Doc Anderson

The ladder may not ultimately be too short. The current model is still using stock KSP landing gear. They seem just a bit taller than necessary.

One way to do that might be to make each of the engines and the doors that go with them a single assembly (i.e. hover engines and doors as one part and the retro engines and doors as another part). That way the animation could be coded to open the doors when the engine is activated and close them when it is deactivated. This would also reduce the overall part count and make selection of parts for action groups easier.

I installed Throttle Control Avionics and took the DX-1 to the surface of the Mun and back. Way cool! Here's my impressions of the craft: 1. For a WIP this is AMAZING! Very fun to fly. The flight rebalancing is much improved. It handles well. It does get a little twitchy in the upper atmosphere. Definitely needs the RCS to fly smoothly. But considering the aerodynamic nature of the craft, this didn't feel out of place. 2. The scramjet seems underpowered. I realize it's thrust increases with velocity, but I really couldn't get much out of it and ended up using the mains entirely to make orbit. 3. Question, did you remove the other (controlled explosion) engine? Also, in the last version, it didn't line up correctly in the SPH. 4. Holy buckets this thing has a metric crap ton of Delta V!!! I smell a grand tour(ism) opportunity. I can see the brochure copy now: "SEE the solar system ... ALL of it! Bring the whole family! Pack extra underwear and snacks!" 5. Retro Engines don't seem to do much better than the RCS. I tried using them to do a short landing. I glided (fell steeply out of the sky) to the end of the runway, flared (which it does REALLY well) and gently touched down. Then I hit the brakes and the retro engines. Not as dramatic as I hoped. The retro engines need more power (they also suck a lot of fuel for as little as they contribute). 6. Can't wait to get dedicated landing gear with steering. 7. I also did a rendezvous with my orbiting space station. Evidently the docking ports are not compatible. Need to talk to the boffins in R&D about that one. I'm guessing one is imperial and the other is metric or some such thing. So much for that resupply mission. 8. Landing on the Mun using hover engines worked really well. But it was trickier than expected because of lack of a visible velocity vector (due to the spaceplane orientation of the navball). I would love to see a vertical landing window to make this easier. I'm thinking a downward-facing landing cam with horizontal and vertical velocity indicators. That said, I can't even begin to imagine how difficult that would be to do because ... SO not my skill set. You guys that do this kind of stuff have my utmost respect. 9. The docking port needs a retractable ladder that will survive reentry so it can be boarded on Kerbin. All in all, I had a blast joyriding in the Deltaglider. Thank you for all your hard work. I can't tell you how much fun I had.

I'm getting an error on several files when I unzip the archive in Windows and they won't extract. Using 7-zip I had no problems. Anyone else experiencing this?

Before I say another word ... LOVE the mod. Can't wait to see how it develops. Nicely done! This was my favorite vehicle in Orbiter. It's a natural for KSP. Thank you. I'm also having flight issues. It's very sluggish on takeoff (not near as much lift as it needs) so it burns through a LOT of fuel. I'm not even making suborbital altitude and it becomes unstable as it gets low on fuel. This is likely what makes reentry so difficult. The other difficulty is with the hover engines being unbalanced. Even setting the rear hover engines to 40% thrust, it's pushing the nose down. (BTW, selecting the right rear hover engine in the VAB to assign them to action groups is very difficult.) And one last question... How do you get the crew out? Having trouble transferring them to the airlock. All said, this is a WAY cool piece of work. Once the bugs are worked out, this could be the workhorse for servicing and refueling space stations and colonies.

If you don't like certain features, adjust the settings till it plays the way you like. Remember the devs put in all these bells and whistles that the community requested and THEN they made them optional so you could STILL play the way YOU like. Turn down the reentry heating till your spaceplanes work. Use mods for other features you want. I, personally ALWAYS use Kerbal Engineer and Chatterer just because it makes the experience what I want it to be. A while back I made the mistake of posting how I thought KSP was a GREAT game and I got slammed for it. I wasn't allowed to simply enjoy the game without also acknowledging all the shortcomings someone else saw. I felt rather beat up. As a result, I really don't post anymore. I still think it's a great game. I play it more than any other I own. And I tweak it so it's the game I want it to be.

I'm having same problem. TACLS v.9 on KSP .24. When I EVA the Kerbals have no resources. Also noticed that there are no resource bars on the Kerbals when I right click on them.

