razark

This sounds interesting. It would make sense to me to have the data saved as it currently is. After all, those folks in Mission Control are looking at screens of telemetry being sent back. What would make more sense to me would be a requirement for either an antenna to stream the data or part recovery to get the data after flight (or to get additional data to represent what couldn't be transmitted). The problem I see is the automatic deletion of "debris" parts making it hard to implement the second one. It might work for planes or SSTOs that don't drop stages. I'll try to remember to capture screenshots if I notice anything odd again. I just happened to try your mod, and then found the post reporting it immediately afterwards.

I'd rather have the ability to directly determine what my Kerbals are, even if it's just an extra line in the save file. I had the problem with one career I started where I couldn't get any Pilots. I started with Jeb, of course, but all the available candidates were either Engineers or Scientists. I ended up having to delete that one and start a new career.

I'm just trying this out. I love the idea, especially as I'm in the process of rereading The Right Stuff right now. I'm really looking forward to seeing where this mod will go in the future. It adds a sense of actually doing something to advance Kerbal knowledge, aside from the "clicky-clicky, now you've got a new part" science system. I have a couple of questions and issues, though. Do I need to recover a part to keep the flight data? For example: I launch a ship with a booster. During flight, the part gains data. Once the booster burns out, I drop it and continue the flight with the rest of my ship. The booster falls down, and gets removed as debris, or explodes on hitting the ground. Does the data gained by the SRB during the flight persist? Do/can part failures give a data bonus? Sometimes, a failure can lead to greater understanding of what's happening during flight, or about the materials used. For example, before STS-107, foam shedding was not considered a major issue because the foam density was believed to be too low. After the loss of OV-102, the engineers looked at the insulation and realized more about the actual nature of it. Would you consider a possible chance of additional data after a failure? I can confirm this happened to me. The capsule showed "Status OK", but the debug window said Monopropellant leak, and the level of MP was dropping. There was no repair option showing, either. Another issue I saw was with the part highlighting. If I click the "H" button, the part would get the bright green outline. If I click the button again, the outline disappears, but the part is still glowing green. With the propellent leak, the "H" button gave a yellow outline, I assume to highlight the failure (even though the main window didn't show it). However, the capsule continued to have the green glow.

My pet peeves: -Removing access to Action Groups. These are a shortcut for the user interface, not some sort of special ability. If I want to set up three things to happen at the same time, I should be able to do it. Having to scroll around and click "Deploy Panel" on a bunch of different panels at one time is a pain that should not exist. Dropping parts of a vehicle in a balanced manner can also be very important. -Piloting. The way it's done is odd. A pilot's skill should determine the ability to hold a ship steady on the marker, and not oversteer and waste all the power of RCS fuel. The way it is, a pilot seems to be oddly unable to find an arbitrary point on the nav ball until he reaches a certain level. -The science clickfest. It needs something more than just a "go here, click that, click this, you have new parts" mechanic. There's a handful of mods I'm watching that might help with that feeling. -The tech tree seems to be oddly ordered. -The tendency of the game to move further towards "LOLsplosion simulator", instead of feeling like a space program. -The Kerbal Classes being implemented in a way that we don't have real access to.

Arbitrary removal of Action Groups. Bizarre implementation of piloting. Brain-damaged method of class determination, locked away from the user. Plus the game seems to have taken a step away from "making sense" towards "herpy derpy make 'splosions! huh huh huh, kerbals all be stupid!" and I find it to be ridiculous. Edit: On the other hand, 0.90 does seem to run somewhat better on my old machine.

I do what I can to keep them safe. There's abort systems and contingency plans. But the bottom line is that spaceflight is an inherently dangerous business. Sometimes, something is going to go wrong. And sometimes, a Kerbal is going to get into a situation he isn't going to walk away from. They knew the risks when they signed on, and if they let me know, they are free to resign at any time. (Of course, if something goes wrong with the game and not the fundamental design or piloting of a vehicle, there's revert.)

From the list of games I've played, of course. Best game from 2014: KSP 0.25 Worst game from 2014: KSP 0.90

Since I don't have any pictures from the Cavalla that's a few miles from me, I'll post this one I visited a few years back SS-383 USS Pampanito, Balao Class Fleet Submarine Docked in San Fransisco I started talking to one of the guides that was there, and our group was let up onto the bridge and conning tower. The Pampanito has a rare example of a working Torpedo Data Computer. A truly amazing machine for solving fire-control problems.

I seem to recall it working this way when you change it by clicking the flagpole in the space center screen. Haven't bothered to try lately, though.

Son of a... And here I though I was posting on nasa.gov. The fact that it's a game is not an excuse for not making sense. And "It's Kerbal Space Program" is as much an argument against having any probes as much as it is against starting with them.

There's more problems, such as the starting tech has nothing for the rockets to lift except a Mercury-level capsule. That level of spacecraft just does not fit with the presented barn-center. Giving us something to lift besides that capsule makes a lot more sense. Putting up, for example, small atmospheric sensors on small rockets is a sensible precursor to launching a crewed capsule. There's also the problem that basic things like wings, airplane engines, batteries (which the starting capsule already contains), or wheels are beyond the ability of the starting level of technology.

There's a sounding rocket mod that would fit in well with the style. That, plus basic plane parts would give an appropriate start to the barn-centric space center. Reorder the tech-tree and have a low-tech, appearance-is-not-a-priority, get-it-done sort of place to start pushing out the boundaries of Kerbal Flight.

That pretty accurately describes what a space center looks like.

#Don'tCareAboutTheBarnButTheTrailerParkCrapIsStupidAndShouldGoAwayAndThere'sAlreadyAThreadAboutThishttp://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/103579

Yeah, this. How many languages are there in the world? Do we expect the devs to go through every one of them to find out if some off-hand joke that's barely noticed might translate into something off-color? How many languages should they need to check? The top five? Ten?

I find it to be very appropriate for KSP.

A couple of coworkers mentioned it in the office. Downloaded the demo. Soon, I was playing 0.15, and as soon as 0.16 came out, I bought it.

... Damn it. How the hell did I miss that one?

Fleeing the world because they no longer have a place in it? A bunch of squares that make everything less fun? Over-rated with big egos?

I don't know what you could be talking about. I mean, one of those names didn't even have a "K" in it at all!

Ok, you have a point. Waffles are good for something. Make a note, folks. If you add ice cream, waffles become edible.

Waffles: "When flavor isn't enough, maybe a novelty texture will make people like us?"

Wow. I can't believe how bad y'all are at typing. Absolutely horrid. I've never seen people have so much trouble typing "I accept the superiority of french toast, and apologize for promoting the waffle as a better food." Maybe your keyboards are broken?

Given the amount of time players tend to spend building ships, is there any way that whatever they add to it won't be repetitive? The only thing I can think of is giving us control over the music, letting us add and select files to play in each of the scenes.

Research Facility