kStrout

This is awesome that you guys are doing this all stock, but if we could also make a modded version with KIS and TAC life support, along with some mod allowing us to grow crops in the hab, we would have a truly interactive story. Also I may point out that in the book Watney had one RTG and drove mostly on battery power to recharge every 5 days using solar power. However I don't know how practical this is in KSP.

Only if you are trying to recover all the cores, they probably aren't, at least at first because it's expensive and finicky. But they probably will be in the future, maybe they will add crossfeed then? Anyways not only is the Heavy wayyy cheaper it will almost definitely be flying before the SLS. Also my solution to the whole ton = 2000lbs or 1000kg is to use tons with the imperial system, and megagrams for metric, just try saying it, it sounds awesome.

OH MY GOD SO MANY PUSHY BUTTONS, I WANNA PUSH A RED ONE AND A BLUE ONE AND A YELLOW ONE AND A (distant explosion)... But seriously, this looks amazing and I will be downloading it.

Not much trouble, you can just delete the part and use your best friend cmd Z. I have had this happen many times, though for me it is more often when selecting a strut.

Banned for not using a period.

These songs are amazing, but can you make some that are a bit more upbeat? In 8th grade I played an epic song called in band, it was really supposed to be about the western frontier, but it totally sounded spacey and adventurous to me. No issue with your songs, but many of them sound sad and desolate which is the reality of alien worlds, but can't you have something exciting to launch huge rockets to? Just saying I am a trumpet player, so I may be biased with my tastes.

Have an idea for a reaction cannon that uses I-beams, the longer shape should mean the exhaust pushes them for a longer amount of time, more testing commencing soon. This could replace multi-Ibeam cannons on larger ships, the part count would be lower and it might allow high velocity attacks at close range, but Mass accelerators as primary weapons do not seem practical. - - - Updated - - - the problem with larger engines is that they are bulkier, so the center of thrust will not be as close to the projectile and will have less effect, I do see what you are saying though, but in terms of thrust 300m/s for plate+decoupler ammo still requires 1152kN. (16(sea level thrust for twitch) * engine amount).

I was able to model my previous results with the equation x = ((y - 12)^2)/1152 where y is the velocity and x is the number of (twitch) engines(note, if you enter 0 for y, it will tell you you need 0.125 engines to stop the projectile) which gives 12m/s for 0 engines, and 60 for 2, only odd thing is that the equation believes 80m/s is achievable with only 4 engines, but perhaps my secondary engines were not it the best possible location. So even though this is a optimistic equation, it states that 300m/s requires... drumroll please: 72 engines! I am going to do more testing to make sure this equation is valid, but it is obvious to me now why reaction cannons are frowned upon in practical use by you guys.

New results from reaction cannon tests, It seems that the number of engines required grows exponentially with desired speed, in testing 2 engines have provided 60m/s with 6 engines only providing 80m/s, 0 engines provide 12m/s so when I get a graphing calculator this weekend, I can make a graph predicting engine number based on desired thrust or vice versa, I estimate it may take up to 50 engines or so for 300m/s velocity impact.

KSP has an unload distance in the atmosphere, if you are below 20 or so km any ships 2.5km away from the active ship are destroyed, so the computer doesn't have to simulate aerodynamics on lots of ships.

New design for a reaction cannon I'm working on, it fires 5 (or more) decoupler+plate projectiles, which are very low profile and only 2 parts, at 129m/s, consuming about 10-5 fuel per shot(depending on how good you are at using it, 10 per shot is turning it on and spamming the space bar) total mass of entire assembly is 4 tons, pictures and more results later. I am yet to do experiments regarding optimal engine placement or field effectiveness or resistance to attack. But I have the current prototype mounted in a new ship I am building.

Hold on, can you shoot through a decoupler? or only see through them, because if you can't than my system got way more practical.

maybe, but the only issue I've found with mine is it uses decouplers as ammunition, so like it was said earlier, it doesn't do that much damage, plus you would need a perfect shot through the decouplers for a kill, anything else would just subtract some ammunition. I'll try to get pictures and exact details later.

For reaction cannons, I've found that instead of using one huge engine to provide to kick, a bunch of smaller radial engines will do even better, are lighter and consume very little fuel. I'm still testing but I have been able to consistently get 500m/s velocity and only use 5-10 fuel per shot. More updates as development continues.

There is no real reason to, It's a singleplayer game, people can do whatever they want and challenge themselves. Besides, if someone had the urge to cheat they wouldn't download an anti-cheat mod now would they?

just don't have any variation of any kind in your machines, or they will evolve and take over.

I'm developing one which uses those tiny radial engines and decouplers, It has very efficient fuel usage, can store lots of ammo and is compact and destructive, but I have a problem with staging being to slow to fire in a burst. After you stage there is a second or so of delay before you can fire again. Any suggestions for faster fire rates?

did you take into account that the interior is hexagonal? That's going to be the tricky thing about this, the volume of the part is not all necessarily living space.

That makes sense to me, did you find it somewhere or did you calculate it?

I always like to have a general rule of thumb when sending kerbals on long missions with regards to living space. In other words, I don't like stuffing one kerbal in a mk 1 command pod and them sending them off to eeloo. So I did some research and now know the real life requirements, but I got stuck in an unexpected place, I can't find the interior volume of habitable parts in KSP. I would like to know if anyone else knows, but if not it might be a "fun" community project to try to find them all out using the size of the capsule and where the windows match up or something.

There was an amazing time when I had a station in minmus orbit, and I got a rescue contract for minmus orbit, the derelict was in a much lower orbit, so I got Jeb to EVA from the station, rendezvous with the derelict, get the stranded kerbal out and then fly both of them back to the station. It's the coolest feeling ever when your kerbal has been in EVA for hours in empty space, and suddenly a station appears and you get inside.

I open a wormhole into another dimension and watch in amusement at the war while eating popcorn in 4 dimensions of space.

When it gets stuck when loading a part, in my case the mrk 1-2 command pod, do I just keep quitting and trying again? I have done so about 3 times with no improvement, is this just part of the set up?

The only other mods I am using are Interstellar and tweakscale, and I am looking for it in sandbox mode and it still isn't there.

Well after some more checking I was able to find the file, but it still doesn't appear in the game, neither does the first launch pad. The runway and launchpad 2 as well as all the other parts appear though.