Vindaloo

Shoot, you are correct. My bad.

EDIT - Nevermind, this article is from July 2014 and was already discussed at length in the forums. Please ignore this post and move along. http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-07/31/nasa-validates-impossible-space-drive

This happens when you load a ship that was built with tech you do not have (either due to tech tree not being unlocked or mod part no longer present).

Female Kermans would be awesome (I think there is a mod that has some as well? Not sure). My suggestions for names, to keep with the theme of the original three: Clementine Kerman Belle Kerman Abigail Kerman If we wanted to go exotic then I would go with: Valentina Kerman Kalpana Kerman Liu Kerman (named after Soviet, Indian, and Chinese astronauts, respectively)

Absolutely, great idea.

This is a really good thread, but I find the OP is steering much of the discussion right towards Sherkaner's tech tree idea, and while it is clearly an improvement over the current tech tree I think that giving a player 15 different branches to go down right at the start would quickly overwhelm new players. Personally I much prefer the Engineering Based Tech Tree by Probus. I think it is more intuitive and more elegant, it provides a for a nice flow; whereas the Sherkaner tree has no flow, you just hop from one node to the other. Also, I agree that the way science is gathered should be updated. Personally I would first get rid of all the KSC science, it is rather silly to do an experiment at the flagpole and then at the administration building and get points for both. Second, some of the experiments should not be instantaneous (science junior, seismic accelerometer, etc), give them time for completion and have the completion time significantly decreased (and reward increased) if the experiment is hooked up to a science lab (which would make space stations and outposts incredibly useful). Third I would add a system of diminishing returns for repeating experiments, for example say a particular experiment can net 60 science max: the first iteration gives 30, the second gives 20, the third gives 10 (each iteration of the experiment would have to be done after a minimum time interval, and in the case of surface samples at a different location, say 1 km away, to make rovers more useful)).

Yeah, I had hoped that as well...

Just want to share this awesome thing that happened in my game last night. Due to some unfortunate errors at mission control I had three kerbals stranded on Mun with not enough fuel to return to Kerbin (who the heck presses quicksave when they want to quickload? silly kerbals). Anyways, rescuing the mission and all of its sweet science became our top priority, so the team shelved its plans for a new space plane and redesigned the Munar Adventurer IV (renamed Munar Rescue) with plenty of delta-v for a trip to Mun and back. Everything went amazingly well, the exit and capture orbits were textbook and the intercept to target course was plotted without much trouble. The landing was a little iffy due to the lander's probe core stubbornly wanting to land on the side of a crater wall, but after a few tweaks Munar Rescue landed within 850m of the target. Fantastic! The kerbals EVAed over to the rescue capsule and set for home! Once the ship hit about 100 km altitude over Kerbin it was time to ditch the last of the fuel and engine, and descend with the capsule alone. This is when things went wrong. The mission planners had forgotten to put a decoupler between the capsule/heat shield and the fuel tank! Some simulations were run (save, load, repeat) and it was determined that the ship could not survive re-entry with the fuel tank and engines attached, the aerodynamics of the ship would send it in a deadly tumble at 2000 m/s and the heat from re-entry would do the rest. Was there any way to wrench victory from the jaws of defeat!? The flight engineer, Thomden Kerman came up with a plan! The heat shield would be decoupled from the main capsule, thus also separating the fuel tank; hopefully then the fuel tank (being less aerodynamic than the capsule) would just tumble away. The trick would then be to keep the capsule and heat shield lined up so that when the drag hit the heat shield it would just shove it back right up against the capsule and protect it from deadly re-entry burn. It was mad! But it was our only hope... AND IT WORKED! Mad cheers rang throughout mission controls as the capsule finally made it through the re-entry and deployed its parachutes, the team had made it home safely!! This was an amazing rescue, and I couldn't believe Deadly Re-entry actually factored in that a piece of space debris (which is what the heat shield became after being detached) could protect a ship right behind it. I cheered so loud that my wife and daughter ran over to see what happened. Note: this is my first game of KSP ever (I chose to use both FAR and DER for some additional stress, lol). Whew! What fun!

These tips are great! Keep up the good work!

I understand, but if you have already figured out everything about rockets (delta-v, thrust, mass, TWR, orbits, inclination planes, etc.) then I am fairly confident that you could pick up realistic aerodynamics. It is true that FAR offers an insane amount of tools to help design planes, and they are indeed fairly complex, but you don't need them at all to build and fly a plane. Even with complicated designs you only need to understand the very basics of FAR to get your design to work properly. Anyways, my point is that any player that has figured out rockets can figure out planes, even though they are more challenging.

News to the Devs: your player base wants it realistic!! Seriously, why do you think I downloaded and installed KSP last week? It wasn't for the funny green guys (though I do love them so); it was because the game offered me the chance to fly "real" rockets. In order to advance in this game I've had to learn delta-v, orbits, transfers, prograde, retrograde, etc. Maybe its because I am an engineer but I LOVE THIS GAME. And sure enough I am now looking at mods that make the game more realistic, FAR, Deadly Re-entry, TAC, etc. Realism is what brings the player base to the game. And of course planes are harder than rockets, but you don't need planes to play the game. I have been trying for 2 days now to land a plane on the small runway on the island and so far no go, but once I succeed I will be ecstatic. That is the fun of the game, trying challenging things, working through it, then finally succeeding. Trying to understand the calculations in FAR is quite the challenge for me, but the great thing is I don't need to in order to play the game. There is plenty to do in KSP without ever stepping into the SPH (in fact I would say that the SPH is a whole side-game). So, please, get aerodynamics right! Break all the things!

That's No Mun! Not mine, this is from Reddit.

Currently my science sandbox game is in hard difficulty (60% science iirc), and I am discovering the science tree for the first time so I never really know what to go for (definitely makes it interesting). I just unlocked Ion engines, up next is supersonic flight.

OK, thanks for all the advice. I set myself two new goals: 1) build, fly and land planes; 2) Land a probe on Eve. Once I do those two things I will probably start a career mode game.

I am new to KSP, been following Scott Manley's tutorial videos and I feel I am doing pretty good (so far). In order to learn the game I have been playing a Science Sandbox game; I have just completed succesful manned missions to Minmus and Mun. What do you suggest I do next? Try to head to Duna? Start a career mode game? Something else? Mods I am using: FAR, KER, Deadly Reentry, Kerbal Alarm Clock Mods I plan on trying next: TAC, RemoteTech, Karbonite (or Kethane) - which is a logical next step?

I am new to KSP (just got to Minmus, yay!) and have been told that this is a *must have* mod. However, after reading through all 43 pages of posts here I am still a little unclear as to why this mod is considered essential. Can someone please enlighten me?

My understanding from his last post above is that he would be willing to give over all the source files for someone to take over the mod, not that he would continue it on his own. Anyways, I hope we see something soon, as a new player I was totally awed by some of the ships pictured in the KerbPaint mod post.

Is KerbPaint going to be updated or is someone working on a new mod?