Nori

Mmmm good coffee beans... What kind of beans do you like getting? Thanks for the great mod, it really adds a lot to the game for me and I love that you are continuing to add and expand it.

Hmm I didn't look too closely at the GPU, but given what Leonov said I took another look. If you can swing it you should look at this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130909 It is the GTX650 Ti BOOST. Basically it uses a newer chip on it and is thus quite a bit faster from what I've seen. It is a bit more expensive though, but will last longer (before showing it's age that is).

MrKicker - I would highly recommend getting either http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236100 or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236176 over the Hanns one. The Asus monitors are better built and I've never had any issues with them (I've bought probably 50 various models at work and none have failed). I would also recommend finding another case. My experiences with two NZXT cases haven't been the best. They tend to be poorly designed and have fans that fail quickly. Of course your mileage may vary and I realize you are on a budget... It is tough to recommend budget cases, but this might fill the bill: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147153 Rosewill usually makes good stuff (it is a newegg brand). Your PSU looks great. Partially modular is very very handy. I never buy none modular PSUs anymore. As far as intel vs amd. You will most likely get better performance for KSP from Intel. The reason is that Intel has better per core speed and since KSP is more or less single threaded you would be better served with a Intel CPU. However, in bang for buck AMD usually wins. Personally if you can't afford a Intel i5 I'd just stick with the AMD. Hope that helps. Edit: oh and maybe look at this for memory instead: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231314 I have a few of these at home and they've worked superbly.

I really like the flight engineer for the TWR and other stats while building the rocket. They also have very nice informational displays while flying. However, I like having MechJeb because sometimes I screw up really bad and MechJeb could save me. In general though I refrain from using it. Kethane mod is epic... I also like the KAS mod. The rest I'm not so sure about.

Dang that thing is ginormous! Cool design though. Slightly larger than I was thinking though. I'm just having a tough time getting my 100t into orbit.

Anyone have any large ships with the new large drills? Trying to make a nice one but having trouble launching it's bulk into space...

I try to not leave anything up there but I'm not the most efficient pilot so there is usually something... So if I get too many I just delete from the tracking station.

I actually edited the files for this pretty heavily... I thought that the engine/battery combo weighted a bit too much given it's low thrust so I lowered the weight a bit to 2.5 (Ion engine) and 1 (battery). I might bring the engine up to 3, or maybe the battery up to 2. I also thought that the batteries held way too little energy. You really should be able to go for a while with such a large battery after you leave the sun. So I upped storage to 1200 and more importantly lowered fuel consumption to 4. So you can now go for 5 minutes if you had full battery. To compensate I lowered the solar panel energy gain to 1, so you need 4 per engine at a minimum where as before you could get by with just over 2 (Ion engines use a lot of power). I like these changes to be honest... Now in response to changes, I would leave the 2meter one the say and just halve the .4 rescale. I made half sized parts and basically halved everything (except I made the engine 1.5m instead of 2.5m). Just my thoughts. Love this pack and am really looking forward to the update.

Nice! Thanks.

Is there a reference somewhere on the things you can do with this plugin through modding? For instance there is the MuMechVariableEngine module class, but without going through the source code how can I tell what parameters I would need for a engine? Didn't see anything on the wiki or elsewhere.

Ummm, a fallout shelter for Kerbals?

Thanks Kreuzung. That clears a lot up, at least for me.

This is a pretty awesome tool. Very nice for quickly displaying properties.

Well count me in for looking forward to a update that will allow that.

Do you have a setting besides the ion engine that will reduce energy? For instance if I wanted to make something take energy to use. ~Edit: Found the source files which has the powerconsume module. Doesn't seem like you can turn it on and off though (if you press kill part it doesn't let you turn it on again and of course it doesn't disable the part). Also how does the IonRCS one work?

Forgive me if this was asked somewhere but can you use this with the electrical energy plugin from kreuzung?

Wow that station looks pretty awesome. Did you launch that using normal rockets? Could you be persuaded to upload a craft file?

I'm using the Electrical Energy Plugin with the DSM pack (has a nice Ion engine/battery/solarpanel and I made a 1m version using rescaling). However I to am confused by the difference between all of these mods and would like to hear them explained better.

