RocketPilot573

To be honest, I don't see the difference either way. A tanker sitting at the station is the same as permanent tanks. However, for lag reasons, a tanker ship is going to be many more parts than some fuel tanks (maybe ~50 versus ~10), so that tanker could make it annoying for other ships to dock, better to just dock the tanker, refuel the tanks, and get out quickly.

Launched my new space station into orbit... In one piece. I may need to install better lighting.

Pretty much.

I think everyone already knows about the setting, but they still dislike the aero for a reason.

This, I don't care that we can change the aero, I care that the stock KSP is somewhat decent. Changing the settings of physics just doesn't feel right, why should I share an SSTO on this forums if it doesn't work by default?

I think the best option for the devs is too just go in between 1.0.0 and 1.0.1. Then it might actually be comparable to earth. Seriously, I want proof that going straight up to 10 km is not the best option (delta-v wise, I don't care about debris falling, flipping rockets, etc).

Is it normal that I am generating 4 LF+O a second? Sustained (never runs out of ore/power*)? *Does not work at night, that amount of fuel cells would require 3 times the amount of fuel this generates, alternatively it could work with ~600 RTGs, without generators it would need ~11600 2.5 meter batteries to last the night

I have an Ion probe in Ike orbit, I looked for a few minutes and then lost interest. I do still have the slightest hope that it is back though.

So I was going to launch some equipment into orbit... However the payload is actually very light for my massive lifter, and by "light" I mean the weight distribution was not very dense, resulting in a huge fairing (so I couldn't just add more payload). What to do to nerf the lifter (reduce cost)? That's easy, just remove one of the boosters! Going well! This part kept give me trouble, I had the rocket flying too flat, so it kept losing control and flipping after stage sep. Made it past the kill zone! After fairing jettison. Stage sep. Once the flames started, imediatly the basic fins exploded. Bu that's ok because they're dirt cheap and, to be honest, fins on the bottom of the downwards moving rocket is really bad anyways. Intentional! A.I.R.B.R.A.K.E.S Landed! A bit short of KSC though. We don't talk about this.

Issues with parachutes and heatshields don't mater much here, the topic of the poll is meant to be about the atmosphere itself. At least that's the intention.

I thought I was noticing something wrong with the memory again...

There seems to be differing opinions on the atmosphere changes lately, so which update with different atmospheres do you think is the best for the game? Consider both realism and fun please.

Is there even any reason that jets have 1000 Kn thrust? Planes went so fast before because the jets are too powerful at low attitude, that does not mean drag should be increased by a third! Nerf low altitude jet thrust instead, problem solved.

Sure, it works, but what is most efficient delta-v wise?

I am only upset about 1.0.1/2... 1.0.1 is less realistic (EX: fighter jet in max thrust dive slows down, regardless of out streamlined it is, and rockets need to fly straight up for many kilometers before starting a gravity turn), and it is less fun, for those same reasons I just mentioned.

I suppose that is true, but the vast majority loved the 1.0.0 aero. Now most people seem to hate it after the patch. EDIT: Also I have seem several reports that flying straight up to 10 km is literally most efficient again. Squad has said that they prefer fun over realism, but when both realism and fun are going down the drain then something is wrong.

I don't care that my rockets need slight more delta-v than in 1.0.0, I just care that in 1.0.0 it felt and handled like a rocket, in 1.0.1 it's a brick. No more fun.... Seriously, no one complained about the 1.0.0 aero, maybe the turbojets give a little too much thrust, but increasing the entire drag is really hard on rockets. What is the point of fairings if the atmosphere is so soupy that having fairings doesn't make you go any faster?

I was amazed when I first played 1.0.0... For the first time since FSX I was able to fly anplane and have it feel and handle like a plane. Then 1.0.1 happened and its back to flying a brick again.

I agree with this too. Basically, this patch killed both realism AND fun.

This, right here. I would really appreciate it if Squad could review what 1.0.1 has done and revert the changes. They say they put a ton of time into tuning the 1.0.0 atmosphere just right, and they did. But massively changing it with only a couple day's testing after the full game release is not ok. I'm sorry if this just sounds like I'm whining about a nerf, but all I want is an atmosphere that is somewhat realistic. As sp1989 said, a supersonic rated aircraft in a maximum thrust dive should not "slow down," it should continue accelerating until it breaks apart, burns up, or hits the ground. You guys got good reviews about 1.0, so why did you change it?

I did some more tests, things DO seem to get easier once the sound barrier is broken! *Fasten seat belt sign turns on* "This is your captain speaking, we will now begin our descent" *engines spool up to max thrust*

Welp, since the atmosphere keep changing I might as well just abandon Kerbin. I will launch as much reusable stuff as possible once and for all, and set up a huge mining base on minmus. So long, KSC.

1.0 was not all that bad, some previous updates have been much worse.... But I agree that 1.1 really deserves all the time it needs to get Unity 5 working. For example not having an internal release date may help (pls), to prevent rushing it and such.