I'm sure you could point me to a lot of code thingies that would be really impressive if I understood them. Here is what I do understand: The game is not done yet. It is still an unfinished alpha and yet it is FAR more fun than SO much of what is sold as finished. That's pretty cool! Plus, SQUAD is doing a truly remarkable thing. They're defining a genre. That's impressive. And they've opened it up to us in the community to tinker with knowing full well that other people (in many cases with as much or greater skill than themselves) would take it places they never dreamed (I mean, Holy Cow! Look at ALCOR. It's mind blowing!). But, the fact that SQUAD has done this is both generous and commendable. And, if that is not enough, they've created something that has captured people's imagination about space exploration. This is wonderful! Not to mention KSP is inspiring kids to go into science. This is genuinely important. ... And I heard somewhere (can't confirm) that SQUAD is working on a version of KSP specifically for classrooms that will allow teachers to create shared content for students to work with. This is WAY cool and goes far beyond "just a game." Yes, I realize the game is not perfect. And the code absolutely could be better. I'm not disagreeing with that. My point is simply that, despite its shortcomings, I think (that is to say, me, myself ... not anyone else) ... I think that KSP is a fantastic accomplishment. Warts and all. So, no, I don't care about "less-than-optimal code" in a game that isn't done yet. That's not my job. I will leave that to people with different skill sets than me. I just see a lot to celebrate in the bigger picture. And remember, this whole conversation started with choosing to look at a shared frustration in a positive way.

Mihara, congratulations, you have an opinion. My opinion is that KSP is one of the best games I have EVER bought. WHY do I say this, you ask? That is a FANTASTIC question. Thank you for asking. I think it is one of the best games I have EVER bought because I have nearly 200 games in my Steam library and I have more time logged in KSP than the next 20 games COMBINED. Now THAT (for me) is value for dollar. Yup! $22 bucks happily and well spent. No buyer's remorse. Lots of great game play. I think I can unreservedly use words like "great" and "astounding" at that point. The great thing about opinions is they are not facts. You can have a diametrically opposed opinion and it doesn't make mine wrong. Everybody wins. FYI: You are not going change my mind about using words like astounding. As for whether SQUAD deserves all those opinions ... er ... pats on the back, consider they are the ones getting them not me or you. I, for one, am happy to let them enjoy them.

Love the mod! I immediately created two ribbons: KSC Original Recipe: For surviving a difficult reentry. Proof you're not a chicken. KSC Extra Crispy: For not surviving a difficult reentry. Awarded posthumously. Get a bucket.

My gut reaction was much the same. But then it occurred to me that SQUAD is doing exactly what they should be doing. They are creating an absolutely astounding infrastructure upon which work like this can be done. That things like the ALCOR capsule are possible is a testament to their excellent work. Also, SQUAD made the decision to open this game up to the community for just this reason. It is a decision that has made their work more complicated, but gives them access to some amazing innovation. Remember, this is still an ALPHA release. And as "finished" as the game feels, it is easy for me to forget that myself. In the grand scheme of things, I would MUCH rather have SQUAD complete the infrastructure and mechanics and then put a better polish on the individual parts. But, I do agree, Alexustas' work has raised the bar on what is possible with IVA so high, it is impossible not to notice the difference. He deserves recognition for that and I'm sure SQUAD would be the first to say so themselves.

Crazierinzane, I wasn't calling you out specifically. I'm sorry if that's how that came across. Please accept my sincere apology. Yours was merely the most recent post expressing our collective impatience and frustration. And that frustration is understandable because, let's face it, bac9 raised the bar for KSP modders everywhere. A while back I heard an interview with a television writer. They said the secret to writing for a soap opera was imagine the absolute worst way a character could respond to something and then write that. Sometimes that is how it feels reading forum conversations. My post was a response to reading page after page after page of complaints. I'd had enough. I just wanted to remind folks (myself included) to keep some perspective and act like respectful adults.

Yes, here's a cookie. Now go play with your rockets.

How about we cut bac9 a little slack. There is an old saying: "We judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their actions." It is all too easy to say, "so and so should do this or that." We forget we are dealing with real people with real lives. Real lives (look at your own) are seldom neat and tidy. Yes, it would be nice if bac9 would drop a line and let everyone know how things are progressing. We would certainly appreciate knowing. But remember bac9 has a name, a life, a job, a family, friends, and all the complications that go with them. Any ONE of them is more important than a computer game. Remember that he (or she, - I don't know) put b9 together because they wanted to and then shared it with the rest of us at no cost. He/she owes us nothing. I would love to see a .23+ update (ideally uploaded to the spaceport before I am through posting this). But more than that, I hope they are doing well with everything that is REALLY important ... then maybe they'll have the energy to devote to an update. Whether and when an update comes is (as my grandfather was fond of saying) just one more thing in a long list of things I can do nothing about. Complaining won't help, so why do it? Offering to help might. Just saying "Thank you. We respect your hard work." or even "Hope you're doing well." can't hurt. Then do what you will end up doing anyway, no matter what happens ... sit back and wait. The only question is whether or not you will do it with some dignity. I continue to be impressed with this community, so I don't think expecting excellence is too much to ask.

