Gaarst

Yes. Most threads in Announcements are locked as soon as they are published, yet mods can post updates to these. Maybe lower-rank moderators cannot post in threads locked by higher-rank mods, but I doubt it. EDIT: woop, 1000th post !

So does SpaceY.

This might have been suggested before, but would taller 3.75m booster be possible ? Thing is, the tallest 3.75m SRB (S321 Fenrir) is shorter than the S223 or even S121 SRBs, this causes a proportion issue with these: the Space Shuttle SRBs were 3.71m wide for 45m high, hence, the Fenrir booster just doesn't look right in terms of proportions. While the S223 booster fits nicely on 3.75m or 5m cores (for designs that look like Ariane 5 or Space Shuttle Boosters for example) and "looks" like a real SRB that would be strapped to a rocket (as well as the S121 which is even taller relative to its width), it is hard to fit a Fenrir on anything other than a Vega design: the rockets that would need a 9MN radial SRB are often too tall and you end up with an Ariane 6 rocket. As a result, I never use the 3.75m SRBs while they would be extremely useful for large rockets, a SLS for example (yes, I know I shouldn't abandon an efficient design because I don't like how it looks, but fashion > all ). Another issue that arises is the burn time of these boosters: the Fenrir burns for only 40s at full thrust; which means that if you need the full thrust for your rocket (SRBs are supposed to provide the majority of thrust at liftoff) you'll have boosters for 40s and then your rocket will be on its own. A taller 3.75m booster would solve this issue: more fuel, so more thrust is possible, as well as longer burn times at the same time. The description mentions that the S300 series of SRBs are meant to be used as lower or middle stage, but then again, I have a hard time finding a use for them: the S308 Thor and S312 Odin just don't give enough dV when anything that uses their 4.5 and 6.4MN of thrust is put over them, and the S321 Fenrir is too tall to fit under a 3.75m design that would still need 2 liquid stages to make it to orbit (playing RSS here). So I would appreciate if you considered adding a much taller 3.75m SRB, or even create a new family of 3.75m boosters that would be designed to fit radially and then modify the current S300 SRBs to make them specialised for lower or middle stages, as intended. Thank you!

You've got my support on this: I really enjoy your style from your other mods, and a more "KSP-style" alternative to FASA would be a great thing. I'm going to follow this closely

Thank you and apologies. It is now corrected.

Just reached 1653m/s with a Rapier powered plane (air-breathing mode only), and found out, after blowing up a nosecone at the front as well as a precooler, that the Inline cockpit handles heat pretty well at this height and speed. Tried to get under 19km to get more thrust... it did not go well: craft actually slowed down due to air resistance and cockpit eventually blew up. I'll try to work on aerodynamics to gain a few m/s. But I think designing a missile instead of a plane would indeed be better. EDIT: just broke 1670m/s with a similar design, but this time launched vertically. Still under Gojira's record, so I'm definitely starting to think a simple design will get you further than a complex one (and using a 1t heavy cockpit also ). Either way, even if 1700m/s is beaten, we're not going to get much faster.

Not only I like the new aero model a lot more than the Souposphere; but I would like the game to go even further: I want to see my rocket being ripped off by aerodynamic forces as soon as it goes off course. Of course this is never going to happen: getting a rocket to orbit would be a nightmare for beginners (and experienced players as well) but it could be a nice idea for a mod. So yeah, forget about the Souposphere: it's not coming back.

Though I don't think you can display the AN and DN in map view, I think KER can show you the argument of ascending/descending nodes, ie: their position, though I'm not sure if this corresponds to their longitude centered on 0º or something else.

We're not stuck on this rock: see pictures above for a proof: we can go to the next rock ! And give me some time to organise it, but I'm sure we can get to the red rock just a bit further ! Seriously now: I see your point, but I like RSS especially for this reason: after messing around the Kerbol system for years (IRL) landing on Moho or going to Eeloo feels like your daily job, whereas in RSS just going to orbit first, landing on the Moon then, is so rewarding ! This, and the simiarities with real life: you can just imagine watching your rockets blast off the launchpad at Kourou/KSC/Baikonur as you would watch a real rocket launch on NASATV or whatever streaming channel you want.

As said above, 6km/s with jet engines is impossible; only way you could achieve it is dropping a plane from LEO in RSS (Earth orbital speed is 7.8km/s) and fire your jet engines during reentry hoping for your plane to be aerodynamic enough for intakes to kick in before air slows you down below 6km/s. But considering the fact you'd have used rocket engines to get to LEO, I guess that doesn't complete the challenge... Though I'm pretty sure you could hit 2km/s when falling from space: if your plane is powerful enough to give you an apoapsis high enough in space, then falling straight down and lighting your jet engines during the fall might get you close to 2km/s, surviving it is another thing though...

No TweakScale, it is just the 0.625m "Docking Port Jr." retextured with VSR, but still at its original size. Though it does look small on the picture, keep in mind that the main lander tank is 2.5m, and the radial tanks next to it are 1.25m tanks. I must also admit that I think this is one of the first times I've actually used the Jr. docking ports.

Yes, AFAIK, clipping two small lander cans is the best way to sit 2 Kerbals in 2.5m base lander: the Mk2 Lander Can is just too heavy. Only downside of this is the IVA view bottom right of the screen: IVA mode works fine, but the "boxes with the Kerbals' heads" (don't know how to call this) are a bit messed up.

