Daniel Prates

Thats what I do. Mainly for the timewarping advantages. If it is going to be a busy station, placing it in 100kms or so is a pain.

@Jager798 One thing you must consider is that the center of mass might change as you consume fuel. Fuel acounts for a large percentage of your total mass. So if your tanks are not aligned with your overall craft, the center of mass will shift during flight as the fuel drains - sometimes dramaticly! Most rockets have a gimbal angle. In the first stages of the flight the CoM shift may occur within the scope and limits of your rocket engine's gimbal, and the compensating gimbal will counter the CoM shift. But if the CoM shifts further than the gimbal angle, you will FOR SURE have an uncontrolable plane - one that no control surface is able to counter. A good tool to check both your FULL and EMPTY CoM is a mod called "CoM helper", found in spacedock. It will clearly point the path of the CoM as fuel is depleted, and help you design better craft. A final note: maybe your spaceplane can be salvaged as it is. Maybe the empty CoM is overpassing the gimbal limit of your engine by just a little bit. Did you consider offsetting the angle of the engine UPWARDS, just a little bit? Check the historical spaceshuttle: the engines point UPWARD a little bit, just for that reason. Maybe you could twist them upward, test it, and keep twisting until the entire CoM shift is within the engine's total gimbal angle. It will only not work if the twisting required is so high, that the CoM will over-excede to the other side, making your nose point down right after takeoff! Also: some engines have higher total gimbal angles than others. Consider that. One last resort: redesign your plane, so that the fuel tanks are more in line with the overall fuselage. This way, CoM tends to remain in the same place as fuel is depleted. Maybe that should have been the first resort anyway!

Oh ok! Good to know! 1. I has having some issues with deep freeze. However it must have been an install or version problem. I did a fresh install and things got into place. 2. I understand. Changing vessels will change the days left in the counter, because the counter checks in realtime the available health points in any given vessel. I guess the mod is even better than I thought!

@garwel i must say, that above is the most beautiful aspect of your mod. I went into the mod habit exactly so that KSP would properly replicate the difficulties of travelling through space, and along with LS mods (I prefer TAC-LS myself), yours is the one that better adds to a real-life feel. I have lots of fun designing spacecraft tailored to the amount of time I expect a mission to last - as it should be! Many thanks for developing this! Now, there are a couple of things I would like to ask you. I've done some tests of my own but I would like to hear from the creator how the mod treat these two issues. They are: 1 - Deep Freeze. Once I thaw a kerbal, will KH stop counting the days left before kerbals becoming incapacitated? Or the counter keeps on going? If the vessel allows for, say, 10 days, can I unfreeze the little guy, work him for a day, freeze him again for an entire year, unfreeze for another single day, freeze again for an entire year etc...? 2 - Imagine a vessel, a large one with lots of space, designed for a two-kerbal crew so it is roomy enough to allow for a long flight. Say, a 100 days flight. Then assume it has a sort of a small two-seat escape pod, a small capsule meant only to have the two kerbals reentry Kerbin at the end of the mission. Obviously, the whole vessel provides for a 100 days flight, but the capsule by itself, when detached, will have maybe a few days worth of available time (say, five days for the sake of the argument), since it is much smaller and cramped. The question is: imagine I just made a 80 days trip and am ready to return the crew back to the ground. I move the two kerbals to the escape capsule and detach it, leaving the rest of the spacecraft behind (and with it, it's roomy interior space). Will the kerbals "carry" their tiredness of 80 days into the capsule, and instantly go insane because it only provides 5 days of flight worthiness?

I was having some difficulties running this. Reverted to the older version of module manager and voilá, it worked. The newer version of module manager is screwing up some of my mods that were supposed to be working fine. This can be the result of my 100+ mod build though, and most likely it is the case, so I by no means want to blame the mod for my game presenting difficulties. I often wonder if people relating issues, here and elsewhere, also use a heavily modded KSP, a situation that generates issues on it's own. Anyway, that is my suggestion to people having issues: try an older version of module manager. it worked for me and this mod is running 100%! With the current version of MM it would simply not work, probably due to my mod-soup.

