Stratzenblitz75

Rover wheels in KSP are weird... Sometimes they slide around, unable to control or gain speed (like you described). Other times they take your 10+ ton mobile Eve lander up a slope at 30+ m/s: I can't even go that fast on a flat surface! But here, these wizard wheels are able to move it at that speed up a slope on EVE! EVE! We are talking 16.7 m/s surface gravity here! I'll never understand these wheels...

Introducing the FLS KLAW series! These lifters are equip with ARM Klaws which makes them more reusable than the FLS Original series. See the main post for more details:

If you aren't against Turbojets, then these lifters should do the job. They can lift payloads at a rate of 22 funds per ton if the launch vehicle is fully recovered. The largest lifter, the FLS Titan is capable of lifting 164 tons to LKO and it only burns 3700 funds in fuel.

Another great video! Rep 4 Yew! ..."You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to CG_Kerbin again." Dang... I'll be back!

Very nice craft! I especially like the interior and how you used the the deployable dish as a "door". I don't usually download crafts but I might have to give this one a spin

For me, the fun in KSP comes from planning and building something, finding ways to improve it, expanding on the idea, rebuilding it, tweaking it, removing unnecessary features, and testing it over and over and over again until finally I have something I can be proud of. This is how KSP manages to suck up an unreasonable amount of my time; Whenever I'm "finished" it always leaves me thinking "hmm, I wonder if I did this" and then all of a sudden, I'm playing KSP again.

If you look at the Joolian moons in terms of how useful they are, Laythe ranks #1 easily. For starters, Laythe has an atmosphere which allows you to areocapture directly from a Jool flyby into a Laythe orbit without having to spend a ton of fuel, or aerocapture at Jool. In addition, Laythe has strong gravity (as strong as Tylo) which makes it a prime target for gravity assists. You can also perform both a gravity assist AND an aerobrake to change your orbit in ways a regular gravity assist couldn't. This makes Laythe an incredibly useful planet for correcting inclined, hyperbolic Jool flyby orbits into Jool equatorial orbits. As mentioned before, Laythe also has oxygen in its atmosphere which means that you can use KSP's incredibly overpowered jet engines to land/lift heavy payloads with minimum fuel (not saying that this is a bad thing, I'm guilty of it too). On top of all of that, Laythe is the most science rich celestial body in the Kerbol System. So there, Laythe OP volvo pls nerf. Despite all this, I can't like Laythe as much as Pol. There's just something mysterious and captivating about Pol... I also like Vall a lot too, it ranks #2 as my favorite Joolian moon just for this scene:

inb4 Laythe... Anyways, my favorite Joolian moon would have to be Pol because of its very colorful and very mountainous landscape. Also, its the first Joolian moon I ever landed on... Can you believe it! That picture is over 1 year and 4 months old. Ahh the memories... T'was a simpler time when I didn't care about Delta-V or building decent rockets or doing anything remotely efficiently...

Ever since I started getting into rovers that use landing gears, my biggest pet peeve has been: "why do the landing gear's brakes take so dang long to disable?" I mean, seriously, it shouldn't take 5+ seconds after you press the button for the brakes to disengage.

I was going to space just fine... Then all of the sudden, the probe core just "stopped moving". And tore my spacecraft apart. It seems to be "stuck" in space. It says I'm going 690.3 m/s but in reality I'm not going anywhere. Also I can't time-warp because the craft is apparently "under acceleration".

Oh no... Xacktar has learned about the Klaws... Kerbals, run! Run while you still can! A reliable ladder drive that can SSTO off Eve? You sir, are a genius.

In my experience, copying the thing you want to save as a subassembly, then saving it causes the fuel lines/struts to get messed up. If you're copying the rocket, try saving it as a subassembly without copying it first. This solved the problem for me.

The best part is that my speed remained at a constant 1911.9 m/s which caused the funny orbital calculation above. Interestingly, as I kept climbing higher, my orbit kept expanding as if I were traveling at that speed. Yet my ship wasn't traveling at that speed... It seems the game calculated the mach effects and the orbit based on this "1911.9 m/s" figure while the actual flight continued as it should. (well actually, the flight didn't continue "normally", my camera was horribly offset and the ship jiittered up and down a lot but it was semi normal). Also note the my altitude remains at 384 meters even though I'm clearly much higher than that. This isn't even the end of it, on one of my flights, I got the fuel tank on an escape trajectory because its speed remained constant and it just flew off in one direction, unaffected by gravity (or my attempts to slow it down). On another flight, my ship exploded and sent the fuel tank spinning so quickly the camera shook violently trying to keep up with it. One time, I got to space and detached the fuel tank. When I did this, the fuel tank fixed itself relative to my ship; when I moved the ship, the fuel tank moved with it despite there being no physical connection. The list goes on and on... Its amazing how buggy these Klaws really are...

