Chakkoty

I have a question about the Konstruction Docking Ports. How does the rotation feature work? I usually can't get the angle right when docking so before I Multi-Weld, I have to correct it by rotating. How do I do that? They don't rotate like Vanilla ports. Any help much appreciated and awesome mod, thanks for your hard work!

Fortunately, there are mods that add RGB lights and LED strips for all your Rover and/or station tuning needs.

Question: How do I upscale the 2.5m 6-way connector with tweakscale? I saw the 1.875 version upscaled in the gallery for the 2.0 release. So it must be possible. Tweakscale refuses to let me do it, though. Any advice? Or rather, is there some setup required for it to work? I know TweakScale disables scaling on parts where it thinks it'll break.

Excellent, thank you.

@Nertea I have a question about the extendo-tubes. How long are they, in meters? I can just try and measure it with a bunch of tanks in different radial sizes as a makeshift ruler, but I figured you might have some exact value flying around. Reason being I want to build a custom centrifuge by essentially rotating a piece with motors and extendo-tubes acting as arms that connect to the endpieces. Since I 5 RPM is as slow as the motors'll go, I need to use a specific length to get my precious g's. Only if you've got time, of course.

It helps a lot, that's what I wanted to know. Thanks! Edit: Specifically this helps me a lot when deciding which parts to use for building RL rockets: Saturn 5 --> 10 meter diameter. 10 * 0.625 = 6.25m, adjusted to 5m diameter. If I wanted to make a Falcon 9 replica, I'd use either the 2.5 or 1.875 size parts (since The F9 has a diameter of 3.6m * 0.625 sits right in the middle between 1.875 and 2.5).

I've looked through posts here on the forum, on Reddit, looked at how several mods interpret the issue... What does radial size actually mean? I know that a curved panel of radial size big (2.5 m) is going to fit snugly around a 2.5 m fuselage. But does that mean the RADIUS is 2.5 meters or the DIAMETER? I know KSP size doesn't directly translate to RL size, but taking the Cupola as an example, it fits 2.5 m closest. In that case, it's diameter. But the Saturn V 1st stage had a diameter of 10m, while the KSP version has 5. Am I missing something here or is there just no "canon"?

That ...is dope.

Thanks for bringing that mod to my attention. A hole has been filled in my heart. First thing Imma do at home is build a pretty new space station plus launch vehicle with aaall those pretty parts.

...you cannot fathom the catharsis. Thanks, awesome mod. And the integrated paraports are just...mwah. Chefs kiss.

And once again, @Nertea delivers as he always does. Sooner or later. You've outdone yourself once again. I was positively throbbing when I saw those new parts. It's a shame they don't work fully with TAC-LS yet, but that's just a cherry on top for people who need immershun. Thanks, man. Really. I actually had given up on seeing those parts anytime soon, and then he even adds 1.875 parts - my favorite size! Just right and absolutely gorgeous. Love the more rounded, domed aesthetic you're going with for the medium 5-way connector as opposed to making them flat. The Medium station core is perfection, papa kiss. In fact, I believe the 1.875m station pieces may be my favourite out of all of them. It's just...mmh...just right.

Alright, thanks!

Oh. I meant in real life. May have been a bit unclear, sorry.

Thanks, that's all I wanted to know! So it is possible to use airbrakes for maneuvering during descent, just not with the KSP airbrakes?

Not specifically on those rockets, but yes. Of course the airbrakes would have to hug the hull much more snugly so that they cause little to no air resistance. They could serve as simple airbrakes when it's absolutely necessary by fully extending them, but first and foremost to direct airflow away from the hull to steer during reentry. This would of course create small turbulances behind the brakes and is probably a very non-optimal way to do this, but I just have to know if it would at least be feasible.

Watching the 3-part starbase tour got me thinking - the airbrakes in stock KSP fold against the hull and can then be extended outward. What if using them to aerobrake was their secondary, not primary function? Theoretically, by adjusting their angle only slightly, air flow can be directed away from the hull and used to "steer" the landing booster, with fully extending them to aerobrake only being used in emergencies when the booster is coming in literally "too hot"? I need someone more knowledgeable about aerodynamics to tell me either "Huh." or what a stupid idea that is.

@Nertea I took a cheeky peek at the english localisation file and saw that (for a while now) you included some planned 5m parts, namely the - SDV-2 'Atlas' Deep Space Habitation Module - SDV-3 'Minerva' Deep Space Control Module - SDV-1 'Leto' Deep Space Logistics Module and the - SDV-X 'Cronus' Extensible Centrifuge. Since you are currently quite busy with stuff like Kerbal Atomics and CryoEngines (I think), I don't expect to see any updates on that soon. However, since you based a lot of stuff in SSPX and NF parts on existing concepts...what are the inspirations for these four? I'm especially curious about the centrifuge, seeing as the 3.5m one is already enormous!

LET ME BELIEVE

I choose to believe that the symbol above Aerodynamics stands for life support. I want it, I need it.

@Nate Simpson Seeing those Kerbal animations made me think of life support - even if it's just for flavor, imagine Kerbals on the threadmill as they try to stay in shape during long journeys in zero g!

I have confidence in the Devs. They are passionate, able and persistent. They'll be fine. As long as the bean counters stay out of it and we keep our jimmies from rustling over every little thing, KSP2 will be everything we need for the next decade or two. So until Elder Scrolls 6 comes out.

I welcome thee. Don't lithobrake too hard!

Hello beautiful people, I'm Chakkoty and I like space, science and building big, bad rockets. I've posted before in a couple topics and thought it's time for an official introduction. Mostly play modded for beauty, immershun and Nertea's godly parts.

I haven't used spaceplanes a lot, but I find them to be more practical for getting payload into orbit efficiently (or at least out of the atmosphere, where it can circularize with efficient vacuum-optimized engines like the Wolfhound). However, I am very impatient and I like big booms. So, for anyything other than orbital delivery, I'll probably use rockets. It's easier to build a bigger rocket for a heavier payload than to reinvent the wheel with a new spaceplane whenever your current design can't handle the increased payload mass. In the long term, though, I'll probably go for something of a mix between starship concepts and spaceshuttle: vertical, booster-assisted takeoff, gliding during reentry and then a vertical landing. Big F...alcon? Rocket with more wings.