Arugela

I think some of that may be calculating the drop in weight from the loss of the fuel tank. AKA it's assuming you are doing asparagus staging by the looks of it. The rest could be aerodynamics or something else(maybe the diameter of the front of the tank at the top). I don't think it's weight. Only the odd tanks are different base mass per weight. Like MK2 and a few others. And those are like .57 vs. of .5 or equivalent. When you measure tanks mass. take out the fuel weight then compare to another tank. They are generally the same. I think there are now only two tank types for liquids weighing 0.005 per unit. They equal the a factor of 0.5 or 0.57 empty, as stated above, when compared to total fuel. fuel weights: Xen: 0.0001 per unit MP: 0.004 per unit LF: 0.005 per unit OX: 0.005 per unit Ore: 0.01 per unit Edit: Actually, in this case the weight is smaller for the lighter tank. MK0vsMK1: 400/50=8 .275-0.25=0.025x8=0.2 Total weight if it were mk1 size. MK1: 2.25-2=0.25 So it's the empty weight of the tank(Similar to what Chaos_Klaus was stating) for the first 2. And the tanks after are probably calculating for asparagus staging because of the decouplers. NVM, I assume you know most of that. 8) It's getting late!

How much ore is there per Cubic meter or whatnot in KSP? I'm trying to recreate a ship and am trying to convert it but I haven't found anything to do that particular measurement. This is the last piece of data I need to scale the ore containers properly.

What about the ability to select parts and designate them as paired/group for symmetry. Then you can save them or something and put stuff on those locations and use symetry like they were in symetry to begin with. Could somethingl ike this get over the limitation in symmetry that currently exit. You could even possibly mark them as 1 and 2 through whatever or click them in the order of their pairing to place items. Or just let them work in tangent as symetry based items. If you make the computer act like they are in a symetrical location in some manner you could allow parts to be placed more easily where you want them and have some more ways to make craft. Maybe simplifying current designs or extending the current game to have multiple symetry locations. The hardpoints could be color coated or be stored and numbered differently and even allow single parts to be part of different symmetry groups. But you may have to allow designation of which group you are working with. Possibly being accomplished via pre clicking the part in some symmetry mode and maybe clicking the symmetry or some other button until you get to the group you want. Then place the items and you know which group it will work from. The group could have an artificial lined version or box representing it possibly showing it's logical symmetrical positioning in a separate location in the VAB/SPH. You could use these place and or see its logical symmetry separate from it's physical location. This could be activated in a special mode. The parts acts like it is in the logical location while being visually represented in the physical one. If you allow moving or parts in the logical or physical it could allow turning of parts in ways the current system does not allow. Meaning if a part is not located how you want, say rotation, you could rotate the logical part and it would turn without turning the rest and adjust the logical making is so you can adjust things as you want and making their orientation separate from their symmetry logic or their physical location. Whatever other logic you could pull from this could allot a much better and easier vehicle creation process. It could also allow any number of parts to be placed potentially in symmetry. This could all then be still manipulated by the current tools. This would give ability to make many things you currently cannot and make it much easier to correct mistakes among other things.

One more stupid post. This is where I likely will put Version 3 with 1.0.5 parts for the orion. It is more to scale. And in this pic I took one real quick before it exploded on the runway. The sections(Head, Middle, Engine block) are stable individually empty and full. But together they are still unstable empty. I have to strut it up until it is stable now. But This is what it looks like almost finished. I also have to work out problems with the sub vehicle having fuel lines(And sometimes struts) going in odd direction into the air away from the vehicle and attaching to other things and get it properly into vehicle etc. But here is basically what it will look like. Empty weight is now around 2880 tons and it goes up to like 8800 tons or more. It no longer is designed to land and refuel on it's own, but should use nukes(144 of them) for deep space travel and other engines for being around planets. It's primarily a 0 gravity vehicle but can do other things if needed. May be an SSTO if I can get it, but that may not happen. It is now 68m tall alone, and only around 1300 parts atm. Which is oddly small compared to the last versions. Should be back up in parts count though once I put the other vehicles in. I also have nuclear based probes to help bring asteroids to it for feeding. So it's much more fuel efficient now. I just need to work out some weight and electric type issues and it will be done besides putting in vehicles. Pic: (Took this shot before it exploded on the runway! 8p) http://www./download/wa4wy99omd5r45f/The_Orion_V3_1_0_5_Bottom_Electricity.craft <- This is the newest version without the head and neck of the ship. it is at over 2800 parts(a lot of wich are struts.) and has been stabilized for the runway. Very slow vehicle because of parts count though. This will probably be the main body and engine block for the end ship. Unless and until I find something else to change on it. The head/neck on the above ship will probably be replaced with a different slightly more realistic version. Also less vehicles for realism. Uneless I decide to put them in anyway or I the real ship adds more probes(assuming it doesn't already). I have little mono based probes that are light and hopefully fit the bill of probes on the real ship. If they add more to the real ship I may add more back. Empty weight is now to scale at around 2,380-2,380.99 tons for a 1:2.5 scale ship. Cargo weight is now the difference between 2880 and empty weight. Ore weighs 2880 and max weight is now 8640 tons. Shortcuts: Abort: Jettison Ore tanks contents x All Brakes: Deactivate all ISRU functions 1: Toggle Rhino engines 2: Toggle Mammoth engines 3: Toggle Vector engines 4: Blank (Will be for starting drills) 5: Reserved to toggle/extend/retract drills 6: Activate ISRU+LF+OX 7: Activate ISRU+LF 8: Activate ISRU+OX 9: Activate ISRU+Mono 0: Toggle LVN engines Engines: Main Gravitic engines: 36xRhino engines; 72,000 max thrust Main Takeoff engines: 14xMammoth engines; 56,000 max thrust Secondary takeoff/maneuvering engines: 16xVector engines; 16,000 max thrust Deep space/Main engines: 144xLVN engines; 8,640 max thrust Instructions: Empty ore on runway. Use engines in action group 2+3 to get to 6k altitude. Deactivate 2+3 and activate group 1 at 6km. at 30k or so if desired or when out of oxidizer actiavte group 0 and get apoapsis high enough to circularize with lvns only( possibly 300k to 1000k meters). This may work at lower altitudes. (Still working on making this possible. If it doesn't work I will have to add boosters for initial takeoff after 1.1.). And if you know a better way, go for it! This ships needs all the help it can get getting off kerban! 8) I still have a lot to figure out about how to maximize launches to make this vehicle better. This version also has 480 generators shoved into the bottom of it to test the electrical system.

