Sky_walker

Hm... I thought that "áñþрþчýþ" in OPSEK - ÑÂñþрþчýыù - quite specifically refers to assembling from parts (as in: assembly line - ÑÂñþрþчýыù úþýòõùõр). Though my russian is sh...., so I looked up Wiki and from what I seen they got 4 major planned uses for it: Large spacecraft assembly Flight tests and launches Creating, servicing and completing inter-orbital tugs Providing medical and biological conditions required for the rehabilitation of interplanetary expedition crews after their return to Earth orbit. Nothing about refuelling probes... but who knows - the demand for any of these planned activities is nearly non-existent, so they might go for whatever opportunity arrives. Totally agreed That's pretty much exactly what I've been talking about last week on this forum

Yea, I mentioned that in a topic about ISS fate. In general idea is good. Whatever they'll actually accomplish it - is another matter. Call me short-sighted, but I don't see any reason why Russians might want to assemble large space craft on an orbit. Or even have a budget for that in the first place.

I'm not complaining about grammar. Don't have any reason to - my own grammar is far from perfect. So do I ~_~

You really should read carefully. It's not balanced right now because it got significantly easier since 0.24 due to huge influx of science points that never was there and funds playing marginal role in the game if any at all. They didn't scale the research tree to match science points you receive in 0.24 and they didn't scale income to expenses properly (edit: look: post right above this one) Yea - and you agree that it's a good deadline. Ridiculous. That's what I tried to point out in my post - but again: you didn't read it carefully.

You're talking about problem that doesn't exist. There are very very very few mods that use stock toolbar. And last thing we want is a sh1tty toolbar plugin spamming the GameData directory with something that doesn't add any new major feature into the game since now we have toolbar implemented in the stock game. Also note that noone said that they want old version abandoned. Just give us a variant that doesn't require 3rd party plugins. And finally - all we're asking for here is implementing a feature that was promised by the plugin developer himself: Now with 0.24 having stock toolbar - it's a better time for doing this than it ever was or will be. So DuoDex - stop so avidly defending that toolbar plugin, cause there's absolutely nothing good coming out of it. You might be one of these people that collect every possible plugin that they can stumble upon but majority of people are not.

loooooooooool

Yes. Do this instead of spamming forum with some weird questions. Also: Dyslexia is a pathetic excuse for not using a spellchecker. It's build in a web browser and automatically highlights you any mistakes you make suggesting a corrected version so you wouldn't have to bother with anything. Start using spellchecker. Seriously.

The follow-up will be autonomous PRIDE (Programme for Reusable In-orbit Demonstrator in Europe) capable of orbital flight, deploying and servicing satellites and performing experiments on orbit. It's going to be launched on Vega, much like IXV is, but after returning back it won't just splash down into the ocean but rather perform a runway landing. It allows them to lower the price point of Vega launches and at the same time make the vehicle much smaller and lighter than for example Skylon migrating the risks and prices. Georges Lemaître ATV (which will be launched on 12 August) will contain another important component of PRIDE - new automated rendezvous system with uncooperative targets - that will in future allow PRIDE to service satellites without the need of additional weight on a satellite itself. You can read more about it here: http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Human_Spaceflight/ATV/ATV-5_set_to_test_new_rendezvous_sensors More details about PRIDE will most likely unfold in December after ESA ministerial-level meeting.

Failing contract is not a disaster. Failing contracts should be a part of learning experience just like failing flight in your rocket is. Currently it's borderline impossible to fail a contract unless you intentionally do it. That looks very much like a broken game design. You take 24 years in-game travel to get on a Duna? o_O You make a trip all the way from Sun low orbit to beyond Eeloo on your way there? lol What do you mean "even harder"?! The big picture is that contracts made it far easier than it was before (you get flooded with science and money). And the times before navigation nodes and internet tutorial videos are long gone. But even without the tutorials - game is relatively easy - I did my Mun landing just fine in a first day after getting the game with no tutorials or looking up manual/etc.

