Tw1

Open the file called addmodule in KAS's folder. Copy and paste a bit that looks like this: ///////// linearRcs /////// GRAB { stockPartName = linearRcs evaPartPos = (0.0, 0.00, -0.21) evaPartDir = (0,0,-1) dropAtGroundPos = false dropPartPos = (0.0, -0.1, -0.65) dropPartRot = (0.0, 90.0, 0.0) addPartMass = true storable = true storedSize = 4 attachOnPart = True attachOnEva = False attachOnStatic = False attachSendMsgOnly = False } And replace the name of the part (the bit after stockPartName = ) with the name of the part you want to be able to use. The name, not the in game title. That will be found in that part's CFG. Then, alter things like stored size, and whether or not it can be attached to static objects (buildings), or Kerbals until you're happy. I tend to leave all the other settings alone. The //////// bit is optional, and is a spot where you can write the name of the part the entry below adds grabbablity to. But make sure all the other parts are copied exactly, or it won't work. (Particularly watch those {} thingies. I've accidentally duplicated them a few times.)

On closer inspection, seems you guys are right, though the differences are subtle. Still, giving them more distinct hair would be a plus. Then again, maybe that's something to be implemented later. It's a pity they haven't completed the female Kerbal design yet, could have been an opportunity to have an important female character. Squad may have missed a trick here, unless there will be more in game charters added later. IDK, we've had kerbalizer, and different Kerbals in video and non playable roles for a while now. I think it's meant to happen one day thought. Or for others, it is possible retcons are in order where kerbals with different names have played the same roles. Perhaps it would be best to wait to see if they appear in an up coming video, so we get some proper insight into their characters.

Unlucky. Maybe you've got to be quicker? Mortimer. A shout out to SimCity? Awesome. Though the all use the generic kerbal face. It would be more interesting if they were more varied, like how Gene has no hair, and Wernher has a moustache.

I know that feel... (hope you're not too disappointed this isn't some new commenter. But, hey it's a bump for the thread.) I haven't needed to come up with random names so far, but I think I'll keep this in mind.

There is a solution. One way mission. Give Jeb a base, or send him off on a long term job. (Or, park him next to the launchpad, where he can watch everything but not participate, for maximum evils.)

I've thought about putting a link to it, or the thread in my forum sig, but don't want it to get messy, and I'm out of pictures. Maybe when I find time to continue the voyage.... Yeah, to make the most out of one of these, you've got to use physicsless parts, and low mass parts wherever possible. The last vehicle in my previous post was intended as a re-usable Eve SSTO, (which I haven't tested yet, and expect to be extremely finicky,), and the only non-massless parts are an OKTO 2, a small control surface, and an external seat.

Works on Eve too. And is a 100% legit way to tour the planets But this type of craft can be very tricky to make work.

Congrats on the 9000 thread views! I like that flapping wing craft, that's quite stylish. Doodbro. Now there's a name...

There is some truth in what the OP says, if your apoapsis and periapsis do happen to line up with the AN and DN, then it's perfect for plane changes. The problem is, it's often not the case. APe can't be manipulated directly. You can muck around with prograde/retrograde and zenith/nadir burns, and move the AP and PE, and normal or antinormal burns can move nodes to an extent, but none of this going to help set up an efficient plane change. Go with Kashua's plan. Burning at AP efficiently raises the PE, high orbits are slower, that makes plan changes easier.

Love a good drawing. I did not do anything in KSP today, as I have misplaced my mouse. This is rather impeding.

Lucky. I'm probably too far north in Sydney. At least, that's what all the data seems to be showing. [quote=PakledHostage; Edit: I should add that you can get a sense of whether or not it is worthwhile going out before you leave the house by looking at the Ovation site that I linked to above. Lots of red over your part of the sky is a good sign.

Hi. I recently updated Karbonite, and seem to be having some extra crashes, when loading from the VAB. I'm also getting some more crashes when switching to ships, and issues with a previously working texture replacer, but that might be something coming from kethane Here are some crash report things: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jzoabt97tflmtbv/AAA_yBOnjtihaem5jChaMa9Da?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ayaxrc1k2s0od7d/AACxWXkVAGymD4I9lHb5bUU7a?dl=0

I've never really thought about it in great depth, but it makes sense that Kerbin would have animals not too unlike ours, but a little different. Though, we are aware of at least one species that comes from Kerbin:

The thing is, to make the most of KSP gameplay, you've got to give yourself a challenge- build something better. weirder, fly it better. Or, get into the roleplay sort of thing. Watch the planet below, as you pass over continents or craters. Look in to the kerbals eyes, and imagine their story. I play slowly, so an interplanetary voyage becomes a big event. I am looking forward to sending this off. I tend not to make particularly specific plans outside of KSP, as inevitably, something won't quite work. Though I agree, most ideas come in the back of my mind, when I'm not actively playing.

