dave1904

You did not pay for 1.9.0 so stop acting so entitled. Take it or leave it. I am leaving it. 1.8.1 will do just fine until a better version comes along. If not then so be it.

Doesn't matter what you call it. It will still have bugs.

I am not denying the problem. I simply do not get the big deal. 1.9.1 will fix those problems and new bugs will be introduced. I would still rather 1.9.1 than no patch at all. KSP has always been like that. I do not get why people expect things to start changing now.

just roll back to 1.8.1. It has its bugs too but I would rather the updates come with bugs than no updates at all. Atleast they fix them unlike alot of other games out there. Their player base will not turn against them because we can choose when to update. You can roll back to 1.0.0 if you want to. Sure, they could make it officially a beta for a week or 2 but in the end it doesn't change much. Players will either play 1.8.1 or 1.9 beta Its as simple as that.

I deleted all the miniavc.dlls so that should do it. I couldn't be bothered finding out what one it is.

My KSP log is going insane. I know basically nothing about reading logs. Can anyone identify what is going on here? It doesn't always CTD but the log is insane anyway. https://drive.google.com/open?id=197lfoj7qLEtT1X1kjY38x7eHWsxRWHmh

Smarch 13, 2020

I have done 30-40 landings atleast with the shuttle so far and never needed the steering. I do not think you should waste time on it since its works perfectly as it is. Sorry for long response but I like to get a good feeling of things before I give feedback. Landing can be a bit to hard however. I have changed a few things in cfgs to make it a bit easier. I believe is the best overall way to have very high stability and good landing even with payload inside the payload bay. I know its a shuttle and it flys like a brick. Maybe I went to far but personally I like returning things with shuttles too. My cfg. I gave the Forward fusalage a buff in lift to 2.1 and increased the dry mass of aft to 3.0 tons. For testing I enter eve and have no problem keeping a 30 degree angle of attack. Original cfgs

I use both this mod and kerbal launch failure and it would be a cool to have a fast emergency construction option with a higher chance of failure.

The ISS is just as political as the apollo missions except that it lacked competition. That is why it failed and apollo succeeded. The shuttle achieved nothing more than launching the biggest waste of money into LEO. The few things we have learned from it could have been done with other far cheaper space stations. The Saturn was capable of launching smaller stations to orbit in one launch. They would have done the job.

sorry I missed this reply but it started working by itself. No idea why. Otherwise I would have given log.

they can actually make 9.

My cpu is fine but I think my 970 is a bottleneck now. I am waiting for next gen I think. Not sure

with that new hardware I'm betting station building is so much nicer Who cares about part count now

I guess it is more consistent with the stock game. The only thing actually missing is columbias rudder sensor but otherwise it is a 10/10 mod. Steering is missing on the nose gear. Is that a design choice?

is that not what monopropelant in KSP is? hypergolic fuel? It just seems a bit odd to have the OMS and RCS run of different fuels.

I think atmospheric autopilot should be a recommend mod too(Its just great for any plane to be honest) Why do the OMS do not use monopropellant? Otherwise I am loving it :))

wow, how did I not know about this until now... Nice mod!

I was going to upgrade and then 1.8.1 came out. My 4770K and Gtx 970 have a few years left in them yet I do not know about you all but my FPS between 1.5.1 and 1.8.1 is around 30-50% better. I am sure some of the mods are also more stable and play there part too. I just googled your old cpu and yeah I believe you. Those old amd cpus had terrible single core performance. The 4770K is already 7 years old and is still amazing. I am now waiting for intels response to amd hammering them Nothing better than some good competition! For me personally I do not need anything other the game mechanics we have now, stable, axial tilt, nicer looking and easier to mod. The more we have the better but stability and moddabily is all that matter

I just wish it is stable. I'm sorry I am such a skeptic but I do not want to wish until I know its a working product.

I still stand by my point that solar is not an option. Its dangerous to because if there is a storm you might go without power for a while. Couldn't you use the ground as your cooling solution? I don't know a lot about thermal radiation.

If you were being realistic about a mars colony you would go with reactors over solar. Getting solar to a level that it could sustain a mars colony would be impossible on mars. Solar doesn't even work properly on earth and we do not require life support 24/7 to survive. Just imagine the heating costs at night time when it is -100 degrees. To be fair they have great insulation but still.

No. That is not the plan. The moon base is only testing for long term space habitation. A mars mission would still be launched and assembled in earth orbit or maybe straight to mars. The reality is that nasa is nowhere close to mars. The moon missions are cool yeah but also pointless just like the ISS and space shuttle were.

There is no way a Lunar base would ever make a mars mission cheaper just like there is no way a Mars base would make an outer solar system mission cheaper. You would need hundreds of missions to ever make it worthwhile. Even if you're trying to save deltaV without money. It would require more deltaV to get the equipment to mars and land it than getting it to where you need straight away. Long term plans do not work for space travel. For all we know the US, nasa, EU, esa and space x will not exist in 30 years. You never get a return in investment. By that time we will hopefully have new engines making those bases useless before they are ever ready. Just like the SLS.

Is that not the same thing?