Omnivore

It checks the date-time stamp of the dae file, it *does not* load the dae file unless it fails the check.

You could try creating a 1 byte text file, renaming it to xxx.dae, and making sure it is older than the dae file you use to create the meshes. Then just replace the actual dae with the fake dae in distribution with meshes.

Too avoid argument/misunderstanding, it\'d be nice if the authors of challenges like this one and http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=3927.msg43807#msg43807 would specify the max weight that a stock parachute can handle for salvage purposes. It was worth welding one SRB onto a stack of 4 LFT\'s + LFE in order to provide a parachute mount for salvaging the stack, question is - for purposes of the salvage rule(s) can one parachute handle 3.56 tons?

I had no idea this was even possible: Yeah that\'s right - a water landing of a Munar rocket - did have a speck of fuel left to do a last quarter second burn before hitting the water.

Thanks. However your conclusion on the chutes seems to be a bit in error - pod weighs 1 ton, empty LFT 0.3 tons, burnt out SRB 0.36 tons. I\'ve landed with a total weight of nearly 5 ton using parachute before losing only the engine. I\'ll grant you the engines - though at 2 tons they\'re drastically overweight for their volume and thrust. With stock you have to do with what you have available. Stock doesn\'t have heavy/triple chutes or side mount chutes so not much you can do beyond what I did with the Minima II design.

I believe this is a new record: My pure stock Minima IIb has a total cost less salvage of 0, although I suppose you can\'t really salvage explosive decouplers so I count the total after salvage as 5850 kerbits. Not counting any salvage the total cost is 31854. Fuel was awfully tight on the way home but I had just enough to make a successful parachute assisted powered landing on *water*!!! Bill of material/budget: Minima IIb 1st Stage: 1x Parachute 422 1x Pod 1600 2x LFT 1100 1x LV-T45 950 3x SRB 1350 3x AV-R8 winglet 1500 ---------------------- Sub Total: 6822 Salvaged: 6822 2nd Stage: 3x Stack decoupler 2925 12x LFT 6600 3x LV-T30 2550 3x SRB 1350 3x Parachute 1266 3x Strut 750 ----------------------- Sub Total: 15441 Salvaged: 12516 (stack decouplers non salvageable) 3rd Stage: 3x Stack decoupler 2925 12x SRB 5400 3x Parachute 1266 ---------------------- Sub Total: 9591 Salvaged: 6666 (stack decouplers non salvagable) ================================================= Total: 31854 kerbits Salvaged 26004 Total less salvage: 5850 (cost of 6x stack decouplers) Highlights of the voyage: Just noticed from some of the other stock designs I\'ve seen lately that evidently not too many people realize you can \'weld\' SRBs to other SRBs or LFTs, I\'m attaching the Minima IIb craft file here in case anyone wants to see how its done.

Nice job! However I don\'t think anyone in that budget thread is going to beat Zool, not sure exactly but his setup, all vanilla of course, couldn\'t have cost much more than 12000 if that:

Sorry C7, didn\'t mean to pick on you with my reply above, it\'s rather obvious some things have to be done in a wonky way as a workaround to game limitations/current implementations. In fact, I\'ve decided to just take a break from modding all together until things stabilize a bit. Hopefully at that point we can as a community come to some sort of consensus whether it be based around NovaSilisko\'s SE mod, a refined IKAO/vanilla based specification, or something else entirely. Even playing right now is a bit dissatisfying as putting a decent sized payload up runs into all sorts of problems. By decent I mean somewhere around 12 to 15 Kerbal tons in Munar orbit.

I think there are bigger issues at hand than the details of pricing and balancing heat loads. There are plenty of mods out there and more every day with absurdities like wings weighing 70kg and simple mounting brackets weighing 200kg. Some sort of standardization is needed least this \'best guess\' business continue to create incompatible mods.

Still haven\'t launched my rover to the Mun, but came up with a different Munar Rover concept: http://youtu.be/PUXFw7X_8KI

KSP Circus act practice:

Wheel-o-doom:

The idea of making this into a community mod has my support, if Tiberion decides to go that route I\'ll contribute.

Awesome, just awesome! Great idea and great job!

I got tired of manually editing dae files for import to Blender, so I wrote a little Python script that should take care of most dae file problems. Written and tested with Python 2.6.6, some knowledge of using python scripts would be helpful to the user

Yes, to a point at least. It doesn\'t help directly with top speed, since that, at least with non-RCS based designs, comes from the last few seconds of burn as I\'m sure you\'re aware. What it does help with is lining up for runs in both direction and altitude, also gives you a bit of extra time to set up anticipated camera angles and the like. There is a problem though, at KX-19 and larger \'payload\' sizes the B-52 starts getting more and more difficult to stabilize and the available ASAS modules start being more and more destructive. I\'ve actually had a B-52 stage shake the X-15 stage apart due to ASAS instability - was kinda funny like a terrier shaking a rat to pieces.

Glad you like them. If/when KSP supports real wheels that actually rotate, assuming someone else doesn\'t beat me to it, I\'ll redo these in a fancier more Curiosity style model.

You might try a B-52/X-15 approach - use a larger high fuel load moderate thrust nice and stable first stage that allows you to take off and maneuver into position for the start of a run. Something like:

Eh knew somehow that was too easy a solution. I\'m not sure its possible in a single part but if it is I\'d not be surprised to see the obj_gimbal_1, obj_gimbal_2,... work as it kinda follows a pattern seen elsewhere.

Aha the trick is to join all the nozzle meshes into one object named obj_gimbal, with ofc the mount being named obj_anchor.

No idea if this will work but worth a try: give each model a different name all starting with obj_gimbal - example obj_gimbal_1... etc

And that\'s what broke my heart with this run:

I can run it (or similar programs at least), the trouble is that what I find I most often want to record (or take a snapshot of) is a sequence taking place while KSP is pushing whichever core it is on to the max (and my video card isn\'t the greatest either). In those situations, running Debut (or fraps) isn\'t an option (just makes a bad situation worse), Afterburner might be better, haven\'t tried it yet.

Thanks I\'ll give it a shot, might do better than Debut\'s free version. With a borderline system like mine though (outdated by a couple years), it seems like when I most want to take screenshots and/or record a vid, I find KSP is already near to stuttering.

This intrigues me, some friends and I have been discussing various ways of delivering payloads to Mun surface and some of my recent mod work includes parts that make this a bit more doable. The video referenced by this post http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=4511.0 is also very helpful. All that said... the payload package I\'m looking at getting into Mun orbit masses at just under 13 tons. Given that weight, I\'m likely to have bits and pieces from every mod out there in this, lol. My Kerbin side tests show severe potential instabilities with the ASAS in the \'Kuriosity\' configuration as payload mass increases, it seems most stable with the ASAS at the very top. I\'ll post an update after I get this thing into Munar orbit.