scottadges

This thread was helpful to me (2 years later) because I totally forgot this key command after not playing for almost 6 months. Thank you!

I actually played KSP today, is what I did in KSP today. (Seriously, it's been like 5 months since I played!)

83 (+)

44 (-) I come back to something about RP'ing planes and Space Force?? (too lazy to read back 4 or 5 pages...)

Wow, people still playing the Negative/Positive forum game? 37 (-)

Ah, yah no it's not officially updated to 1.7.1 as far as I know. But at least for me, it does work if you use the most recently-updated ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads DLL (which itself isn't updated to KSP 1.7.1 either, but it still works) swapped out with the 1.4.4 SimpleConstruction files which you can download from CKAN or the repositories. Also, I'm not affiliated with the mod in any way, I'm just an avid long-time, non-coding user who it seems to work for!

If you're referring to KSP 1.8 then I'm not sure. I have been using it in KSP 1.7.1 without issues.

I love these! Great use of minimal design to create really compact, efficient vehicles. What mod are the wings from in your fighter jet above? Is that from Airplane Plus?

@captinjoehenry I've been using Simple Construction without any issues, but you have to use the latest ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads DLL by overwriting the file provided by SC with the one from the latest EL file which includes later KSP compatibility. The production chain is super-streamlined with SC (Ore > Metal > RocketParts) since basically SC is just EL functionality with a bunch of modified configs to simplify things.

I absolutely LOVE the way the 6-way adapter looks with the variant docking ports on it. Looks like like a Russian docking node thingy. So awesome @Orbital_phoenix!

I get this is probably something else... or maybe it's just your abject exhaustion with what you mentioned as these kind of updates... but what is "chicken" in this context?

This aspect of the Russian language has opened my eyes to a whole new side of the Russian psyche - deeply, fatally ironic and probably laughing your asses off without cracking a smile. LOL https://en.bab.la/dictionary/russian-english/нежность

I think there's some nice irony there. I imagine anything you're using that tool for isn't exactly "thrilling" LOL

This seemed relevant:

Awesome, thanks for the update @Flupster. Any chance you've had a moment to look at the issue(s) we're seeing with Universal Storage II and the DMagic Advanced Material science unit? (No pressure, just wondering if you might have time to look at that)

Awesome Tonka, thanks for putting together this code for us. I love CC and had resigned myself to getting all the Agent issues Muchas gracias!

Pics or it didn't happen! Just kidding, congrats on the KSP accomplishment and seriously we'd love to see pics. Is that black nose piece part of the command piece/cockpit? If not, you could maybe throw a long tapered aero piece (usually meant for the end of a craft) to get that super-long nose portion like in your reference pic. Very cool aircraft to emulate in KSP!

That's interesting, see I didn't know that until you mentioned it. Here's what the wikipedia page on the GRAU (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRAU) has for the Soyuz designation: 11 (Rocketry and associated equipment) 11A: Rocketry (11A51, the Korolev N-1 heavy-lift launcher, 11A511, the Soyuz launcher) Oh and for those who don't know what 'GRAU' stands for (like I didn't): The Main Missile and Artillery Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (GRAU) (Russian: Главное ракетно-артиллерийское управление МО РФ (ГРАУ), romanized: Glavnoye raketno-artilleriyskoye upravleniye MO RF (GRAU))

Thanks @JPGSP I feel like we’re learnin’ stuff on this thread!

It’s interesting you mentioned this, because I was reading more and found a thread on Quora (of all places) where they talk about this: https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-Russian-word-soyuz-mean One commenter, a self-described Russian native speaker, highlights the point that in the Russian language “union” and “alliance” are both soyuz. Another commenter, described as studying Russian and living in St. Petersburg, continues the point saying the word soyuz can also refer to a “professional alliance” or “marriage” that is implied in the Soyuz’s function to dock with a station.

Right, I think we’re saying something similar. Not trying to argue here. Also, I think there was a level of pragmatism when naming things in the Soviet space program, following a lineage of previous spacecraft, and broad meaning. From what I’ve read, it’s pretty utilitarian when you look at the English translations of these names. Completely opposite from SpaceX naming their booster landing barges, by contrast.

It was referred to as “Sputnik” (Russian for satellite) because it was an R7 variant designed to carry satellites. Later iterations of the R7 were named based on the components or missions, like Voskhod, Soyuz, etc. they were designed to carry. From the R7 wiki page: “The R-7 family consists of both missiles and orbital carrier rockets. Derivatives include the Vostok, Voskhod and Soyuz rockets” - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-7_(rocket_family)

There’s probably a dual meaning as you point out. I hadn’t thought about it that way, I’m sure they were thinking of it. But I think the “official” meaning comes from ‘Union’ as used in “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” or CCCP in Russian. There are many references online about Soyuz. Obviously, the Wikipedia entry for the family of rockets: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_(rocket_family) The ESA site also references the “union” meaning: https://m.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Transportation/Launch_vehicles/The_Russian_Soyuz_spacecraft But I have yet to find a specific citation referencing the political motive behind the name. But I bet it’s out there on some Soviet space history blog.

The biggest accomplishment from the past several days was completing my much-planned Minmus Expedition in my current Career game. I'd previously only done flybys (science & tourist contracts) in this one, so I designed the mission around multiple biome landings to maximize science collection. This lander packs in 1 kerbal scientist with terrestrial & repeatable science and then a separate orbital science pod (docked between the orbiter & lander) which was returned to Kerbin with all the sweet, sweet science! I was able to get 4 biomes in this mission by landing along a polar orbit. I captured multiple copies of some "in space high" and "in space near" science to off-load into my Kerbin science lab. With the plane changes, it had JUST enough dV to get back and dock with the orbiter. Then it was back to Kerbin! Once in orbit, the orbiter/science module was docked with my KSS Alpha station to top off the Science Lab with essential data. Then the last step was to dock the orbital science pod with a separate heat shield reentry unit and prepare for descent. The other big thing I've been designing is an orbital construction platform to allow building ships for my upcoming Duna launch window (using the Simple Construction mod). After about 6 iterations, I think I've finally gotten it down to a minimum functional level. I'm really trying to avoid "over-building" as I intend to construct this in orbit (using the Konstruction mod ports). I'm planning multiple launches and using a combination of RCS tugs to fit it all together. Forward section with Command module. Massive power generation and heat control from the main solar array / heat system. Main construction port in the Aft section. The platform will be able to refine Metal into Rocket parts or process fuel. Metal or Ore will be delivered by Cargo vehicles from either Minmus or Mun mining outposts.

I was just browsing around forums and saw this thread. I looked up Spanner on Spacedock and happened to see this: https://spacedock.info/profile/SpannerMonkey From the description: "Hi thanks for visiting SM Industries on SpaceDock. Due to poor health i will no longer be modding KSP" Not trying to spread gossip or talk about users or anything, just thought I'd share that info RE: the conversation above.