[Recovery Factor]

4 hours ago, Curveball Anders said:

I try to land (or splash) as close to KSC as possible, mainly out of personal pride

With my standard Up-Down vehicle I set a 72x72 orbit, lock retrograde and then I eyeball 165E and retro burn to a pe at 32.

Then I just stay retro, drop the retro stage when it's heat is hitting 3/4, and pop chutes at 10k.

Best so far has been splash down 350m off KSC

Placing a maker or ship out in the waters East of KSC might be especially helpful for aiming. 

[On the particulars of drag in 1.2pre (measurements done on build 1553)]

3 hours ago, Aru said:

I'm also assuming, that there's no mechanics of shifting humidity or temperature, therefore densities at different altitudes are always the same.

Can confirm that density is a function of altitude. The best way to get the answers to your other questions would be to look in the game files at the code. 

[List of world first contracts and their prerequisites]

1 hour ago, Dman979 said:

Interesting..........

How do we explore this? Using jet engines to move, or wheels?

I've had luck building small planes with very little lift, so, fuselage, stabilizers, and control surfaces. KSP uses the water as a very thick atmosphere, but "gravity" (actually buoyancy) pointing up. I've gotten up to about 35m/s with a single Juno engine on a .625m fuselage, using only the elevons as my "wings".

Best of luck with your diving!

[Station/base contracts changes in 1.2]

47 minutes ago, James Kerman said:

As to station/base contracts - I tend to build these craft so that the resources on board can be undocked, and connected to an orbital station for later use.

I too do this; I take the bare minimum for it to be considered a station and fulfill the contract, assemble it in a modular fashion, and then move the useful components to the stations I'm building. I look at these contracts as "Hey, we're gonna pay you to haul heavy stuff into orbit."

 

[Reusable Vessels]

6 minutes ago, suicidejunkie said:

I'd plan for both a surface base and a fuel depot in orbit to halve your dV requirement and allow much more reasonable size and payload.

I'm planning to have orbital stations around Tylo, Laythe, and Jool. 

1 minute ago, cy4n said:

• Only about 5500 Δv is required to land on Tylo, spare no excess.
•  

Is that for landing and returning to an orbit, or just to land??? Also, from what orbit does that number assume the vessel is starting?

[Reusable Vessels]

So, I know there are tons of threads on all sorts of variations on the idea of reusable, including Scott Manley's Youtube series, and EJ_SA's Twitch stream with Condor 9 (Space X Falcon 9). My question is about the practicality of using a full reusable space program such that I can send infrastructure to a Joolian Orbital Station and be able to run missions on every moon without needing to keep shipping vessels and fuel and supplies from Kerbin. I'm playing fully stock atm, save for a handful of engines I modded myself. Any advice or building tips for reusable landers (for Tylo especially) would be greatly appreciated!

[Can We Turn the Moon into A Projection TV?]

Hold up, with batteries and capacitors, massive solar panels, and most of a month to charge? I think we may be able to get enough energy to project once a month, on the height of the new moon. Still massively expensive, but much more practical

[G-LOC maybe G-LOK]

Build vessels with 100m/s acceleration, and you'll knock your Kerbals out every time. Translates to 10g's of acceleration in space, more if you're in atmo with that sort of acceleration. 

[Combination Flying Wing and Lifting Body]

The easiest way to explain the differences between a flying wing and a regular fuselage/wing set up would be to build one and see how it flies. For example, take the very simplest flying wing set up for stock: Mk1 cockpit, the largest areoplane wings (FAT-455) and fuel/engines. This design, with the addition of a vertical stabilizer, flies rather well below Mach 1, with variable "best" altitude dependent on what engine you're using. 

I use this design with a "whiplash" engine for long range scouting of low atmo planets, as I've found that there is a great mass/lift ratio, resulting in lower take off speeds on Kerbin, which translates to a better flight in a lower density atmosphere. 

[Practicality of having stations in frequently visited planets/moons]

Just to add a voice in favor of building stations:

I have used a variety of LS Mods for which stations were invaluable for setting up a ground base on a planet, as well as good homes for MPLs and landers

[The Kerbal Franchise - Other "Kerbal ____" Games]

I would vote for a Space Station or general Kerbal Colony Program where the object was to build up your colony as much as possible, either by building up the infrastructure (ships, supply depots, shuttlecraft) and maintaining your expanse, or take it a half built scenario from the computer and have to make do with what's there until you can launch new components. 

[Space Corporation mode]

1 hour ago, Legendary Emu said:

What about multiphase contracts? Maybe a specific government dishes out some Duna colony contracts to different people. One guy gets contracted to build the shell of the colony, and another gets contracted to put in equipment, another guy to transport people back and forth to it. It could be fun if there were also race contracts where the first person to get a colony up gets a lot of money.

