Montieth

For orbital launches from Earth or Mars they're probably using more conventional Methane/LOX derivatives. For RCS and non-Epstein drive ships (like the Knight Shuttle from the Canterbury) they have a small reactor and fusion torch drives, also tea-kettle which is heating reaction mass with the fusion drive. The key thing for atmo-flight with an Epstein drive is that it has radioactive products and is a LOT of energy that's hazardous to the folks on the drive side. So, while we see the main drives used in the series, they'd not be boosting away from say, Tycho station with the drive cone pointed AT Tycho. That'd cook the station. They'd RCS away and get to a vector where their drive would not cook the station and it's occupants.

Calculations of the Brachistochrone curves is what's needed. Someone might already have done the code for this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brachistochrone_curve

1000 meters? Is that for main or the drogue and then mains? 'Cuase I'm pretty sure that's WAY too low.

Besides MechJeb and Scansat, what are the other functions that dovetail with the new IVA systems you're developing? Also, what's the external mount camera of choice?

I suspect aerial refueling hoses that are used with probe and drogue systems are rather complex in their construction as well as being resilient for both flexibility and tensile strength. Let me ask a buddy who actually works with this stuff. I'm curious now about their actual construction and if they have any data or power functions in their makeup (valve status or control).

True, the synthetic stuff is nice. It's also super un-durable. I was set to buy some until I found some elevator cable ( finer threads, tighter bend radius) for free that was removed from an elevator in a building I work in (They have to dump it in the land fill because it can't be easily recycled, gums up the metal shredders, I was able to get a spool of it for free! Spare wire rope is nice to have). However, the synthetic winch rope is very un durable as I said. Chafing and heat are a problem. Steel wire rope you can run it over a structure like a frame and it'll be fine (mostly). I know one guy who got his deuce and a half stuck in a field and he could only run the winch under the truck past the axles. It sawed a nice mark in his axle housings. I'd not want to do that with synthetic rope. You'd ruin the rope quickly. Heating in space would probably be a problem for the Samson and other stuff. It starts to lose strength at around 250°F.

Well, you can, you just need to include some return path for power. The ground works as a current return path it's just not very efficient. Or you can send signals down cable that has a single copper core and a braided outer core. A but of dielectric inside to keep the separate. The cable is in fact a wave guide and not exactly a power signal and return path. As to a winch, a friend works on the electro/mechanical/hydraulic systems for these things. The hose is loaded on a drum that effectively works like a winch but with very specific controls for how far it is deployed and with specific tension monitoring sensors. I think there's some valve control wiring in the system as well. Far more complicated than the 10,000 lb Garwood winch on my Deuce and a Half. From a technical perspective, the winch cable is wire rope. See US army FM 5-125 https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/5-125/ More seriously, on the point of winches, something that occurs to me now that I'm thinking about 10,000 lb capacity PTO winches. They usually have a shear pin in the drive input so as to act as a torque limiter on what the winch will pull and to act as a 'fail safe' to help avoid blowing things up in the winch or in your PTO/Transmission. Have you thought of such a function on the winches to help avoid parts explody when Kerbals use the winches over their strength capacity of say the parent parts?

The thing to remember is that a steel cable is actually wrapped around another cable or sometimes a fiber strand there to hold oil. A hose is just a hollow cable designed to hold MORE oil than with a fiber wick. http://www.gsproducts.co.uk/media/wysiwyg/wire-rope-fiber-core-2_2_copy.jpg And you can transfer power over a cable....that's a resource ain't it?

So, I'm back playing KSP after focusing on other games and hobbies for a while. This is nice to see bigger and better than ever and very very pretty. Skimming the thread looking at some of the feature requests, it struck me that some players might appreciate a half core/half fairing not unlike a bomb bay or equipment bay on aircraft for the Mk1 and Mk2 fuselage sections. A conventional bay with outward opening doors for the Mk1 with a rotary bay not unlike that on the Buccaneer would probably be nice for the Mk2. Edit: Space for 1-3 of the wedges with perhaps the wedge mount for each section extending out to put the payload in the air stream.

I'm back into KSP after a year's hiatus. One of the things I really prefer are the better IVA's for missions. I really prefer to run most if not all from the IVA. I really like that the new MAS system will show the Action Groups on the toggle switches. For example, in the VAB under the description area...I type in... AG1 = RW (Reaction Wheels) I can toggle those off in the VAB and then not have the Command pod RW's wobbling the rocket. ANd it's easy enough when I get close to orbit to engage those and not wonder what I set that control to. Nice little detail.

Hmm. I thought you were doing that initially. I can understand why you're not. In order to make things reasonably passable, why not make a larger bulge around the pivot point? It won't look sleek but won't have the same question of how it all really works for spacing. I've worked with electrical bits like that joint, they tend to be rather cramped with that sort of single pivot point joint.

I think from a mechanical perspective, a sliding elbow might be more workable. The joints rotate against each other which, when the two wedges are slipped in opposite directions makes the tube straight instead of an elbow.

