jimmymcgoochie

Or just a generic “fusion fuel” and “fission pellets” that can be made of whatever they need to be made of at that given moment- liquid fuel, oxidiser, solid fuel and monopropellant aren’t specified, hence the debate on whether LF/Ox is kerolox, methane-peroxide or even high-performance hypergolics (and the apparent weirdness of the NERV getting liquid hydrogen-level ISP while using kerosene or methane as propellant), so why should more exotic substances be specified when a more generic term would offer greater flexibility? I don’t care what combination of deuterium, tritium and/or helium-3 you’re throwing into that fusion reactor, only that reactor go brrrr and rocket go fast.

I think you need to check the burn time on both of those METAL probes- the smaller one is using an engine that might not last the full duration, while the larger one has a burn time of 40 minutes which just won’t work for Mercury, cosine losses will eat the delta-V. You should also check the power production down at Mercury and adjust your solar panels accordingly, you don’t need nearly as much panel area that close to the Sun and every gram counts when going to Mercury. A well-insulated kerolox stage using something like the RD-58 might be a better choice for a Mercury capture stage as it’s significantly more efficient than any hypergolic stage and doesn’t need the heavier HP tanks so will be lighter too; it’s possible to use hydrolox for Mercury capture as I’ve done it a couple of times, but that requires much MLI and radiators.

KSP/saves/your-save-name-here/ships/subassemblies I believe?

Probably TUFX, there are plenty of configs out there so try some and see which you like best.

The KSP launcher is a textbook example of “worse than useless”: A redundant UI with a redundant button to start the game, which we already had; Zero in-game utility; Uses processor and memory; Crashes a lot; Can be removed from the game with zero in-game impact. But management gets what management wants…

Tried to build a reusable spaceplane to be used as the upper stage of a rocket. Those streaks of fire in the background? Those are (or rather, were) the rear half of the plane...

I believe it’s Magpie Mods that makes Restock/+ parts shiny, along with a variety of other mods’ parts, and I think it uses TUFX to do so so you’ll need both.

TUFX and KS3P might do what you want- both are post-processing mods that change how the game looks, which could include the background blurring in that loading screen. If you also want the additional KSC buildings featured in the loading screen, you’ll need KSC Extended- this has been updated since that loading screen was made so it doesn’t look exactly the same, the diagonal road coming off the crawlerway isn’t there any more. It also adds some extra launchpads which are functional (you can launch rockets off them!) and replicate some of the real launchpads at Cape Canaveral/Kennedy Space Centre.

Turn the science gains down to 10% in the difficulty settings, it's a totally different game that way.

You’re hauling ORE to orbit!? Why, when you can build a mining rig and just leave it on the surface, hauling fuel up to the station via a dedicated fuel tanker instead?

You definitely shouldn’t be moving files around inside mods. If downloading from SpaceDock, CurseForge or GitHub you need to unzip the downloaded folder and then check what’s inside- if the mod contains a GameData folder, drag that into the root KSP directory so it merged with the existing GameData folder (or copy the contents of mod/GameData into KSP/GameData); if not, copy the mod folder into KSP/GameData. Make sure you also include any dependencies such as Module Manager, some mods come with those but others don’t.

A lot can depend on the difficulty settings, you’ll progress a lot slower at 10% science gains than 100%. Most of the facilities and buildings in the KSC are their own biomes- and some of them change as buildings upgrade- so there’s A LOT of science to be had right there, not to mention the Island Airfield not so far away; a little jet-powered science rover to trundle around the KSC can rake in science points for minimal effort. While it can seem like a good idea to send every science experiment you have on every mission, the heavier experiments (materials bay mostly) can really cut down on your delta-V. It can be better to send a group of small, lightweight probes with only the small, lightweight experiments on them and drop those across several biomes, something that works particularly well for Minmus due to the low gravity and thus low delta-V requirements per lander. Try sending a scientist Kerbal on a free-return trip around the Mun and have them transmit all the data they can and collect the rest and store it in their pod to be returned later, this will maximise the science gained per mission. Free returns can take a bit of work to get right, but also cut down on the fuel you need to carry and so lighten the entire vessel.

Are fuel tanks going to be that procedural in KSP2? I thought it was going to be a set of fixed diameter tanks with a variety of fixed lengths that you can switch between to give the equivalent of e.g. the various FL-Tx00 tanks in a single part for convenience, much like structural tubes and engine plates in KSP. While I've come around to the use of procedural parts in RO/RP-1, I don't like them for stock KSP as it's too much faff and to my knowledge that sort of millimetric-accurate part tweakery isn't coming to KSP2.

