Sidereus

Hmmmm......

Made a bunch of spaceplanes, and updated one of my 1.0.2 Mk3 designs: More about it here.

This is a rework of a design I was using in 1.0.2. Because of the RAPIER nerf, I had to add a few more engines (original design only used six), but it works pretty well: This will get 20 kerbals into a circular 75km orbit with 850 dV leftover, which is more than enough to do a rendezvous at 100km. Ditching the rearmost four engines in orbit (which are attached with a Docking Port Sr.) gives you an extra 200 or so dV, if you really need it. Replace them with four LV-N's, remove all the oxidizer and top off the liquid fuel completely and you can get ~10,000 dV out of it. And it practically jumps into space...not a whole lot of fancy maneuvering needed, just get to 10,000m and climb at around 10 degrees until you start losing speed, switch to closed cycle mode and power into space.

I had a combined manned mission to go to Duna with two landers - a smaller single seat lander "piloted" by Bob to land on Duna, and a larger one crewed by Jeb, Val and Bill to get the flyby mission at Ike and do some temperature scans at the surface. I got into Duna orbit just fine, detached the smaller one, got the Ike lander into LIO, then landed the smaller one. This is when the trouble started. First thing I found was that neither of my landers had antennae, which was OK since I'd be recovering them eventually, but a bit annoying. Then I found my larger lander only had two landing legs, and also had a radial monoprop tank covering half the science instruments. Definitely need to be more careful with the symmetry mode in the future...it also lacked any solar panels. Good thing NERVs generate lots of electricity... I did manage to set down the larger lander without using any legs, get most of the science I came for, and get it back to Kerbin OK though (it helped that the "surface" temperature scans were actually altitude temperature scans, which saved a ton of fuel as I only really needed to land once). Bob's still stuck on Duna, waiting for a rescue mission, but was part of the original plan, anyway.

Or use the Stock Bug Fix mod, which fixes the problem.

Neither "Left-handed" or "ambidextrous" really applies to me, so I'm having a hard time choosing which to go with. Cross-dominance I think is the term that fits best. I write left-handed, but I do a ton of stuff with my right hand as well, such as throwing or batting. I consider my left-hand best for detail work, and my right hand/arm best for things that require more strength. Also, while I can't write right-handed with a pencil on paper, I can do it just fine on a chalkboard. - - - Updated - - - I shoot long guns left-handed (because it feels more natural to use my right-arm as a support), but it turns out I'm right-eye dominant. The end result is that I can shoot pistols (and long guns off a rest or bipod) ambidextrously.

So far I've only lost one Kerbal on this career save...and it was because I didn't realize his vessel used parts from a mod I uninstalled (the parts were exactly like stock parts, just with slightly different properties, and I must have grabbed one of the modded parts by mistake). Luckily he was a rescued Kerbal, and not one of the orange suites.

Not as bad as that formulation makes me cringe.

My computer. I get, at best, 8-12 FPS. On a more complicated ship, the best I can hope for is 4 FPS. This makes everything take 2-3 times as long as it should. And then there's the constant crashing...

Running 1.0.4, though I've got backups of 1.0.2 and .90 if I ever feel like going back and playing them.

I don't recall. It may have been "Icarus I", or maybe "Untitled Space Craft". For my newest save, it was Nova I.

I'm running a 32 bit operating system (Windows Vista ), and they killed the Win64 build, so I can't see how that would be it.

Ok, so I played a bit more today and the problem came back. I think I've tracked down the issue, and it's weird. This only happens if I don't launch from Steam. If I launch the game using the .exe -- which I usually do in order to save memory -- the issue comes back.

They seem to be extremely sensitive to angle. In space, the magnetic pull helps bring them together at the right angle because both craft can easily move a bit. On the ground, gravity and friction prevents the craft from moving to accommodate, so you have to get it perfect. Have you tried using the Docking Port Alignment mod? That would help you know where you're off.

One of my jets was overheating too, just not to the point of exploding. I haven't played with it yet, but I suspect Claw's fix worked on that as well.

Thanks, this seemed to work. I moved the Physics.cfg file out of the KSP directory and verified the game cache through steam. Two files failed to verify (not sure what the other file was). I ran the test again with no radiators and the engine never got above 650K or so.

Update: See post below. Not sure if this is a bug or something about the new heat system I'm not getting, so I'm putting it here for now. The trouble started when I began the first mission to the Mun in my new career save. It's early career, so I have limited parts. I threw together a craft that used two X200-32 Fuel Tanks, a single X200-16 fuel tank, and a Skipper engine as a liquid fuel booster stage, with a couple of Thumpers to help it out in the lower atmosphere. Everything went fine until I was about 30-40km up, at which point the Skipper started overheating. And it'd keep overheating until it exploded, even at reduced throttle. This is weird, because I've never had a Skipper overheat before. Not in any of the other previous versions. I slapped some radiators onto it to see if that helped. It didn't. Radiators didn't seem to change anything, no matter how many I put on. So I ran a test in my sandbox save, to see what was going on. Created a similar setup as the liquid booster, clamped it to the launch pad, and ran it until it overheated, both with four of the large radiator panels and without any. The radiators didn't seem to help out at all. What's going on here? ETA: The only mod I have at the moment is KER.

I don't really have any standard ones, except for XOV <number>, which is eXperimental Orbital Vehicle, i.e. a space plane. When they're done being experimented on and I'm comfortable with the design, they become KSS (Kerbal Space Shuttle) <name>, like KSS Constitution (a long distance LFO space plane). Other than that, if they don't get a regular name (similar to Apollo or something) I'll create a designation based on their use -- like an orbital fuel refinery will become OFR -- but they aren't standardized.

Mk2's and Mk3s have always had that feature, at least since 0.90. As others said, it's just new for the Mk1 inline.

Getting to orbit is actually stupidly easy. I didn't realize just how easy it had become until I built a simple craft to do a Mun flyby yesterday. What would have taken a fairly massive vehicle in .90 and before became just a couple Thumper boosters and two fairly small liquid stages made up of a half dozen or so FL-T400 tanks, a LV-T45 and a LV-909. Getting back definitely is harder, though. I think the parachutes might be bugged....they seem to be opening at ASL instead of the altitude over the terrain like they used to. Going to have to investigate that a bit further. n/m. I think it's just that you have less time to slow down over land than over water...

I found attaching engines directly to the precoolers is a good way to have them both explode in 1.02. Fuel tanks always seemed to be the best thing to attach engines to. I didn't notice any huge differences in having precoolers vs. having a radial intake, except for in dV. Haven't really tried it yet in 1.04. I've been waiting for KER to be updated before I build any space planes.

I'm having a somewhat similar experience, though it's complicated by the fact that my design was using the Mk1 Liquid Fuel tanks, which have had their masses more than doubled and their fuel content increased from 150 to 400. My 1.02 design had six of them, so the total mass went from ~28t to almost 40t. Going to have to rejigger some things, I suppose.

There's a screen shot floating around somewhere of it...either in the announcement thread or the article. I personally don't really see what the difference is vs the version 1.0 cockpit, or why it was changed. It'd be really nice to have a side-by-side comparison. Edit: Here it is:

KSP's language rules were set by the admins, not by the forum software. This is true of any forum software. I've been members of vBulletin boards were the language rules were non-existent and any language was acceptable. Given that in this case, the admins are Mexican, that you keep continuing to call it "american style" is frankly ignorant.

It doesn't bother me as much with Jacksepticeye. Screwing things up in KSP is kind of his thing. When it really starts to make me twitch is when Scott Manley does it, because you know he knows better...