DaveLChgo

Agree with leaving the manuver node calc unlocked / available even without enough fuel for it. Cause If im short delta v I can try to make up the difference using monoprop. But without even being able to know?? Hurts the game.

I kept tweeking my Saturn V. ( available here ) I kept tweeking my Skylab ( available here ) Then I thought Saturn 1B !! Pairs nicely with the skylab crew rotations! Afterall you wouldnt expend a whole Saturn V just to get to orbit. Milkstool included ! Enjoy. Please goto my Saturn V page (link above) if you need to know staging information for S-IVB and above.

No real need to program this. Just add the C4 part into the part tree. (explosive charge) Then the designers can set the charges to the abort button via the actions menu. Regardless if there is a Kerbal on board or not. Admit it some of you would utilize this! So we really should ask the devs to include a C4 charge in the part tree.

Thanks for the feedback! Glad you like it.

I kept tweeking my Saturn V. (available here ) Then I thought .... Skylab! (available here) And here we are. I enjoyed building this one, figuring out how to make a quasi accurate frame was a bit tricky. I modelled this one as if the shielding stayed intact on launch and didnt mess with the solar panels. But for true accuracy just remove the port arm. I look forward to when we get movable hinges back on the menu. You know that character on 'FreeGuy' that couldnt put his arms down? Thats this version of skylab at the moment. Hope you enjoy it! Let me know how it goes. Check for a pic of the staging stack on the Saturn V page. Hope it helps.

Good evening all. Some nice feedback and interesting discorse. When talking about aircraft not spacecraft. Positive G's and Negative G's are very very different. In relation to the pilot Blackout (positive G) and Redout (negative G). Real life aircraft have had G meters for decades. They show positive and negative. The example below has 3 hands. The current G hand would push the max positive hand and max negative hand. This way the pilot can see after the fact how many Gs were applied to the airframe. And to re-iterate the point, the G meter in game has a negative scale. But it doesn't get used. This isnt the argument of should negative G's be shown in space. That's not the example shown. Its the suggestion to the devs to make the G meter while in atmosphere work properly. Since a plane typically does not fly sideways, side to side Gs usually are not an issue. But then again this is Kerbol... So OK you're right, we also need a working lateral G meter!!!

Amazing comment!! So glad for the contribution.

Yes that was how KSP1 worked as well, it centered on the center of mass. But it did not suffer from the same staging affliction. Understand Im not complaining about why its recentering, Im suggesting that the recentering could be done better by being a smooth recenter instead of a jump.

Good morning, Minor instrument tweek I would hope. Fly a plane and pull back on the stick, plane goes up. Positive Gs and G meter goes up. Push down on the stick, plane goes down. Negative Gs and the G meter still goes up instead of down. Fast forward to the 3 minute mark and watch the G meter. It goes up when push down on the nose. And then goes up again when pulling up on the nose. Thanks for your time.

Good morning, Im hoping that the developers keep the launch plumes pluming until the plume of the engines clear the tower. Same with the orange glow beneath the launch pad, it needs to continue until engine plume clears tower. Also orange glow needs to sputter out. Right now the whole glow just turns off after a certain point. Having it flicker and sputter then turn off would like better. Minor details I know. But little details add immersion. Thank for your time.

Good morning - Im hoping this ask can be implemented. Please find a way to stop the camera / view from jumping after staging. I realize that it is jumping to the center of the 'new' craft. But it is jarring and annoying. Instead have the camera / view slowly move to the new center. Thanks for your time.

This thread should also be in the craft exchange thread. @Nyius How can we post videos on KSP Builds? I dont use youtube as a host. All of the embed variants I have tried do not work on KSP Builds. I can embed videos on this forum for example. Thanks for the work and the assistance.

Had a similar idea in KSP1. Big tanks - drills - refinery - on wheels - to roll up to craft, connect with the extendable grabber and refuel. I was a cheap SOB and sent the rockets to the pad empty. (please disregard the cost of the refueler itself and the blacked out line item in last years budget)

Hi, sorry for the delay. Its literally a single part, the goliath engine. Engine is sold as a complete unit. No intake parts were used. The cockpit section was mounted to the centerline of the goliath engine and "moved" to a point in front of the engine.

