Tyko

How can I make Ciro brighter? I looked in the configs and there's a Luminosity setting, but that alone doesn't seem to make a difference. Thanks!

wow, that's cool! Are the textures going to be close to Tantares style for interchangeability? CobaltWolf uses more metalicity in his textures, so wasn't sure where Commonwealth rockets would net out.

You're not seeing the shroud issues? On stock 1.4.3 shrouds on engines and heatshields don't line up with the rocket stack properly. Also, I'm pretty sure there are still issues with Fairings and drag.

It is really beautiful, but it's not actually a stock game if you've modded it

KER is definitely the one I wouldn't play without. KAC and TWP are probably the next two.

In earlier versions of GPP there were a bunch of Terrain Presets that could be added to the game's Settings file to enhance graphics. I don't see those instructions with the latest GPP. Are those Presets deprecated or am I missing the instructions? Thanks!

You might want to ask in the Tantares forum discussion page That's where people who understand Tantares would see your question the quickest.

Yep, that's the one I'm using!

There's been something odd about the part that I haven't been able to track down. I've seen the following issue many times: I build a sampler to send around the Mun/Iota. I pop it into orbit using F12 and deorbit to test its descent and it works fine. I then launch the real mission and send the sampler out to the moon. It returns to Kerbin/Gael and when I start deorbiting it rapidly slows to below 100m/s when it's still around 50km up and it slowly 'sinks' down to ground level. I spent hours trying to figure out what was wrong, but I'm not really a part modeler, so after lots of trial and error I just gave up. The only way to test it was to fly entire missions.

@Kerbas_ad_astra - Love the way the 1.4 update is shaping up!! Any chance you could please update the Mk5 Strip light so you can change the color of the light like you can on the Mk4 Point light?

Mac only has a 64 bit version, so you're all set

seems really cool! Just a question though, do any cubesats use LFO? I'd imaging most use cold gas or monoprop for weight savings and simplicity

That sounds amazing! I'd add 2.5m and think that using stock variant switching is a great idea if it doesn't get too complicated. Maybe you have one part for each size and then the variants allow you to scale up one end if you need different diameters. So you'd pick the 1.875m part, one end is fixed at 1.875m, using part variants you can choose if the other end is either 1.875m or 2.5m.

Nice! have you considered publishing it? maybe creating a set of them with various diameters?

I had a station that would always go wonky if I did a vessel to vessel scene change. If I went back to the tracking station and loaded the vessel it always worked fine. Never figured that one out. May be worth trying to load from Tracking Station to see if you get the same experience.

Yea, I was always a bit surprised that the Apollo missions used retrograde lunar orbits. They gained free return trajectories, but lost efficiencies in the LEM. When you consider Apollo 13 it was clearly the right choice though.

Agreed 100%! There are tons of wargames out there in which you can happily blow each other to bits. No reason to corrupt one of the few decent space simulators.

yea, that's super cool! One part that I'd love to see in the game would be procedural strutted decoupler ring. Being able to set the top and bottom diameters plus length would open up some fun design opportunities from Russian Launchers to the Orion HydroLOX service module.

perhaps in the forum called Making History Missions? https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/forum/98-making-history-missions/

what are the stats in the two columns? there aren't any column titles

I've been using something similar for a while...I reduced scienceMultiplier to 1. I also dropped researchTime to 6 (from 7) and lowered the scienceCap to 250. Combined the effect is that I'm getting 1 to 1 science out compared to 5x just like your settings, the research happens a little quicker, but I have to visit each station fairly regularly to top off the science because of the low scienceCap. Since it effectively doubles the amount of science that can be gathered I cut my Science down to 40%. End result is that I'm actually working harder to get less science, but it's a lot more fun for me. Gives me a great reason to set up and manage stations and revisit old biomes without being OP. Here's the config I'm using:

I don't think that tidal influence really matters for craft, even in real life. It's a very subtle effect that wouldn't get the craft tidally locked in any reasonable period of time. There'd be an ever so slight nudge that would probably very slowly start the craft rotating on a planetary timescale, but not a Kerbal time scale. I guess you could build ships with a chunk of mass on the end of a long boom to get enough leverage to make it work, but it's easier just to set the craft rotating slowly so that it's rotation keeps the same side pointing "down".

Wow...this is looking really cool! I've been following along and can't wait to try it. I'd almost rather have an open node on top and attach a standard docking port JR rather than a custom one. I guess the trade off is higher part count...

Thanks, the problem is that I'm using a scaled system and I'm trying to figure out how to actually calculate the altitudes. In the example config below it says 650000, but my scaled Kerbin is 1500km equatorial radius instead of the normal 600km. So I'm trying to figure out what the ideal height is above my larger Kerbin @PART[dmImagingPlatform]:HAS[!MODULE[SCANsat]]:FOR[DMagic]:NEEDS[SCANsat] { @description ^= :$: Can also interface with SCANsat equipment to function as a biome scanner: MODULE { name = SCANsat sensorType = 24 fov = 10 min_alt = 5000 max_alt = 1000000 best_alt = 650000 scanName = Multi-Spectral scan RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 1.5 } } } Thanks!

how do I determine the optimal altitudes for various scans? For example. I've tried the Multi-spectral scan from 250-1500km and it's all listed as sub-optimal. Is the math somewhere such as X number of meters above the planet's surface? Thx