Terwin

This is because your view is focused on a vessel that is slowly orbiting the body in question, so even if you don't move the mouse your POV is slowly moving, thus dragging the nav-point with it. I will use this some times if I have a particularly fiddly bit I want to do, I just drag it slightly before the point I want and let the orbit drag my nav point to where I want it

I would like to see what the official version of Life support would look like, but as I would not expect it to be on by default in normal mode, I do not expect to actually see it added to the game. KER has a number of things that I find to be very important for proper flight planning. I think it would be reasonable to require multiple facilities at level 3 to unlock it(level 3 R&D+tracking+current assembly building, on top of the requirements for maneuver nodes. (start and end acceleration for each stage along with d-v calculation for that stage. Make it acceleration instead of TWR so it is body independent Something like: "Stage 1 Start: 10.2m/s/s(8.3m/s/s @1atm) End: 15.6m/s/s(9.2m/s/s @1atm) Total: 2000m/s(1500m/s @1atm) in 18s" Make it a little tab down in the corner like the engineer report currently is so that new players will not need to bother with it if they do not know what it is/does. KAC is also important, I think. There is a good start with the 'next maneuver' times in the vessel listing in the tracking center, but at the very least I would like to be able to tell the tracking center to send me a notification a specific number of minutes before a given maneuver(this only requires adding the method of requesting the alarm, and the text of the notification as UI elements(and a notification like 'X minutes until planned maneuver node for vessel Y' would be plenty). Perhaps add a 4th button to the change orbit/delete node UI of the maneuver node, this one being either a blank circle or an alarm clock. (I think the time before the node alarm value would probably need to be in a setting, and default to 1 minute, unless they wanted to add more than the minimal UI to handle this functionality)

I prefer having an automated refueling base that generally stays landed on a low-gravity body.(Minmus, Ike, Gilly, Pol/Bop) That way if you have a mission go poorly, you can just divert to any planetary system where you can capture, then wait for the fuel bot to come and give you enough fuel to land and refuel. Actually saved my 1.1(.3) Jool mission after a flubbed ejection burn from Jool when I realized I would need unreasonable amounts of d-v to capture at Kerbin, just redirected to Duna, used the last of my fuel to capture, and got enough fuel from the fuel bot to land on Ike to refill both fuel and Life Support supplies. I also use them to refuel my scansats(usually my first ships to a given system, and just about the only interplanetary vessels I launch which do not have ISRU).

Sorry, I thought that was primarily for the fuel flow priorities, I did not realize surface mounted fuel tanks previously would not feed engines. Thanks for all your hard work on the mod.

I guess that is what I get for waiting to report this until I was done playing for the evening. I only have 19 mods however... (took me a while to figure out why KER said ~10K lf only gave a few hundred m/s and would all burn in less than 3 minutes... It was only seeing the fuel in a 2.5 to mk3 adapter, not all those 1.25 LF tanks I had in the cargo bay, the fuel in the 1.25 tanks was considered dry weight)

Before the biome re-vamp in 1.2, I found splashed in the highlands over on the far side of Kerbin near the badlands(I was actually trying to get splashed down in the badlands for a caveman game, and was surprised to find I was splashed in highlands instead)

The stage recovery mod(updated to 1.2), you can open a read-out in the VAB/SPH that will tell you estimated descent speed with full or empty fuel tanks of each of your stages. I find it works well to hep me have enough chutes, but not too much. (the default display is for empty tanks, but if I still have fuel, I can always turn on the engine just before I land to slow down if I am faster than I like).

When I first started playing with R&D I would have disagreed with you about it being over powered(at least in principal). Then I discovered the converter efficiency upgrade. With the converter at +50%, you get 1.5 tons of fuel for each ton of ore you process, allowing your high-endurance vessels to have a fuel fraction well over 100% when most of the fuel is stored as ore. All you really need is a fuel tank that will hold enough fuel for your longest burn, and store the rest as ore, converting it into a larger mass of fuel only as needed. Any idea what the delta-v is on an ISP 1000 nuclear engine with a fuel ratio of ~130%? (I really need to install one of those dev versions of KER) --- Of course with the amount of success I have been having with some of the goals I have set for my space programs, overpowered is probably a good thing...

I thought that the small drills(much like the small ISRU) produced substantially less than the large drills, on top of having a lower limit beyond which they are non-functional.

Sitting in LKO on a 4 kerbal rescue mission, waiting to pick up his first rescuee. Since his rerendezvous was taking so long, I also launched the first ISRU enabled exploration craft/cruise ship destined to head to the Mun, Minmus and beyond(With Val, Bill, Bob, and lots of tourists who only expected to get orbital), forgetting he was up there, there are enough empty cruise ship seats to pick up everyone in orbit(except Jeb) before heading to the Mun for refueling...

... when you are calculating a time-frame and reflexively cut it in half and feel like you need to do something at that point. "Hmm, time to head home in 2:40, so in 1:20 I need to.... wait a sec!"

Generally I consider ~5% to be the minimum for a useful refuel location. In my 1.2-pre game I had multiple locations on Minmus with 12-14%(some of the highest I have seen) When feasible, I try to make my first and last landings on a body for a given visit in higher ore areas, while the other stops can usually get by with little or no refueling, making the ore concentration unimportant. For a fuel base, I will generally look for the highest concentration I can find near the equator. For bases looking at other resources, it is just wherever I can find useful levels of the most important resources under consideration.

