swjr-swis

I think they are the same thing. Look closely: in my case the same as yours, the base of that line starts away from the fairing, there's a good bit of empty space between them, where it should start inside the part. And they point in the same direction, if you consider that my fairing is 90 degrees rotated compared to yours (facing 'radial' instead of 'prograde', from the ship's perspective). Also, I am not convinced that the vector should really be that large.

I am not entirely sure if I am 'suffering from' this issue, or benefiting from it, with this particular build... The 'dish' is two 3.75m fairings, back to back. Notice the aero vector starting in the empty air above the dish. It goes a loooong way...

And the circle is complete. The same phrase that was coined when the invention of fire launched Kerbals to the top of the Kerbin food chain, is now used after the invention of highly directed fire launches them into space...

Succeeded.

Have you asked them? Face the ones you have picked for the mission, look into those big, googly eyes, and ask them what they think. (if they actually answer you, run. Don't wait to save. RUN.)

Except when it crosses it at all points.

Son archivos compilados para Unity, que es la base de KSP. Es muy posible que se puedan encontrar explicaciones detalladas en algún sitio del Internet. Este hilo en la parte inglesa del foro dedicada a modear el juego da unas pistas en la primera respuesta:

Not sure with that specific design, but aircrafts that small can actually have sufficient control authority purely with the torque supplied by the command pod's reaction wheels (or SAS unit if installed).

Hay algunas cosas que se pueden ver, como las texturas de las piezas, en el directorio GameData\Squad. Hicieron esto para facilitar el modear el juego. Pero las texturas de los kerbal o los planetas no están disponibles de manera abierta: están compiladas en los archivos .assets en KSP_Data.

And whatever you do, and this is of extreme importance, never ever

Lego cheats. They never put enough of the exact piece I need in the box to finish my creations, forcing me to buy another box...

Click derecha en la linea por encima del mensaje que has posteado, donde dice 'Posted xx minutes ago', y podrás copiar el link directo al mensaje (el URL incluirá el argumento 'comment=xxxxxx').

Thoughtlessly having thoughts of another person, while the person you should be having thoughts about is thoughtlessly unthought about... is cheating. Apparently. Or so I heard. From .. a friend. Oh you mean game-wise. I see. Well, KSP is whatever you make it to be. You are engaging no one in competition; you are engaging the limits of the game's environment and of your own creativity and problem-solving capabilities. Anything you build that achieves your intended goals within those limits is fair game. Anything that actually goes beyond and breaks through those limits should be revered moments of enlightenment (or hilarity, or sometimes both). Since the only one you're battling is you, a simple rule of thumb to keep when it comes to KSP: if something you do feels like cheating, it probably is. To you. Which is the only thing that matters in a single-player experience. So stop doing whatever made you get those cheaty feels, you naughty person you. A few examples. Going against all in-game and real-life conventions and logic, and using the Alt-F12 menu to 'allow clipping' enabling you to get a very specific look, because what you want most of all of this design is that it looks the part, is not cheating. The feeling of completion when you see the finished design is completely warranted. The sensation of achievement when it actually lifts off is totally fair. Seeing that your efforts of tweaking the design not only made it controllable, but you even understand why... is one of the absolutely most awesome experiences you can get from this game: On the other hand, giving up in disgust over in-game physics not doing the impossible things you ask of it while trying to make another impossible-physics contraption fly, and just brute-forcing it into the sky by strapping on a set of boosters, now that is cheating: Not that there is anything wrong with boosters. I am totally ok with boosters. They have their place. Rockets thrive on boosters. Some of my best friends use boosters.

Bienvenido al foro. El proyecto que describes es bastante ambicioso, y me gusta que hayas decidido intentarlo lo más stock posible. Seguiré el desarollo del hilo con mucho interés. Saludos!

Did you undock just before (maybe to try align the modules better)? If so, the ports need to have a certain minimal distance apart before they will 'engage' again to dock.

Just in the news: another massive black hole discovered in or near our galactic core. Not quite as big as Sagittarius A*, but massive enough to be proof of a new class. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/01/astronomers-spot-another-giant-black-hole-our-backyard I couldn't access the paper, so I didn't see if they mention this: how does this affect the calculated mass of dark matter for the Milky Way?

Engines used: Junos (LF), Twitch (LFO), linear RCS (mono), Sparks (LFO), and RCS blocks. 5x Junos + 2x Twitch + 4x linear RCS for the TIE fighter itself, 12x Sparks for the booster arrays, 4x RCS blocks for the minitug. Tried to use the smallest parts for everything, 0.675m form factor. External command seat for the TIE fighter and the minitug. Hybrid onion/asparagus staging. No SRBs of any kind used. No mods used, pure stock 1.0.5 install. See 5, no TweakScale used. I took the box, folded it into a TIE fighter, and had myself some irradiated Goo snacks in orbit. I had fun! I think my entry meets the following levels: level 1 - apoapsis of 73km, made it to space! level 2 - periapsis of 71km, stable orbit! level 3 - brought package of 10x yummy Goo for snacks (10x 0.05t = 0.5t, total a bit higher with support structure and Jr docking ports). level 4 - brought a satellite slash minitug to orbit, with probe core, RCS, panels, antennae and command seat. Used to deploy the snacks! At the end, I reboarded and deorbited the main craft, and got it back safely to land. Obligatory picture album:

Very untypical for Jeb, he's usually having even more fun than I am, even when he really shouldn't be...

