chickenplucker

Can anyone give me a quick run down on how exactly the antenna's work? I've been really enjoying the mod but have been having problems losing control of ships that I sent off to say Eve or Duna. I've unlocked the third tier antenna that says it can reach the nearest planet in its part description, but the satellites always loose signal roughly halfway between Duna/Kerbin and I zing right past my maneuver node. Is there is a way to view or actually see what your antenna range is?

More boosters has really been something that was around since the beginning way back in version .7 (June of 2011 If I remember) With only a small handful of parts to choose from, if you didn't get to space you needed more boosters. Anyways, this is from an old challenge from September of 2011 with r4m0n showing off more boosters: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/2118-Do-It-Like-Jebediah-Orbit-and-land-safely-using-only-boosters?p=26628&viewfull=1#post26628

Those are some really nice pictures Rjhere! I think you will have no trouble at all mastering that projection adapter ISO is basically exactly what you described, increased light sensitivity at the cost of more "noise" in the the image. In film cameras ISO numbers would have been the speed of film you put in the camera. Faster film had more grain but short exposures, and slower film needed longer exposures but had less grain. Going back to the barlow, basically think of it as multiplying your F-stops. I think your scope is normally F/10. Adding the 3x barlow turns it into an F/30, which means you may need to increase the exposure time with the ISO setting to keep up. But there is only one way to find out, just keep playing with settings and see what works for you and what doesn't. Have fun

I have both and I'll try to help out without rambling too much First, you did not mention what type of telescope you currently have. Newtonian telescopes can sometimes have trouble reaching focus if the camera is mounted directly to the focuser with the T adapter, but eyepiece projection will work fine with them. Most other types of telescopes are okay to just mount the T mount directly to the focuser with no issues. Just using a T mount, at least from what I've experienced, gives you sharper pictures. There is less glass and things to focus/worry about which seems to make things just work better. Eyepiece projection can be touchy. I have a Meade .965 direct projection adapter I hook to my DSLR every once in a while. It seems to only work well with an 18mm eyepiece Anything lower then 10mm or higher then 20mm makes it really hard to focus, and to do that you sometimes have to adjust the eyepiece in the tube which can be a pain in the butt with that little set screw on the side. Its very, very, touchy. Also the pictures from it seem to be not as sharp as you would think they would be. Also, check this out. Its roughly the same price as the projection tube but you would still need to buy a T mount for you Nikon: http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-93230-24mm-1-25-Eyepiece/dp/B0007UQNV8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394872585&sr=8-1&keywords=8-24mm+zoom Its a zoom eyepiece that you can zoom in or out by twisting it. It makes finding and zooming in on things very nice and easy since you don't have to keep swapping out your eyepieces. But the really neat thing; that rubber cup on the end pops off, and under it is a T mount thread for your camera. This means that you can screw your camera directly onto the eyepiece and then zoom in or out by just twisting the eyepiece to help focus/zoom. I would highly recommend it over a direct projection tube just because its so much easier to use, and as an eyepiece its very nice as well. Oh, and one last thing, Barlows! I never had any luck using one with the camera, it just made everything way to dark.

Thread needs more Space!!! From tonight, it was nice and warm out so I was messing around with an old 1958 Dynascope Rv-6 that I picked up as my first "real" telescope (sorry little C-90) which is mounted to a Celestron VX. Since there was a bright little dot by the moon that looked familiar, slewed over a bit and... Jupiter and its moons! Could not be happier with the Rv-6, the pictures have a hard time showing how sharp that scope is. And to be fair this picture is a composite of two images, its a royal pain trying to get the moons and any banding details to show up in one shot on a DSLR.

Oh wow, I was just thinking about this and wondering if the little Ausplane was ever updated. Keep up the good work!

@Lexif Nice crescents! Yupper, that's the same lens. The Exakta version sounds pretty interesting, I ended up getting some extension tubes trying to make mine a macro but that one sounds much more useful @Moon Goddess You can take some amazing shots with any camera if you experiment enough Find an app that lets you manually control/set an exposure time, set it for around 7-15 secs (Any longer makes star trails). Make sure your phone can't wobble or move, then hold a piece of paper over the camera lens to block it. Hit the shutter button, wait for the phone to stop wobbling then pull the paper away. The paper will keep your picture from blurring when you push the button, or you can use a self timer so when you push the button and set the phone down it will stop wobbling when it takes the picture. For moon shots if you hold a set of binoculars in front of the phone it can sometimes help get you closer. It may not be as sharp as a DSLR, but you can still do quite a bit if you experiment enough

Here are a few shots I took from last year, nothing special. All of them with my trusty Canon T2i/550D. This is cropped, but used my Tamron "AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 SP Di VC USD XLD" The name of that goofy thing is almost as long as its focal range. The light pollution coming off the horizon is from Lansing, dang city always tries to ruin the sky's. This was shot with an old Yashica mount Osawa MC 28mm/2.8 I had laying around from my 35mm film days. You can track that lens down pretty cheap on Ebay, grab the appropriate adapter for you camera, and then have a pretty decent wide angle lens for about 30 or so bucks. It does a pretty decent job. Orion over the house on Christmas Eve, seen it when heading out for work and had to snap a picture. I think this was with a cheap manual Soligar 19-35mm I picked up to play with. Just a wide field shot of our neighbors. This was a stack of 7 images I think, maybe one dark and light thrown in there too. Same Osawa 28mm lens as above. And here is a short time lapse I threw together over 2hrs just to watch some stars fly by but ended up catching a lot of planes zipping around.

Since .7 something something, like tntristan12 said the atmosphere ended/started like a brick wall, no moon, grass and palms off one side of KSC, and no struts. Rockets were wobbly stacks of explosive fun.

What happens if you try to use a bmp or some other format for your textures? In the past I ran into some random issues with png's and different export options in Photoshop.

I must say, while I'm excited about all these shiny new celestial bodies I'm also quite concerned for some reason. Change confuses and scares me. Look at all those things flying around in there, the sky is getting crowded!

Is there any specific reason you dislike asparagus staging Fried? I hardly ever use it, but I'm curious now since your the only one that mentioned that as a factor.

Welcome to the forums crazyforthedesert For the those types of missions where an empty rescue vehicle is needed, or its just an unmanned test flight I normally just have the kerbals that are in the pod bail out before launch. That way they are safe on the ground when everything goes to pot. Then I just end their flights and they cycle back through the crew rotation ready for another round. Not sure what it is about these little green guys, they are just too happy to send to their doom. I just spent 57 minutes rescuing Bill who bailed out of a failed rocket, but had enough RCS to make it by himself into orbit. He is now safe and sound on the space station, although slightly traumatized.

@Gusturbo I was staring at the first picture trying to figure out where they were hiding at for a bit (slow connection, 2nd pic didn't load right away), that is impressive. @Whackjob .... wow lol. Here is my main launcher, the "Lawndart MkII". You can see how its kind of spindly and tall due to the lack-o-zoom. Missions to Duna usually require sending the launcher up to my space station on a few fuel stocking trips before heading out.

I've noticed that as well. You can coat those things in struts to the point that they look like they are almost welded on and the dang boosters will still try to flex around. To much power to hold back