MR L A

Respectfully disagree. It's just one part that gets a part upgrade with the fuel node. Before the upgrade it can only attach and then jettison things. After the upgrade, fuel can be transferred through it too. That seems like a pretty logical and linear progression to me. I'd ignore any reasoning tied to the fuel line, it only confuses things unnecessarily and both parts/functions remain separate and relevant anyway. For example, once the fuel node has been unlocked, the decoupler allows fuel to be shared (or not) between tanks and subsequently jettisoned when empty. The fuel line allows the flow of fuel in one direction rather than both. perhaps it would be useful to think of the decoupler as a bi-directional fuel line?

I think a lot of us forget how much of a new experience was when we first played KSP. Understanding how prograde, retrograde, radial and ascending/descending nodes work, how to do transfers, how to dock, flight stability, heck even how to get into orbit is a HUGE learning curve for a completely new player. Adding mods like MechJeb, InfernalRobotics and even KER would be an extremely confusing and un-enjoyable experience for new players. As experienced players, we forget that we have pretty much mastered the stock abilities of KSP and seek to add more complexity as we progress. Having said that, I will reiterate how essential KAC is - though I do think even this may appear a little confusing to a brand new player. I think SQUAD should have a play of Stellaris with the tutorial guide thing switched on. Possibly the best way to introduce a player to any game I've ever seen

Download mods called Scatterer, EVE and RealPlume They're available on SpaceDock or Curse

Ha, some good ones on here guys lets keep 'em coming!

I second, third and fourth the Mk2 nosecone there's a mod with a pretty sexy one in but I didn't like the rest of the parts, with the exception of the Linear Aerospike, which was just plain sexy! Though iirc the textures weren't quite perfect Other than that, the only parts I actually want to see are the Porkjet overhaul things that didn't quite make it to the game... I've been using the mod, and it is absolutely gorgeous (SQUAD, if you read this, I will pay a large amount for it to be included in a future DLC, that's how much I loved his work on RPO). Shame the 2.5 meter stuff is so ugly, especially that decoupler...

(Hopefully this is the right section) Hi everyone! Last night I was scrolling through Instagram (yes, I'm one of those) and I found an interesting post. It was captioned "The last two games you played have merged into one... How bad did it turn out?" The OP had GTA V and Mario Kart As this is the KSP forums, lets keep it to Kerbal Space Program and X. So, what game did you last play other than KSP? Do they mix well? Mine was the original Star Wars Battlefront II... So, I guess Kerbal Klones using blasters?

No. Of course scientists didn't go to the moon to build the F1, but they did, however, do a hell of a lot of other science things before the built the F1. You just have your example backwards. A proper refutation of your nonsensical argument is that scientists DID go sub-orbital (the German V-2), then orbital (Sputnik, Juno, Atlas) before they built moon capable rockets (Saturn). The reason for your confusion is the apparent lack of an even bigger and better engine/rocket as a result of going to the moon.

weird.. I did this literally an hour ago haha fortunately my insertion stage sill had 700 dV left and my lander had over 1000... so as soon as I realised what had happened, I burned a combination of retrograde and radial out (my orbit was taking be closer to the sun) - allowing Kerbin to catch-up with my craft. It was not an efficient way to manoeuvre, but I wanted Jeb back asap, managing so in approx 20 days (more efficient manoeuvre's would have be waiting the best part of a year). Yes this was in career, also, I play with reverts turned off, so I HAD to get Jeb back!

I imagine the reason behind this is similar to why KER can't detect acceleration coming from RCS thrusters or acceleration due to gravity - only works with currently attached engines

*grumbles about including Porkjet's overhaul parts with DLC or 1.3* Insanely looking forward to this DLC... slightly surprised about the direction they've gone with it, but imo it works Anyone care to guess when it'll be released? BONUS SPACE POINTS for closest guess!

Yup! I get burnt out too. Finding a new mod always help, I recently installed ScanSat so I'm rather loving that atm. Oh, also, have a go at career mode but turn reverts off and no Kerbal respawning Keeps things a bit more interesting I usually go in a cycle of playing KSP, Stellaris, having a sesh on the original Battlefront 2 then back to KSP.