Even though I don't personally use it, you should try the "Interstellar Extended" mod: AFAIK it is pretty big and adds a lot to the game.

ATM does that, only fix I know is removing it.

I spent way too much time going to the Moon and making a report of it...

So I recently reached the point in my RSS save (sandbox) where I could send Kerbals to the Moon (actually reached it 6 months ago but I endlessly postponed the launches), and finally decided to launch a Moon mission. I did so a few weeks ago, with the mission Virgo 7: the first mission of my Virgo-Libra programs to send Kerbals on the Moon. Unfortunately, overwhelmed by the greatness of that achievement I forgot to take screenshots of the mission (my laziness also has a role to play in it...); and fixed this problem with this mission: Virgo 8, during which I took a lot of screenshots, over 130 actually. Even though I deleted a lot of them, there are enough of them left for me to make a nice (and way too long) picture album and to present the mission in (probably boring) details. (And no I won't stop with brackets ) There we go: Mission Virgo 8: The mission was launched from Kourou as a fictional joint program from most space powers. Hence the variety in the astronauts' origins and name: Brian Melvin - Pilot of the Command Module, remained on board of the CSM during the landing Ilya Stanislavovitch (great name generation BTW...) - Pilot of the lander Aurélie Leroux - Flight engineer, first woman to walk on the Moon Virgo 8 was launched using the Alba Ice 3 launcher, which, even though it is labeled "3", is about the 15th Moon rocket design that I flew: the constant redesigns of my rockets is another reason of the postpones of my Moon missions... The rocket weighs 2240t, is made of 166 parts, mostly from SpaceY for the launcher itself, and redesigned stock parts from VSR for the CSM and lander. It stands at 119m high, as it can be seen on the (large) picture below (with clear and precise labellings), making it taller than a Saturn V or N-1 despite it being a lot lighter: The rocket is made of four stages in total (the fourth being the lunar insertion stage), plus the lander and Command and Service Module. The first two stages burn kerosene and liquid oxygen and the last two burn liquid hydrogen and oxygen; the propulsion for the lander and CSM is ensured by Aerozine50 and nitrogen tetroxide, and, finally, hydrazine is used for the CSM RCS. The details of the rockets' components are shown in the following (even larger) picture, with not so clear but precise labellings, meant to look like a blueprint (click on it to see it in its full size, and zoom out): Now that you probably skipped the boring part, lets continue with the somehow even more boring part: the mission itself; whose events are "summed up" in a 92 picture album (consider yourselves lucky as I removed a lot of them): If you went through all of these, then well done; and I hope you enjoyed it, and don't feel like you wasted half an hour like I did 10 hours doing this thing! If you didn't, then here is a (really) quick summary of this post: TL;DR: I made a tall rocket, I went to the Moon, I broke a rover, I went back. Thank you for reading ; Gaarst

Be sure to check the mod requirements: some mods require others to function correctly, for example, mods that modify the planets need Kopernicus to work and most mods use ModuleManager. Also check that the mod you downloaded is compatible with your version of KSP: chances are a mod for 1.0.4 might not work with 1.0.5. Make sure that the mods you use are compatible with each other, to avoid conflicts. Finally, follow closely the modders' instruction when installing/uninstalling/updating their mods, to make sure that everything works correctly. These few pieces of advice should give you a good start concerning your problem. If none of these work, then you might want to provide more information about your KSP install so that we can find the cause of your issue more easily.

I honestly thought He was immortal... RIP God/Lemmy

Insert the image as usual, then double click on it: this will give you a few options including adding a link to the image.

Even though I don't use it, I consider that MechJeb is not cheating, and my personal opinion is that you should try to learn getting to orbit, docking... before/while using MJ. Some people use it because then find it annoying to orbit the same rocket a thousand times; other to learn as they watch. But always using MJ and never learning basics is not a good thing (personal opinion, bla-bla-bla...) Also, as others said, this has been asked and debated a lot before, often ending in flames. Please try to do quick searches before asking this type of question, even if the forum search feature is not that good (yes this is an euphemism).

The formulation is a product, each term depends on one characteristic of the planet and its reference value (Earth's). Also, ESI depends on radius, density and escape velocity. Considering the unrealistic characteristics of KSP's planets, the ESI you will find will be extremely small, even for Kerbin. You'd be better off calculating the "KSIs" of KSP's planets, changing the reference values to Kerbin's; or maybe use x64 or another rescale mod's sizes for planets' ESIs.

Taking derivatives and so on, you can go to infinite "values". Recall that velocity/acceleration is a variation of position/velocity respectively. A value in m.s-3 would then be a variation of acceleration, it is called "jerk". Most case studied in school assume constant acceleration so this value is almost never used except in specific engineering contexts, among which stands rocket science: constant fuel consumption rate implies constant jerk, the two can be easily related in basic contexts. FYI, the following derivatives are called: Jounce or snap (m.s-4) Crackle (m.s-5) Pop (m.s-6)

Played around with 1.0.5. I'm still playing with .4 so I don't load up .5 that often. Made some early-career orbital rendez-vous: And made my first actual jet fighter:

Please don't post in threads with last posts that are over 3 months old: this is called necroing and while technically not against the rules, it is often frowned upon.

No worries though, my current lunar program includes at least 3 landings, so I'll definitely get another chance to take screenshots.