micha

KIS works out-of the box. Here's a MM patch to allow scientists to run the experiment while on EVA: # This Module Manager config file modifies masTerTorch's KDEX experiment. # Primarily it's to allow scientists to manipulate the instrument while # on EVA. # # Original Mod forum thread: # http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/54656 # # Thanks to xShadowx on the #kspmodders forum for some help with this. # # LICENSE # Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) # http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ # @PART[KerbalDustExperiment]:Final { @MODULE[ModuleScienceExperiment] { # Allow pod usage by anyone %usageReqMaskInternal = 1 # Allow EVA usage by scientists %usageReqMaskExternal = 8 } # Remove obsolete KASModuleGrab !MODULE[KASModuleGrab] {} }

So far all the Rescue Missions I've been offered have been for female Kerbals. I wish the mission profile would tell you the Career of the Kerbal too though; I need another Engineer! Mostly they've been pilots with one or two scientists. Also it would be nice to know what ship/capsule they are stranded in.

I've watched too much Scott Manley and been a bit influenced. So, I never delete junk, what stays up stays up unless I deorbit it. So either I put expensive probe cores on everything to autonomously deorbit it, or plan maneuvres so spent stages drop back to Kerbin or impact the destination. I also go to great length to make reasonably "realistic" looking rockets - as little as possible sticking out all over the place during atmospheric ascent/descent. I've also not yet gotten out of the Kerbin SOI, except one or two sandbox missions just to test the theory of it. I play quite slowly, usually with MANY simultaneous missions (no more than a couple of days of time warp at a time), and every time I've gotten my space program to an interesting point Squad released a new version of KSP and I almost always start from scratch.

Absolutely 100% behind this, something I've been arguing for years. Especially bad in software and design patents. Come on, rounded-corners, really? Or 1-click? Those are standard -engineering- solutions to a problem, not new ideas. As regards Boeings' engine concept, I'd have no problems with this being developed and then using it. I don't know enough to know if it's feasible, but I do know that it will have an incredibly hard time to fly. First it has to get past the rabit anti-nuclear and "green" lobbies, then it has to beat the oil companies.

Works (mostly) in 1.04. Trying to work out how to allow scientists to run the experiment while on EVA. The UI gives the option to run it, but nothing happens. Also, personally I think the experiment should be limited to low/hi orbit instead of biomes (unless landed).

Hey DMagic: THANK YOU!!! This update is -amazing-, loving the way it replaces the stock mechanics.

Ditto. How can you "cheat" at a single-player game?? The only possible way is if they use mods/debug menu for Forum Challenges where the Challenge didn't explicitly allow them. If people enjoy playing the game in different styles, so be it. End of.

That's the point. Nobody minds if a credible scientific theory is put forward based on (new) evidence which can then be tested. But none of the instruments on Rosetta or Philae can detect life. So while yes, in general the idea of life on other bodies is a valid theory, specifically stating "there is life on Comet 67P" while having no specific or new evidence for it (we've known for a long time that comets contain organic compounds so that's not new) is a bit crackpot. This has got nothing to do with ridiculing people with new ideas.

While I know you're not so fussed for others reading this it sounds like maybe the electronics on the controller board fried. Happened to me once. What I did was get exactly the same model HDD and swapped controller boards. This let me boot up the old disk and get the data off.

JFYI, in case you're not aware of it: the Field Experience mod. (Yes, it should be stock).

There's no evidence; just a crackpot non-mainstream scientists' musings. Which the world's media immediately distorted and whipped into a frenzy, of course.

