Specialist290

Welcome to the forums! Glad to hear that you've been enjoying yourself so far.

Agreed. While coding a specific part to actually survive impact unscathed to transmit science might be very difficult for obvious reasons, I can definitely see how this might integrate well with the contract system, giving you a science reward for completing the mission. I can even see a good in-character justification for it, in light of the comments others have made: The contracting organization has their own measuring instruments to observe the effects of the impact, and they'll share the data with your space program if you'll construct the probe for them to their specifications.

Merging these two threads together. Carry on We're just as bemused (and amused) as y'all are.

Welcome (back) to the forums! I had to take a break from a forum myself once due to getting too personally involved in some drama I shouldn't have, so I've learned that lesson (or something close to it) the hard way myself. Everyone makes mistakes, and the number of pure, honest too-good-for-this-sinful-Earth types out there is exceedingly small. I'm sure we all have a few skeletons in our closet we wouldn't want others to see in the light of day. As far as the current status: We're on 0.23 now, which has made a few changes to the science system: You can't spam an unlimited number of transmissions with certain experiments to deplete the science in one go. Instead, certain modules are one-use only, so you have to decide whether to transmit now or recover later. However, there's also a Mobile Processing Lab part that allows you to reset modules after they've been "used up" so you can still make reusable probes to a certain degree. Also, there's a new SABRE-type engine called the RAPIER, and various other minor features and tweaks.

I agree. I'd say this is complete and comprehensive enough to have earned a spot on the Drawing Board

Impressive work. Definitely one for the Drawing Board

I've done a few Duna landings with DRE before, and I can confirm that if you're coming in from a decently low orbit, you don't really even need a heat shield at all unless you plan on doing some aerobraking as part of your initial orbital capture.

Friendly neighborhood moderator reminder: This isn't an English class. I could understand if you were pointing out errors in someone's mission report or tutorial to help them make it more presentable,* but if you must nitpick someone else's spelling and grammar, I'd advise keeping it to discreet PMs. Let's try to stay on topic here, folks * Indeed, I've offered my proofreading services to other users before, any they've found it most helpful.

Out of curiosity, could you post a screenshot with just the intended lander, not the launcher or transfer stages? Your current rocket does strike me as a bit overengineered for its intended destination, and I think we could give some better, more specific advice if we knew exactly what the payload we're dealing with is.

The LV-T30 is a liquid fuel engine, meaning you have to manually manage the throttle for it to burn. Use the Left "Shift" key to increase your throttle and the Left "Crtl" to decrease it. "X" allows you to instantly cut it off as well.

A picture or two would help, definitely. We might be able to troubleshoot some specific areas of a given rocket that way. That said, in general terms, to get the most "bang for your buck" out of the fuel you add, it's generally more effective to add it to a lower stage than to a higher one. As a general principle, you want the vast majority of your fuel to be in your launch vehicle, because the more mass you can shed through staging, the less unnecessary "dead weight" your engines will be pushing once you get into orbit. You'll sometimes hear terms like "the rocket equation" and "delta-v" being thrown around; these are essentially ways to quantify how efficient your rocket is (and are quite well-explained here, if you're up for a little light reading). Hope this helps

Not with RemoteTech directly, as far as I'm aware. However, I believe the kOS project was working on a programmable autopilot that could execute certain actions when specific triggers are met.

Arrowstar's Trajectory Optimization Tool has a gravity assist planner as a feature, I believe. I haven't used it much, but it's a nifty feature to have.

If this thread is one of the ones you're talking about, then yes, I believe the information is still valid as of 0.23.

Just unzip the .zip into whatever directory you want, then run it from there.

As mentioned above, I believe the settings.cfg file is the one you're looking for.

I'll have to take a look at this later tonight (stupid bandwidth caps...), but I like the idea.

Welcome to the forums! Glad to hear that you've been enjoying the game, and that you're experimenting with different things. Feel free to ask questions and share your experiences with the rest of the community as well.

Just remember, when it comes to rocketry: It's not the size itself that matters, but how you use it

So while going about my regular trawl through Youtube, I found this: It's an interview with a man who has a comedy skit he does at airshows by deliberately flying an airplane "badly." I thought y'all might get a kick out of it

This looks like it's shaping up nicely

It might be your screen's display settings as well, since that screenshot looks rather dark on my monitor.

As Taki117 has indirectly alluded to, part of the problem is probably that you're not coming in "straight-on" at the target docking port, but that there's still a little bit of lateral drift as you close the distance. DPAI can really be useful for lining up clean approaches once you get used to the interface.

You can still download the one previous version from the KSP Store even after an update. Also, some people probably haven't gotten around to manually updating their copies for whatever reason.

Looks like your pictures aren't displaying on my end.