softweir

Most Launch organisations don't count propellant as payload unless you are talking about a propellant tanker refuelling another, orbiting vessel. Normally, the payload mass is exclusively the stuff somebody is paying to go into space - the satellite(s), the astronauts, the space station module and so on. Hence "Payload".

This looks to be one of the better QoL mods I've ever seen:- small scope, simple to use and invaluable! Thanks for releasing it!

I too would be sad to see that, however only really significant mods will make any money from paywalling and the trivial mods that we don't really need will simply not make cash, acting as a disincentive to further such behaviour.

Ah. Very-well, my information is emphatically out-informed!

Hmm... OK, I'm a bit less sure of myself. Have you got a reference I can look at? A lot of fully cryogenic engines (NEVER kerolox!) produce best ISP with a rich mixture, causing some part of the exhaust to be super-heated propellant rather than combusted products - the lighter the molecule, the higher its velocity when heated, and the better the ISP. This is most apparent when burning H2, as H2 molecules are vastly lighter than H20! Even methane (CH4) is a lot lighter than the H20 and CO2 combustion products, so a rich mix leading to a proportion of CH4 in the exhaust provides better ISP. Of course, this has to be a carefully judged balance:- make the exhaust too rich and the reduced energy leads to excessively reduced exhaust temperature, thrust and ISP!

Because a suitable volumetric LOX/Methane combustion ratio (for this rocket) is approximately 2 parts Methane to 1 part LOX by volume. The two tanks have to be stretched proportionately, so the Methane tank gets two added rings, the LOX gets one added ring, to keep that 2:1 volumetric ratio.

The OP was edited just over a week ago, which suggests it is still usable even if no work is being done on it.

There were concerns about designing, testing and building microgravity gas turbines and make them efficient enough to deliver useful power, Unfortunately, a device like that can't be reliably tested on the ground nor at anything but close to full-scale, and nobody wanted to launch a full-size parabolic mirror and microgravity gas turbine just to see if it worked! Additionally, the gas-turbine/collector assembly needs to be aimed very much more precisely than photo-electric solar panels, with a 5degree misalignment leading to complete loss of power; it was thought that the technology didn't exist to achieve that. On the other hand, photo-electric solar panels are easy to scale up, and all the electric equipment can be tested in any damn gravity you like. Yes, the high-energy plasma environment encountered in orbit can degrade any kind of electrical equipment, but all the agencies had been testing and using photo-electric in orbit over may years before any serious work was done on MIR-2, so they were confident the technology could be scaled up and would have a reasonable lifespan. And they don't need to be too precisely aimed: a 5 degree misalignment leads to a trivial reduction in power output.

Indeed - with lots of emphasis on "well made"! But we're stuck with Nexus (not that I have any issues about Nexus), unless and until T2 get a genuine solution to the mess KSP is in.

That's a great tip! Ima gonna use that!

Those are two very different questions! For shorter load times can I recommend using a PCIe solid state drive. I'm using a Samsung 980 1TB PCIe Gen 3 which has made KSP much faster to get into! (I should have gone for 2TB, but I had to cut a corner somewhere, and it was the drive that lost out!) For best FPS, can I recommend you find a CPU with a very high native clock speed. This is more important for KSP than a large number of cores or threading capability, since KSP is very bad at using more than 1 or 2 cores! KSP will load faster with a better single-core clock speed. I'm using an Intel Core i7-13700F. A fast GPU is of less importance than a fast CPU, but a large GPU ram size helps if you plan to overload it with graphics and parts mods. Mine is a bit over-specified for KSP, but there are other games I play that need a better GPU; it's an Asus RTX 4070 DUAL 12G. I hope this helps!

Exactly correct.

There is no facility to do so. The alternative option is to use a file-sharing service (such as Dropbox): upload the files there and post the sharing link here.

Read the previous page or two. MUCH discussed!

Come for the Kerbals, stay for the physics. perhaps? These days I spend almost all my time in the SPH and VAB, and I ended up turning off the Ground-crew option. However, in the early days they were the face of KSP that helped draw me in and suspend disbelief, which was especially important as my early days were in the very early days of KSP when it was extremely primitive! A new KSPoid without Kerbaloids would suit me, but I suspect it would need some sort of "face" in order to grow beyond just being "KSP without Kerbals". But there we have an issue: how can somebody replace Kerbals without being too KSP for IP safety? I'm out of ideas on that!