RoboRay

I know Squad has previously dismissed life support requirements on missions because keeping the crew alive for long missions requires planning and paying attention... and the punishment of killing the crew and forcing the mission to be over is a high barrier to entry when learning the game. But what if running out of life support resources didn't kill the crew? What if, when the snacks were all gone, the crew simply stopped being able to do their jobs. Pilots lost SAS, engineers couldn't fix things, scientists couldn't work the experiments, and nobody could go on EVA. The crew starts acting like Tourists. That would give a pretty strong penalty for running out of supplies, but not a fatal one. You could still get the crew home... their experience wouldn't be lost forever. You could even salvage a mission in-progress by sending out a resupply ship with more lunchboxes. It would need to be optional, of course, like reentry heat, with a checkbox to enable life support requirements in the game setup. Maybe even a Hunger slider to affect the rate of snack consumption.

Because it eliminates the stability issues caused by having wings up front.

Roll-rates tend to be excessive (too twitchy) if I don't limit the number of control surfaces that apply roll.

Something from Russia! The first one is essentially a self-launched MAKS.

It flies great! Here's some larger variations that don't throw away expensive engines... Album: http://imgur.com/a/DXk9r#0 Album: http://imgur.com/a/9QbIy#0

My solution...

Thanks! Other than the boxy white crew cabins (which are truck cabs from Modular Multiwheels), it's all stock. I love using those truck cabs for their industrial look, and they've got a pretty good view from the IVA. It's kind of hard to see in most of the pictures, but it does have one of the big fuel cells, tucked between the aft ore tanks... Here's a .craft file, if you want to take a closer look: https://www.dropbox.com/s/bp0a07uh27k8hg3/Wildcat.craft?dl=0 You will need Modular Multiwheels installed, but you can delete everything but the truck cabs for this.

I prefer to keep it all in one package. It's not as efficient, but you're not tied down to returning fuel-haulers to any particular landing site, either (which can save you some fuel, too, depending on the destination orbit, though not enough to offset the losses hauling the mining and refining gear with you).

Before I start screwing things up... From comparing the config files for this and 64K, it looks like I could change Kerbin's rotation rate to 24 hour days by adding %rotationPeriod = 86400 right after the radius value for Kerbin's properties. Right? EDIT: Yes, that is all it takes. I am enjoying this double-sized Kerbin a lot, and even more, now with a much slower planetary rotation not flinging my rockets out into space. I just did a test flight to confirm that you can still reach orbit in Career using stock parts and without any facility upgrades, but barely.

Reddit, because the important stuff only seems to come out on Twitter and Squadcast. I have zero patience for the 99% crap that is Twitter and no time to watch Squadcast. Fortunately, people that do tend to post it to Reddit right away. You'd think Squad would post the important stuff to the Announcements forum here or something, but no...

My joystick has worked fine for a couple of years, now.

6km Pe is not "just gently dipping into the atmosphere"... it's fairly steep, but survivable (depending on the craft design). I normally set Pe to about 20km with planes (since I can pitch to a high Angle of Attack and slow down quickly) and 30km for ballistic reentry pods.

Why not use the VAB gizmo to slide the engine slightly off-center, to compensate. RCS Build Aid will show engine-induced rotation, making it easy to get it into the right position.

In MechJeb's Delta-V panel, "TWR" is vacuum TWR. "SLT" is sea-level TWR.

I'm looking for a mod that provides something similar to Left/Right and Forward/Back indicators on this: Normally, you can read this information from the NavBall. However, when making a vertical landing with a horizontally-oriented (airplane-style) cockpit, you can't see the prograde/retrograde markers because they're at the top of the ball and you're looking at the side. Being able to see your lateral and longitudinal drift rates would make IVA-only landings a lot easier. The Apollo LEM had something like this, showing two crossed lines that could be centered to zero out the horizontal velocity, but I'm having trouble finding a good picture of it. Does anyone know of an existing mod that adds a UI window or IVA prop that does this? I'm pretty sure RPM can do this, but I'd rather not recreate the wheel if someone has already done it, especially considering I currently know next to nothing about RPM and IVA development.

I posted this before and it vanished... The original node position leaves a visible open gap between the cab model and the part you're attaching to the node. I moved the node position forward just enough to close the gap, so that the attached part sits flush against the cab. You can stick with the original node position if that kind of thing doesn't bother you.

If you want to fix the attachment node for the truck cab, change the bottom node line in the part.cfg file to: node_stack_bottom = 0.0, 0.44, 1.0875, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0 If you want to add a new attachment node on front of the grill, add this line: node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.64, 1.0875, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0

Changing the bottom node to... node_stack_bottom = 0, -0.69, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2 ...in the part config file (Mk1-1A2CommandPod.cfg) will align the stock 2.5m heat shield correctly with the base of the pod, though it will leave a gap between the pod and anything else you attach to the bottom node instead of a heat shield. You're probably better off just sliding things around with the VAB gizmo to line them up.

If you need a wider runway, you've got the entire grassy plain around KSC. If you need a longer runway, I'm sorry, but your plane designs are broken.

It used to be about 69.1 from version 0.1x (not sure which version exactly, I started with 0.16 and it was 69.1 km then), through version 0.90. In version 1.0, it seems to have changed to 70 km.

It's not the question you asked, but FYI... Putting fins halfway up a rocket does not improve stability. In fact, it does pretty much nothing for stability. Putting fins near the back of a rocket adds positive stability (meaning, the front wants to stay out front). Putting fins near the front of a rocket adds negative stability (meaning it wants to fly tail-first). Fins in the middle don't contribute to either condition. Look at an arrow that's shot from a bow. Where are the fins? At the back, for positive stability.

The ones that kill me are the people specifically asking for help or comments on their craft design, and they only offer a vague black silhouette against a starry black sky. "Gee, Ricky... it's kinda hard to say what you could do to make your craft better."

Why is there no sunset option? If you're launching to rendezvous, launching a little before sunset will tend to have you meeting up with the target around dawn (assuming you fly an optimal ascent). Docking sure is easier in sunlight.

Diameter in meters... So, 0.625m, 1.25m, 2.5m, 3.75m. I like the Size 0, Size 1, Size 2 and so forth... but it becomes problematic with the next quantum jump to 5m mod parts as the "first digit" relationship fails. Do you call a 5m part Size 4 and break the size-diameter relationship or call it Size 5 and retain the relationship? And then let people who don't get it scratch their heads over the missing Size 4? Physical dimensions is the least confusing.

This looks really nice! I want to compliment you on seeing to something most cockpit mod-makers ignore... usability from a pilot's standpoint. Most seem to go for "form over function" instead. It's so refreshing to find a cockpit that actually lines the front window up with the seated pilot's eyeline so that they can look forward, and puts the window close enough to the pilot's face to offer a wide viewing angle.