Borklund

I saw that, but it's not done and it doesn't look like it will be any time soon either. I want blackheart612 to do it because (in my opinion) his parts look nicer, the way the parts stick together is great and he's already done a lot of the groundwork (could just rescale some of the models, use 4x of the iCPS engine etc).

Hello! First of all, love the mod. I am a stickler for realistic/stockalike fusion or whatever you want to call it and this mod perfectly complements SDHI and other SLS/Constellation mod elements already out there. I was wondering if you would please expand the mod further by making a stockalike Large Upper Stage (LUS) in the same style as the iCPS you've already created? LUS is going to be the upper stage of the SLS Block 1A (starting with EM-2), replacing the iCPS equipped Block 1 SLS. With 3.75m now a stock diameter, I think LUS would fit perfectly in the game and provide players with a more potent in-line upper stage. Also, if you could create a short SLS-like 3.75m to 2.5m adapter (see below) that'd be great. Cheers!

I would love to use this mod, but I don't want to have to install the toolbar addon. I look forward to an update which removes the need to use the Toolbar addon.

Thanks for the new smaller hab

Kommitz, really like your work, this mod is a staple of any new campaign of mine. Question/request: Would you care to make a special nuclear-friendly bi/tri/quadcoupler adapter system similar in look to NASA's DRA 5.0 NTR vehicle concept? A special decoupler (with or without fairing module, or separate fairing part instead) and bi/tri/quadcoupler part scaled for 1.25m and 2.5m? Thanks!

Is there a reason why Engineer doesn't seem to work with SDHI?

Thanks for keeping this up to date!

As unique looking boosters:

Love the mod, especially the stockalike look of the engines and the fuel tanks. Brilliant work! Just have to point out one itty bitty problem though, with the fuel flow breakers: The attachment nodes are not in line with the edges of the model, causing gaps like this one. Very minor visual problem though, overall this is fantastic both in terms of functionality and looks

Absolutely brilliant! Thank you so much

It's purely practical. You get a better sense of what's going on when you have sounds for engines and rcs thrusters. Seeing the rocket fly past your brain expects a sound, so in one way it's more immersive.

It's better, but not the thing I'm after. I have a clean audio sample for you to use; PM sent.

So I downloaded the mod because I'd like to have RCS sounds, but I was disappointed when I heard the actual sound used in this mod. I would prefer something like this instead: Could you accomodate me? Maybe offer it as an alternative?

I've been looking for something like this for quite a while, this is wonderful! Thank you so much

Fantastic, they have one contract with one space industry company. Let's have a look at the block quote in the press release you linked to, shall we? "The contract will enable the initial conceptual design of the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) and Mars Surface Exploration Spacesuit System. During this study, Paragon will identify major suppliers, concepts, and technologies that exist today and can be used as the baseline architecture for further development." It's not a hardware contract. It is a study to pave the way for more studies. Mars One is claiming there will be humans on Mars in 2023. It is now almost 2014 and there is no metal being bent anywhere. It takes years and years to design, build and launch a 1 tonne rover to go to Mars. There is a significant difference between that and what Mars One has to pull off in order to succeed. Nobody knows how to get a <1 tonne payload to the surface of Mars safely yet. That's just one example, there are hundreds of other problems that have yet to be demonstrated, tested or worked on by Mars One or even national space agencies, and that's just the hardware. It is going to cost many tens of billions of dollars to get to humans to Mars, money that Mars One does not have, or they'd have hardware being built right now. Get real. Mars One is not going to happen. They can have all the talks they want. They could talk to his holiness the dalai lama; it would change nothing. There is no progress being made towards actually getting people to Mars. They are just talking. There is an almost infinite gap between what they say they will do and what they are doing. In that sense it's a scam.

Mars One does not have hardware contracts, neither for launch vehicles or spacecraft. They can sign all the we'll-agree-to-have-our-logo-on-your-website agreements they want, Mars One are not going to go to Mars in 2033 or ever. They don't have a launcher, SpaceX has a launcher. Mars One has not bought a single launch from SpaceX or anyone else for that matter. Mars One is a scam, stop giving them attention so that they'll go away.

The standard for the game is 24 sides, by the way.

