sal_vager

Hey, keep it civil, there is no need for arguments

Ghery88, no, just no, you can add all that to the original post, and you should really have something here to show, not just "to be added later" In fact, this is not a Spacecraft exchange thread at all, it is a test thread and it's pointless without content, sorry but I'm closing this.

Here is some documentation to help you The complete Blender Tutorial Blender Tutorials

You could make a cylinder and then select only the top vertexes, then scale them smaller. Also, if Blender is set to Metric measurements, a .5 radius cylinder should be 1 meter in KSP.

Hey these are pretty good kacperrutka26, well done, are you working on a forth episode?

Well kacperrutka26, seeing as the old thread is now found, and is pretty much the same as this one, one of these should be closed I think. The comments here have kind of spoiled the flow of this thread, while the old one is still on-topic, so I think this one is the one that should go. Cool videos thought

To be fair, it isn't a rule or even part of the good conduct guide, though maybe I should add it. It's just tidier, so we ask that you do it

Not very much......

Yeah, spoiler tags are advised, especially for all images after the first (you need one to get people interested) I'll have to add spaces here so you can see it, but spoiler tags look like this: [ Spoiler=TextGoesHere ]ImageURL[ /Spoiler ]

Actually, more boosters is a popular phrase here, but they can help Personally I like to keep the total size of my craft down for efficiency, and there are a few tricks that will let you do so as well. It's possible to run fuel lines from the base of your liquid boosters to the base of your core stage, keeping the core fully fueled and letting you drop the spent boosters sooner, reducing weight. It's possible to daisy chain pairs of boosters this way, with each feeding into the next, greatly increasing the mass you can loft at the cost of some complexity when building. If you set up your lander carefully, you can even add it's engines thrust to the total thrust at launch, eliminating the dead weight that landers usually are.

Hi Crater, welcome to the community Eccentric orbits and stranded landers are all in a days work for Jeb, Bob and Bill, have fun getting those guys and their brothers home, remember, if the first rocket didn't work just add moar boosters!

Hi jmcdaniel0, welcome to the community Applied physics? Orbital engineer? I think you and your friend will fit right in here, have fun playing KSP

Hi Andrew, welcome to the community Glad to hear you are enjoying the game, it's easy to let the hours slip away when playing KSP

Hi technotica, welcome to the community Ohhhh naughty, don't let your boss see you, unless you are the boss, then don't let your minions see you

Yeah guys, don't worry about Nutt007, he is opinionated, just as many supposedly mature adults can be too Stay on topic now yeah?

Hi Chev, welcome to the community If you need to ask about making add-ons and plugins, you can check out the add-on development boards, or pop into #kspofficial on esper.net irc

mackinhow, It's been ages since the post before yours, and Lunniy Korabl seems to be too busy to update this add-on. I am going to close this and I suggest you PM Lunniy Korabl and ask him yourself, if he wants to continue this, he can PM any Moderator to reopen the thread. Oh, and necroposting is frowned upon mate

Hi TheUnknownPoet, I think Orbiter might be more suitable for what you want to do, as it is a proper simulator unlike KSP, which asrobly18 says is a game, it just happens to have physics simulations of rockets. Also, orbital decay only applies to craft currently under control or nearby, that also happen to be within the atmosphere, the cut off altitude is 69,100 meters.

Lunar Lander, by Atari

I think everyone will be on 0.16 by now, maybe it's time this thread was allowed to get some rest, closing

Hi Crusader318, welcome to the community Oh don't worry, everyone here has an idea for the future of KSP's development, so much so that it is necessary to make this thread. You can see the planed features of 0.17 here, and the changelog here, plus the planned features for further down the line are here

Uhhh yeah, this is how deltaflyer_19 types, we can't all be rocket scientists you know fellas.

Hi BlackHoleSun, welcome to the community KSP's future is stellar, and you can see the soon-to-be-added features here, plus the lead Developers blog here

I have 2 gigs on my laptop and 2.5 on my desktop, and KSP runs okay, my task manager tells me that KSP uses about 1.4 gigs maximum, I am not using many mods though, just the cart and the lazor. KSP is very CPU intensive, it is 32bit only and does not use multiple cores, plus it performs a lot of physics calculations. PhysX calculations should be able to be offloaded to the GPU if you have a suitable Nvidia card, but I'm pretty sure that Unity3D does not support that yet, maybe v4 will.

Hi Oilfour, this might be caused by a write permissions problem, MechJeb needs to create MechJeb.cfg in KSP_win/PluginData/mumechlib/ and will not be able to do this if it is being blocked by Windows or an Anti-virus program. It's a good idea to install KSP to C:\Games and to make sure it is whitelisted by your AV, and make sure you are using the latest version available here.