least for spaceplanes). FARs Flight Data contains all the info you'll ever need - it's far too much for me to explain here, hopefully the wiki has the info. Talking of spaceplanes, I've found them incredibly easy with FAR. Make a simple deltawing with 1 RAPIER at the back (keep in mind CoM/CoL and everything) and while in the VAB, make it manual mode switching and put the following into action groups - AG1 = Toggle Mode + Toggle Intakes, AG2 = Toggle Intakes. This allows you complete control over your intakes and engine. When you start, press both AGs and get going. Go up high enough (around 10km or so, depending on how many intakes you have) and then fly about 5 degrees up. Build up speed and keep an eye on the Air Requirement Met % in FARs Flight Data. The faster you go, the higher it'll be, but the higher you go, the lower it'll be. Once it gets below 100%, you'll flameout unless you throttle down so keep going until about 120%. Your AP should be around 17km or so and you should be travelling at around 1.5km/s. Press AG1 to switch to closed cycle mode (and close your intakes), pitch up more and watch your AP. This is likely where you'll have to turn off DCA if it was on because it simply won't let you pitch up far enough. Don't pitch too much or you will break, just maybe 20 or so degrees up. Enough so your Time To AP rises at about 1s/s should do. If it's not going that fast, don't pitch up, just fly straight in closed cycle for a bit longer. Once your AP gets above 30km, you'll likely get to space today (as long as you have enough fuel). I've honestly found making spaceplanes much easier now I know what to do. My current airframe is very capable and stable almost all the time. It's slightly more complicated due to having separate rockets and jets, but the principle is the same.

Up or down relative to the command pod and the orientation of the kerbals exists though. Lander can pointed toward the engine and you throttle up? That negative gee's, no matter what orientation your ship is in. Besides, like I said, if a negative G needle is too difficult to implement or understand, then get rid of it, I don't mind. At the moment though, the -g section is unused.I'll repeat for the third time, use it or lose it.

Hohmann transfers must be done within the same SoI - if you burn until you're just out of Kerbins, once you're out, you'll be able to do one. Terribly inefficient, but yes, the transfer to another planet (or moon, if there's several in the same SoI) is the option you want.

Oh no, however did we cope before them..

And that's what I'm suggesting is changed.. that the G meter differentiates between up and down. It has a display that would show it, what I have an issue with is that it's not being used. Like I said, use it or lose it.

I wholeheartedly appreciate the effort that person took to make that cfg, but I think for the future, I'd like to make a feature request, if I may. Similar to the NEEDS, FOR and all that, how about a WITHIN, to apply changes to all parts inside a certain Gamedata subdirectory. MM can already detect them (for FOR, NEEDS, and AFTER).. how big of a coding leap is it to implement this idea?

Finally, a nice looking 2m pod that doesn't suck! Please continue work on this!

They gave us seas and water, but nothing to use on them.

Are you on Mac? Because that can happen when you copy across the Cateye gamedata folder incorrectly, as Macs overwrite feature is more of a replace than a merge. I don't know how to do it as I don't use a Mac, but don't try and merge Gamedata folders, just copy across Cacteye to inside the target Gamedata. Course, that's not a lot of help right now, as you now probably have a mostly empty Gamedata folder that you'll need to refill

Probably best to change just those decouplers in the persistent.sfs - changing it globally might have serious unintended future consequences. Would not recommend the above advice.

I see two engines that have no fuel.. which engines are they and which is the empty tank?

It's in the settings.cfg.

I'll have a fly around, but I've honestly never seen the G go negative, not even in the Flight Log stats. I'll update this with any findings. EDIT: No luck yet.. Inverted loop? That's positive gee's, son: (I just realised I had the same guy on each trip.. Poor Fredrick.. )

Yeah, I know about the various effects of the different Gs, I've flown a plane or two (only single seater trainers though but negative G was a lot harder to cope with than an equivalent positive G). Side note to the side note: the highest amount of G-force recorded as survived by anyone is by Formula One racing car driver David Purley, who survived an estimated 179.8 g in 1977 when he decelerated from 173 km/h (108 mph) to 0 in a distance of 66 cm (26 inches). And I think you might be crazy:

-5G? That's shown as +5. I mean, the negative section is right there but it's not being used. If it wasn't there, I wouldn't have an issue, it would all just be G forces, not negative or positive, but it even goes down to negative 5, but the needle only goes down as far as 0. For reference: Just a minor thing but one that doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Either use it or lose it.

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines],@RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]] { @RESOURCE[ElectricCharge] { %isTweakable = false %hideFlow = true } } Might want to include ModuleEnginesFX in there, but I haven't seen any of those that aren't already like this so I don't think it's necessary. Oh and B9 is working on an update for, I think, 0.24 Anyway, ferram, I have a feature request... Well, two. 1, could we have an 'X' button on the various pop up windows FAR can toggle? You can keep the button toggle behaviour, I'd just like to have an 'X' in the top right corner too. As far as I know, FAR is the only mod that toggles new windows (apart from it's main one) that lack an 'X'. 2, would it be possible to disable all flight assistance toggles once out of atmosphere? It's happened a few times where I don't realise why my craft has phantom spinning while out of atmo (even the Manley one got caught out by this) just after an ascent (and falling victim to the first request, I found it's quicker to just click the Toolbar button to remove all windows).

And if you let go of the mouse, they go back to the galactic plane. I've tried setting that option to False, but honestly, found it more confusing and harder to use than just pointing the camera where I wanted to go.