LitaAlto

Valentina Kerman would like you to know that, aside from being a crack pilot, she is a sophisticated and deep Kerbal, and strongly supports the arts. Especially if the arts consist of several tons of exploding spaceship debris.

Thanks. I see Nertea added heat exchangers, which ought to help me greatly. I'm mainly using this for LV-N overheating for now, but I'll bear your advice in mind if I start to explore closer to Moho.

I'm still a little confused about how this all works. Should the insulators be between the engines and the fuel tank, or should it be insulating what's above the fuel tank in the stack? That is, should I be treating the fuel tank as a heat sink, with radiators attached radially and the insulator to keep the heat from spreading?

EVE with city lights works fine in KSP 1.0.2 for me. I also really love Engine Lighting and SmokeScreen although those make your rocket flights look better, not Kerbin itself. If you fly a lot of planes and want more realistic light scattering, Scatterer looks amazing. (It doesn't transition well to space yet, and I mainly fly rockets. But the flights I had with it looked incredible in the lower atmosphere!) All four are on CKAN.

Outside the Civilization series of games, which I dust off now and then for nostalgia purposes (LOVE YOU ALPHA CENTAURI/ALIEN CROSSFIRE!!!) I've never played a game so much without being more deeply invested in it financially. There are MMOs I took up, played enthusiastically, handed over a couple hundred dollars in DLC, and then eventually burned out on, feeling like there's nothing more to do. I've got hundreds of gameplay hours into KSP. Yet I've never landed on Moho, Gilly, Ike, Dres, Bop, Pol, Vail, or Eeloo. There are tons of easter eggs in the game I have yet to visit. And there's whole types of craft I have yet to build, like a proper spaceplane. The replay potential here is so massive, and I have yet to grow bored of the game. If anything, all the options available make it harder to decide what to do next. I've got a lot out of my initial $30 (what I paid for 0.23.5 over a year ago).

How well do the fairings separate in the upper atmosphere? I usually dump mine after 20 km up because eventually gravity losses outweigh drag losses. But while I've experimented with Stock Fairings Tweaker I eventually abandoned it because I had a few Unplanned Rapid Disassemblies while in orbit when the larger pieces collided with my rocket. If the fairings here separate more cleanly and clear the rocket's path, I'll happily switch to using this.

What I think these numbers are really telling us, is that the Mk.7 nosecone is too darn heavy. Which I think we knew already, but still. But seriously, these are awesome numbers, and it's good to know about the shock cone intake's performance.

First, I am seriously loving this, even with the default options: Second: What about adding value placeholders for crew names, or even their portraits?

Has anyone mentioned the new 0.625 m SRBs aren't showing up under the SpaceY Manufacturer tab in the Editor? To the best of my knowledge those are the only SpaceY parts not showing up there.

As it says in the OP: Hope that helps!

I've started playing with this and it really does look and act amazing. Are you planning on doing any retexturing? I noticed the "KSP" letters looked a little askew, probably from how it wrapped around the shape. Also, normal maps would be nice for the capsule seams and the engine textures.

Thanks for the suggestion. I've seen it before, as have a few others I've discussed my data with. There were even some attempts at making more aerodynamic test weights, but given the new KSP drag model, apparently shape isn't really a factor, so there's only so much optimization we can do, outside of nuFAR's voxel model.

No, that's understood. Thank you for being more explicit about it. The data includes mass and dynamic pressure so the drag can be calculated. And I stress again, I am not claiming any of this data applies directly to anyone else's craft. Again, this is at best a baseline. - - - Updated - - - ...I should see if any of the G+ folk care to share their number-crunching here, actually. We've got some nice graphs coming out of this data.

I just did another terminal velocity test, and I've posted telemetry, video, and commentary here.

Click here for the telemetry spreadsheet. I've been experimenting with Graphotron 2000 since it was released for KSP 1.0, and as I'm playing version 1.0.2, I figured I'd see if I could pull some interesting data from the game and see what it has to say about terminal velocity. (Now, let's be up front, each craft will have its own unique terminal velocity based on how much drag it creates. I'm not about to claim these numbers have any direct applicability to anyone's gameplay. However, it may prove insightful.) I built a 1-ton payload (really 1.04 tons but I can't quite shave off the last 40 kilograms....) and equipped it with an accelerometer; a barometer; two thermometers, one inside and one outside the cargo bay; and the Graphotron 2000. After sending it up on a BACC booster, I let it drop, recording data starting at the edge of the atmosphere and continuing until about 500 m ASL. At that point I was about 150 m from lithobraking, so I paused to save the data recorded. Already there have been some attempts in the Google+ KSP Community to puzzle out the implications in the data. As they say--the more the merrier. Feel free to grab the data and use it as you will. I only ask that you credit me for generating the data.

If you go part-less, any chance you could release the model? While I understand the textures need some serious optimization, I'm looking at this and thinking it'd be a nice prop for KAS/KIS, for those of us who make videos or engage in (dare I say it!?) role-play in KSP.

I am seriously loving this mod. I'm currently using it for some terminal velocity analysis. Here's the terminal velocity for a one-ton, 1.25 m payload with drag minimized, along with a second graph showing how barometric pressure at Kerbin's equator varies by altitude. I graphed the raw CSV data in Excel--nothing fancy.

I apologize if someone already brought this up--a search didn't find anything. But I noticed that you can install solar panels in cargo bays, and leave the cargo bays closed--and the panels will still work as if the bays are transparent.

Is this compatible with Firespitter? More to the point, if you're only using Firespitter for fuel switching, can you replace it with this mod and expect it to work?

And with a bit of imagination, "FIX IT" becomes "PHYSICS" and then it's KSP players complaining about 1.0 being too hard.

I HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH MECHJEB!!!!!!1!!!1! ...I can't find a Donate button. Surely there's some way for me to help show the love?

Is "supplies" just a generic resource, or is it broken down into parts like food, water, O2, etc.? I'm asking because I was going to release a Snacks! part as a KIS-compatibile life support resource, and while Snacks! Life Support is a natural fit for this, I'd like to have MM files for all the existing life support systems. That now includes this one.

TBH I almost didn't download, just because it's on Dropbox. I know many mod developers have reason not to use KerbalStuff, GitHub, Curse, etc. but I prefer using CKAN as much as possible, and save manual installation for those rare mods that are too useful to go without, CKAN or no.

Video of me flying the Jupitec 7-A to the Mun: I did get back to Kerbin in one piece, too--although it became apparent I had excess oxidizer. That's easy to fix, and I'll probably do so in the next few days.