AVaughan

Back when I tried Kerbalism, I solved that by using multiple command pods.

Typically, if I want to know the orbit, I'll just make a named save, accept the contract and look at the orbit in the tracking station. If I don't like that orbit, I'll just load the save. That is easier than attempting to find the info in the save.

For the first, as far as I can remember, everything in a low "planet/moon" orbit, is typically in pretty much the same orbit. eg approx 80x80 for Kerbin.

Do your have principia installed? See and https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia/wiki/Concepts

Or they issue heavy fines and get court orders instruction Visa and Mastercard to prevent any payments from European countries being processed. For something like KSP, they might get court orders preventing it's sale in europe via Steam. I expect Valve to have at least an office/sell prepaid steam gift cards in Europe.

Also worth considering is a rescaled solar system, or maybe even Realism Overhaul. It's also perfectly normal to take a break for a few months and to play another game.

They are part of the free 1.4 update. (Note that your kerbals need a certain amount of experience before they get parachutes).

I'm pretty sure that USI doesn't add any experiments like that. So another mod is probably adding those experiments to USI greenhouses, so I'd try asking in that mod thread.

You still have to come up with a way to handle timewarp that keeps everyone happy. (And any version which has players playing in different timelines is basically a fail. When you are in different timelines, you might as well be playing single player). I just don't see that working for anything beyond driving around with rovers or flying planes around. Otherwise there would just be too much we want to warp to my next maneuver, but someone else is in the middle of a launch/landing or some other engine burn.

(From http://spacenews.com/safety-panel-considers-spacex-load-and-go-fueling-approach-viable/ )

Well if I understood what Elon said, then they don't need the densified propellants for a ISS mission, so they can fuel, then load passengers, if that is what NASA wants.

Personally I think Squad finished the game they envisioned, unfortunately there are people who want/expect features Squad never intend to implement. (A lot of those features are available as mods, often even maintained by some of Squad's developers).

I'm pretty sure that the choices in the dialog you showed are Play KSP (the 64 bit version) and launch KSP (the 32 bit version).

@NSEP That depends at least a bit on player skill, and a lot on patience. Other requirements, like max time in orbit because of a life support mod, can also be a factor. (And all of this assumes you have managed to launch into the plane of your target. If you need to do a plane change then the cost of that is extra). With enough time in orbit, then yes a small increase/decrease in apoapsis/periapsis will allow rendezvous, but depending on the phase angle separating the vessels, it might take a lot of orbits. Often it is easier to just use a design with 800 or so excess dV, and increase apoapsis enough to force a rendezvous in an orbit or two. The amount of monoprop/dV you need for docking depends a lot on your experience with docking and your patience. (A slow approach at 0.1m/s tends to require less monoprop for corrections than a faster/less patient approach at 1 m/s). I find the Docking Port Alignment Indicator mod to be very useful. With it I can often dock 20 ton ships using 5 monoprop, or 5 ton landers with 2.5 monoprop. Without it I use much more. A tip I find useful is to set your rcs to just translation, thrust limit your rcs thrusters and use fine controls, and let your reaction wheels control rotation. Having rcs centered around your CoM is also useful, but not required if you have enough reaction wheels and limit rcs to just translation.

I mod I've played with before that adds some interesting ideas regarding stations, labs and science is . It might be worth incorporating something similar into a science rework.

People playing with Realism Overhaul probably want to see min thrust somewhere, since in RO most engines can't throttle at all, and even the throttleable engines often can't throttle to zero.

@jiver RO is hugely different from stock. Whilst it might be possible to change orbit parameters so that you can moving existing craft into an RO install, they probably won't be of any use except as passive rendezvous/docking targets. You are better off starting a new game to learn RO mechanics. @MechBFB RO without RP-0 isn't intended to be played in science or career mode, so it's quite likely that things like science transmission are only rarely tested. And even when someone does test it, they probably have remote tech installed, because remotetech is sort of straddling the line between recommended and requires. Things should work without it, but most people who are doing anything beyond playing in sandbox should have it installed. RP-0, is Ro's career mode, and it requires all of RO recommended mods, and a quite a few more. Hence there are probably very few players playing career in RO without remote tech installed.

Thanks for that. A quick follow up regarding compatibility of this mod and Kerbal Construction Time. I've only played a bit since I installed this, but they do seem to be compatible. One thing that might lead someone to think things aren't working is that vessels seem to get their new name when they spawn on the launchpad, so you can easily have 3 satellites named the same in KCT's construction queue. (KCT also offers functionality to rename vessels during construction/rollout. I haven't got around to testing how that interacts with launch numbering). Edit: Just to be clear I'm not suggesting that renaming needs to be changed to work better with KCT, just that it is something to be aware of if anyone wonders about compatibility between this mod and KCT.

Is this mod likely to work with Kerbal Construction Time ? (Just in case you aren't aware KCT overrides the launch button in the VAB, and has its own launch button after construction is finished). Personally I think just tracking the name, and adding/incrementing a number if I've used the same name before would be good enough. So if my first Mun lander is a 1.25m design, and the second Mum lander is a 2.5m design (ie completely different design with the 2.5m design using a 2.5m command pod as well as a 2.5m booster), then if I've used the same name, I'm happy for the second launcher to be numbered Mun lander 2. If I want a different name, then I can change the name or add the block number myself.

Well x3 isn't exactly stock. So balancing parts for x3 shouldn't be Squads priority even if they did do a balance pass. As I said earlier the Mk3 parts are shuttle parts, not space plane parts. Shuttles normally have external boosters and an external tank, and launch straight up, then pitch over into a gravity turn. That substantially help their max payload fraction to LKO. Personally I think that the higher drag is a useful asset for shuttles during re-entry. If you only want the Mk3 tanks for liquid fuel then maybe just add a mod that enables you to switch some of the 2.5m tanks to liquid fuel.

Thanks for that. Something that doesn't work for me in my 1.4.3 install. If I target an object in Kerbin orbit whilst sitting on the launchpad, KER no longer displays a phase angle, which is useful when timing a launch to an LKO rendezvous. (Not a huge issue, since i can just eyeball things from the map screen, but a phase angle would be better). KER 1.1.4.10 installed via ckan.

Can I suggest, adding the synchronous orbit period as well. (Ultimately for a synchronous satellite I'm likely to take more care with the orbital period, than with the exact height of the apoapsis and periapsis. If I get the orbital period right, then the semi major access is right, and provided I'm reasonably circular, I don't care whether apoapsis = periapsis). I agree about them belonging in the body section.

@Corona688 I back up c:, which contains my important documents, (and saves from some of my other games), but I don't backup d: which contains my game installs (mostly via Steam). If I lose them, no big loss. I'll just redownload via steam, and start a new game. (I often create a manual .zip backup of ksp before installing or updating mods, but that is mainly a precaution in case a new mod breaks something in a horrible way. The zip-files reside on the same hard drive, so if that died, I'd still lose them).

KSP already has backups of savefiles. Open your saves folder, select the savegame, and look at the backup folder. Personally I'm thinking that maybe the op installed a new mod, started a new game to test it, and made the mistake of using the 'default' savegame name and overwrote his save.

I have multiple copies of ksp with different mod sets (and even different ksp versions). I just place a copy of ckan.exe in the ksp directory (beside ksp_x64.exe) and run ckan from there.