r_rolo1

Well, as for myself, in spite of loving to rover around ( Kerbin is a very pretty planet even on stock ... ), I decided to abstain of rovers until the new wheels come out with 1.1 . The current ones are way too glitchy for long travels :/

Yeah, great music ( and to boot, Mr Tin ( the composer ) is a rather swell guy ) and the graphics themselves in the intro were rather good even unmodded ( the "Blue Marble" mod made it even better ) ... Now that you say it, good ol' "Baba Yetu" would make a great intro music for KSP ... Hum... *starts digging KSP music modding threads*

Well, I do see things a lot diferent of everyone else in here, I guess ... to me Kerbals are more advanced than humans. See, their parts have 100% reliability as long as you don't push out of the envelope and they were able to make a reentry worthy capsule out of paper products as their first space program part ( see the Mk1 capsule description ). Or the trees in Kerbin are made of tungsten or there is some seriously advanced paper making technologies there

Hum , that reminds me of yet another game intro:

Well, answering to the OP, a mod becomes stock when the current dev team decides to insert their features in the stock game . About criteria the devs use to decide which stuff goes stock... well your bet is as good as anyone else, including the devs , since they already changed their opinion on several features more than once, and even on points they were and are very adamant they would not do, they sometimes ended relenting partly ( even on their most staunch denial, automation, the devs ended mimicking some of the mechjeb features for the pilot skills ( and did a mostly poor job at that, but that is another issue ) ) ...

Well, with all of the above said, the current state of the game about RAM usage is that , due to some legacy decisions that probably don't make much of sense now, the game has both a subpar handing of part loading ( loading all the parts at game start does not make much of a dent when you have only a handful of them ... ) and it has a absurd number of scene changes due to bad UI design ( something, that given the issues with scene change the game has, is almost criminal ). You also have to add the fact that the game does not make use of the GPU as much as that, a thing that overloads the sole thread the game uses even more ( I'm pretty sure that my 2003 retired desktop would run KSP better than my current laptop because of that ...if the AGP GPU I have there could run shader 3 :/ and if the motherboard could use more than 2 GB ).... Hopefully the port to Unity 5 will solve or atleast alleviate most of those issues, though ...

Rune, just a question about the HL-20 ( that I wanted to ask since I've seen it in the WIP thread some time ago ). I have done some similar glider return ships ( IIRC I have once posted somewhere in this thread ) and I know how hard is to do a glider with so little parts that will perform well with various fuels loads due to the dificulty of keeping the CoM in the same place. Being myself out of a KSP able computer, I just wanted to ask how well the HL-20 handles on various fuel loads ... or you have a hidden fuel tank somewhere to ballast things ?

It's good to know that Bill got a beefier hardware to play his Bill Space Program save ( those Kpads can't really do anything useful, right ? :D ) and that he let jeb to give it a go :D Now, just a question: how did he got the First Person IVA mod working with O[B]k[/B]ulus rift for the flag planting part ? :P

@sal_vager Well, I never said that the ingame aerospike should have the Isp values of the teoretical ideal aerospike ( that, among other things, has infinite lenght ;) ) or that the aerospikes didn't had flaws in RL ;) I just pointed out that the in game T-1 Isp was nerfed back in the days basically because the LV-30 and 45 were so underpowered compared with it ( you were here at the time, sal, so you must remember it ;) ) and it was never brought up to more realistical values based on RL tests. I also said that IMHO this should had been reverted a long time ago, especially since nowadays we can actually replicate in game some of the RL aerospike weak spots, like the cooling ( hence the fuzz there was about the aerodynamic aerospike ( that, BTW is not the case of the ingame T-1 ) ) or the non ideal performance in atmosphere ( that one is actually in game already , btw ;) )

[quote name='Agost']AFAIK real aerospikes can have thrust vectoring by varying the propellant distribution inside the combustion chamber... and in some other ways Hope it gets added[/QUOTE] Don't wait for it :/ The devs aren't even willing to give it back more realistic Isp values ( once upon a time the aerospike actually had them, but it was nerfed due to gameplay considerations ( basically it was too good compared with the LV-30 and 45 ( hum , where did I heard that one recently ? ;) ) and everyone was only using aerospikes nd nukes. IMHO there are other ways to balance the engine nowadays , like for a example, aerospikes in RL are harder to keep cool than bell engines, but who am I to say such things ? :P ) and better not talk about other examples, like how there isn't a single SRB in game that has thrust vectoring ( or even how historically the devs always make them underpowered compared with RL .... )

Hey, haven't you heard the news? Dres is not alone for atleast 5 game versions In fact it might be the planet in game with more company now

I , for myself, would like to see Moho. There is a certain Kerbfleet officer that is deathly afraid of the Mohole, so I guess that he has to face his fears