I believe I know what you are talking about CaptRobau. The 1.75 Meter Solid Rocket Booster has a crash tolerance of 160. Which I believe means it could survive a crash at 160m/s. That should probably be lowered to 15-40ish... The half sized one has a rating of 75 which is a wee bit high as well. Looking through the configs it looks like a lot of things have a crash tolerance of 160. PLF - Explosive Bolt SAS-2 vernier pod SSH Series Odin OTV Docking Structure LEM-5 Lander Leg Mk6 Parachute KC-120 Adapter/Decoupler KC-130 Adapter/Decoupler Large Bertha Medium Bertha HH-78b Adapter HH-78b6a9 Adapter Mk. 847 1-2 Hollow Stage Decoupler HH-90909 Adapter Mk. 77b Hollow Stage Decoupler HH-78c Adapter Mk. 77 Hollow Stage Decoupler Mk. 2.3 Hollow Stage Decoupler NovaPunch Series Lander Tank HH-78a Large Fuel Tank HH-78 Double-length fuel tank RCST-175 HH-78ab Small Fuel Tank HH-77 Insulated Fuel Tank FL-S100L Fuel Tank FL-R25 Fuel Tank HH-78e Adapter Mk. 46 Hollow Stage Decoupler RS-351 Stack Decoupler (1.75m) TiberDyne JF-1750 Solid Booster KC-210 Adapter/Decoupler Centaur-21 Adapter KC-230 Adapter/Decoupler RS-202 Stack Decoupler RS-201 Stack Decoupler FL-S2000 Fuel Tank FL-S500 Fuel Tank Bearcat Tri-nozzle rocket engine (2m) HH-90908 Adapter RCST-200 KC-310 Adapter/Decoupler KC-320 Adapter/Decoupler Centaur-32 Adapter HS-300 Stack Decoupler RS-501 Stack Decoupler RS-502 Stack Decoupler FL-T3000 Fuel Tank FL-R1000 Fuel Tank HH-78d Adapter 3 to 5 meter adatper structure Mk-97b Hollow Stage Decoupler RCST-300 HS-500 Stack Decoupler RS-701 Stack Decoupler RS-702 Stack Decoupler TD-5002 Fuel Tank TD-5001 Fuel Tank RCST-500 QS-80 Stack Decoupler QS-91 Stack Decoupler QS-92 Stack Decoupler QS-93 Stack Decoupler 2 to 2.5 meter fairing panel 2.5 to 1.75 meter adatper structure 2.5 to 2 meter adatper structure 2.5 to 3 meter adatper structure 2.5 meter fairing panel 2.5 meter fairing panel 2.5 meter fairing panel ML-22 Landing Leg KSP-30 Solid Fuel Booster KMX Industries MiniBooster CMM-96 Surplus Booster LM-00 Support Structure (Thor Lander) Of those these are the engines that are above 100: SAS-2 vernier pod Large Bertha Medium Bertha TiberDyne JF-1750 Solid Booster Bearcat Tri-nozzle rocket engine (2m) KSP-30 Solid Fuel Booster KMX Industries MiniBooster CMM-96 Surplus Booster TD-0120 4X Odin OTV Orbital Engine LF-A30 Liquid Fuel Aerospike Engine

Yeah wasn't sure about the Aerospike as I had heard it would be toned down a bit, so maybe it is fine. However, should it's values be changed a bit just to differentiate it from the stock one? Maybe it could be a lighter lower thrust version? As for the NERVA, I don't know if you can make a ISP of 0. But in any case, I would say lower it, but not to 0, more like 200. No sane person would use it to boost into orbit then. In space I would argue for 1200 like I said before. That would balance out the weight, which is at a good point. One could argue for higher thrust though, maybe 200. There is a distinct lack of reasonably high thrust high vacISP engines as a final stage. Also I disagree about not having a larger version. I don't know about some people, but I frequently put massive ships into space (or at least try) and so a high ISP high thrust, high weight large engine sounds great to me. So I would like a 2m version. Don't really need the other sizes I guess. I agree we could use some more medium/small thrust engines. There is a lot of options in the 900+ range and the 300- range, but not much in the 400-800 or the sub 100.

Novapunch has a crapton of decouplers and adapters so you should try that out. Plus they have payload fairings and I believe Saturn skins as a option.

That is just crazy... I mean I have a hard enough time flying one ship....

I'm looking forward to the building changes, such as thrust to weight stats, center of mass, etc... Also new parts, bug fixes and other changes like that. I am also of course excited for the new planets/moons, but that comes second to what I consider core to KSP (rocket building of course).

The Aerospike in your pack weights more than the vanilla one and has lower ISP. Most of your parts have crazy high breaking torque/force, is that intentional? I understand it being on things like fairings but I find it a bit immersion breaking to have it on all the engines and most of the parts. My experience is that 200 for engines is usually plenty, while still having a small chance of breaking. Just food for thought. I personally think the NERVA should have higher ISP (at least in vacuum). The reason being, it is 6x as heavy as the aerospike, while having half the thrust and just slightly over twice the fuel efficiency. Not bad, but if I put something on a ship that weights 12x as much for the same thrust, it should be very fuel efficient. Maybe it could have a ISP of 1200? Just a thought, I obviously can tweak it how I want. Also, maybe a 1.75m, 2m, 3m and 5m versions? The Radial Liquid Boosters are rather lackluster. They have lowish ISP, higher weight and very low thrust. I suppose they should have a disadvantage being sidemounted. But still. The SAS-2 vernier pod, is it supposed to have a dryMass while not storing fuel? Not sure how it should work so just asking.

When the PNG's get overwritten are the deposits still in the same location? I've lost my maps too many times to count...