Tw1

That would be pretty cool, though I imagine it would be hard to achieve the full effect without altering the meshes somehow. I have not looked at much Dieselpunk (yet), but some of my own ideas for a sci-fi series have aspects of that style.

Well, the idea I had could have more than one list. But, as the separate lists work using a different method, it would get complicated.

This is a brilliant idea. No need to worry about either planing or delta V, fling em all out, and see what happens! Are you going to keep running the experiment?

Is there an aurora australis, as well? I like the look of these planets, quite surreal. Unfortunately, I am out of RAM.

Awesome. Thanks! I can see much use for this.

Om nom nom. I Fire the next poster from my Minmus Cannon.

Now I'm imagining someone stranded on an island, collecting rocks, and metals to melt down into a giant Internet signal receiver, just to check on KSP.

I'm loving the irony in their expressions. Today, I set some things up, and tinkered with mods.

This happened completely by accident, (forgot a decoupler) but it looks very cool. Dramatic faces.

Adjust your orbit so it has a periapsis in Kerbin's lower atmosphere. Or, just aim it straight at the planet. The atmosphere will slow you down, and assuming you have enough parachutes, you should be able to land safely.

KSP should also be issued to anyone who wants to write space opera. They should not be allowed to do a space flight scene without achieving a circular kerbin orbit, then landing again. USA really aught to set up their science education. Some of this may relate to cultural issues. For example get the impression that America has a much higher proportion of people who insist that the most literal reading of Genesis is true, and therefore rule out ideas of evolution and much of geology, and cosmology is ruled out a priori.

What about an option to toggle the first person /EVA view on and off? Like how you can choose if you want to be in IVA view always, it would be useful to have a setting that enabled toggling the first person EVA view. That doesn't seem to be there, and is the main thing deterring me from giving it a go so far.

Well, been a while since I've checked in on this mod. All looking great, seems to be running fine. Though I have a question: Is there a setting that modifies how the city lights fade out? I'd like to make them finish fading out further from Kerbin.

What do you mean, I shouldn't be using them as floaties? (The flat I-beam makes quite a decent float, actually. ) That's a very good point about about the titan probe. The reason boats aren't featured in space travel so far... well, how many places have we been that you could use one?

There's some good ideas there, separate lists for separate vessels could work. It would be convenient. I can see some potential downsides though. *Probably break saves. However, conversion might be possible. * Save files would be slightly bigger, as the list that goes with the root part would need to know where each part was, and what it had do do. *This list might have to be duplicated to every capsule or probe core, or you'll loose your staging if the root part is decoupled. *Decoupling a probe core would have a little more lag, as the staging list gets re-worked out. *Editing save files to fix a bugged action group could be hard. (*Action groups no longer carrying over would be a downside for people who like to rearrange parts using KAS mod.) Though it could open up a lot of new possibilities- each probe you build on to the mother ship could have a list of its own. Staging and action groups could get really complex. I like the idea of making more things includable in the staging sequence. Perhaps what is and isn't in the sequence could be controlled via tweekables- that would get over the complexity issue, and allow far more complex staging sequences. I had an idea for how staging could work a while ago. It deals with the some of the same issues. Currently staging works like this: Staging and action groups are saved on the part they trigger. For example, a part that performs an action when you trigger action group one has "Custom01" in the appropriate place in the save file. I suspect this is why staging gets mucked up when we dock- everything marked for stage one, goes in stage one, etc.. If you keep this in mind, there are workarounds for the current problems. Now, my staging idea. I'd like to see staging done with a tab, like action groups. That would give you a lot more room to play with. The first feature it could have- a scroll bar. And no more accidentally hitting exit while in the middle of a build. Second- this is the big one- an active and inactive stage system. You could have two columns- one for active stages, and one for inactive stages. This way, if there are actions you don't want in the staging sequence, you don't have to include them- put them in the inactive column. Perhaps, when you add a new part or subassembly, its actions could be put in the inactive column, rather than going straigh into the active one and mucking everything up. That would make it easier to sort things exactly where you want them. It would play a role during flight too. When you launch, the sequence would look like it does now, except with inactive stages in it as dark brown squares. They would not have the actions in them showing, and wouldn't trigger when you reach them in the sequence. They could start sitting below the active stage with the same number as them, or perhaps you could have the ability to arrange their position in the final sequence in the Editor. Right clicking on an inactive stage would bring up one of those little menu things, which would let you change it to an active stage. Likewise, active stages could be changed to inactive. This would have a number of benefits over the current system: When docking, you could change all the stages on one craft to inactive, and on the other, all active. This would prevent stages merging once they are docked. There'd still be some necessary rearranging, but it would be a lot less. There would be no need to pull all the staging icons for detachable probes in the last stage any more. It would be so much neater.