Why does every Jeb pic is see with him in the command chair has him with a grin that looks that came out of Dr Strangelove? Anyway, slow clap *111

Thanks. Rep for you, my dear friend

As long as you have girders ( aka, since the start of career ) you can clean stuff out. Just make a inverted cup with them on the ship and drag the debris to a suborbital trajectory BTW this was the standart way of "docking" before docking ports were added to the game

KSP: 1.0.5, Windows Problem: Can't transmit science in 1.0.2 legacy career game Mods installed: ( Long list is long ) KER (current dev build for 1.0.5 ) EVE overhaul KAC Alarm NavBall DockingAlignment Indicator Field experience Planetshine ( unofficial 1.0.4 build , that is currently giving some error messages in the log ) RCS Build Aid Active texture management Precise Node Distant objects enhacer Science Alert Scatterer TAC Fuel balancer Texture Replacer Trajectories ( yeah I know it doesn't work for 1.0.5 at the moment , but I forgot to take it out ) Transfer window Planner Issue: As said in the title , I can't transmit any science in a legacy career save that I started in 1.0.2 in all the ships I tested so far. A typical transmission attempt gives this result in the log: While I listed the mods I have above, I have pinpointed out the issue to this particular save AFAIK ( a fresh minted career save with the same mods installed will not give any issues ). Other point of interest is the messages the log gives when loading the ship in question: The parts in question are the parts that have science stored in this ship, so I guess some issue in the part loading is in the origin of this problem. I don't know of any change in the logic behind this from 1.0.4 to 1.0.5 so I'm somewhat stumped ... and any help would be welcome Anyway, here is the output log ... and thanks in advance

Now that you ended your final stream, Max .... Be well and Fly safe.

There is Arrowstar KSP Trajectory Optimization Tool, that unfortunately is not a in game too :/

The tutorial that the OP links is for 0.25, so yeah, this ship was not designed for the 1.0.x atmo. I'm betting in too much drag in the top part of the rocket as the culprit for the flip as well ...

I got one so far, to change orbit of a Mun sat. It should be pointed out that the probability of getting one of those increases with the number of vessels up there ( NathanKell said so , atleast ), so I would not be surprised if they would be rare if you have only one or two ships active ...

Good rep gives you better rewards for your contract proposals ... and bad rep does the oposite Back on topic, first things first. no one is forcing you to acept all the contracts... you're just being punished by giving a bald face "No" to the proposals. That leaves you with the option of simply letting the proposal to die out, that so far is not punished ( IMHO this is a unreasonable situation, but well, it is what we have ATM ) Second, if this game career mode is about managing a space program ( sort of Space program Tycoon ) like SQUAD used to say in their site ( since 1.0 than that reference is not there, mind that ), then this measure is a step in the good direction, but given the lack of other features ( like , say, a coherent contract proposals system ), it sticks out like a sore thumb because it punishes a player by weeding out bad outputs of a flawed contract system actively ( in spite of the 1.0.5 contract system being better than the previous ones ) and because it offers the player the option of simply time warping out the problem ( and, let's be honest, encouraging the player of your game to skip the game it self is a strange idea IMHO. It is one thing to be forced to enable time warp due to the game context ... but encouraging the player to do so ... ). In other words, I'm ok with the measure in itself, but I'm not OK with this measure in the current game context :/

Hum, now that you talk about this, how do the female kerbals put their hair like that? It is not like their hands reach the back of their heads ... Do they have special coiffeur officers to do the female kerbonauts hair ?

Well, if you're putting it outside, you're probably going to make it worse due to added drag P.S I do not know if this is 100% true. That is how it was explained to me during a twitch stream of one of the KSP-TV regulars. But it would make sense P.S II From what I heard from NathanKell in one of the previous weekend KSP-TV streams, the passive radiators ( like the one you have in here ) will only draw heat from up to two parts away ( in other words , from the part they are attached to and the parts that are attached to that one ). Maybe the best solution is simply to put more parts in between the fairing base and the radiator?

Thrust damage was upped ( better said, it was made to follow a law more closely related with RL, a thing that makes that if you're close of a rocket nozzle, you're going to have a bad day ), so if you decouple and activate at the same time, the lower stage will most likely get damaged . The best way to solve this is to either activate the engine in the upper stage after decoupling and gaining some distance ( like most rockets in RL do ) or simply hot stage ( aka decoupling and lighting the engine at the same time ) and forget about reusing the lower stage ( also a thing in RL )

AFAIK as I understand , it is not that the radiator is heating from the atmo in 1.0.5, it is the fact that in 1.0.4 radiators could radiate to the outside while inside a fairing ( a thing that, if you think it right, doesn't make much sense ). In 1.0.5 the radiator is trying to dissipate the heat generated by the fairing friction with the atmo , but it can't do it because it is enclosed, so it heats up. If you staged up the fairing , the radiator would most likely cool down ASAP.