Wjolcz

A tweakable for this would be nice to have. You would simply right-click on the MK3 passanger module and switch its role to the lab.

I would have nothing against that actually. HH's IVA doesn't make much sense anyway. The crew sits in a way any significant acceleration would break their spines. The best apporach to do this would be either to relocate them to a "laying" position (a'la any spacecraft designed by a sane person) or like it is in planes that are meant to do something else than just transport passangers. There's no up and down in space anyway. Assuming the seats could rotate to adjust for the acceleration we give one part two new purposes. Not only it is now a station part, but can also be used with planes and bases. The only thing to do would be to change the outside looks to make one of these functions dominating others less apparent.

Not sure if this belongs here, because it's more of an engineering than aesthetics tip, but if you are ever going to make an asymmetrical probe always have more than one engine: This thing has an RTG on one side. By watching the thrust offset angle and adjusting the thrust percentage on one engine it is very easy to keep the probe stable during burns. This is exactly how Cassini's engines work.

2016 is just the worst

Soooooo... About that station... YOU DID WHAT!? I am an idiot. What happened: in order to expand the station I decided to attach the HubMax. The problem is I don't have it yet, so I decided to go with a new module instead. The new problem is the station has only one tiny docking port. And I forgot about it. Because of this I had to make a decision to either attach the new module with an adapter in the middle (which I wouldn't be able to remove afterwards because it would be between them) and leave the RCS drone floating around, or attach the RCS drone to the station and leave the module floating around. I did the second thing. It has no power source of it's own so it needs the station's solar panels to stay alive. I now have a dead module floating in the vicinity of OSS New Frontier and I'll have to bring an engineer up there next time to replace the station's docking port with a bigger one (using our lovely KAS).

I think I'm starting to run out of ideas for titles. FIRE FLIES...? The rocket here is named Firefly (I'm not very creative, I know). It's meant to be a relatively cheap feather class lifter. The first iteration had a tendency to flip. The newer one is stable thanks to the bottom wings. I might try and make it reusable in the future since it lands in the water so well. The probe here is some random thing built to fulfill a contract, which I failed, because I didn't include parts the contract specified. The cool thing about the rocket is using the Aerospike + Spark combo and then switching to the tiny radial engines only (IIRC think they have better vac Isp than the 'spike).

FInally more interplanetary action. BE MY JOOLIETTE Another interplanetary mission, woo! The Jooliette probe is meant to study the joolian system (duh). It's powered by a single PB-NUK (that's what that hot thing is called, right?). Unfortunetally it messes with the CoM. How to deal with the issue: give your spacecraft more than one engine and adjust the thrust in one until the thrust offset is 0. It seems like the Cassini spacecraft does just that. I love KER. Also a Tylo gravity assist because who wants to waste fuel for gravity insertions anyway?

The relocation of that Minmus lander didn't go well. A TASTELESS IMPACT Tried to make a suicide burn. It was not a good idea. ------------------------------------------------------- Just some purposeless sightseeing. THE FUEL FOR THAT TRIP WAS FOUNDED BY OUR LOVELY TAX PAYERS Not much happened during this "mission". It didn't even bring anything significant. Just a trip to the southernmost bit of that continent KSC is on. I might do some more of these in the future. I could also build a new plane using other engines, but I really like Juno-powered machines. Making small modifications to them is pretty fun too.

Firstl of all, the style was never meant to be clunky. It's just that the creators of the parts never fully made up their minds about how the parts should look like. Second of all, as far as I know PorkJet doesn't work for SQUAD anymore. He made the plane parts, revamped a few rocket parts and left for some other project. That is why, IMO, the style should be as simple as possible (but still look nice) just so it's easy to follow whenever a new artist is hired and the previous ones are no longer there to continue their work.

Do we really need that though? I'm a fan of spaceplanes and all, but this can be kind of done with FAR and Infernal Robotics (or whatever that mod is called now).

Oh, ok. That's what I was suspecting, since no spectral colour starts with B or O.

Yeah, fair enough. Still, I'm talking about the style not other properties. Back to the parts revamp thread I go then!

That's true. But I think the game should allow for as many design choices as possible. The hitchhiker could look good on stations and planes.

