Amaroq

Also Kerbal Alarm Clock updated its defaults too

Its actually intended as a launch escape vehicle, for when your launch goes awry and you're tumbling wildly / disintegrating about halfway up .. queue "abort", launch vehicle escapes and lands safely even whilst the rest of it goes kerbal all over the place.

@supid_chris - Would you have any interest in publishing a module_manager .cfg with your updates over in the mods section? I'd certainly have an interest in playing with them, but as you have done the work it rightly ought have your signature, credit, and license.

I like this idea a lot.

Yeah, agreed -- one of my favorite parts of BTSM was the Kerbin Low Orbit barometer reading, which confirmed that there was no atmosphere beyond the stratosphere. Careful configuration could ensure that only a single reading, transmitted, would suffice for a given planet

Congratulations!!!

Count me one more in full agreement with the O.P.-- tech tree off, science on!

My first plane design had the same problem. As a quick-fix solution, you can right-click on a fuel-tank, and press the green arrow next to the fuel; it will turn to a red X and cease drawing from that tank. Since I use the Mark II fuselage, the Mk1-Mk2 adapter was perfect for this, I just disabled it, leaving some weight well forward of my CoM, and can turn it on as a "reserve tank" once everything else is gone.

Yeah, that tutorial above is fabulous. The other key question here is, "Stock or F.A.R.?" Ferram Aerospace Research is a mod which completely replaces the stock aerodynamics (in which drag is based on the mass of the part) and replaces it with something realistic (in which drag is based on the shape of the part). If you're using F.A.R., then your wing shape and configuration are going to matter a ton -- for that I strongly recommend "Procedural Dynamics" procedural wing mod. Also, the single "Small Landing Gear" from stock doesn't handle a plane's weight perfectly -- it works much better to do them in pairs, two together with the same orientation. (So, instead of 3 wheels, you'd use 6 for a tripod configuration.)

Yes, I had. Your logic makes very good sense, and with that explanation I wouldn't change it. My experience was "on a fresh game", as I tend to start fresh when testing any new mod; I hadn't considered the mid-game consequences. Ahh, I hear it now; it was just subtle enough that I was missing it with the volume on low, chatterer, and engines. The graphical display and "stop warping" should be sufficient. Single kerbal, single Mk1 command pod, no transmission. I didn't even have an attached probe part for controlling another stage; it was very early in the tech tree. Repro steps (confirmed again this morning): launch a "first stable manned orbiter" craft. When Science Alert alerts about EVA for a common terrain (grasslands, water, shores), EVA out, right click on the Kerbal, "EVA Report", then return to the craft. Begin warp. As its in orbit, eventually the craft will leave that biome .. and since its common, eventually it will re-enter it. Re-entering the biome triggers the "EVA Report" Science Alert again, even though the report for that biome is already onboard. If I EVA, right click, "EVA Report", and return to the craft, I am told that the craft can't store the experiment data and I'll have to dump it. Its a tough case, because a.) I want it to Alert when I get to a biome that is not on the craft, as I can collect multiple EVA Reports, and b.) its really annoying when its the "Shores" biome, as it jumps you out of warp about 16 times per equitorial orbit. * * * Keep up the great work!

I'd modify the sentiment, barely -- if people build saves that they don't want broken by updates, then they ought to have a "no update" install for that save. I've still got a 0.18.4 save tooling along which I'm quite content with .. though as it falls further and further off the curve, it gets harder to go back to, its still got many of my first accomplishments in it, so its nostalgic to play it for a while.

Played around with this all weekend, very nice work indeed - I can see it quickly hitting my "must have" list. Suggestion: Default the settings to something like the "<90%" setting; I certainly got surprised the first time I sent a Kerbal to a spot that I knew I had science to do, and the beaker didn't animate. Suggestion: The beep is very similar to the Chatterer beep, enough so that I have trouble telling them apart and am so tuning it out a bit. Bug: The "pick a spot" logic picks different spots for button #1 on my setup depending on whether there is one or two items. Setup is: Mac OSX, 0.23, several mods. Toolbar plugin is positioned directly below the altimeter, top and center. I think the issue is, with only one item, there is room for the button "above" toolbar, when there are two or more it needs to put them "below". In general, maybe you want to go "below" when possible, and kick to "above" only if it isn't? Or set that up as an option from cfg? Bug: EVA Report remains "lit" even after my Kerbal comes back inside, thus storing the EVA Report in the vessel. I'm not sure what that is, but its pretty reproducible for me. Could not reproduce: I also use RT2 and have not had any issues transmitting reports back home with this mod - if my probe shows as "connected" underneath the mission elapsed time, I have been able to transmit data.

Oh. Wow. Yeah, orient the camera so that it is pointing from one side of my craft, through my craft, to the center of the SOI. Very good idea.

I think you have the gist of things, here. The same concepts apply at just about each body you need to potentially work around; a triad of satellites 60-degrees off from each other should do it; at least one satellite in a low polar orbit will help to cut down your transmission times. Using "aim at the body" lets you pick up "whichever satellite near that body is talking to me", and should be used liberally to make use of any network redundancy you have.

Excellent! I like this idea a lot -- downloaded & will play with it a bit over the weekend.

