Pax Kerbana

Yes! A concrete playground with ramps, bowl, curbs, and a big flat area with a few blast marks! I didn't know I wanted a rover garage and test area until this thread!

Treat it like a fast moving station in an eccentric orbit. Get to LKO with aligned orbit. Set node and adjust to cross asteroid path. Then advance the node forward by clicking the +1 orbit button until you get or of the intercepts close to target. Burn out at the right time and adjust the course along the way. Get to asteroid and switch on target mode nav ball, kill relative V and burn to target. Pretty easy once you get it once. You'll be better of learning to do it first, MJ not needed really. Watch a vid, it took me days to get it too but it's not all that hard.

Compare the cost of a Kerbal to, oh I don't know, let's say the Mammoth. Then let me know if you think that makes any sense at all. I'm not saying it significantly impacts me playing career, it's just extremely annoying to have to rescue random kerbals who have random specialties and stats when all want to do is hire an engineer. It not balanced at all, nor does it make sense. I know that the bases don't have to be Kerbaled, it's the contract requirement of 100% new that I'm talking about. If there isn't a way to add more to an existing base and complete a larger contract, then new contract types should be offered. For when they balance career and stuff.

So I finally crawled out of the sandbox and went back to playing career after being disillusioned with 1.0 career mode (the ridiculous cost of Kerbals). There was a way to create larger bases and complete contracts prior to 0.90 by changing the old one to a probe and docking the new module to make a bigger base. For example if the contract called for an 11 Kerbal base, one could dock a new hitchhiker with 2 existing ones and still satisfy the contract. This does not seem to be the case anymore. Mods need not apply. 1) Is there anyway to do this after 1.0? 2) Will this be implemented in another patch? If no & no, do we want this? I would think that adding a second type of base contract would be good. Say if you don't have any bases on a body, you're offered a contract to make a new one by, let's say, KWF. Then Rockomax comes along and wants a base for whatever backwards purpose they might have. A little while later, Rockomax might decide they need a bigger base and offer a contract to expand it.

Nav ball and nodes all you need. 1. Establish low orbit (15km Mün) 2. Burn retro until path ends on target (about 1/8th of orbit away) 3. At lower 1/3 of trajectory, burn retro and antil-radial to establish parabolic arc ending just past target. 4. Over target kill all horizontal v (use Nav ball surface mode) 5. Use Nav ball to kill most of vertical v, say to 30m/sec or so 6. Use Nav ball target mode to fine tune 7. Set down 200m away with nice soft landing That's the way I do it at least. Obviously adjust trajectory when doing node burns with normal/anti-normal vectors so path is crossing through map target icon. Don't be so aggressive the first time, use a few parabolic burns.

Buff it or junk it. #smashtheoldmk1

Wow you guys jeez. This is one of my favorite parts. Yeah I think it is too heavy but it looks awesome. I use it for orbital transfers and to deorbit crew. Strap on some solids and send right back up again.

Asthetic differences between the Mk-1 and Mk-1-Mk-2 aside, what we really need are entry level pods. The ones we have now should be developed mid-career. Better variety of cans, capsules, and cockpits is warranted, amirite?

I am very un-optimistic about this. Unless there is some way to program the probe this will not turn out well. Because Kerbals are smart enough to build rockets but too stupid to build a programmable computer. The range thing is just plain ridiculous. There is a probe out past Pluto that is transmitting high def at 5 watts. More like Kerbal RC Klub 1.1

Internal combustion engines. Electric motors. Propellers. Gears. Drag slicks.

Yes yes, but will they fix the ridiculous cost of Kerbals?

Hire extremely overpriced Kerbals?

Wait wut? We get a RAMP?! What's next, clouds? I love this update! Love the Goliath! The new Panther! The redesigned Wheesley and Whiplash! Damn gimme now! I want I want I need I need!

I propose a compromise... Keep the new one but give it more of a bubble canopy. This will be for space planes. Then take the old Mk 1 and run it through a sander to buff out the hard edges and make it clip with the other Mk 1 parts better. This will be for atmospheric planes. And for you fighter droolers, you should be using the new inline with explosive separator, tail adapter, and NCS adapter anyway, a la MiG.

I like it a lot but but it looks like a 2-seater cockpit. Change the glass to a single section with a little less glass and It would be sweet. The 2-seater passenger section is cool! Makes me think of spaceship-1.

Fear not, my space plane challenged friend, for I have successfully SSTO'd, and you will too! Keep working on it and you will prevail. Honestly just try to make a fast plane that has more lift then you think it needs and forget about trying to add oxidizer. Once you have something that will go fast at high altitude, redesign to add oxidizer and rockets. Keep your first SSTO limited to one kerbal and forget about trying to get cargo or anything extra like RCS up there. It isn't all that hard to make an SSTO that will ferry one kerbal without payload up to orbit that can deorbit and return to KSC. Doing the same with RCS, payload, or multiple passengers is harder. But just a one or two kerbal plane is very useful for exchanging crew. Besides, planes are just damn fun! Love the new engine fx!

Ouch. Wife should wait until you are done and she should also be the one cleaning up after the kid. You laugh (or are offended) but you know I'm right.

I play stock. Why? 1) don't want want to deal with downloading a bunch of mods 2) don't want to deal with troubleshooting mod induced bugs 3) don't want to deal with more unfinished products than vanilla KSP The only mod I have used so far is welding... For obvious reasons. If someone came out with a mod that increased performance of KSP... That's a mod I would use. Besides, the fun comes from doing cool things in space, making it easier is not going to make it more fun. This is an interesting question/topic however. I think the problem with mods for me is that they seem to fall into two categories, they either try to add to the game or make it easier. If there was a mod such as "SciFi 2525" that was old-school science fiction in spirit (think lush jungles on Eve, marooned obsolete self-conscience robots on Moho, and insanely massive but simple FTL ships that have brains and spines) then I would be all about it. A few carnivorous plants and rudimentary ray guns for self protection would be a nice touch. That is to say, make a mod that significantly CHANGES the game and you would have my interest. MechJeb, not so muchâ€â€I can fly my own damn ship, thank you!

Nice! Like it! I didn't realize Dres was so small, Tylo so big, and Eve isn't as big as I thought it was. Now Jool... I love Jool. Nothing like a station in low orbit just barely skimming the atmosphere.

Hey, it works! That was how my first ever Mun landing went... A few burns along the way and it's not a total suicide. I say you're a scrub in KSP if every part of your space station needs batteries, solar panels, RCS, reaction wheels, and a probe core... and docking needs to be done at launch.

Chadcal tried to drive a rover down a ridiculous slope on Minmus... in the name science... Against everyone's better judgment. Well he crashed it and RCS'd back to the lander. He was not to happy about it. Pretty chicken s**** if you ask me. So then the badS scientist Kelry decided it would be a good idea not only to go back, but start from the top of the ravine in an ion powered toboggan. Not only did he succeed (with a screaming Chadcal stapped to the back) but he also flew that sucker to north Minmus pole and did some ice racing while at it. Well that's the story behind Chadcal's Wager and Kelry's Leap.

And I told him to use two docking ports as a suspension. Its not the best method but it works well and most importantly it is low part count. What am I supposed to do, build it for him?

Yes.... I see that. I still don't understand the question. Do stock wheels have an adjustable suspension? If they do I didn't know about it... I use the docking port technique.

So what are you asking then?

Docking port to docking port is great for suspension. Hang a girder underneath it with wheels on the girder and the mass of the chassis on the top port. AFAIK there is no way to adjust the suspension built into the wheel itself.