Pretty much fully agree with what you've written here, and most of what's in the linked thread. The current Kerbal management system is not that great. As well as what you've written I just wanted to highlight the following point: Apart from the early game being difficult (due to lack of multi-Kerbal capsules), the mid-game is difficult because the Engineer can't level up enough to perform basic repairs, which your early Mun/Minmus missions are likely to require without going to Duna. If not a complete overhaul as you suggest, at the very least the experience system needs to be changed so that people can grind away in the Kerbin SOI to get enough XP for Level 3. Just like you can either grind low-value Science in Kerbin to unlock nodes, or go on a far more lucrative mission further away. However, I would argue that repeating an activity yields progressively less XP each time until eventually the payoffs are too low to bother with. Classic RPG mechanism. XP gain should also be somewhat linked to the skills. So every Kerbal gains XP for being on a mission, but Pilots get bonus XP for piloting, Scientists for performing science, and engineers for repairing things or transferring resources when docked etc. This might be a bit difficult to implement though. Also, I would restrict the multi-classing (skilling) of Kerbals somewhat. I think Kerbals should still be primarily Pilot/Engineer/Scientiest/<whatever>, in which (set of skills) they can progress all the way to the top, but would still be able to progress somewhat in the other disciplines. Otherwise you just end up with people having Kerbals maxxed out in all skills and being able to do everything. IMHO there should still be a benefit to bringing multiple Kerbals on a mission. Largely agree with what you wrote here, except that rockets actually predate planes. Ok, not manned rockets, but the Chinese already used rockets in warfare over a thousand years ago. Also, I don't like planes that much. It's KSP - Spaaaaaaace!!! - after all. I do agree that the tech-tree needs a major revamp to more logically isolate the technologies into functions so that you can build rockets (or planes, or rovers) based on tech primarily in their part of the tech tree. So instead of a "historically accurate" or "tech accurate" version of the tech-tree, I'd prefer to see one in which the various streams are more separated, perhaps with players being able to choose very early on whether to initially go for planes or rockets. The game could easily do it by giving you an initial node and 1 Science Point which you can use to unlock either the rover, plane, or rocket starting node. The current tech-tree also rather weirdly gives you a lot of tech before you get the tech needed to actually use that - such as the Rockomax adapter before you get Rockomax parts. If nothing else, at least that needs fixing! Not entirely sure what you're proposing here. The current contracts DOES need an overhaul. The descriptions still read like placeholders, and the timing of various contracts are very weird. Tourist-contracts after you launch your first rocket? Duna contracts before you've reached the Mun? etc. Apart from that I do like the nerfing of science from contracts - it's easy enough to get science as it is. Perhaps a better question in reply to your point is: "Should Science be the currency to unlock the Tech Tree?" But if not for the Tech Tree, what other uses are there for it? In the Real World, it's mostly the actual end result of why we go to space. Sure, there are HEAPS of real-world spin-offs in terms of technical progress, and some of the science we gather is useful to drive progress en masse, but on the whole, what is the point of knowing the Lunar regolith's composition? It's knowledge for knowledge's sake, which isn't a bad thing. So in-game, perhaps it could be turned into the high-score? So if not Science for the Tech Tree, what else? Funds is the obvious one, but it's already used pretty much everywhere in the game. So add another currency, Tech Points, which you get for technical-related stuff (launching and recovering vehicles, parts-testing, etc). Might add unnecessary complexity though. Not entirely sure how to fix the MPL, but I largely agree. It made some sense that you need a Lab to reset certain experiments. OTOH there is a need to have long-running uses for orbital stations which the new MPL kinda fulfills. Although I prefer the mod approaches of having long-running experiments. Even if Scientists should continue to be able to reset instruments - they only be able to do so on Lv1 or 2. Engineers can't do anything interesting until Lv2 - but this really goes back to Point 1 above.

Uh, actually the standard ASCII set is 127 symbols, so only 7 bits, but almost always encoded in 8 bits these days and extended because most computers use bytes as a fundamental unit of storage. I'd expect a space probe to (a) use the most efficient encoding for what it's trying to send, and ( compress the data before sending (, and © use LOTS of error detection/correction algorithms). Further on character representations, Windows APIs and Java uses UTF16 encoding (2 bytes), which unfortunately is not enough to encode all of Unicode. UTF8 has become one of the most popular storage/transmission formats for text since it is endian-agnostic and can encode all of Unicode. It's a bit tricky however since it's a variable encoding scheme - depending on the symbol, it can take anywhere from 1 to 4 bytes so text handling is not as easy as with a fixed-size encoding scheme. Modern Unix APIs tend to use UTF8. There are many other encoding schemes..

The heat shields' ablation shouldn't trigger just on temperature, but on temperature plus being exposed to an air stream.

G'day, Having recently started a new career game, I'm just wondering whether the various fairing parts shouldn't be moved to other nodes in the tech tree. Currently the fairings are in the aero/flight node sub-tree. While initially that makes sense, it doesn't make as much sense for players who are only/primarily interested in rockets, such as myself. In fact, the only reason I've unlocked the Aviation node is to get access to the fairings. Now I need to unlock several other flight-related nodes in order to unlock the fairing size increase. So I'm wondering whether other people feel that the various fairings should be made available in the relevant rocketry nodes of the tech tree instead? After all, rocket fairings have very little to do with aeroplane flight. Excellent mod, btw, keep up the great work - Micha.

Just an update, I've recompiled this mod for KSP 1.04 and KIS 1.1.5. Download link in the Experimental Release Thread. As before, any issues or questions please post them in that thread, and not here.

Having looked into it more, EVA Manager does not do anything more unless suitable config files are installed and activated. So apart from a bug report (raised on GitHub) and an improvement suggestion (also raised on GitHub), don't mind my earlier post

As of the last release or two, AntennaRange has required "EVA Manager" and "Toadicus Tools" as well as "Module Manager" when installing through CKAN. ModuleManager I can understand since AntennaRange patches the stock antennas. But I don't know why it would require the other two. Is this on purpose or just an oversight? PS. Loving the Mod; thanks very much for making it! EDIT: Ok, the distribution ZIP of AntennaRange includes the other mods and I had a very quick look at the various projects so I can see why it needs the Tools as well. But as a suggestion, EVA Kerbal Antennas (and hence EVA Manager) should be optional / a separate mod since EVA Manager does a lot more than just affect antennas.