With regards to the assymetric lift / CoM issues shown on the previous page. I've been noticing something odd with symmetry as well, and I wonder if its related: If I attach two control surfaces, and use the tweakables menu to adjust the part thickness, the visual resolution shows that both sides have "Root" and "Tip" the same; they ought to be mirrored. By this, I mean, set the "Tip" thickness to "0.1" and leave the "Root" at 1.0. The pieces ought to be: tip-left ROOT-LEFT ROOT-RIGHT tip-right but what I get looks like: TIP-LEFT root-left ROOT-RIGHT tip-right If there's something subtly off about the mirroring calculations for control surfaces, it would explain both that symptom and the assymetric CoM or CoL for users with assymetric control surfaces.

^--- What he said. The keycommands for Kerbals on EVA was a little counterintuitive for me.

*wince* Sorry, all, KasperVld. I did hope that providing links and a recent positive experience might help defuse any lingering tension around that statement. It was actually an awesome feeling the first time I got it right, one of the top five feelings I've had in the game, when I first had a plane that went straight down the runway, pitched its nose up to neutral, and took off on the slightest tap of the "S" key. Learning to land did take me a while, though!!

I missed whatever rocked this thread enough to bring KasperVld's attention, but I have to agree with the O.P.'s title: "Planes aren't hard, they're easy!" I struggled soooo badly trying to get planes working with F.A.R. and stock wings. Then I found keptin's fabulous tutorial, Basic Aircraft Design Explained Simply With Pictures. Based on that, I installed Procedural Dynamics procedural wing. Then, I practiced a bit. Now, I can design planes. That fly. Its tricky to get the CoM, CoL, and CoT balanced well, but once you have the trick of it, and remember to check it at full-tanks and empty-tanks using "Tweakables", you can build some pretty nifty, nimble planes that want to stay in the air. Remember how hard docking was -- it was like that.

My two-year-old loves it. To be fair, she's mostly watching Daddy play -- but she's got the idea. She loves seeing lift-off, how she can then see the whole world. She also loves watching stars, on our backs, outside at night. She can already identify Mars and Venus, and the look she got when she saw Duna ("Mars") in the game, and understood that it was a planet and earth was a planet and the moon is a planet and somebody could stand on all three .. Well. Mission accomplished, Squad.

@BLFonsworth - To get the orbital indicator in your signature file, of course . I think you've got a few of the basics from this thread, but besides personal enjoyment, you've got: 1. Good stepping stone towards landing on the surface 2. Establish an orbital station with science lab, and refueling as a base for any future missions 3. Virtual requirement for a manned landing Mods add: 4. Establish a command relay center (Remote Tech 2) for that SOI 5. Establish a polar mapping orbit (ScanSat, ISA MapSat, Kethane) @arise257 - Brilliant!

@Narcan -- download "procedural wings", you'll need procedural wings to get the balance right if you try to space-plane with FAR

I doubt we're going to get a texture update on it, its pretty canonical now. However, I would like to see something like StretchySRB's "pick a texture" integrated into stock -- there shouldn't be any reason we can't pick textures, and even a default texture, for our space programs. Save art development costs, of course -- would you rather have Squad spending their money on fun gameplay additions (science, career, asteroids) or on graphical updates (especially when the mod community seems so willing to oblige)

Where is "exhilirated" -- I yelled so loud I woke my wife at 2:00am.

Yeah, I'd echo some of the entries off of the list: Simple utilities: Kerbal Engineer Redux and Kerbal Alarm Clock as simple "utilities", no new parts, just good fun. Almost-stock parts: KSPX will unlock more creativity without changing game balance at all -- the mod builder got hired and her work is slowly becoming stock. Procedural parts: Stretchy SRB's Procedural Fairings Procedural Wings (These basically let you connect an object, such as a fuel tank or a wing, and use "drag" controls to drag them to different sizes.) Ubiozor's welding is similar, it lets you weld two existing objects into one object, reducing your part count If you want to change game play, that's where the real fun begins, and here are my recommendations: Aerodynamic Update: Ferram Aerospace Research -- FAR gives you a realistic drag model; you will need to build UP instead of WIDE. Required: Kerbal Joint Reinforcement -- The realistic drag model makes KJR critical, so that you don't get destroyed by increasing wobble. Procedural Wings -- The stock "wings" just won't get it done for you with FAR; you'll need Procedural Wings. Either Procedural Fairings or KW Rocketry -- For any non-aerodynamic payload, you'll need fairings. There are some very good ones in KW Rocketry, or Procedural Fairings if you want more flexibility. Optional: Deadly Re-entry -- introduces heat shields for atmospheric re-entry, plus some cool effects even for those vehicles that survive. Kerbal ISP Difficulty Slider -- reduced aerodynamic drag from FAR makes the game "easier". I don't mind, as my difficulties tend to come from width instead of weight, but some people like to adjust the efficiency of engines back down to "stock equivalent". Remote Tech Remote Tech 2 -- introduces the concept of "communications link"; you must maintain a link to your probes, and your commands take the speed-of-light time to get there. Makes for plenty of good "missions" as you work through setting up satellite networks for the major SOI's you want to explore, such as Kerbin, Jool, and Eve -- plus new "kerbal" ways for your satellites to die. Better than Starting Manned Better than Starting Manned, Deadly Re-entry -- completely redesigned tech tree with a focus on game balance rather than on the "new player experience". Warning - does not support other mods such as FAR, etc.