[video=youtube;P_u9zjamBvs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_u9zjamBvs[/video] I found this on grinding mirrors. I've seen videos along time ago that go into more detail potentially(On the grinding at least.), but I have to find them again. Also found this: [video=youtube;snz7JJlSZvw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snz7JJlSZvw[/video] I still think it would be cool to try to make a base for a mirror rotating liquid to make the concave...

[video=youtube;Q90i31JIQ3M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q90i31JIQ3M[/video] Is this bad for telescope mirrors?

Is there a simple way to test focal point by using light the reverse way into the eyepeice and watch where it goes at the end of the telescope? couldn't you cap the top and get the light to fill to the edge of the telescope or something? If that sort of thing could work it could be good for adjusting adjustable casings and secondary mirrors or something. [quote name='Shpaget']It's perfectly possible to do all the steps to make the mirror in your back yard, except the final reflective coating. To get the good job on that one, you'll need some equipment that is beyond amateurs. However, there are companies that will do that relatively cheaply for you. To make the mirror you need just some basic tools. [URL]https://stellafane.org/tm/atm/general/myths.html[/URL] Also, don't entertain the idea of the satellite dish. That's nowhere near good enough.[/QUOTE] What about the idea of developing a liquid that becomes reflective. Or even reflective and translucent and having cheaper reflective surfaces on the back to help reflect light? Or is the back the worst place. Maybe with enough metal in the liquid you could make the metal sit in a way that makes the resen/material naturally reflective. (or even coat it after you make it with a liquid silver or aluminum coating that is super thin.) Maybe very fine silver or quarts?!(what am I thinking of?) or whatever is reflective. And if not maybe you could make a surface you could polish to get coated with reflective materials.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV4AOo1nUMU how could you go about making a real mirror like this for a Newtonian Or similar telescope? I want to make a big one but I have no idea where to start. I was thinking something like water mixed with maybe a fine metal like in metal liquids they play with with magnets to give it a shine and background color to reflect then add a solution while it's spinning to get it to harden. Is this realistic or possible. What other methods would be possible like this to make telescope mirrors at home?

247 parts at 56,000 tons is like 227 tons per part average. How did you get individual parts that heavy? Is one of those numbers is wrong? 8) (I'm assuming this isn't stock then.) And why would you keep it all to yourself?!

Oh, well! I'm making sci fi replicas anyway. So, I guess I can pretend. 8)

How much could you realistically compress fuel and gasses. And what amount of stacking fuel tanks could this equal too If you have no money concerns and used the greatest amount of knowledge available. And what would that cost compared to the cost of stacking fuel tanks in the game currently? And by stacking I mean putting multiple fuel tanks in the exact same spot by placing them on the end of one another and moving one up to the same physical location so they look like one item.

I was thinking more the challenge and ore seeing how close you could get. And just to do it.

You won't need alot of radiators or any at all... You need more electricity. and if you run the converter and Drills with a small amount of ore you can run it in fast forward pretty easily. It takes more than 8 drllls to get enough per second to feed one converter correctly. So you may have a lot of wiggle room. Just use a single 75 ore container and see if it's enough. And you won't use full electricity if you can't convert the full amount. It will scale with the available ore from my experience. I just stack a bunch of generatros somewhere in groups of 8. You's be surprised how little it uses in practice. you may not even use up stored electricity at all.

[quote name='juanml82']Doesn't South Korea have only a few last names? It may just be a cultural thing of Kerbal civilization. Or "Kerman" is their tribe/country/something, and only Kerbals of the Kerman group are brave (or stupid :P) enough to go into space[/QUOTE] Maybe they orignally discovered something about and ancient species called "man" and the space operations is an attempt to copy what they learned about "man". Hence they are called Kerman! The Kerbal Astronauts! Maybe the first names are taken from it too. And Kerbals normally don't even have names...