Why? Disabling it would only make your solar pannels less effective.

This is a good point. I don't see any need to go adding anything beyond the basics for aquatic exploration. Like how rovers were made possible by the addition of wheels, to make a boat, you just need some sort of electric propeller (with swiveling capability, ideally) and possibly buoyant parts. (Both of these are available as mods.) We've got everything else. Though in my experiance, control surfaces are too flimsy to make good rudders. Anything that touches the water while at speed must have a high impact tolerance, or it gets lost, due to the dodgy water physics.

That's lucky. It puts things in perspective a little- everything in KSP has no problem with temperature, or anything like that. It's a little racist through implication. It suggests that the Chinese are only capable of shoddy workmanship. Basically, the designers and manufactures must be terrible because they're Chinese.

You might be having a problem with parts clipping- by default, parts don't like to overlap. Sometimes the game may consider them overlapping even if they don't look it. Sometimes sticking a section on elsewhere first can convince a part to go on properly when you try to put it where you want it, a second time. Alternatively, have you tried using the Alt + F12 cheats/debug thing to let parts overlap? Though, without clear access to an attachment node, getting a part to stick there is still really tricky. Sometimes, you just have to plan a craft carefully, and hope for the best. Some tips you many find useful: The lack of camera angles can sometimes be overcome by flipping the whole craft over. Build from the center out, if possible. Find alternative construction methods- perhaps a segment could be constructed on the end of a long set of truss pieces, to keep it clear of other parts. Then the trusses could be removed, and the segment placed where it needs to go.

I've more or less settled on a landing zone now. That's the last step left to do before I write up the next bit. Apart from finishing an essay IRL. Toying with the idea of raising the game reported temperatures a bit. KSP's temperature model is mostly placeholder, and Eve does have a pretty thick atmosphere.. Flicking through an old thread, I found a post from April where I mentioned the idea of exploring Eve by boat... I hope this works.

Technically, they should be inline with the center of mass, for even rotation. Reaction wheels aren't magic, they just spin, causing what they're attached to spin (or stop spinning) because of Newton's third law.

Haha. I'm ok with that. Some good ones there already. I've had that happen. I planted one on the VAB roof, found it on the side building, fallen over.

True, but wheeled rovers aren't. Yet they are useful. I don't imagine boats being essential for space travel- even rovers can sort of be replaced by hopping about with rocket engines- but they would be nice. And maybe we'll have a planet even more ocean than Laythe one day. The ability to economically move through water would be essential. Boats probably wouldn't need many parts to work, but they aren't exactly something needed urgently. Until then, I highly recommend this mod. http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/ksf-boat-propeller/ You'll need to add PART [ ] around the CFG content, but it seems to work for me.

I support long term payouts, but not in this form. I'd prefer a base level of funding from "Sponsors" (Deliberately undefined, so the player can imagine being whoever they like) that would be linked to your level of reputation, so it will rise and fall based on your levels of success or failure. Timewarping for ages will only yield so much, as the supporting kerbals would loose interest due to your inactivity. However, once we see the contracts system at work, he monetary system the game needs will be clearer. If contracts are diverse enough, you might be able to support the space program by doing constant little tasks on your space stations. We will see. Although I wouldn't mind having manned stations and bases improving your base level of reputation. (If reputation is a fluctuating level, rather than something you just collect.) Though each station or base would have to meet occupy certain criteria for its existence to have a significant boost to your reputation. IRL, more stations = more science (or in this case, reputation as science in KSP is collectible points), but this may not be the best idea for KSP. I think a balance must be achieved between giving the player the opportunity to run the space program as their imagination pleases, (e.g, establishing lots of stations and things within the one planetary system) and pushing them to explore new places.

Ooh, an ion probe to Gilly! I've done that. What type of trajectory did you use to get there? At first, it looked like your kerbal was underwater while taking that sample. Anyway well done on the completed rescue! That will teach Jeb to go galavanting of in experimental space planes.... not.