I find it more convenient to take a look in the astronaut complex under assigned kerbals. Just scroll down until you find the name of the stranded kerb, and it will tell you the part they are in.

The Eye, Tentacle, and Beak look very much like the kraken was drawn to the bloaked vessels, almost as if they were kraken bait! Best be aware of how your bloak works if it calls the kraken...

I find that if I quoted someone then cancel the message, that the quote will still be there the next time I try to post. If you select the box around the quote and hit delete I find that usually works, and failing that you can just delete the quote text, possibly even putting the empty quote box in a spoilers tag.

I was just noticing something. It has been a couple weeks since 1.2 dropped and I am not seeing anyone with hair on fire crying out that the release is unplayable. Sure there is some grumbling about wanting mods to be updated, and there are issues with parts of the UI not displaying properly in the VAB/SPH if you have too many part mods or contracts, but in general, I am not seeing much grumbling. Certainly no where near the level of vocal unhappiness that marked the last two releases.(I joined on 0.90, so I can't speak for earlier releases). Considering how much of an edge-case some of the 'game breaking' issues were in the past, I can only conclude that this is a pretty stable and robust release. As a developer, I know that the difficulty of releasing stable and robust software can easily be quadratic, or even exponential based on the complexity of the system, so I must say: Good job Squad!

I had not realized they were massless, I may need to look for opportunities to replace my struts with auto-struts. I have yet to have a career game where the cost of struts matters, but every ounce of mass matters to the rocket equation. (I almost wish I used struts on non-launch stages so I could get even bigger benefits)

Docking ports are needed before station contracts will appear.(love these, as one will usually pay for the entire launch, making any tourists/rescues or other station contracts I can manage with the same ship pure gravy) You should *always* have at least 1 'world firsts' contract (active or available) to take your exploration one step further. I think that anywhere you have taken a manned mission, tourists may want to go, so visiting Moho, or landing on Eve may make it hard to find cost-effective tourist contracts.

This is my 1.1 game, which transitioned up to 1.1.3, but was abandoned because it used USI mods(Life Support and Kolonization) which had an over-haul for 1.2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tech tier (Starting tech is tier 0): 100% of community tech tree + > 30K unspent science ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last milestone - BUILT SPACE STATION WITH MASS GREATER THAN 30T (more than that just in fuel...) ACHIEVED INTERPLANETARY TRAVEL(Scansats and automated fuel stations: Bop, Gilly, Ike, Moho, en-route to Eeloo) ACHIEVED MANNED INTERPLANETARY TRAVEL, RETURNED HOME(Duna/Ike, Gilly, Val/Pol/Bop[orbiting Duna with full tanks, waiting for window to Kerbin when 1.2 dropped]) INTERPLANETARY SPACE STATION(interplanetary craft had Life support and > 30t just in fuel) INTERPLANETARY BASE(interplanetary craft also landed and had ISRU) INTERSTELLAR ARK (How many Kerbals does this require? Bonus points for Life support?) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reputation: somewhere up near max ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Funds: > 30M

I have seen some examples that indicate that a single strut will secure the entire part as if a lattice is in place, as opposed to a single point of reinforcement. May be worth testing to see if your triangle is needed.

I would recommend adding a bit of cinnamon. If it is getting too done, a bit of butter, or perhaps a lower AP would be helpful(a PE between 30km and 40km seems to work well for many banana roasters, adjusting the AP for your desired level of roasting. I like 80km as that gives some nice caramelization with a core that is still soft)

That is the way KER worked when I used it in 1.1.3 and earlier. if I'm in orbit, TWR is not terribly useful, but acceleration sure is.(Surface TWR is pretty useful as well, just remember that it is using the current atmospheric density, not the surface atmospheric density)

Those two contracts sound like something I would use a small LFO rocket for. Just throttle down if you start to go too fast when you are close to your target height. I previously used planes for survey contracts that were near the KSC, but it has been a few versions since I last did that outside of a caveman game.

Every time I have grabbed an asteroid, I have always had ISRU on the vessel. Drill out enough ore and what is left of the rock may weigh less than your 6 LV-N engines... But for a Class E, I might want a larger engine to help burn off that excess fuel... Of course I once did something similar, but not for a contract. I sent a ship out to grab an asteroid for a drop-tank on it's way to Jool. Only problem is, the asteroid was far too large for the ship, so after a few cycles of 'top-off then burn most of the fuel' I finally gave up, topped off a final time and just went without it.

According to my game, the Mk0 is 0.025 tons for 50 units giving 2K units/ton vs 0.25 tons for 400 units for the Mk1(which has the same ratio as rocket tanks), giving 1600 units/ton. I still used Mk1 fuel tanks for the core(6 of them for the 2400 LF I had in my old core), I just attached stacks of 12 Mk0 tanks radially at 8x to get the 4800 in drop tanks (each one with the smallest radial decoupler(0.025) and a strut(0.05) for stabilization. Saved me about 0.14tons on the Mk1 core, and about 0.62 tons on the Mk0 drop tanks(which now have 4 stages instead of 1) for the same fuel. All those full-length drop tanks do make it a little harder to attach everything without overlap however. May need to move them down or something.