Simple fix. Currency will be a resource that will only be attained and consumed on Kerbin. And as far as building various items in the VAB you must have x amount of the 'resource' to use said parts. But joking aside. I do see both sides of the coin very much. In KSP1 that was indeed part of the challenge to complete contracts to get extra cash. For me it was to the point that every part of every craft flown was recovered and recovered as close to KSC as possible to increase the cash back percentage. Boosters and every stage had enough parachutes on them to bring them down safely to get the cash. A second stage normally just sent adrift in Kerbin orbit had retro rockets that I waited to fire again so that it could be recovered as close to KSC as possible. I even had a crawler next to the launch pad that had huge fuel tanks, several drills, several resource converters. I sent the rockets to the pad with no fuel, cause it cost less. Then pulled the crawler up to the pad and connected the two craft via pipes or docks. After the connection was established the rocket would be filled with the "free" fuel. I enjoyed that. (please disregard the cost of the crawler, versus cost of the fuel and how many fillings it would take to break even. The crawler was federally funded and buried as a line item in the budget, so yeah essentially even that was 'free') Now "realistically" (this is a game after all) even in KSP 2 one is still going to rely on Kerbin to send components to other planets. Until you have sent enough components to establish a factory of some sort. Only then would you be able to start cutting the cord. But for me, even that shouldn't be until the middle portion of the game. So I do understand the eventual need for using resources. But being able to just plop a factory part onto a rocket and establish an offworld factory in month one would be a bit anticlimactic.

Yup. Definately a bug thats been in the chats since last release. I've had craft that when landed on flat surface less than 2 degree grade.... the exit door is facing downhill.... when the kerbal exits the craft tilts and falls over.... UpHill!! So Kerbals be taking some serious steroids.

Agree whole heartily with the above posts. I would also like to see being able to review accepted missions while in the VAB. Trying to keep the tasks in my noggin while putting together a craft to do the tasks is a bit too much of a task.... I mean its really tasking.... it really is!

Good morning all! Kinda bugs me that the portraits don't seem to follow logic. Two issues here. Crew portrait arrangement Stowaways When building an Apollo style craft in VAB. The crew manager shows the 5 seats. CM 3 seats above the LM 2 seats. Thats fine and is as expected. But I'm always getting a stowaway Kerbal in the LM. Come to think of it when I had a craft with a CM / LM / Rover the stowaway would always be in the Rover. So maybe the stowaway gets inserted into the bottom most seat. But back to this example. In the VAB we have the Apollo style craft. The crew manager shows the stowaway, Shercas. Next we add crew to the CM (Mk1-3) They are Herbree, Ludel and Doodoly. When launching this Apollo style craft. You will see 3 portraits... occupied (Shercas), empty, mechjeb. The next row is three portraits all mechjeb. The last row is 3 portaits... occupied (Herbree, Ludel, Doodoly) Here are the asks... Toggle the mech portraits off. Group the portraits by part. Establish a hierarchy. The CM portraits shouldn't be at the bottom in the example above. Thanks for listening!

The g meter is something that needs a tweak. But I'm wondering about your example. "in Flight" is that on Kerbin or in space? At rest on Kerbin will show 1G. And that would be normal. So in flight at 1.5G might also be normal depending... in space, zero throttle? Or in atmosphere? Did a bug report previously on G meter as well. But more so about the negative G not registering as negative.

In this case I think it better to state you would like to know the front versus the back. As there is also a top and bottom. I believe it is marked by a yellow arrow. Mixing up the front and back? Happened maybe once or twice way way back when a very long time ago. Something that may help. Pressing the space bar while the part is selected will reset the part back to its default orientation (front up if in VAB).

