Gumby

All of you recommendations and clarifications are much appreciated and the responses given are remarkably enlightening, so thank you. But i still cant wrap my head around the understanding of how it might detract from the community's experience with the game. If any of you are willing to elaborate in more depth it would be great.

I wanted to suggest this to create a semi-unique experience each time you embark on a new Journey (begin a new universe). Features: Kerbin: "biomes" alike in other procedural terrain engines, could be an area that cultivates an expected result, such as mountains where mountains should be and desert plains wherever the game feels comfortable placing them. It wouldn't be heavy during the game as it would enter a pre-generation state, generating terrain for all celestial bodies +- Kerbol Craters: im a big fan of holes in the ground, but when their bowl shaped and great for driving around in, oh boy! My point is, is that celestial bodies that have craters would be alot more interesting if those same craters weren't there in a second career playthrough. Mapping: this feature would now have a legitimate purpose, as it would allow pilots to plan their next celestial vacation on the currently mapped body as well as perhaps science for such accomplishments. Mapped bodies should display number of unique biomes Science: oh yeah science... this will be a lot more non linear collection of important data and will give a more exploratory feeling to the well known system we love and perhaps more incentive to enjoy a terrain generated jewel. Also, to refer back to mapping, the science menu should catalog known biomes, visited biomes, and perhaps "discovered" biomes (feel free to use a less confusing word by all means); these biomes are not discovered through mapping but through close up analysis, kind of like sub-biomes where the terrain is slightly different, but not unexpectedly different from the biome in general and can be used to key in a extra 5 to 10% of science points. I hope you like the suggestion! feel free to add comments!

well on my 3-2 it has a lower part count, but its the previous version's pod. i could easily re design it to use less parts, and be more user friendly.

we should hook up and combine geniuses

A modular ejection system that enables the escape of a kerman from a dangerous situation. Ejection path is a forward-vertical ascent to get above and past assemblies, or dis-assemblies. Fully replaceable module when cockpit and forward-most docking port is removed. once used, it is no longer replaceable. to enable re-useability, use just a mk-1 cockpit with a docking port on the back of it. Make sure you cut engines before activation, if you can. I would Greatly appreciate pictures of designes it was used in, comments, feedback, and love for putting time and frustration into creation. Thank you for choosing Jeri.co! Spaceport: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/e-3-2/

Hello Everyone, this is the showcase of the E Series Modules from myself, Gumby. Id appreciate if you would post back pictures of the assemblies you use this on and comment your ideas on how to make it better. This is also a proof of concept also comment if you want the mk 1 command pod version. (pics on imagur) The First module Is the E-1 which can be found @ the spaceport here with additional information: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/e-1/ the second being the E-3 the difference being weight and reusability the E-1 is more like an unrechargable battery while E-3 is like a Rechargeable one, with the ability to interchange and the E-3 is much heavier in comparison to the E-1. I've made both Modules steerable. The both work on all atmosphereic bodes. If it doesnt, there are multiple factors why, more prominently with the E-3. The E-3 has basic maneuverability in space. mk1 Cockpit it holds onto is completely blank in additions, besides the docking port on the aft end of the cockpit. The modules are separable and can be delivered individually and reassembled together in space. Docking the two together is a nice challenge for amateurs and pros alike, if you are too far left or right you are due to nudge the pod in the stead of actually docking it. Once you do get it docked you'll probably notice that your cockpit isn't orientated properly, this can easily be fixed by simply undocking, switching to the cockpit, re-orientating and re docking the two together. the E-3 is designed to have minimal debris when not in full orbit around a celestial body, otherwise you'll have a pretty large cloud that is very light in durability with the exception of the parachute ring. The primary issue with the desintagradeablity of the parachute ring is that it uses two i beams which are remarkably more durable than anything else on the ejector itself with the exception of the pod. it is strongly Encouraged that you activate stage zero when your landed, otherwise you wont have parachutes. The parachutes function in such a manner that it prevents the cockpit from detaching when the pod is at high speed and the parachute is fully deployed. The only disclaimer i have for the both of these is that i tested it Ferram so there may be drag instabilities. You can get it here: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/e-3/ PICTURE TIME!!!! Sepathrusters fire (this is the first stage) E-1 More images here: http://imgur.com/S1Tz8qO ENJOY