Hi More Boosters, and welcome to the forums! My "essential must-have mods" are: * Kerbal Engineer (both while designing and flying rockets) Why I should have to switch to map-mode during ascent to check my apoapsis (for example) or to IVA to check the current radar height above the ground is beyond me. The game already provides this info in-game, this mod makes that info available on the main screen. I do turn off most of the displays though; the main one I leave on which the game does not provide is remaining delta-v. * Kerbal Alarm Clock - while some people say it's no longer necessary because Squad added the "Warp-To" feature, I tend to run many simultaneous missions, so this mod alerts you when another ship needs attention. Useful/nice mods which I almost always install in a new game: * Docking Port Alignment Indicator - makes docking a doddle. * Waypoint Manager - better way to navigate either to your own landing sites or to contract locations * Trajectories - plot reentry burns * Blizzy's Toolbar - declutter the main toolbar and have appropriate icons at your fingertips in each scene * Enhanced Navball - adds a few useful features to the Navball * RCS Build Aid - helps you place RCS thrusters aligned around your center of mass * Ship Manifest - easily transfer resources around your ship/station * AntennaRange - make the different antennas actually mean something without going overboard * SCANSat - very very nice way of scanning planets and provides a reason for probes * Final Frontier - Kerbal achievements, adds immersion * EVE - clouds and other visual effects * Distant Object Enhancement * KAS/KIS - gives EVA a real reason * K2 command pod - a 2 Kerbal command pod situated roughly half-way in the tech tree between the stock pods * Procedural Fairing - sorry Squad, but these fairings do beat the stock system for usability and looks. IMHO. * various science mods such as DMagic Orbital Science, Nehemia's collection of Orbital Science mods, Station Science, KDEX, Munar Surface Experiment Package, ... * Universal Storage - great way to build nice looking rockets and stations I usually play with quite a few more, but these are the core ones. And agree with the above - try out CKAN to manage your mods!

Hmm, where did you get KSP from? I bought it through Steam, and I don't have any .exe files, nor is the executable bit set on everything. The two main binaries you -should- have are "KSP.x86" and "KSP.x86_64" - and you run whichever one is appropriate for your system (64-bit or not). micha@urutu:/opt/SteamLibrary/SteamApps/common/Kerbal Space Program$ ls -l total 83248 -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 52 Jun 23 22:14 buildID.txt drwxr-sr-x 3 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:35 CKAN drwxr-xr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 24 20:42 fontconfig drwxr-sr-x 50 micha users 4096 Jul 1 19:38 GameData drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:14 Internals drwxr-sr-x 6 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:15 KSP_Data -rw-r--r-- 1 micha users 9276151 Jul 2 00:37 KSP.log -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 18143888 Jun 23 22:15 KSP.x86 -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 18736192 Jun 23 22:15 KSP.x86_64 drwxr-sr-x 6 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:16 Launcher_Data -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 18073752 Jun 23 22:16 Launcher.x86 -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 20545768 Jun 23 22:16 Launcher.x86_64 -rw-r--r-- 1 micha users 578 Jul 1 19:55 MiniAVC.log -rw-r--r-- 1 micha users 171208 Jul 1 19:56 PartDatabase.cfg drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:14 Parts -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 4311 Jun 23 22:15 Physics.cfg drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 23 23:50 PluginData drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 23 23:08 Plugins -rwxr-xr-x 1 micha users 182855 Jun 23 22:16 readme.txt drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:14 Resources drwxr-sr-x 7 micha users 4096 Jun 30 23:11 saves drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 30 21:53 Screenshots -rw-r--r-- 1 micha users 23380 Jul 1 19:55 settings.cfg drwxr-sr-x 5 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:14 Ships drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jun 23 22:14 sounds drwxr-sr-x 2 micha users 4096 Jul 1 22:36 thumbs

Despite saying they're not supported they do work (mostly?) in 1.04. It's just a warning, not an error.

New release uploaded (see post #1) compiled against KSP 1.04 and KIS 1.15. Not entirely sure it's necessary, but I had a situation where KEES contracts did not complete when the vessel was recovered. So if you run into this, you may want to try the new release.

Welcome to the forum, Tazin. 1 - You can use KER to switch the body that KER is simulating when designing your rocket in the VAB. Select Duna and all the technical readouts (eg, TWR) will change to suit. 2 - It's a valid gameplay option, yes. But you'll need to see whether your lander is lighter with the return fuel or with the drill/converter and thus which is cheaper / more efficient overall. 3 - The nuclear engines are very efficient, so yes, very good for transfer stages. 4 - A lot of people use the Klaw to "dock" on the surface, but beware the Kraken. Alternatively you can use KAS/KIS (mods) to connect pipes between ships. Minmus is considered a better option as a refuelling base due to the MUCH lower DV required to get to/from orbit. 5 - Don't know 6 - Don't know; imgur albums are supported by the forum though which is what most people seem to use. Have a fantastic trip to Duna! And let us know how you get on

Usually completely restart with every version update, but have vanilla backup copies of every version since 0.23.5, and complete copies (save games and mods) of my most played games (0.25 and 0.90). Currently trying to find enough RL time to get seriously into 1.04.

Do I think Squad jumped the gun released 1.00? Yes. Do I complain about the iterative updates since then? HELL NO! Please Squad, keep updating and fixing the game, even if it means that some vessel designs will no longer work. People who don't want the changes and who want to keep playing with their old designs aren't forced to update, after all.