fireblade274

To the first point, I completely agree, and maybe even require it to use mono propellant as fuel to re-inflate again As for using a decoupler, I did think about that, but It would require me to put out and maintain small "cube" like stations of deflatable shields for ships to pick up before making a burn back to Kerbin, and I may very well do that, but I still hope the heatshield is looked at again. To me it just makes sense for it to fold back up again Perhaps have the heat shield as is be a level 8 tech, and the same thing but with the ability to refold at a cost of slightly more weight?

Being able to deflate the heat shield makes sense and should totally be done. I remember reading the dev notes and seeing the statement that it wont be able to deflate; i immediately told myself "I guess ill never use that". But now I see it, it would fit the job perfectly for one of my large interplanetary planes that can land on the runway, but needs better heat shielding. It will not be able to come in and land like normal with the heat shield inflated, and I built it so I can reuse it for multiple missions: I cant have it inflated all the time.

Well here's what happened; I decided to send out an entirely separate ship to Eloo that will stay there and make refueling trips to the tug in low orbit. It holds 2/3 the fuel capacity of a jumbo fuel tank, and uses 4 1x6 solar panels, 2 Fuel Cell arrays, 4 jr. drills, an a jr. ISRU. the zone I land in is slightly above the min amount needed for the Jr. Drill to work. The efficiency is terrible; it takes 1yr 50 days to refill the fuel tanks, but it does work. Any suggestions on how to make it more efficient? I think Ill replace the solar panels with the larger ones to take more load off the fuel cells, but I can only do it to a certain degree on Eloo since its so far away, especially during the apoapsis of its orbit. I think Ill also add 4 more drills maybe? but then that would take more power from the fuel cells, would it provide less benefit? Also, @SteveD80 when your using the mini drill an engineer will help with efficiency, but they wont help efficiency with the mini ISRU, just in case you didnt know

KSP logHey has anyone else had this issue? I'm using MechJeb 2.5.7 and the MJ pork chop for a Eloo to Kerbin interplanetary transfer is showing zero intercept opportunity's, it's completely red and does not display a delta v amount for any point on the graph. First I thought it was because the planet needed to get to a better position, but idk that seems unlikely since every other planet had a working porkchop plot, and after a few years it still did not change. Interestingly, it will display a viable porkchop plot for every other planet. Kerbin is the only one showing a completely red "--/-- Dv" plot I'm posting here because the operator for the MJ forum thread closed it because some people were posting the same question over again. Here is my KSP log file if anyone wants a look

I'd like to see it come stock I thought that was implied lol

I'm a bit skeptical, but on the other hand you don't write something like that unless youve been really affected by it. I found the posts very interesting

So ive been building a large re-usable tug that will tow with it a med/large sized lander. I found out that I can get to an orbit around Eloo, detach the lander, land, re-connects to the tug, and I had barely enough fuel to intercept Kerbin from Eloo. Even with 3 small and 1 med heat shield, the best thing i could do was use Kerbin as a gravity assist to lower my solar orbit as much as I could, and I had to launch a rescue mission. I decided the best way to remedy this was to make the lander module (which must fit inside the MK 100 cargo-bay, I've allowed myself clipping privileges) capable of re-fueling after landing, and then making multiple surface to low Eloo orbit trips to gradual fill up the mothership completely, which will have no issues getting me back. This was my first attempt to use resource mining/conversion on planet surfaces: I needed to use the small drill and small ISRU to make the lander compact enough to fit my requirements, and placed one of each on the craft; 1 radial ore tank, 1 small isru, 1 drill. I placed 2 small radiators on the lander to cover heat, and I had 1 radioisotope generator (i failed to remember that energy generation was paramount in refining craft). Keep in mind I did do my hw and make sure my landing zone had more 2.5% ore When I got to Eloo the second time (this was yesterday, and this mission is in 1.1.2 where the previous was in 1.0.5) I as you can imagine vastly underestimated the requirements for "pratical" mining; it took 15+ days to fill my radial ore tank, and refining it all took less then 7 seconds, and gained me about 8 units of fuel and oxy each. In 20 min of doing this nonstop, i had only gained 100 units of fuel out of the 1000+ I needed to re fill it; AND i was banking on doing the trip multiple times to refill the orbiting tug. In relation to my Eloo endevers, my questions are: how many jr. drill o matics and cooling should I add? What energy system should I use? Obviously not radioisotope, but is fuel cell an option? How many Gigantor solar panels should I use if I go that route? Maybe something I'm not taking into consideration? Much thanks!

Hm I already did that not too long before it happened, but I'll delete both KAS and KIS and confirm they are the most recent versions Much thanks!