Or, even implementing a system of "Okay, now that you've done a contract to establish a colony on Duna for Company A, Company B would like the exact same set up on another part of Duna, and is willing to match what the first company paid". That's how the real market works, and would give incentive for players to come up with cheaper ways of achieving identical goals to improve profit margins. Thats how progress happens

[Space Corporation mode]

In addition, a "Space Corp" mode could be responsible for maintaining colonies already set up when the game starts, hard coded into the game. For instance, getting a contract to establish a trade route between Duna and Eve that cycles 5 times in 5 years or something. 

[[1.9-1.10] Hangar]

4 minutes ago, allista said:

It's better to use some file-sharing like Dropbox. And to zip the whole thing.

Anyway, as I see, you're trying to use an old version of the Hangar -- 2.3.2. This was a beta version for KSP-1.0; so if you're playing 1.1.3 or 1.2 it won't work.

Please, if you're on KSP-1.2, download the latest version (3.0) form the SpaceDock: http://spacedock.info/mod/1000/Hangar

If not, go back a couple of pages to get the last Hangar-beta for KSP-1.1.3.

That is an embarrassing mistake... but that you for clearing it up! I love your mods, and am really excited to be able to use this one!

[[1.9-1.10] Hangar]

2 hours ago, allista said:

4 hours ago, LordKael said:

I don't see how to get this, as I've never had a need to pull my logs. Could you/somebody maybe give a quick how to for it? much thanks. 

Look here: https://github.com/taraniselsu/TacLifeSupport/wiki/Help

Here is the bottom chunk of the logs: http://hastebin.com/ivobuhuxil.sql

 

It wouldn't let me post the entirety of the log, as it was too big, so I read through them until it started reporting errors

[[1.9-1.10] Hangar]

17 hours ago, allista said:

Mac: Files>~/Library/Logs>Unity>Player.log

I don't see how to get this, as I've never had a need to pull my logs. Could you/somebody maybe give a quick how to for it? much thanks. 

 

[[1.9-1.10] Hangar]

26 minutes ago, allista said:

If you're using Blizzy's Toolbar, you may need to enable Hangar's button in Toolbar settings; separately for Editor and for Flight scenes.

In Editor a hangar adds most controls into the part menu, so if there's none, something is definitely wrong (and if so, I need to see the log).

In Flight all controls are in the GUI window.

I'm using the stock toolbar, I dont see any controls in the part menu, other than the regular probe control type things, and I have no GUI window in flight. What logs do you need?

[[1.9-1.10] Hangar]

I'm having troubles interacting with the Hangers in both editor and in-flight/landed. I don't have the toolbar icon that you reference in the wiki, and right clicking only gives me the stock tweakables, nothing special for hangers. 

[[1.9-1.10] Throttle Controlled Avionics]

9 minutes ago, goldenpsp said:

Sounds like you downloaded the source code, not the release.  it looks like the latest release was put up on spacedock but the release isn't present on github.

Thank you good sir

 

[[1.9-1.10] Throttle Controlled Avionics]

So, I'm not fully clear on what to put into my Gamedata folder. anybody able to help me out? Currently, I have the entire "Throttle Controlled Avionics-master" folder in my Gamedata folder, but the mod is not showing  up in game. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I am running KSP 1.2, and the newest version of TCA from this thread.

[Version 1.2: The Little Things]

7 hours ago, Avonix said:

• ...
• Brown paper packages tied up in string.

These are a few of my favourite things.

I understood that reference!

 

to keep on topic, I have to say, the editor changes are quite nice, specifically the change of part highlight. 

[The Grand KSP 1.2 Discussion Thread]

26 minutes ago, Mad_Scientist said:

I never used Hyper, but is not it obsolete after the release of the new debug menu? Although maybe for the purpose of hypering staff to the surface...

why hyper to the surface? If you're going to play with cheats anyways, just build a reliable, super impractically heavy lander that can land anything cargo, and hyper edit it into orbit

[Removed some great features]

17 hours ago, _stilgar_ said:

Nothing was removed. You just need to enable Advanced Tweakables in settings. This was made so the context menus weren't cluttered for people who didn't use those things 

Why thank you good sir, you've removed my only major complaint with the update!

[Removed some great features]

Did anybody notice the lack of some really great features from 1.1 in 1.2? The one that really bothers me is that SQUAD got rid of all of the RCS options to control when it fires and all that. 

[Mission to Duna Tips]

Duna is really forgiving on aerodynamics, since the atmo is so thin. As a result, you're going to get very little help from parachutes, but taking off is crazy easy. Make sure you pick a good place to land, as there are some pretty wide, relatively steep hills.