There's too much nonsense in this thread to refute post-by-post so I'm going to post a write-up aimed generally at everyone in this thread: - Virgin Galactic has claimed that the first customer flight is 18 months away for about 6 years now. They have yet to fly anyone but two test pilots to space and back and there is no indication of that changing any time soon, let alone them "taking over space exploration" in place of NASA or anyone else. They're going to offer short suborbital flights for a few rich people, nothing more. - SpaceX has ambitious goals (that are far into the future, if they ever come to fruition). So far they have successfully flown 6 rockets with payloads to orbit in the space of 5 years. This is not exactly the mindshattering accomplishment of epic proportions that people make it out to be. Elon Musk may talk a big game but SpaceX has yet to come close to Mars, let alone their competitors in their bread-and-butter operations. - NASA isn't dead, hasn't given up. The pace of development is dictated and constrained by a number of factors, the most important of them being that this isn't the Apollo era with massive budgets and a national focus on NASA and what it is doing for the nation. Orion is looking good, as is SLS, and they will fly next year and in 2017/8 respectively. Mars is still two plus decades away, an asteroid mission may come in the early 2020's on EM-3 or 4. There's not going to be a mission to the Moon's surfacein the next decade, where are you people getting this from? There is no work on a lander (except for small trade and concept studies) or mission ops for the Moon's surface. You need a new piece of hardware to land on the Moon, which there is currently no money for. When there is money for it, and it gets spent, it will still take many years before any metal is welded, let alone the lander flying somewhere on a mission. - Roskosmos are working with the comatose Russian space industry in developing new spacecraft and launch vehicles to take Russia to the Moon and beyond with hardware that wasn't invented when Kruschev was still around. Russia plans to go the Moon and I believe they are serious about it, based on what I've read and conversations with Russians who have an insight into their space industry. - China is slowly but surely advancing their space program. Later this year they will perform the first soft landing on the Moon and operate the first spacecraft on the surface of the Moon since the 70s. Beyond that is a bigger space station, more Moon and Mars missions and eventually a moon landing. It may take decades but they will surely beat both Russia and NASA on a return there, unless there's a drastic change in the coming years. - A flag and footprints mission to the Moon by NASA is utterly pointless. They've already done it, and the only sensible reason to return would be for proper science, which nobody is interested in. Not the politicians, not NASA, not the public at large. - In-situ resource utilisation (ISRU) tech has yet to be proven anywhere else but on Earth. To suggest that asteroid mining will save the day and bring in billions of dollars is laughable, because of the neglible or even negative return on investment. It is infinitely cheaper to start a new platinum mine on Earth than it would be to design and build spacecraft, send them to an asteroid, set up a mining operation and then somehow get platinum (or whatever else) back to the Earth's surface. The same applies to prop depots because NASA and US lawmakers are more interested in ultra-large pork rockets that sustain the existing workforce than changing the paradigm of space exploration. Even a water depot is questionable, seeing as it would probably take a decade or more and several or tens of billions of dollars to get the first water tank ready for its first use, and then they'd have to sell the water for under $10,000 per kg. It is therefore highly unlikely that private asteroid mining operations will commence in the decade to come. Reusable launch vehicles and/or prop depots sent up from Earth make more sense but even then they aren't completely necessary. - Space based manufacturing is a joke. It's not been done even on a microscopic scale and there's nobody working on it. It won't happen in a very long time, if ever. Do you have any idea how complicated it is to build a spacecraft on Earth, and you propose we do it in space with resources that have been taken from asteroids which also hasn't happened yet (outside of a few kilograms). I urge you all to read up on these subjects from more in-depth sources than Wikipedia before you post.

It's not an argument; they're facts. President Obama is not privatising space exploration (Don't confuse Orion/SLS with Commercial Crew and Cargo) and there is literally no way the next manned landing on the moon is a private company (it'll be either Russia or China on the moon next). If that happens it'll happen many, many years from now.

No. No. No.

First of all, great work, it looks beautiful! Secondly, I would suggest 3.75m SLS with 2.5m Orion, and make Orion a 3-man capsule. Realistic proportions but scaled down to fit the KSP gameworld better.

You need to take a deep breath. I'm not insulting you or your work. I petitioned the creator of this magnificient mini shuttle to not saddle it with what I think is an unnecessary burden. I await his reply.

Not by much, and you'd have the same problem after you deplete the liquid fuel tank anyway. It's a much more elegant solution than having a stupid plugin that will break every other KSP update. In my opinion.

Not a problem. As far as the main engine(s) is/are concerned the CoM would not shift if the payload mount is in line with CoM and assuming the payload's CoM is also in line with the payload mount (meaning the payload isn't built all asymmetrically). If you get to stick on RCS after the payload is in, you've got perfectly aligned RCS as well. Face it, it's a much more elegant solution.

See my stealthy post edit for the engine solution, for RCS thrusters the simple solution is to have a separate RCS thruster part that you yourself stick onto the craft's CoM in the VAB/SPH editor.