Herr Doktor Strangemember

First off welcome to the game; no sorry not a game, a Lifestyle Change, and welcome to the forums. Second Eve is evil. :-)

With everyone carping on being schooled by fish, this thread might just flounder. :-)

Well asked if you did anything interesting over the weekend, when you answer they then ask if you did anything that didn't involve KSP. You can't answer them.

When finally getting around to cleaning your backup KSP folder you discover KSP back to ver .24 saved just in case. Also your saved mod folder when tidied up goes back to 2013 and nets you a few GB freed up.

What about the 'Expanse'? What I loved about the show is scene were one of the characters pours himself a drink, and the stream of liquid curves since Ceres is spun up for the sake of gravity. Sure there are places when the plot overrules science, but that is a choice that the writers have in every show, it's that they make an attempt, and the attempt is consistent throughout the run of the show. That is where Star Trek fails for me, and shows like B5 and Firefly succeed.

It's a close call but the landing lights win with the launch pad placing second.

Sort of, my idea would be once the modular wedges are fitted around the core the size would be the same as 7.5m parts. So it would like the 7.5m crew module in appearance once all sections are assembled.

Hello, Bonus if you don't mind a suggestion how about an octo-core in 2.5m size, and wedges that you can attach to the core, like in Universal Storage, but the wedges are things like crew quarters, science labs, storage, and if you chose to expand, forge/furnace/ISRU, or other modules like greenhouses/life support etc. You could add the mass to the core to keep CoM balanced. It would allow much more freedom in how a ship is assembled, and expanded. Also no reason why the wedges couldn't be Ore/Fuel tanks. Just my $0.02.

Well you could make it look like a 'normal' flat panel radiator but have the panels translucent? Would that be possible? Or even doable? OT, in the future be careful with Atomic Rocket links I just lost 6 hours to it reading about various radiators, drives, centrifuge, etc, it's like TVTropes for nerds.

When talking low mass high power it seems nuclear would be the way to go. Most submarine reactors seem to generate in the area 150MW-180MW from what I can find out, Of course low mass when talking a nuclear marine power plant is relative. However something that size does fit in the Kerbodyne-Plus dimensions, and you can't beat the energy density of a nuclear plant.

Nope no trolls or internet piranhas here, but we do have a Kraken that needs to fed now and then. Seriously welcome onboard.

And the weapons...ah the weapons...Dres I never liked you...WHAM then mine the rubble.

Hi, it's me again. I still love the mod been playing with it to get a feel of what is possible: Answer: A Lot! But, there is always a but, a few suggestions if you don't mind. Would it be possible to make the parts bigger? I'd like the ability to install 3 rows of 3.75m parts in the cargo bays, it would make stuffing the bays with all kind of useful stuff as well as support craft for exploiting, no wrong word, exploding, no still wrong word, exploring planets. Or perhaps more of a 3.75m-5m-3.75m internal arrangement? I know I'm greedy... Anyways again thanks for the mod.

Dude...just dude. Seriously awesome, nice work. Any plans for an modular engine section so if we use mods like Interstellar, K+, or Orion we can mount them inside the hull and not ruin the lines? Hmm how many guns can I put on this from BDArmoury... This appeals to my inner mad scientist...

When you consider KSP to be the best sleeping aid ever, as in you start playing it and always fall asleep, usually 18hrs later. Don't judge me.

Hello I've run into an odd problem when I've got Buffalo installed I don't have the ability to open/close the Mk2 and Mk3 cargo bays. The button is gone, and the option in the Action Groups is not there. Is there anything in the Buffalo/Wild Blue Tools that might interfere? Only happens with the Mk2 and Mk3 cargo bays, the Mk4 and the cargo bays from OPT all work just fine. Or has anyone had the same problem and beaten it to death? Update! Got the cargo bays to work by just installing the 'Buffalo' file, no other files that came with it and it works now. Very odd but at least now I can sleep, well after just one more flight...

Wait what? Jool and Tylo are real, it's Ganymede that doesn't belong...

Wow...I feel such kinship, 47 here. In the way back machine, Commodore 64 w/tape drive, taking a hole punch to my 5.25" disks so I could use the other side, Amiga 500, then I went IBM around when Wing Commander came out. My IBM was a 486 SX25, with a Voodoo 16 graphics card and Sound Blaster 8. Oh and a 56k modem (dial up). I still have my Dos for Dummies books, and C programming guide buried somewhere. By the time I was done with that 486 the only original part was the beige (yes beige!) case. I remember getting my first 1Gb HD and thinking I'll never use it all, the fun of installing from 5.25, and 3.5 disks. The joys of overclocking by cracking the case and resetting the DIP switches, the horror of Plug and Play Pray. Oh and anyone remember the original Elite, back and white fake raster graphics? How about...Load Runner? Bard's Tale? More recently EverQuest, Asheron's Call, Ultima Online, back when grinding 20 levels in a MMO could be 6 month task. Hmm....all of sudden I feel old.

Great post have +(e^0) rep

Of course you rescue them, and glad to hear the rescue was done. OK how did you get the tapes of my 2nd rescue mission, all the evidence, uh, documentation of that chain of events was uh, well never mind... Seriously sent 3 man crew to the Mun, tipped over on landing, sent another mission to the Mun to rescue the first crew, forgot to unload the second capsule so ended up with 3 seats and six kerbals, was so annoyed with myself, sleep deprived and caffeine deprived, that I did the same mistake AGAIN. If you only had to run one rescue mission you are doing good.

Congrats, that is, just wow.

I know this sounds like heresy but for this thing, and grand and glorious thing it is, thrust limiter is your new best friend when using this, also reaction wheels, you need the 5m versions from RoverDude's other pack. Also full throttle is a big no-no. I set my thrust limit to 50% and got out atmosphere easy, of course by the time I picked my jaw off the floor I had achieved Kerbol escape velocity. Have I mentioned how awesome this is?

Yup but in KSP it would be at the start of the tech tree...how crazy is that? If it is placed there, before NERVA, heck before the 2.5m parts, why bother with anything else for propulsion? Only thing I can see in game that would balance it out is cost and maybe a rep hit for using nukes as firecrackers, but even then Freeman Dyson I think said one Orion launch would cause between .1 to 1 fatalities from cancer per launch, so realistically maybe big rep hit for the first launch (much fear) but after the first maybe much less? Even then if we assume later, improved, version of the Orion drive are using fusion instead of fission charges with 90% or higher efficiency the fallout is negligible. So maybe just cost to serve as a reason to develop other engines? Of course that's if you want to place as 1950's tech.

Dear Kod....BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA! Seriously this is a beast, I had my ship hitting 270g at roughly 66% throttle, Kerbin to Jool in 32 days with an incredibly sloppy transfer and circularize at Jool. Total dV used was around 200,000 m/s, and that was only 4% of my fuel I think, game crashed before I could return. Ok I'm much calmer now... Animation with pusher plate needs to be somehow linked to bomb detonation rate. I keep wanting to say that this is OP, but it's Orion, which is by definition the most OP of OP drives. I'll play more, but now I want to make an asteroid tug with Medusa and play 3D snooker with a bunch of Class E's.

Well I had free time.... Seriously thanks.