Surprising that they haven't thought about adding it as an easter egg on the Mun. At least rocket alone... with infinite amount of fuel... just think how nicely you could use it as a refuelling station with the Klaw...

If only these would actually be in a game....

Well, I didn't do it either But I had material science for 2 years on my uni back in a day and I read a lot... ok - it's mostly reading.

1. I used LV-909. Just one. And 2 disposable side-attached tanks (when landed I transferred fuel from them to the core and ejected both to make my ship lighter while at the same time - it's shorter what makes landing much easier). 2. In my first flight I did 2 landings (I like to play it safe) with EVA report when landed, then on surface, surface sample, Goo, and Science Jr. (I had just one Sc.Jr. and 4 Goos) Key is not to be too greedy. Yea, that's what I did too, but my lander on return was relatively small - just 3 fuel tanks, engine, landing struts, 4 goos, Science Jr and a capsule with 2 chutes.

100k?! Wow, looks like you have some serious problem with overengineering. My lander with all the science equipment onboard and enough fuel to do 3 landings and return back home is ~80k. When I made my first flight in it to the Mun having barely any science gear onboard - it was around 40k. Seriously - simplify your design, don't use large radius parts, use some solid rocket boosters, and perhaps most importantly: Don't try to make it reusable. It's a waste of time and money. You'll be much better off building smaller and cheaper disposable ship quickly stomping that mission than spending hours in an attempt to build low cost reusable vessel that will do the same for 3 times the initial price and 10 times the time spent.

There are quite a few blue pixels on Scansat map of the mun: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/File:Isa_mapsat_mun_map800.gif

Yep. People suggest that at least 10 times a day anyway in the existing topics - no need to have a new one every time the old came out of the first page

Sorry, but planting flag on a gas gigant is a total nonsense. Not a "tricky contract" as you call it.

Agreed. IMHO the default setting should be 100%. Or 0%. 50% is totally illogical and can only make new players confused what's going on or why they need to build some obscurely weird rockets to get into orbit. Equally well they could pick 42.3%. It'd make just as much sense as 50% does and be equally useful.

It's significantly cheaper to manufacture small ablative tiles than a single, large, monolithic heat shield that would meet quality standards. Well, that's basically how IXV is build already - frame and interior can be reused, ablative shield (high stress) is one-time-use.

There is no buoyancy in KSP (as in: atmospheric buoyancy) so your perfect fix would cause nothing more than everything sink down slowly (probably with added fire effect if you'd try to use engines to accelerate)

Don't feed the troll people. I thought you learned your lesson after he started showing off his removed tooth.

ESA just posted a video that gives quite nice sense of IXV size and shape for those who have trouble imagining it on a pictures:

Yep. That's quicker than doing a docking operations for each flight to the moon and back. Also note that landing on a planet is a good chance to catch some additional contracts to complete on a Mun or Minimus surface making the whole process not only notably quicker but also significantly cheaper thanks to all the "test parts" contracts that you will do out there and you cannot while flying a single reusable lander. Sorry, but going to the moon, coming back, synching orbits with a station, orbital rendezvous, docking there, moving experiments around, refueling... it's just a waste of time while you might make a return to kerbin on a maximum time acceleration, then quickly pick new contracts, attach parts, hop back into rocket and get another landing done. Quicker, gives you science in more regular and manageable intervals (especially important for new players, but also as mentioned: it makes progression in the game much more efficient), gives you money more quickly, doesn't require so much effort. Using processing lab in it's current form is just crippling yourself. (BTW: I'm talking here about stock game)

400 000 , but I'm right after redirecting a large asteroids to the orbit of Kerbin, so I'm kinda broke - this was way too expensive and over-engineered mission, as I never have done asteroid redirects before. Now I have a beautiful plan of building a space station around that asteroid . I also have 3 satellites (inc. one around minimus) and done a landing mission on a both moons.

"I do not have enough money!"