Started working on a new and improved space station design that I plan to use as the hub for lunar operations in the future, with docking spaces for landers, visiting crew capsules and refuel/resupply missions. I’ve made the core module with docking ports, storage tanks and all the ancillary systems to make it functional in its own right, plus a lab module that will be launched separately; still to do, a habitation module for visiting crews so they can sleep in proper beds and not the seats in their capsules and possibly a dedicated propulsion system for orbit adjustments. I may even add a docking port so the existing station can be connected up to the new one, no sense letting it go to waste since it’s already out there.

I think RO/RP-1 has added the RD-254, the vacuum-optimised version of the RD-253. It’s about three times as powerful as the RD-0210 and a bit more efficient too plus very high reliability. If not it’s in CH4/ROEngines Extended. TestFlight engine failures are permanent- if it fails, it’s dead (unless you cheat and reload a save afterwards ); TestLite allows you to restart engines if they fail in some circumstances, TestFlight does not. I think the station problems might be due to some parts being designed for nitrogen pressurisation at 1atm (101kPa, the larger station modules) and others for oxygen pressurisation at 0.3atm (30.3kPa or so, the D-2 capsules and smaller station modules) and since it was only oxygen pressurisation that was running things got weird. Don’t EVA from a large part as it vents the whole thing, and don’t turn habitats off as it wastes a lot of O2 trying to depressurise it later. Probably best to destroy it and build something new without those ugly, heavy docking ports in the middle.

It uses the letters of the bases, not an actual DNA sequence that means anything. No idea, they’re very different.

Gattaca, a film about a future where humans are genetically modified, has a title that uses only the four letters of the base codons in DNA: ACGT.

Many launches to come today! First up is the first Green Amethyst GEO contract sat, replacing the old Green Cucumber with more than double the payload capacity- I should have known reliability would be a problem- the upgraded NK-33 config starts out at about 93% ignition chance, compared to >99.99% chance for the RD-107/108, though it will improve in time. The rocket was rolled back, engine replaced and rolled out for a second attempt. Meanwhile, I came up with an idea- use the first stage of this rocket, with some minor tweaks, to launch a Gemini capsule into orbit. It turned into an SSTO for some reason and things didn't go too well... Excessive G-forces at the end of the burn (over 10G despite throttling the engines down to minimum thrust), plus the fact that it's heavier and more expensive than the existing launch rocket and the upcoming move away from Gemini to D-2, means this is one design I won't be taking forward. Back to the Green Amethyst for the second launch attempt: A significant increase in contract value- at least 30k funds- for a mere 2000 more funds to build the rocket? That's a win in my book. Now on to the interplanetary missions! Venus and Jupiter windows are both open so there's a lot of them. Green Radish 1, Venus rover: Its identical twin rover will be launching in about a month to see if the more favourable "flyby" window is better or worse than the "orbit" window. Purple Cube Jupiter 1: Should have ample fuel to capture into Jupiter orbit and do repeated flybys of the Galilean moons, with the potential to try and orbit one of them if the opportunity arises. Purple Cube Jupiter 2: Also sent on its way without incident. Purple Sphere Venus 1: Back down to Earth (sort of) for another Yellow Gong LEO Gemini mission, carrying Pat and Tony for what might be their first missions. It's the first time I've launched two engineers on the same mission, but that's mostly because everyone else is doing training right now, either for the D-2 or X-15. A quick visit to the Yellow Timpani space station... And a few days at higher altitude, during which I noticed that the fuel cells weren't producing enough power to run all the systems for some reason: And then back home with some scatterer-related weirdness (strange sky colours, bouncy ocean) because CKAN decided I needed to reinstall every single mod because CKAN itself had done an update. Looking back, I think Antony had a flight before which would explain the reduced retirement delay compared to Patricia who definitely hasn't. Green Satsuma 1, asteroid chaser: Following a course correction a few days later, the closest approach is down to a few kilometres- but critically outside of physics range. RSS asteroids are stupidly large and can sometimes be larger than physics range but this one seems to be approachable; still, best to do so slowly rather than crashing into the multi-gigaton space potato. I took a look at what other transfer windows were coming up and found a Neptune window that's just about usable if I build a probe RIGHT NOW. Ironic, since the journey will take over thirty-four years and so would last until mid-2003. I'll probably send a later mission with much more delta-V and arrive before this one and I'm not sure this probe would actually be able to capture into a useful orbit, so I might not go ahead with this one. That Neptune probe also uses a new launch rocket design, broadly similar to the Purple Shape but with a single 7.5m diameter first stage core instead of the Proton-style design with 3m side tanks and a 5m core. It's a bit heavier, but can carry an enlarged second stage giving greater total delta-V. Working title is Purple Geometry and the probe has been named Purple Tangent. I also designed a new Moon rover which should be better equipped to handle those long lunar nights, since the old Green Huckleberry rovers seem to be perpetually low on power and still have a lot of science (mostly mass spectrometry 4) to do. Using the new 350t launch vehicle I designed for the new GEO sat launcher so these rovers are named Green Basalt. Coming soon: A few rover launches and "landing" on an asteroid.

