GusTurbo

Good practice for the new aero!

That may not be a norm in Mexico. I'm predicting a release at 9:00AM central time.

8:15 am here!

Oh trust me, updating this will be the first thing I do I've been waiting for 1.0 to drop to make any changes, including the ascent profile, since that will be very different now.

Give them a break. It's not really reasonable to expect a release before business hours at Squad HQ. It's 6:42AM there.

I have had misgivings about releasing prematurely, but I don't really see the point of this thread.

Ok maybe not. So the number of sides may actually depend on the size of the fairing base. 2 sides for 1.25m, 3 sides for 2.5m, and 6 sides for 3.75m. Not 100% sure on this though.

Don't know. He just showed the options menu.

I can confirm that terrain scatters are no longer WIP. 4kbshort touches on this.

I think it's a result of how they were implemented, since they break apart at every place you click. Seems like a strange way to have done it, but I do believe that is the case. Harvester suggested that they didn't have time to make it work clamshell style, so it sounds like they were really constrained by how they implemented it. Also, initially I thought they could only split into halves, but I saw in a stream that someone had it split into 6 sides, so I think it's based on your symmetry mode, which is good I guess. That should allow me to do the 4-way petal fairings using stock fairings on my Saturn V.

It seems that preparation is the key! This is a great look at the new aero on spaceplanes.

Ok, DasValdez's stream right now is much better than the previous streams (and even better than his own yesterday).

The pointy boosters should be really easy to replicate well using the new fairing creation system. That's the main thing. Then you can just leave the fairing separation in a stage where it will never occur. I guess now that I think about it, this shouldn't be so bad for simply structural uses, like recreating the pointed shape of the N1. I think I can still make it work on some parts of my Saturn V as well, while still using wing pieces for other parts. I guess as an incremental change it's not so bad, just a little disappointing because it's not good enough to do 100% of what I want yet.

That does seem a bit excessive. The Atlas V 401 has a payload fairing mass of between 2-2.5t, and that's at a 4m diameter. http://www.spaceflight101.com/atlas-v-401.html - - - Updated - - - I agree. Fairings should be persistent, to make players actually care about debris and the consequences of creating it.

When I saw the fairing creation in action, my mind went immediately to R-7/Soyuz.

I might watch that.

I support you in this decision. - - - Updated - - - I don't find unlocking things boring, I just don't feel like Squad has changed the part progression all that much. It's really the early stuff that is not a lot of fun. And of course, you still have to start manned.

You are not the only one.

Two four six oh OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONE! If anyone is watching N1tch's stream right now, it appears that Career Mode is still boring.

I'm pretty sure the asteroids are supposed to be in a belt near Dres' orbit, like the ones near Kerbin. Maybe they sometimes get captured, but I'm not sure.

Really? Have you ever read Robert Zubrin's The Case for Mars? It's not science fiction, it's an actual concept explored in depth, and is potentially possible with existing technologies. ISRU is the mechanism by which the return vehicle is able to make it back to Earth, because it gets rid of the need to land a huge mass of fuel on Mars. It's not as silly as you are making it seem.

Not surprisingly, I agree wholeheartedly with your suggestions.

A big part of the blame lies with Squad, because they do not provide the players with the tools they need to play the game. It would be different if they provided you with the equations to calculate things like delta V, TWR, etc, for those with the inclination to do so. But they don't. Instead, they just throw all the mechanics at you and expect you to figure it out yourself.

It is an interesting idea, but it seems like it would be a poor compromise between chemical and electric propulsion. But then, I'm not sure how efficient the fuel cell is at converting energy.

I hope you get a response. The reason this silly thing exists is because of the folly of having to start manned. They probably thought a .625 booster would look stupid launching a 1.25m pod, so they made this almost single-use part. If the first launches were unmanned, then we could start with .625m parts, then move onto manned launches at 1.25m. This is the consequence of bad design in career mode. - - - Updated - - - I suppose if I were being a little more charitable, I could argue they were going for a solid upper stage, like the Orion 38, seen here: (Of course, they obviously did not intend that, based on its position in the tech tree)