I think we should have a love story between Ross & Rachel Kerman... or J.D & Elliot Kerman... or FatKid & Cake Kerman...

More cores is useful for running YouTube (other music outlets are available) in the background though

Yes they do. I also posted potential solutions that are at least workable ideas.

I was thinking that might be a solution I agree, they're more fun to fly. Actually have to think about what you're doing a little more whereas the bigger rockets (in the same series as this smaller one) have ample TWR throughout the flight. But tbf, the missions with the big rockets tend to be a little more exciting than crew rotation of a space station in a 1000km orbit...

Someone should do a video of this and explain whats going on I think S.M. posted one or two but nothing within the last year. I was trying this method with a small 2.5m design (similar to the stock GPLV - if that's what its called) but it didn't quite work.. after jettisoning the SRBs the vehicle's TWR is momentarily 1.0 (possibly below) resulting in too much turn as you'd expect. Will work fine with smaller payloads, but I was really hoping this particular craft could efficiently deliver this particular payload

Ahh thanks I'll report back soon, hopefully I won't have anything negative to report

huh, I'll whack it in and see what happens I'll do a bit of digging but I vaguely remember a few people saying their performance was unexpectedly (much more of a hit than Scatterer should have). I've used a fresh install of KSP when testing scatterer so conflicts don't appear to be the problem. I'm not with my PC for about a week, so I can't currently show you my config.. it should be exactly as appears on download though

Hi! Is your work rendered by GPU processes or is it CPU "bound" similarly to KSP? Trying to work out if installing a 280X I have lying around will be of any benefit in terms of FPS with this mod I also have the uncharacteristically low frame rate issue (with particle number turned WAY down as suggested) I saw mentioned a few pages back, any fix for this yet? Thanks for the great work!

Hi guys, I was wondering if it was at all possible to develop a system whereby connected parts could be "grouped" so they were treated as a single part for physics calculations. For example, a command module with 4 rcs thrusters, two parachutes, a docking port, a solar panel, and an antenna could be "grouped" as one part rather than ten individual parts in close proximity. Obviously, if this was at all possible, the CPU (fps) savings would be pretty huge

I'll deffo give the mod a go thanks I've had a stick lying about for years.. hardly touched the thing lol. I'll give it a go but I think the transition between WASD and a stick might result in more than a few reverts hah, yeah I've seen it take ridiculous routes just to do a 180

I usually use two each side (for mk3 shuttles) but have them connected to each other and the one of the boosters connected to the decoupler. Looks pretty nice... though I probably haven't described it too well haha. I should really take more screen shots. But yeah, a bigger one would be nice for doing Ares I type rockets. I have a SRB first stage in one of my 1.25m designs.. a scaled up version for a 2.5m design would be tres nice.

Yeah there's plenty of solutions to that, any 4X game (looking at you Paradox) manages quite well. One simple solution is to have time warp work on a sort of vote system i.e. one player requests warp, other players consent to it (manageable in games with friends). Another solution is to have it toggleable on any given server i.e. those with weapon mods will just want to dog fight so warp isnt needed. A slightly weirder solution is to have time zones/fields.. i.e. a player can warp as much as they like and players with in a specific radius as them remain synchronised. Player outside of the radius become de-synced, but catch up when they reach the same zone as the other players. This has the disadvantage of the game time/MET jumping around considerably on re synchronisation with the other players, but does avoid the docking problem you described... who really cares what the in game clock is doing anyway? I imagine there's a few other solutions too, but I don't do dev work, so I don't know any more.

The part about overriding pitch if you adjust yaw etc... this is my exact problem with my shuttle designs - I'm sure this problem was made worse after they adjusted SAS for 1.2 (or whenever it was recently). I'd never quite understood what the problem was, but this explanation has nailed it for me. So annoying when I try to correct yaw on my MK3 part shuttle only to have attitude change with it - made the craft a complete poodle to fly! Would using a joystick help with this?

haha those were the days!