Good morning all! Staging ..... when undocking and then redocking.... the staging gets totally "F'd" up. I think the staging is being merged instead of appended. Everything from the 1st stage of each craft gets combined into the new 1st stage. Everything from the 2nd stage from each craft gets combine into a new 2nd stage. And so on.... "Wrong - Wrong" On so many levels Wrong. It should be something similar to this, All stages of the.... target craft or lighter craft or smaller craft.... gets put above or below the stages of the docking craft. Two sets of pics below illustrate the "merging" of stages currently. Set one Before seperation CM after LM after After Dock - a mess of staging now. Oh lets also massively reduce the size of or simply toggle off the completion screens..... "Please!!!" Look at the big mostly empty grey box that covers a third of my screen pop up and tell me that something happened. "Yes I know... we just docked. Now go back to your room." Set Two. Before Separation CM after LM after After Dock - a mess of staging now. In the last pic I want to use the decoupler below the LM to separate from the booster. But the staging has that merged with the decoupler in the CM. Its coincidence that they happen to have the same stage number after sep so now that are mashed together after dock. Now the manual task of select the correct decoupler and moving it to an empty stage. I don't remember this behavior in KSP1. Thanks for listening!

Good morning all! kinda bugs me that the portraits don't seem to follow logic. When launching an Apollo style craft. You will see 2 portraits of empty seats with one occupied seat. Scroll down and then you will see 2 occupied seats. When you have mech parts in there the mech portraits are inserted as well. Toggle the mech portraits off. Group the portraits by part. And establish a hierarchy. The CM portraits shouldn't be at the bottom in the example above. Orbit lines are still hiding themselves in the map view. Have not found any correlation to what the cause might be. Staging ..... when undocking and then redocking.... the staging gets totally "F'd" up. I think the staging is being merged instead of appended. Everything from the 1st stage of each craft gets combined into the new 1st stage. Everything from the 2nd stage from each craft gets combine into a new 2nd stage. And so on.... "Wrong - Wrong" On so many levels Wrong. It should be something similar to this, All stages of the.... target craft or lighter craft or smaller craft.... gets put above or below the stages of the docking craft. Two sets of pics below illustrate the "merging" of stages currently. Set one Before seperation CM after LM after After Dock - a mess of staging now. Oh lets also massively reduce the size of or simply toggle off the completion screens..... "Please!!!" Look at the big mostly empty grey box that covers a third of my screen pop up and tell me that something happened. "Yes I know... we just docked. Now go back to your room." Set Two. Before Separation CM after LM after After Dock - a mess of staging now. In the last pic I want to use the decoupler below the LM to separate from the booster. But the staging has that merged with the decoupler in the CM. Its coincidence that they happen to have the same stage number after sep so now that are mashed together after dock. Now the manual task of select the correct decoupler and moving it to an empty stage. I don't remember this behavior in KSP1. Thanks for listening!

Not had any new problem with fairings in 0.2.0. myself. Creating the fairings with the arrows is fiddly but that is a over beaten dead horse. They seem to open normally to me. Not sure what you mean by 'shoot back'. Protection from heating... will try with a faster rocket and report back.......... Had a rocket with 8.2 TWR, vertical g force was around 12 g's Fairing covered payload on very top. And the fairing did protect payload inside. The same craft without fairing, the payloads uppermost part, a docking port, overheated and removed itself. The part beneath also started to overheat as well, but fuel ran out and rocket acceleration ceased .

WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER!!! Awesome work on the adjustment. Never really understood how that phrase came into being.... but anyway. Docking Alignment Display (DAD) behavior is really as desired now. Assembly in VAB can use the default positioning. (rotating the dock in VAB no longer needed) For those that have used DPAI from KSP1 this is the replacement for that instrument. Great job!! Trivial difference and very easy to adapt to either instrument. It feels like DPAI yellow cross in middle is keyed on target alignment - whereas it feels like DAD yellow cross in middle is keyed on own ship alignment. Personally I prefer the yellow cross behavior on DAD. But again very easy to adapt to either instrument for those that still play KSP1. (like me) KUDOS!! Looking forward to future enhancements. ( A larger movement arrow perhaps? It gets a bit lost when near the middle...... oooh! oooh! How about have the arrow morph into a diamond when perfectly-ish centered. Not sure how that would look... but request to start with a larger arrow and see where that leads. ) Video showing behavior of DAD v0.4.3 shown below. I had gotten used to the previous version of DAD so my fingers muscle memory did me in for this example video. Not as well piloted as I would have liked.

Look forward to trying it out!! Thanks again on the work.