If so what did you get. I'm playing with a craft atm and got to 170kkm approx but the ship blew up. I don't have that much heat stuff on and I did it with some of the expandable heat stuff blown off because Of my own clumsiness. I'm trying to get in polar orbit with fuel cheats on atm to see what I can do and if I can get close enough. What did anyone get from it? And did anyone do it without cheats?

Should you be able to target the sun in KSP? I thought they removed that.

I'm with the wheels method. Then also add wings or have them in the structure so you can go land sea or air if desired. Even space if designed well. That is my next personal design. I'm going to make the ultimate exploration vehicle. And it will carry my little rover with it. Maybe I'll get some underwater driving done and see if there are minerals on the ocean floors.

[quote name='jarmund']Boring answer: And they're easy to entertain, so static is their favourite show.[/QUOTE] I think I like that part. It would be funny if this sort of stuff could be made official parts of the kerbal world too! >< These glitches make good potential game story elements.

I was thinking the same thing. But I was thinking you should go from eeloo to moho. I was thinking it may be a natural difficutly level thing. You start at kerbin. Go out to eeloo planet by planet. Then from Eeloo down to moho then Eve system. This would seem like it might follow a natural system of increase in DV or something for each destination and maybe follow some logical pattern. I have yet to fully test this yet though. But my next mission is to go to Eeloo with a miner then do this very thing on the way back to kerbin. A round the world/Solar System trip going outwards first.

I've finally gotten a picture of it. Every time I tried up till now it vanished before taking a shot. It has eluded me now for months since they started to slip and turn them off a few seconds after I went into IVA mode to watch them and I initially noticed it... And they slowly got sloppier and sloppier about it until I finally could get proof!!! This is what they have been doing in the cockpits while were not able to fully see. And finally explains why they act so funny in mission! The secret is out!!! [IMG]http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii613/PicsMe101/KSP/Screenshot%20from%202015-11-21%2016-14-50_zpsixdvykmy.png%7Eoriginal[/IMG] Now the question is what are they seeing on those fuzzy screens. Is it fuzzy because they just turned cut the feed? Or can they make out some weird TV feed or whatnot in all that fuzz.....? And what are they watching that entertains them so!? Apparently kerbals have very high tech. Those are some pretty interesting floating displays. I wonder what method they use to produce it...? Is this what we will be like when we finally obtain such technology?

[quote name='KerikBalm']0.1 tons of folding radiator per drill, its that simple[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure the drills use a different heat that is not attached to the normal heating system. They and the ISRU are not heating up that I know of in a way that warms other things(Although that would be a nice effect assuming it's realistic. I don't know how much heat that should be.) They are heating up internally with a different vallue and need to gain heat to be 100% efficiency. It's like getting an engine warm to be at max performance. The numbers for it are displayed in their info when you right click as you use them. You need to to gain max heat to be 100% efficiency. If there is some effect of radiators on drills and ISRUs I would love to know what it is. It would be interesting. I have yet to figure it out personally.

Is the physics file in the link kept up to date. I was wondering since the patch. I wanted to replace mine with the newest one manually to see if it's still working properly since the hotfix. [B][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92231-The-Linux-Thread%21#linuxthread06c"]"with the file here.[/URL]"[/B]

You could try a hopper vehicle and refuel part way at like Gilly or something then head to moho and return. It might take alot of the delta V out of it. Working on a trip like that too it as we speak actually. Hitting Minmus to refuel, then gilly, then moho to see if I can make it. I'm also heat testing my ship with the new stuff in 1.0.5. I just reduced the engines to closer to the needed and saved some weight. I don't think I have to worry about it blowing up from extended burns. Hopefully I am right! [IMG]http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii613/PicsMe101/KSP/Screenshot%20from%202015-11-19%2000-39-06_zpssp14dezi.png%7Eoriginal[/IMG]

If the problem with new action groups is shortcuts. They could also go the RPG route and add action bars on an action bars and visually represent them and you would simply have to push many instead of having a keyboard shortcut. This would give a potentially unlimited ammount. It would also help both situations. Unless it adds that much problem to the lag like in most rpgs. They never seem write the code for the interface well and it's always a problem. Especially since this is a physics game.. Maybe they could let you make and save macros which would be saved action groups that could be put in them. Give it an icon and the instructions. Those could be the adjustable ones even. They would need a new way to put them in the different location and give icons and names. They would also need to let you turn them on and off to save lag from screen usage more than likely. If they added a way to adjust macros out of the VAB/SPH that would be half way or more to idea of modifying in flight/space. Even if you need to stop to change them practically.

They should also add extra banks of action groups to go with it. I thought it would be cool to map a separate one to alt/Rightshift. Then they can have ships coliding auto set to the Alt/RightShift category to not mesh them. Or let you set them so they do not mesh as you combine vehicles. This could help with docking and or multi-vehicle setups. We need more action groups regardless. And the more action groups the better.