KSP... What are you doing... I got this to happen by connecting a Kerbodyne S3-7200 Fuel Tank to 3 ARM Klaws and decoupling the Fuel tank with a TR-18A Stack Decoupler. Most surprisingly of all, it flies just fine! I don't even... Orbits = logic I can replicate this "anomaly" just fine: If I replace the stack decoupler with a docking port, more strange things happen: Yes, the probe core is levitating. Ultimately, I found a workaround for this "anomaly"; simply don't attach multiple ARM claws to one part. So, have any of you guys encountered any strange/nonsensical phenomenon? If so, I'd like to hear about it!

I completely agree that science system needs a revamp. Right now, it feels way too grindy and it just boils down to a giant clickfest. None of the science instruments are actually interesting or unique, they are just there for you to click on and bam! There's your science. I think that the experiments should have more setup like the impactor experiment from KSPI. I ranted about this subject a while back. I would really like to see the science archives fleshed out a lot more too. Instead of having a giant list of experiments you did, it could contain maps and interior "cut-outs" of the planets accompanied by fun facts and other information. The fun in this system is that as you perform experiments, gather data and learn more about the Kerbol System, you would fill in this graphical catalog of the planets. Anyways, just my 2 cents...

When have I overdone the part count? This.. Thing... At 4170 parts, this thing takes over 30 minutes to load. The lag and time dilation is so extreme that 1 minute in game = 1 hour in real life. I flew it for 3 hours before it exploded.

Hmm, "Stupid/impossible requests" you ask?... Let me visit the Steam Forums. Ah yes! Here's one! 725: Random events such as meteor shower that damage example my space station so it need repairs or new spare parts. Or just random failures in general.

You might want to look at the experiment again; I'm comparing the performance of two crafts which have the same number of intakes, engines, the same payload and who follow the same flight plan. The ONLY difference between them is the way their intakes are set up. The experiment clearly shows that the craft with the equally balanced intakes (the first Imbur album) performs FAR better as it almost left the atmosphere. The craft with the unbalanced intakes (the second Imgur album) barely made it above 30 Km. Kasuha talks about this effect here and demonstrates the intake-air flow logic in his thread. Also, you state that this is "not some mysterious air-intake exploit", yet you don't provide any solid evidence to support your claim. How many intakes per engine did you use for your ascent? What was your TWR? How much payload are you lifting? Did you compare the performance of crafts with equally balanced intakes vs. unequal intakes? Without this information, I'm afraid I can't take your claim seriously.

Edit: Dang, Ninja'd Open in notepad: Kerbal Space Program/saves/(Yoursave)/persistent.sfs Search for "sci =" without quotations. Change the value after the "=" sign.

Safety? Why waste mass on emergency systems when you can go bare bones efficiency! The extra mass of a parachute or a decoupler can cost you precious fuel every time you launch. This little bit of fuel may not seem like much, but it adds up over time. When you're on a budget, can you spare this fuel to save your moron pilot who endangered your ship in the first place? I don't think so! So save your hard earned cash, get rid of your safety systems today! Warning, removing safety systems may result in the deaths of more pilots. You may have to forc.. Ahem, "hire" more pilots to compensate.

Post#46 | Line 1 | Error c8234: syntax error : "annoying" has no context Post#47 | Line 4 | Error c9999: "Sense of Humor" not found Stratzenblitz75.exe has stopped working

Yep, certainly is possible. Its one of the reasons why Jool is my favorite planet in KSP; There's just so many opportunities to perform gravity assists on its giant moons!

For me, the most annoying thing in KSP is when the orbit trajectory can't make up its ******* mind about whether I have an encounter or not. Seriously, every time I go to Eve the predicted orbit flickers quickly back and forth from "Eve Encounter!" to "No Eve encounter". Why does it do that!? It drives me absolutely crazy.

Does this count? Stupid payload got in the way of my de-orbit burn...

Yes, it does matter how you distribute your intakes. Have you seen the experiment that I've performed to test this? The craft with the evenly distributed intakes performs FAR better than the one that doesn't.