goldenpeach

A cool feature would be to pay for the reliability of a part: the more you pay, the more reliable the part is; it would permit for short mission to be less expensive(because you don't need as much as reliability) while a interplanetary mission will cost you more. Also, it will make you choose between having less failures with a higher price or a lot of failures but more spare parts.

What is BurnTogether?

Thank you so much! Spamming "v" rapidly to go once again in the view mode I wanted was somewhat annoying

I have a problem: I can't edit the key for resetting the camera. By default, the key is backspace but it can cause some problem when you have an abort stage. I tried to remap the key to "enter" but it doesn't work; what did I do wrong? here's my attempt to edit the settings: HullCameraVDSConfig { CAMERA_NEXT { primary = Minus secondary = None group = 0 switchState = Any } CAMERA_PREV { primary = Equals secondary = None group = 0 switchState = Any } CAMERA_RESET { primary = Enter secondary = None group = 0 switchState = Any } }

Or, we could do something else: we use the same system as the other experiment(even for the part where you lose science when transmitting) BUT the experiment take some time to be realized. That way, you can't spam science!

And I had to test them on a escape trajectory from kerbin(what, for Kraken's sake, are the kerbals doing?!)

Just for information: when you have to test a part, you can activate it BEFORE having all the requirement met: all you have to do is to right-click the part and then click "run test"(like you would do for testing the landing gear). I though it would be useful for testing heavy parts(especially engines).

You have to go in the mission control and accept the contract: you will see the rewards you will get for completing them and he penalty for failing them. note: some contract give you a lot of science, I don't do any experiment except those required to complete some contract(those saying: "transmit or recover science from [somewhere]":there are easy but don't give a lot of reward) and I can easily unlock parts!

I downloaded the mod called "stage recovery" and I want to know how many chutes it would take to safely "land" the debris so I can judge wether or not it worth the recovery.

well, you can make mathematical proof that there is no bug in a script(you use another script to help you, it's too hard to make it by hand) but it extremely complex and difficult; people who use that usually use that for important programs and only for the "core" of the program.

If you made some scripts you should understand that bugs, even the simplest ones, can give you a hard time when it come to fix them. If you don't believe me, just learn a language (with python it will be easy) and you will understand what I mean.

I had a contact like this... but I had a deadline of five years.

you should ask Danny2462 for that(however, he will crash the game while doing that).

The R&D develops the parts then give the plans to the companies. The companies have to build the parts. however,they don't trust the R&D in developing new parts; that's why the R&D must test the parts: the companies want to be sure that the parts won't blow up during the fabrication.

YAY! I had my first failure which needed an abortion of the mission: a oxidizer leak during launch(right after lift-off) made my rocket (very) unstable. I lost control quite rapidly and used the escape tower to save the kerbals. The rocket nearly missed the capsule, I should make some improvement to the abort sequence(maybe some sepatron that fire once the capsule is stabilized after the LES firing in order the avoid any incoming rocket?) EDIT: yep, it work well enough to avoid any collision that would render the LES useless.

you were on modding monday! (Yeah, I'm a bit late but I don't follow modding monday, maybe I should start now )

When I do my Duna manned mission, I alway arrive in orbit with something around 5 m/s left(I use mechjeb, this is where why I do the same "score" every time). I could use my stage designed to ease the exit of kerbin SOI(I couldn't make a stage big enough to exit properly) but I would use more fuel that should be use for the mission. (I have to say that I have more than enough fuel in the CSM at the end of the mission(by that I mean that I can have more that 1000m/s left) so it wouldn't be a huge problem). EDIT: I have just finished a manned mission to Duna and, at the end, I had between 3000 m/s and 3500 m/s(forgot to check at the very last moment). And that's with a fuel leak that caused me to loose some fuel(even if it should be compensated by the leak of RCS fuel that emptied my only tank of RCS); all thank to the Dang it! mod(a really cool one ) Yeah... I will probably get punished for that in 0.24(I mean: that just fuel that get burned during reentry!) but it give me a small margin

How can you even have the idea of something like that?! You're the King of KSP. Also, the payload make me think of the iron giant(don't get fooled by the theatrical poster from wikipedia, it's not the kind of movie where a giant robot attack everything.(by the way, it's a really good movie, I loved it during my childhood)). EDIT: just by curiosity, how many parts did you need for the robot?

I made a quick test and it definitely bring a good news (or something we can consider a good new for debugging): the result is the same if I "ignore" liquid fuel( I modified the plugin to make it ignore liquid fuel). Why do I consider that a good news? Because, it would be far worst if the systems for ignoring resources worked for some resources but not for the others(I didn't make the plugin though, so it's up to you to take it as a good news or a bad one)

Ok, I have three more bugs to report(yep, I'm back ). The first one: the light of the landing gear stay on even if the light bulb should fail(you can't turn it off tough). Oh, and it's the only light emitting part to do that. The second one is interesting: the SRB leek fuel when I puncture the tank. The third one is not really a bug: when a control surface is stuck, we can reenable the control with the GUI(the GUI hat enable to disable the control surface from controlling the yaw/roll1pitch of the ship).

Oh right.... I tried my idea with the stock rover(the one with the sky crane) but I forgot the RTG(fortunately there was some batteries). Just a question: if I make the rover turn like hell before the first "landing", will it make the initial shock softer?

Oh, well I think I will have to try a lot of different techniques until I find one that make the trick most of the time(maybe that if I add some weight at the bottom it could help?). Thank you anyway for the answer! EDIT: ok, the only I found now is by putting a reaction wheel and balls all around the rover so I can make it roll(I should try to make a "rover" that rely on the ball to roll around)

I know that the title don't really make sense but I didn't had the place to put a title that would make sense. My problem is that using the soccers balls as airbag when landing on a planet can be useful(and fun); however, the contraption tend to turn rapidly and I can't control it. How can I make sure that the rover(or any other payload) will land in the correct position(i.e the wheel at the bottom)? Thank you for reading!

More or less... I watched a youtube video and achieved to grab an asteroid after several try(and a lot of time). However, I forgot to check the size of the asteroid before grabbing it, and when I did it, I realized my mistake. The asteroid was a class E asteroid, my delta-v dropped from several thousand m/s(I used the NERVA engine) to a few m/s. I was disgusted and stopped any asteroid grabbing mission. Maybe I should try again, first by grabbing it in solar orbit,just to have a feeling of achievement

Did you saw the impact tolerance of these balls?! They can stand a 1000m/s impact!!! which make them perfect for shocks absorbers by the way I wonder if Danny2462 will mess up with them