GusTurbo

That's really awesome. What's the payload mass?

I don't understand what this means.

Fairings fixed, eh? I hope that means what I think it means.

That Altair is a work of art! Do the legs have enough clearance to protect the engine when weight is on it?

They might be thinking of the SLS LES, which is smooth.

I'm ok with this taking longer. Better than a rush job.

I don't think struts should behave this way. Their effect seems way outsized.

This is a very interesting bug. I wonder what's going on here.

The workaround to not being able to duplicate them is to save them as a subassembly. See here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43086-Open-Source-Construction-Techniques-for-Craft-Aesthetics?p=1880822&viewfull=1#post1880822

On this topic, the LV-T45 and LV-T30 need their roles reversed, since the T45 has both a smaller nozzle and greater vacuum Isp. The T30 should be more efficient in a vacuum. Also, gimbaling is more useful in atmosphere, since you can use RCS to change attitude in space.

This post from February 25 implies that Harvester is working on making the number of fairing panels controllable.

Amazingly elegant AND capable. Very nice.

I don't think this thread has necessarily been ignored. I think it's too big to be ignored, and I think we have heard indications that the fairings are going to gain additional customizability.

Backseat moderating is also against the rules

Right on the money with this.

The fan blades actually move!? Holy crap!

I understand that. The end result is aesthetic, but the technique itself is not, because it's a matter of editing the file.

I think the crux of the issue is that this isn't really an aesthetic technique.

Let's agree to disagree. This method might fall outside the spirit of this thread, but I'm not going to say it has no place in this game. Maybe take this debate elsewhere to keep this thread uncluttered.

The craft file is edited to include the solid fuel, not the .cfg, so anyone will have the extra fuel.

I can't think of any instance where this "feature" makes sense. They should just remove the code that checks if engines are stowed.

This is an interesting debate on the nature of what is "stock." I can definitely see both sides of the argument. If something can be loaded by any user with the stock game, then there is certainly some merit to the idea that such a craft is stock. For example, craft built with EditorExtensions can have things that the stock editor does not allow, like symmetry greater than 8x and surface attachment for parts that do not allow it by default. I personally consider such things to be stock. I don't think it can be compared to clipping though, since that is allowed by the default editor. So my question about doing this, because I'm not entirely clear: are you adding solid fuel to the SRB in the craft file?

Ok that's bizarre. That might deserve it's own bug report thread.

They're just for looks, but they look super cool!