This could be cool. KSP already has quite the repository of songs, both written and recorded. For example, I'm currently involved in planning [CLASSIFIED] and hope to write [CLASSIFIED] ventually.

"You call that a strut? This is a strut!...." Today, I found a flaw in my plans to aquatify my microver. I can either invest in a much more complex system, or hope the kerbals land somewhere where a little swimming will suffice. Either way, the mission planers are itching to get this ship under way.

This is true, but when playing stock size, I tend to set things when I'm rendezvousing so I just have to do a simple hohmann transfer, without the time-taking wait in a higher/lower orbit until you're close to the target. Seems a lot less practical in RSS, you have to move things a fair bit further out before this is possible. Not a major problem, but could make it harder for new people. True, but that's the one of the real differences between a manned and robotic mission- unless you bring enough stuff, you can only be out there for a certain time. This could be a motivator to set up stations, bases, motherships, and other infrastructure beyond a bare bones science lander. Or maybe a system where you can collect some of the necessary resources for long term survival in situ let's not go there. Not entirely a fan of infinite snack generation, makes it a little easy, unless it's very big and heavy. And maybe doesn't run of nothing. Plus, if you can bring enough spare fuel for an extra landing, why not some extra life support as well? Build your space empire, and swing around the solar system as you please!

I agree with this idea. This was posted a while ago, and seems like it could be a good set up: I don't mind the idea of making the planets slightly larger, but I see some flaws: If everything is re-sized to compensate for reduced delta V needs resulting from aerodynamics improvements, it won't just effect the planets with atmospheres- planets without them will end up being harder to land on/launch from. This may not be ideal. Perhaps they could just adjust the ones with atmosphere. The main benefits that would come from larger planets, IMHO, is the visual effect, and the fact that there's not as much space between orbits. Kerbin would take up so much more volume compared to your orbital path. Basically, the difference between these two diagrams. However, this would make rendezvous harder. The other downside to realistically sized planets which is often overlooked, is it would make ground exploration much harder- Things like Wooks's circumnavigation would be nearly impossible. KSP currently doesn't give you much to do while on a planet, and I'm hoping they will improve this in future, so larger planets may not be that great an idea. I wouldn't mind some simple life support- how long people can last in space is critical in real life space missions- it seems odd to overlook this completely. Flying around for all eternity is a probe's job really. As long as it's not to harsh- then again, if you save up enough funds, it's not too hard to push about huge loads. It will show the real difference between a short trip to the Mun, and the years long voyage to Jool.

IMHO, saves are more tough than most players seem to think. I've played since .18, gone through updates, and mod changes that said they would break my save, and they didn't. Unless the format needs to change drastically, saves seem to adapt. (that said, I do have a few older mod versions hanging around to make sure craft aren't breaking) However, changes certainly will interrupt the ongoing play of a player who's not willing to make use of hyperedit, KAS, or file editing to work around them. I don't see the problem with modifying ISP- adapting to it will mean modifying some designs, It will mean a little more engine is needed to get something into space, causing trouble for Eve, Duna, and Laythe landers with tight thrust margins. But this is assuming that the current max thrust values for the engines are the vacuum levels. Maybe they could be the sea level values. Though maybe that would make things too easy in space...

I use them, but I don't regularly design spacecraft with detachable crew pods any more. The majority of my spacecraft rely in the hope that they will work as intended (Which is not exactly a backup plan....), though both my current deep space mother ships have 1km delta V the crew modules, so they could be detached from the other paraphernalia and maybe get home in the event of an emergency. I also recently made a tiny SSTO plane which is ideal for returning kerbals lost in LKO. I don't to Munar or Minmal rescues from kerbin any more, as I have extensive bases on each. Though I used to have a cool little ship for doing that too.

My favorite exploit advanced physics based technique has got to be the ladder drive, something I refined enough for reliable space travel. See the potential here: More stuff in this thread here.

Ambitious infiniglider: 1654 parts Kerbal cup trophy: 2019 parts. Add base: something like 2400... I did build some pretty rediculus stations when I discovered a mod that could teleport you to orbit back in '18, but don't feel like hunting down the photo atm. Generally, I aim to keep things around 600 or less.

Could it be that you've mapped things to the stage action group by accident?

Maybe I should be sorting these into a proper order. Hmm, maybe eventually. Hmm, getting a little risqué.... Or: Or: ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ In high Kerbol orbit! ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ Pitch, yaw, RCS fires! ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ Pitch, yaw, RCS fires! ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ Pitch, yaw, RCS fires! ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ In high Kerbol orbit! ♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♫♪♫ I think we can probably do a few more...

Strange. Was it a 32 or a 64 bit install? Any mods giving errors? That was pretty bad luck.