A very handsome cockpit!

First! Compliments! Beautiful parts! Will check them out and post some comments!

Cool, a X-15 look-alike. I always think that KSPn is a little insuficient in the field of test and "x" planes, which were an important part of the space race. Another very good mod, with handsome parts. Kudos!

I too get tired of looking all over for parts, be it with this mod's parts or others. What I usually do is to type in the name of the part creator (in this case, "kerbal standard") as depicted in the part description, right into the search browser above the parts list. It will then display all parts where the searched words appear, making it easier than going through command pods, then structural, then wheels, then utility etc.

Your idea was good. The way you did things, this mod will probably go on forever without newer versions of KSP ruining it. It is no hassle to dock them outside. It would have been a hassle to have this stop working every time squad releases a new version. So it was a good choice.

@blackheart612 once again, many thanks. This is a good example on how a simple mod can be a thing of genius (simple concept, that is. I am sure it was a lot of work). KSP needs more of this. Do consider my suggestion of a modular tank hull parts mod!

I know I am overposting, but this one really got me going. To those asking about how to carry resources other than ore etc: I am having ZERO DIFFICULTY in placing containers from other mods on this mod's truck chassis. It takes some part sliding and offsetting, but it is no sweat at all. This here is a rather old-fashioned truck I made with parts from "feline utility rover" containers ... ... and in these two images you can see I even managed to attach tracks from kerbal foundrie's mod, resulting in a competent snow-mobile: This is turning out to be quite a mod!

Put a chassis under it. The different parts are attached to the bottom parts, and the bottom parts attach onto themselves. I am having difficulties, though, understanding how to couple different wagons. I understand how to dock them when already launched, but is there a way to assemble them docked together in the SPH?

What a most needed mod! Kudos! The parts look very handsome too. Actually, they look just right: stockalike enough to fit the rest of the game. An idea: modular tank hulls. BDA needs one of those. We already have tons of guns ans turrets, and tracks thanks to kerbal foundry, but little to put them on to.

Nope @Beale that's weird! TAC LS works just fine with tantares, I do use them together, with zero issues. The command pods do anyway, as they properly bundle together with the TAC resources - i think even the mass of the parts increase proportionally to the resources. If by "no suport" you mean that there is no intentional correlation between the mods, I can say that unintentionally they work very well together!

Great idea! Well... in any case, if you think of it, ground texture resolution is very bad from orbit... I use TARSIER and that mod proves me that it is useless to build some "spy sattelite", to photograph the surface from high orbit, as the ground images would have pictures of what the surface looks from space, instead of a zoom that goes all the way to ground level. This is because resolution changes after a given height, me thinks, because of performance reasons. So a ground-looking camera is perhaps impossible anyway. Or useless.

Those parts are VERY HANDSOME, specially the crewed ones!

Dude read my posts again. In both I am complimenting your mod, and not saying that is insuficient in any way. Anyways, I will for the third time state that your mod is awesome, so please "kindly" do not orient me again to talk to squad for a third time!

But that is no small thing. Kudos again. We need more science stuff.

Oh my! Now, this is great! Do they merelly generate science, or actual images as well, like the KURS "ugly" camera?

Same here!

I was having issues with another mod (can't really remember now what was it) and I got the suggestion to revert to an older version of module manager. It did the trick, things really fell in together. Maybe that could help!

It appears that the link for this forum thread is missing in this mod's spacedock page.

Allright! Tiny cupola now has room for one! This mod, which already was one of the best around, has just gotten epic. It is easilly one of the, say, best three mods out there. Tantares and cobalt wolf's being the other two: that's how good this is, and about as high a praise I can give it.

Tks! Yeah well you get the idea. Somewhere you can test your ground vehicles in. Some proving grounds, with slopes, ditches etc would be a nice adition to KSC. I often send rovers to very far away places only to find out too late that they do not provide the ground clearance (or other atributes) I was thinking they had.