Building tiny flyable contraptions powered by the Juno engine introduced by 1.0.5. I had almost completely ignored the SPH and runway with all previous versions. Somehow the fun of contructing and flying anything inside the atmosphere, instead of lobbing things out of it, just did not dawn on me before. When 1.0.5 came out, I set up a new install, and after a few test runs with my usual monster rockets, my eye fell on the new Juno jet engine. I know, one of the least powerful engines in the game managed to get me interested in building and flying atmosperic-only ships. I've since built the tiniest flyable crap that I never even considered before. Along the way I learned a lot about the new aero model, drag, lift, what makes a ship flyable (or not)... and just generally had a load of insane fun testing the limits of the game physics. Some examples of my stupid fun documented for general amusement (pic heavy) I can't even explain why it's so much fun to me. But it has kept me strangely entertained in stock 1.0.5 while eagerly awaiting what the arrival of 1.1 brings in the ways of stupid fun . (something tells me 1.1 will reintroduce me to crazily modded KSP again...)

You are of course absolutely right. I couldn't find it mentioned specifically in the EL thread OP, and it mentions Kethane, so I assumed I didn't remember correctly how it worked (I was sure I hadn't used Kethane, even though I've had EL installed, but I've been known to be wrong every other blue moon or so - oh look, a blue moon!).

Are there any mods out there that allow me to mine things like iron ore and then process them to practically make new rocket parts? Extraplanetary Launchpads allows you to build rockets away from Kerbin, from 'rocket parts': And in combination with Kethane, you can make the rocket parts from ore you mine:

LFO (Liquid Fuel & Oxidizer) are the rocket fuel tanks, as opposed to LF which are the 'jet fuel' tanks packing only Liquid Fuel. Just one comment, Snark: it's a tad on the high side and prone to tip over, especially for someone still practicing landings in vacuum on bodies that may have very sloped ground. A bit wider at the base may be advisable for extra stability (and will still fit in a fairing).

If it is really that specific a use case, then why wasn't it published as an integrated part of the Mk3 Engine Mount? Why the need to place engine mount, SSMEs, RCS blocks, etc etc separate from each other? Having to use a whole set of loose parts, with all the inherent structural integrity issues the game has, seems very counterproductive for something that apparently was created to be used and placed together in only one very specific way. I think that while the space shuttle was one use case they had in mind when making it, it was certainly not the only thing they wanted to allow it used for, or they would've integrated the whole assembly. So what about adding a toggle, like some of the jet engines have now (afterburner on/off or closed cycle on/off), that changes the parameters to be spefically suited to the SSME role for Mk3 space shuttles? In which case the engine has a slightly different mass and price more fitting to the SSME role, but it can only be toggled in the VAB. That would add the special use case that some are asking for, and still leave the Vector's current versatility untouched.

It does work, but sometimes too good. Intertia can carry a heavy booster parallel to the center stage for longer than you may wish, especially if you're getting into the thinner upper atmosfere and drag doesn't counter it enough anymore. Any kind of rotation while the CoM of the booster keeps up with the center stage can make the other end of the booster hit the center, with catastrophic results. With lighter boosters, it's the drag that sometimes kills you, as the smallest rotation putting the booster nose out of prograde can initiate a sudden flip in midair, again crashing it into other parts of your craft. And sometimes, and I admit this may be a personal thing I have with some of my designs, the shape of a complex craft really needs my boosters to let go with an absolute minimum of lateral or rotational movement. I've had very good results just taking the trouble to figure out the exact CoM of my booster assemblies, and placing that on the decouplers. Most of the time I can even completely dial down the ejection force of the decouplers, cause they just 'slide' down without endangering the rest of the craft, and whatever tight space I left in the configuration of the craft for the exhaust is enough for the booster to fall through. They tend to start rotating only a good distance down/away from my craft. It's very worth the extra effort, and very satisfying to watch.

I understand you of all people would feel a sting at the use of that word, NathanKell, and I love your work, man, but... those are not my words. And not my point either. The vector can already be dialed down as things are right now. It's right there, available to everyone, you have the choice, you have the power. You want it limited to some type of proportionality that you wish to impose on your game, well, max the thrust at your choice of number under a 100% then before you launch, or limit the gimbal. Voilá, all the real you ever wanted right at your fingertips, and all you had to do is choose to use it that way. What a fantastic concept, a game that allows choice. But apparently that's not good enough, we need a consensus to make absolutely sure no one gets to play with a Vector in any other way than what we feel is 'realistic' or 'fitting' or 'balanced', or any other word for it that won't mess you up that basically means 'whatever *I* happen to feel is the right numbers because reasons'. So let's lobby to remove even the possibility of it being dialed to any other numbers than what we personally feel is right. Cause people can't possibly be playing this game in any way that we can't think of. I get it when people complain when a part is simply not up to the task, because the game is limiting the use of that part. But complaining about a part being able to do everything you need it to do, and then some? Really? Especially when it's a click away from then being limited to your personal conviction of how it should work? <shrug>