My main saves are always named the same... SANDBOX: "Kerbals in SPAAACE!!!" CAREER: "Weird SCIENCE!" What can I say ... I enjoyed the eighties.

Love that Kerbals on EVA can collect science data and return with it. Granted, this is documented, but I think it is way Cool. It allows for much more economical designs as you don't have to bring all the science parts back. Also, Apollo-style missions will be easier. Plus, with the lab module to "clean" the science equipment, you could send science missions out from an orbiting space station in reusable science vessels and return the data to KSC with crew rotation as you send the science vessels out again to a different location.

Sure, there are always going to be those that game any given system. And, yes, you will probably be able to suss out the most effective strategies online. No doubt there are people that will do this. To which, I say, "go for it." If that's what makes it fun for you, knock yourself out. Because while they're doing that, there will also be other people who come up with stuff that makes you sit back, slack-jawed, in amazement and admiration. There will be still others that just want to immerse themselves in the game and create incredible things. But that's fine. They'll all have fun. And if we're lucky, they'll share.

Dude, I feel really bad your horse is dead. Mine, on the other hand, still seems to be just fine. And there's five pages here, so that's even enough for a riding club. Tally Ho! (BTW, LOVE the graphic from the last Kebal Polo championship!)

Love the idea of a krash test klockwork kerbal! May have to rename one of 'em.

I look at it more as KSP isn't meant to be REALLY realistic. Granted, there are lots of things that aren't quite right, but what continues to amaze me is how much IS right. They got all the big stuff ... the way orbital mechanics work. And they did it in a way that is accessible to non math nerds like me. To quote d@#n near every sci fi B picture of the 1950's ... "Why that's FANTASTIC!" (Thank you comedian Don Reese.) So we CAN do the Mercury missions ... with explosions! We CAN do the Apollo missions ... with large amounts of deceleration trauma ... and explosions! And we CAN send a skycrane to the red planet ... and drop things on it that explode! Ooh! I'm sensing a theme! And in the end, who cares if it IS really realistic? It is REALLY fun.

Wait?!? Whu?!? "rocket launch into the sky..." Note to self: Tell the other guys at KSC I may have found out what we're doing wrong. Also, we may be able to stop duct taping volunteers in the capsules.

True. You can go through Kerbals like popcorn at a double feature. Still, if I want to do a more "realistic" (oh, the irony) space program, I have to do it in the sandbox. While this game isn't perfect (and be honest, there isn't such a thing) I continue to be impressed with how much enjoyment I get out of KSP ... and it's still an ALPHA! Best $22 bucks I ever spent. ... gotta go. Popcorn is ready.

It suddenly just occurred to me (I'm kinda slow sometimes, especially when I'm distracted by shiny things that fly and explode) that there is a fundamental flaw with the order in which parts are unlocked. If we were actually getting a rocket program off the ground (pun intended) wouldn't you start with UNMANNED (or is unkerbaled?) flights first? Start with small rockets, sub orbital flights, lots of explosions, etc. Then finally get a satellite into orbit. In the process you learn enough to build a capsule and do it all over again with a vict ... er ... astronaut. Seems to make more sense. Well, to me at least.

Absolutely! Actually, I used the table on the wiki to break out the list. This was just my first attempt to break the data out to look at it (and be gob smacked at how big it was). It could be organized MUCH better. The only thing that I do like is breaking it out by biome because getting TO a given biome is going to be the biggest job. So once you get there you want to make sure you get the most out of the delta v expenditure. Personally, I like the idea of a matrix or grid because I am really visual. But others may have other ideas. I'd love to se 'em all. It occurs to me a separate matrix for each biome may be a useful way to organize and access the data.

Yeah, the list isn't perfect. I just listed the combinations possible with the locations, biomes and experiments. And I don't know if it is even practical as a checklist per se, but when I saw the shear number of possible experiments it kind of stopped me in my tracks for a moment. So I thought I would post it for whatever use it might be to anyone else. Make of it what you will.