Gryphon

Amen to all this advice. Also, I try to make sure that my ship is as recoverable as possible. Ideally (returning the entire ship to KSC), my only costs are fuel. Oh, and I use Stage Recovery and parachutes to get back the booster stages. That helps a lot.

Please let me know if this works better for you.

ckan? Ckan't.

I currently have 4 build rates in the VAB, at only 1.2, 0.7, 0.6, and 0.4. Sure, if I build a whole ship from scratch, it can take a painfully long time. Instead, what I do (for big ships) is build parts of the ship - especially the expensive ones - as separate "ships" that I complete and recover. If it's a high-priority ship, I can be building the components in all four slots at the same time. Once I have all - or at least most - of the parts, only then do I construct the complete ship. And building a ship from existing parts can be fast! Usually my top priority is some contract-test vehicle, though. Some common components I try to keep a constant stock of, such as probe cores. For example, I built a stack of 6 OKTO2's as soon as I unlocked them. Budget and available build slots are my constraints on this sort of inventory-building. Some components I seem to always have plenty of, such as SRB's. I think I have around 18 SRB-KD25k's in stock right now (Thanks, Stage Recovery!)

Wow! So far, it looks like FAR is more popular than Princess Luna!

Heck, I've been using PF for several months and I didn't realize it. Actually, that brings to mind a request: Would it be difficult to change the display name of the two "Fuselage Fairings" to "Fixed Fairings?" After all, just because they are fixed doesn't mean they will just be used to make fuselages. And of course, if I miss THAT, well, I guess it's my own fault. Heck, the names could go one further, to "Fixed Fairings" and "Detachable Fairings." For me, I think this would have helped, because I always look at the name to see if it is Conic or Egg-Shaped before I grab it. Of course, if it would break stuff, then nevermind.

I suppose you can try to make it look how you prefer, but here's something to consider:

I am running KSP .25 with DR 6.2.1 and NO Tweakscale. It includes heatshields with the following diameters: 1.25m 2.5m 3.75m 6.25m (inflatable) Is that what you meant?

You're not the only one. As I recall, there was a discussion of this in the old thread, with the original dev saying that to do this would be very hard, if at all possible, so it wasn't likely to happen.

Currently, Curse has the latest version, 0.5.16-317, but Kerbalstuff still has 0.5.15-308.

Just an idea, but you might try using two antennas. With one antenna up and one down, you send the command to close one antenna and then send the command to open the other antenna. Also, I think you'll want to add your desired minute signal delay before issuing the second command.

Quick answer: not at this point. Dev's response on this issue from two pages back: I should add, he was speaking in response to other folks asking for this feature, which has been a topic of conversation on the last several pages. Sometimes, spending five minutes looking can get you the answer faster AND gets you less people being annoyed at you for not looking before asking.

PFF! You should know the response to that: MOAR BOOSTERS! Yeah, for some reason, Metaphor's map is much harder to read. Thanks for the links, though!

Yes, I want to start unmanned, too. However, I think this sort of change is more appropriate to a tech tree mod, separate from RT.

Actually, I found this thread after seeing the new map on the wiki. Three suggestions: - If you have Steam, please take a look at your image in the Cheat Sheet page, as viewed in the Steam Overlay browser. For me, it's ginormous, though I am running at a mere 1600x1200. - Perhaps a visual legend would be clearer than just the text description? It took me a while to figure out what the new numbers were. (Actually, this is something the map could have used from the beginning.) - Regarding the discussion of what transfer durations to show, I like your ten-year-averaging method, but I think it would be useful to show the minimum and maximum for each as well - though I am not sure if, visually, it would fit well. Thanks!

If your KSP is in Steam, you can do what I am doing: In the Steam Library, go to the Kerbal Space Program properties, select the BETAS tab. In the "Select the beta you would like to opt into:" dropdown, choose "previous - Previous Stable Release" and keep rolling with 0.25 until KCT updates.

It's cool, dude. If you are lucky, then someday you'll be on the other side of the coin, and then you finally will understand why it's annoying.

I'll second (or third) a request for such an option, with the modification to your statement: Anyone who should know better and pops a chute while supersonic deserves to have an educational lithobrake. If I can find and toggle an option to disable this warning, I should know better.

It's described on this page under RangeModelType. The practical effects are shown in the table at the bottom of that page: two antennae of the same type have the default maximum range, but two antennae of different types have a combined maximum range at a point between their individual maximums. RT does have the "more antennae = more range" as an option; that is listed in the same section, as MultipleAntennaMultiplier. Somewhere (in this thread, I think) the value of 0.1 was suggested as reasonable but not too overpowering. IIRC, 0.1 means that each additional antenna adds 10% of its range to the total maximum range.

@various people asking about 0.90 compatibility: some people have reported good luck with RT when starting a new savegame in 0.90, but I don't recall reading of anyone reporting success with migrating a save from 0.25 to 0.90.

HAH! I knew it was there somewhere. Try looking at all releases on github Then you can pick the one you want. Personally, I am still using Deadly Reentry 6.2.1 with KSP 0.25.

Any thin part can get attached the less-desirable way in the editor. For instance, it's easy to put an OCTO2 inside the part it's attached to. I use three methods to help avoid this: 1. Adjust Camera Angle: be off to the side, not directly above or below the work face. 2. Zoom In: Put the camera near to the work face. 3. Drag THEN Drop: When you are placing the part, don't clicky the mouse until you are sure it's going to attach properly. (This is easier after doing #1 and #2.) Also, keep in mind that Command Pod Mk1 has a heat shield built in, but Mk1-2 Command Pod does not.

A single omni antenna will connect with any other omni antennas in mutual range. You can also point a dish antenna in "Cone Mode" at a planetary body (Kerbin, Mun, etc) and then it will pick up any antennas in mutual range. However, the area it can see is dependent on the Cone Diameter - how directional the antenna is. Basically, a little dish like the DTS-M1 has a cone that covers Kerbin even from below synchronous orbit, but a bigger antenna has to be very far away before its cone covers all of Kerbin. For instance, the 88-88 has to be a 1.1 million kilometers away. I am also a big fan of activating the Root Range model. I just figured out that I can use a big dish in Kerbin synchronous orbit (2868.750 KM) to stay connected with an unmanned reentry vehicle that only has the tough little DP-10 for connectivity. Before this, I lost several unmanned vessels on reentry due to lack of coverage and lack of predictions for the flight computer. Also, Root Range and Cone Mode will help you keep your communications network from becoming overwhelming - especially in career mode when you don't yet have the longer range antennae available yet.

Sounds perfect for the "Did Science in a Snowstorm" award.

YAY!! Toolbar thread is on page 100!