I am seeing the same issue that Cruzo is seeing with regards to the Casa and Ponderosa. If configured as a hab module in the KSC, it's inflatable and and operations can be managed with the tool tips. If it's defaulting as a GEO lab, then clicking "manage operations" gets you another "Start Converter" Button with no operations manage possible. Perhaps it's something with the GeoLab Tool context tool tip and NOT with the Casa or Ponderosa itself...

That look nice. I like how you've incorporated one of the methods of stacking the ship in such a way that things work for the crew's apparent downward gravity while they're under thrust.

Instead of the pong screens, how about the usual RPM MFDs'output with the controls for the large forward wall mounted screens in the panel in front of the kerbal? That way you can throw a forward camera image up as well as orbital data.

I've been using an OV10 like aircraft for lower level science around th KSC region. Its grat because it can carry air droppable science packages and make reasonably safe touchdowns on eough aras for putting down manually placed science packages like SEP stations. A rear compartment like the aft compartment on the OV-10 and/or the P61 widow would be sorta nifty...

Thats quite nice!

Key search term, "Custer channel wing". The wing is a u-shape around a prop, not a full shroud, a half shroud. The extra air velocity due to engine prop draft increases lift dramatically for very good STOL performance. The down side is that engine out flying performance is poor.

Since it looks like it should be STOL, how about some channel wings?

Ahh, that makes sense. I hadn't realized it was an upper stage motor.

Should the 2.5 Meter Tunguska Engine have a lower thrust than the Volcano which is half the size?

I finally got a change to play with this in 1.2. Trailer brakes don't work remotely. That's a challenge. In trying to make them work remotely I tried the pivoting connection atop the TB-60. This worked great. Brakes work. you can control the trailing vehicle's systems as if you ran a control cable. Controlled steering or not if the trailer was a conventional tag trailer. But...it only worked for a moment. On my first test I got from the runway start point all the way to the path from the VAB to the pad. Then, the Kraken appeared and caused a 60G disaster. More tests and it happens going over less substantial bumps AND at speed down the runway. So, that's a no go. Overall it's a pretty neat system. But the Tow bar REALLY seems like a way to get one vehicle moved by another vehicle short distances. With no brakes any movement at speed is liable to cause the towing vehicle to be jack-knifed.

In the New Game options setting, what's with the options relating to welding and docking ports? Never mind. Derp on my part. Different mod.

With the articulation like in the mk48, there isn't any need to steer the rear wheels. You just steer the front and the rear assembly tracks along. Tweak the traction beteeen the front and rear wheels and you should have reasonable performance. In my own truck. The models with the sprag based front axle engagement, they even have a slight gear ratio indifference which works to engage the front axle automatically when the rear wheels slip and over run the front. This all works on a sprag clutch mechanism. My particular example has an air shift front axle which is manual engagement. I would not be surprised if there was a bit of power division between the front and rear sets of the Mk48 LVS. I'll have to ask the guys on steel soldiers.

I was not so much suggesting these as KAS modes, but giving you a survey of real towing methods which work on rough terrain in RL. The weird and problematic issues you were havivng map to real life. The triangular tow bars are with a flexible connection between towing and towed segments are mostly best for low speeds. There have been some notable accidents where MV collectors as well as soldiers have lost control and died when flat towing a truck with another truck. The tow bars are also not so good for backing over rough terrain and break at the wrist points. For realism purpises, those towbars should be the weakest link. Either breaking near the end of a towbar or at the attachment point of the towed vehicle The single fixed point, with a movable point at the towing vehicle configuration is most apropriate and useful for higher speeds and rough terrain. (Tag trailer configuration) Brakes on the towed vehicle are useful having a touch more fiction in the back as better breaking force helps keep things under control under heavy braking load. Having a bit of distance between the towbar and the wheels (towards the center of the trailer) avoids most of the tire scrub issues you see with non steering tires close to the front of the trailer vehicle. This just requires a simple landing leg for when the trailer isn't connected. In the MK48s, modules both can't move independantly, but thats because the power unit is the front unit. Having a cab unit that contains crew and power systems and a towbar connection that is articulated in one or two ranges (toggle them) pulling a 'trailer' unit that is also powered -when connected- would be handy. In RL the power transmission is a drive shaft that can be disconnected along with hydraulics for the crane and other components if the 'trailer' unit has such. In KSP,power transmission would be presumptively a power cable + controls for the powering of wheel motors for the cab and 'trailer' unit. I take it one can still make two connections with the KAS system right? Via two of the towbar assemblies? Mount one above the other, fix the rear point, and you have the power transmission and motion methods of the MK48 LVS. From a KSP design perspective, for my mun base vehicles, if i can get away with a trailer thats minimal as possible allowing a cab unit to perform construction tasks and later drop what anounts to a wrecker (a hitch, frame truss, two winches and 2 axles) for dragging modules around the base for assembly, I tend not to bother sticking remote control, power and guidance parts on such a trailer. I've been using the wild Blue buffalo, but it can result in rather long vehicles that, without any articulation, have a gigantic turning radii. Being able to articulate a trailer unit (like a fuel trailer to drag over to the landing area) would be handy.