Can someone explain the spectral diagram of the stars? These letters are obviously not in the right order, so I'd assume each of them has a certain meaning? EDIT: How I understand this from Wikipedia: as new types of stars were being discovered they also started measuring their sizes, densities and things like that and came to conclusion that, for example, the B-type stars are the previous stage of evolution of the A-type stars, right? So instead of reclassifying them they decided to just move the letter B before A and keep the class of these stars the same? Basically, it was easier to modify the scale/diagram/whatev instead of recataloging them from the scrarch?

Now, I don't want to start another parts revamp thread. We already have a few of these. What I want to talk about is the simplicity of the parts. Let's take take the HH as an example. Does this thing really have to look like this? The handle bars around the top and bottom dark rings are not usable anyway. And the gold foil needs to be covered to not look as if it was the only thing between the interior and the vacuum of space. Just keep in mind I'm not trying to make a rant of some sort. What I want to say is all the parts, including rocket, MK2 and MK3, should have as simplistic style as possible just so they can be put together and always look good. Right now it's not really possible. If you want to make a plane with hitchhikers as crew modules they will look out of place. To sum up: simplicity would be a nice way of solving the issue with all the parts not looking nice when put together. Simple cylinders with the white+grey+black (+orange accents from time to time) pattern would work best and the textures could be reused in many cases, thus making any part revamp easier to deal with.

Pictures. I'd still prefer a dedicated camera part though.

What I'm talking about is not the whole ship though, but the middle container-like bits.

I'm a fan of sci-fi ships that also look like actual usable vessels. Now, I've recently rewatched Pitch Black (again) and noticed the parts of the big ship had the cross section shape of a recangle (more or less; pics below). https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTdlz1yh60__3VC8wAlQjk4m19MAvDUhet_GayLZ7PONUxRPBFV I have no idea what's with the top picture. Probably because mobile Opera sucks. Just google 'pitch black big spaceship', or sth. Anyway, why I think such parts would be great to have: -Bases. They have nice walls instead of being cylinders. that way they can stand either horizontally or vertically and still look good, and, what's most important, have walls perfect for landing gear, antennas, parachutes and all that useful jazz. -Space stations/cargo/colony vessels. They would stack together really nicely to create a square-ish cross section (one on the top, one on the bottom). That makes them perfect for compact designs that could nicely blend into shapes of other parts (ideally, two roof-to-bottom stacked modules would have more or less the same cross section size as the huge rocket tanks). Crewed modules would have windows on each side, of course. Why the MK3s aren't great for this kind of thing: -They have the roof and bottom half-cylindrical bits which makes them not ideal for side attachments. Attaching gear on the bottom makes its CoM high, thus messing with (sometimes) buggy landing gear/prone to leaning to one side. -Simply too big to stack them side-by-side. The truss on ISS has more or less this shape, except it's not as elongated in one axis as this Pitch Black 'container' part. There would probably be only 4 needed: empty truss, cargo bay (<- these two could actually be one part with doors sliding/opening outwards creating additional floor), command/crew module and the lab. Since KSP is meant to be 'near future-ish' then having more actual near-future-ish parts would be nice to have. And we need some base modules anyway.

And my FQ777 is back in action thanks to my skilled grandpa! It was a task for a true clockmaker.

Are we talking about SR-71 or any KSP MK2 spaceplane?

Just download KER and instal the dV map for KSPedia (by @5thHorseman iirc). It's the easiest way.

You know what I would actually prefer instead of this? A system in which unused/not useful sats and probes become debris and THEN the rep is lost. A vessel that would become a debris would either not have sufficient power or signal to function. It would turn into a debris only after some time though. An example scenario: There's a probe enroute to Jool. It loses signal/power before it can reach Jool. If the signal is not restored for, let's say 6 months then the probe is decalred lost and turns itself into debris and rep loss is applied. But all this is not needed in the game IMO. It wouldn't even be that realistic. There aren't many people who care about the real life Kessler syndrome.

Meh. I don't like science points in any form, doesn't matter if they're for upgrading or unlocking things. But since the KerboKatz exchange widget has the ability to buy them then it might work out nicely with the modpack. I like to keep it clean and basic though. If anyone thinks there's a mod that could enhance the gameplay and you've tried it with all these mods from OP please do say so. Nice sounding rocket.

That toolbox was actually meant to be in one of the past versions but never made it into the game.