The Years Start Coming: Reach Year 100. And They Don’t Stop Coming: Reach Year 500. Fed To The Rules: Fail a tutorial. And I Hit The Ground Running: Send a Kerbal to space in the first launch of a save. It Didn’t Make Sense Not To Live For Fun: Go 100 years without launching any rockets from the KSC. Your Brain Gets Smart: Unlock every part. But Your Head Gets Dumb: Activate and decouple an engine in the same stage. So Much To Do: Have 10 active logistics routes. So Much To See: Visit three new star systems. So What’s Wrong With Taking The Backstreets?: Use the cheat menu to reach orbit with a craft that has no engines. You’ll Never Know If You Don’t Go: Go below sea level on Jool. You’ll Never Shine If You Don’t Glow: Have 5 nuclear reactors in a colony. And on a slightly less frivolous note… Rock Star: Build a colony on Gilly. Purple Rain: Build a colony on Eve. Red Giant: Have 1000 Kerbals in a colony on or orbiting Duna. Why Didn’t That Work?: Build a wind turbine on a body with no atmosphere. Whoops…: Destroy a KSC building. Return To Sender: Reach space and then land the vessel on top of the VAB.

Every body in the game should be a destination in its own right, not just something you fly past without stopping because there's nothing there bar a convenient gravity assist. Stars without planets might be common in reality but they'd add nothing to KSP2 and could be detrimental if you can only see planets around other stars at close range- what use is building a huge and expensive interstellar ship only to find out there's nothing there when it arrives decades/centuries later?

Anything compatible with 1.12.3 will also work just fine with 1.12.4 (except that one mod that fixed the tutorials because 1.12.4 also fixed those) so you can safely ignore that warning. Re. planet packs, there are many to choose from: If you want to change the stock system around a bit without adding anything new (minimal impact on memory/performance) then try out the Snarkiverse (100% not sponsored by the forum member above!): If you want to add more planets to the stock system but leave the stock system (almost) unchanged, something like Outer Planets Mod (OPM) might fit the bill: If you want a totally new star system to explore, there are plenty of options there too: Beyond Home, made by the same modder who created Parallax (this particular link is a forked version with Parallax 2.0 support) https://github.com/ballisticfox/BeyondHomePlanetMod Galileo's Planet Pack and Grannus Expansion Pack, both made by the same modder and designed to work together with configs so that either system can be the starting system, or used apart. If you fancy something a bit more challenging, try a larger-scale system. Some (e.g. JNSQ) are built at a larger scale while others including the stock system can be scaled up using Sigma Dimensions and Rescale (can't find the links for up-to-date versions of those, but I know they exist somewhere!) Of course, you don't have to try a new system to have fun- try a community challenge or doing something different e.g. a 100% reusable space program, add a life support mod or a tech tree reorganiser... The options are limitless and there are plenty of things to discover in the stock system.

There's a small DLC button just under the big green PLAY button when you click KSP in your Steam library, and a larger bit on the right hand side further down. If Steam doesn't think you bought them, maybe they're still there on a credit card/bank statement and/or you still have the confirmation email you got when you bought them? Steam support could be your best bet in that case.

Back up your save(s) - KSP/saves/<your save name>, copy and paste to desktop - then uninstall and reinstall KSP and see if that fixed it. If you got KSP via Steam, verify the game files (right click KSP in Steam > properties > local files) to make sure everything has downloaded properly.

Try a different sharing site- Dropbox and Google Docs are often used for posting logs.

Contracts can be glitchy like that sometimes- I've had a contract for landing on an asteroid complete when I docked to a space station and crewed interplanetary mission contracts complete just by going up to orbit and back down. Take the free money!