MachTurtle

Welcome to the forums, jackstech! It sounds like you are hooked on KSP like I am and thousands of other nice people are. I have always found the folks here helpful and interesting and now you're going to be one of them. Your english is very understandable so please don't feel shy about posting. Bueno suerte, amigo!

I've been using a Logitech Extreme 3D Pro ($39USD at big box store) with KSP for about two years. All the analog axes and switches can be assigned in KSP settings. Great base, so-so gimbals, but it's held up over many hours. It makes flying aircraft much easier for me.

As another rl pilot, I want to second Warkeeper's sentiments. FAR makes KSP so much more enjoyable. Hats off to Ferram4!

Hello KerbalSaver! I use a joystick for both airplanes and spacecraft in KSP. The behavior you describe may be entirely normal depending on the craft and its situation. Above the atmosphere, control inputs use either RCS or control gyros to change the attitude of the craft and your inputs should allow you to point in any direction. In the atmosphere, however, control inputs probably use control surfaces (elevator, rudder, aileron, etc.). Depending on the size, placement, and deflection of the control surfaces, your craft may be more or less responsive to inputs. Remember that the craft is (hopefully) designed to remain pointed in its direction of travel with no control inputs applied. This is the quality of aerodynamic stability. Usually, control surface deflections will allow your craft to point away from the direction of travel a few (5 - 20) degrees. Rudder will allow you to point left or right while elevator will allow up and down pointing. In the atmosphere, this attitude change should allow you to climb, descend, or turn. If a design is very stable, it won't be very maneuverable and vice versa. If you want to increase maneuverability, you might try increasing the size or deflection of your control surfaces or moving the center of mass closer to the center of lift. Using SAS can affect maneuverability, so I usually refine my aircraft design without using SAS. I hope this has been helpful. I'm sure other members can add to the discussion. Happy landings!

Live long and prosper, Techpig57.

I certainly won't speak for worir4, but as another rl pilot, I've enjoyed using FAR from 1.0.4 through 1.1.3. I'm anxious to see the update for 1.2.1 because flying stock aerodynamics for the last few weeks has been soul crushing challenging. Even with FAR, the aerodynamic modelling isn't everything one might hope for, but it's still a hangar-load of fun! I can whip together a plane in an hour or less and spend many more hours fine-tuning it using (mostly) common sense changes. I have an SSTO in my 1.1.3 save that I had flying so well that I could fly it through takeoff, transonic, orbit, re-entry, and landing by hand -- no autopilot or SAS. Boy, do I miss that craft! In regard to the OP, all sims are approximations of real world dynamics -- some better, some worse. If it's not fun, don't run it.

First, thanks for a great mod, Nertea! I just replaced the referenced part of the .cfg file and observed no difference in overall drag. I compared top speed in level flight using a Mk4 SSTO w/CRG-240 Cargo Bay I've been working on. I just picked up the Mk4 mod a few days ago, so I can't compare the performance to earlier versions. It seems rather difficult to push it through the trans-sonic region (I'm able to do it with 2 Broadswords, 6 Rapiers, and a pair of SRB's). Like TheReadPanda said, though, it's a huge airframe!

Thank you for this! I'm on a Mac and haven't been able to use HullCam for awhile.

Does anyone else here remember keying a lunar lander game into their programmable calculator? I'm talking about one with numeric display only (I had an HP-33C) where you input a thrust setting and it calculates a new velocity, altitude, and remaining fuel. It was like a one-D KSP, though the sim speed was around 30 seconds per frame rather than 30 frames per second. I hadn't thought about that in 35 years! Does that make me geezer? I found the source code!

I find having to restart KSP to use a (newly connected) USB joystick is often tedious. Is there any current mod that might force a rescan? If not, I think this would be a very useful utility. I suppose it's actually a good thing that this is bothering me more lately... it means I'm not restarting KSP for other reasons as often!

Welcome to the forums, CVerts. You've been playing longer than I have, so there's probably nothing I can say that'll be very helpful. If you've been lurking here, you already know that folks are ready to help with any Kerbal endeavor (the wilder, the better). See you around!

This looks like a splendid addition to KSP and I particularly like the dart board! Zero G darts would be a blast and, while NASA/ESA would certainly mandate those blunt nosed "kiddie" darts, I'd like to think KSA would allow the real pointy ones. "Uhh, Jeb... you may want to double check your EVA suit integrity. Valentina's aim was a bit off last night." Thanks for your great effort!

From your observations, Adelaar, are you confident that changes in the heating of your spacecraft are due to varying degrees of asteroid shielding or might it be due to varying attitudes with respect to atmospheric entry? As I mentioned earlier, I'd like to set up a test to measure what, if any, protection an asteroid provides, but I just haven't found the time yet. Thanks for sharing your experience. I haven't had an asteroid self-destruct from aerobraking yet, but haven't maneuvered any deeper than a 50 km periapsis. Tolerance for aero-heating may be pretty low, but it seems to be non-zero in my experience. Regarding whether asteroids ought to be modeled to provide shielding, I think KSP should reflect real physics as much as possible. My amateur astrophysics instincts tell me that an object on the lee side of an aerobraking asteroid ought to experience less heating than it would on the other side or without any asteroid at all. If anyone can make an argument to the contrary, I'd like to hear it. Thanks for contributing to the discussion, Stoney3K.

Welcome to the forums, Leopard! It sounds like you're well on your way along the learning curve. I struggled with EVA maneuvering quite a bit also. There's a setting that automatically orients a Kerbal on EVA to the camera which is on by default. Personally, I find it easier when this setting is off. You may wish to try EVA-ing that way to see if it's any easier. Good luck!

Hello, liquid_magma, and welcome to the forums. I'll do my best to help you and I'm sure others will add their thoughts as well. I think you may have two problems. The warning you saw about "no remote or pilot controls" happens when a spacecraft lacks both a pilot (like Jeb or Valentina) and probe core (like a Probodobodyne unit or Remote Guidance Unit). Try adding either of these to your craft and see if that warning goes away. The other problem seems to be that KSP isn't recognizing your joystick. The main settings screen "input" tab is the right place to configure it. Do your joystick axes show up when you try to assign them to roll/pitch/yaw? Do joystick buttons (assuming your stick has them) show up when you try to assign them to functions like brakes or SAS? If not, I'd check to see if your joystick works in any other games. I run KSP on a Mac and therefore don't use any included drivers, but other platforms may need them. Also, I find that my joystick must me plugged in when I start KSP, otherwise it's not recognized. Good luck and feel free to ask for more help if you're still having problems.