Hey guys I've been getting CTD's recently again and its on 64x build. game version is 1.1.2 Here is the KSP log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/31c2xsgmxv9w107/KSP.log?dl=0 Again my mods are (took out EVE): DistantObject KIS/KAS Kerbal Engineer MechJeb Kerbal Alarm clock Atmospheric trajectories If some one could take a peek and let me know what could be up with it I'd be very grateful, i seem to be able to play it long enough for me to dock with my station with an ssto, but shortly there after it CTD'd on me, not even during a scene change.

My username is what I have used for everything since grade school lol. It comes from my first Runescape character wayyy back in the day

Hello guys, so I have a project coming up (tomorrow) for my college intro to computers class, and I'll be presenting a project on the topic of "Computers in Automobiles". In a general query, I'm looking for a point in the right direction. To get an an idea of where I'm coming from; I have some good information on the ECU, but could someone detail to me any other main computing components in today's cars? What does the BCM and TCM handle, and where are they usually located? Is the HVAC system entirely self regulating or is is controlled by the ECU or another control unit? Does anyone who's familiar in the ways computers interact with car mechanics, have some good links or their own information they have that could get me going? It would be much appreciated Right now I'm trying to: Identify the main computing components Those components functions and their location in the car Explore technology of HUD's in cars; mainly the different driving aids that are being introduced, such as road lane displayment on the windshied on in foggy conditions Some information on self driving cars What the future of computers in cars will look like Thank you in advance for any help guys!

I'm not having any issues with it atm, x64 on win 10

(from version 1.1.2) Hey guys, so I'm looking at the mass values of the MK1 Liquid fuel tank and the FL-T400 fuel tank. Despite the MK1's description saying the liquid fuel is lighter, this does not seem to reflect in the weight of the fuel tank. Both tanks weight the same, 2.25t, and the mass values of liquid fuel (.90t) to oxidizer (1.10t) in the FL-T400 tank add up to the mass of liquid fuel in the MK1 tank, 2.0t. I understand the fact that liquid fuel in the game might weigh less then oxidizer, but I could have sworn in 1.0.5, it actually mattered, and a full FL-T400 weighed slightly more then then a fuel MK1 liquid fuel tank.. Could someone un-confuse me on this please

Yo guys so is this all working for you in 1.1.2? I see a lot of awesome pictures but I cant tell if your using 1.1.1 or 1.1.2; is it stable for you? In 64x?

Hello, I kinda forget how to install this again, do I copy the entire contents of the mods "gamedata" folder, which includes "trajectories" "modualmanager" and "MMLicense", over to KSP's gamedata folder, or do I just copy over the "Trajectories" folder?

@SQUAD Where are you guys going for vacay? Will we get dev note updates on when Sal's mojito is ready and when Harvester walks down to the beach and such?

Is the most recent version of KIS/KAS stable at the moment in 1.1.2?

That does sound like a bug, in previous versions running all stock, i'd seldomly get the "glue kraken" where the game would think the ship is accelerating when its not, and all information is telling you the craft is not moving, in addition to controls not being responsive. Upon trying to time warp, it tells you you cant time accelerate under acceleration. Can you move the vessel when its in that state? I haven't encountered said bug in a long time though. @Claw through rigorous work expelled that particular kraken to the underkerbin many-a-time ago I would suggest making sure all your mods are up to date, installed correctly, and if you still encounter the bug try running the game stock. You may also have better luck posting this to the "modded game support" thread to get better attention

I had this happen to me to. At the very beginning when 1.1.0 was released, I clicked play (in Steam) and verified (x64) in the right corner. A few days later, I was getting crashes with my mods much like the memory crashes in the VAB/SAB and changing scenes. Upon posting in the modded-support section, @Padishar notified me the game was running in x32. The solution is to simply run the x64exe from Steams KSP folder, however personally Im still getting CTD's even when running x64 now. They are random and can be one after another or after an hour or more of gameplay, and I suspect it could be a problem could be with the individual mods, however I cant really tell since the CTD's are so random. My mods are: DistantObject, KIS/KAS, Kerbal Engineer, EVE - clouds only-no citylights, MechJeb, Kerbal Alarm Clock

@Vanamonde what happened to the 122a?

stock. nuff said.

Step one: go to google.com Step two: type in "ksp bug tracker" Step three: press "I'm feeling lucky" You will be lucky

Exactly

I'd say both options are more or less the same in their results, barring extremes on either end. You probably already know this, but the way I see it and have noticed in my SSTO's is going up quicker at a higher AoA will cause less fuel to be burned during air breathing engine cycle and make the craft heavier for the rocket engines to deal with at a higher altitude, then a lower AoA assent profile. However since your ascending faster in the former then then latter, you reach orbit and more fuel efficient altitudes quicker, thus, generally the 2 factors, in my experience, cancel each other out with a negligible difference.

This. Exactly.