N_Molson

@AlphaAsh Getting more and more interested into this. I had a first look into the code, it doesn't looks too crazy even if some comments would help a bit Trying to get the clearest possible picture of the project, on which functionalities are you currently focusing the most (high-priority stuff) ? There are two things on which I'd like to do something : - Tracking stations : if RT integration is not possible, I guess that the only remaining option is to write a RT-like (without using its code, which would indeed be wrong). Obviously, that's a lot of work, probably enough for this summer. - Resources production : to begin with, "Food", "Water" and "Oxygen". It would cover the basics for a mod like TAC LSS. At first the way you did it with fuel : a water tower + a warehouse you could use to refill your stores. If everything goes as planned, a recycling plant that converts the various types of waste into a little bit of money. That should fit in the "low hanging fruit" category. I see a lot of other things that can be done, but those two ones seem to be a "foundation layer" to me. Also, I think that a detailed .pdf User Manual could be useful, so I'll try something in that area too.

Its a bit hard to say with so little information but those two principles can never hurt : - Maximize the fuel / empty mass ratio of your lander. - Have an engine powerful enough to slow you down. Or add MOAR small ones. Here's how they did it in Apollo 11 (in imperial units, of course) :

That really would be the easiest part, simply a few numbers to tweak, the KK Editor even allows you to do that ingame. Now the real work is about reading the code of both addons, understanding the logic of each one (each coder does things his own way usually), and finding a way to make them compatible But I'll try.

A dampener takes energy and tries to absorb it (typically using hydraulic devices). So a lot of damping means your gear will do its best to absorb kinetic energy on impact. A spring simply throws back the energy. The stronger the spring the more energy can be sent back (bouncing).

1) Same here, it is nasty enough to fail manoeuvers (sometimes, the flight computer never gets close enough from 0m/s and once there it spins madly with engines on, usually destroying your orbit). 2) You are referring to Kerbal Konstructs, which uses the bases of Kerbin Side. Having the KK/KS tracking stations working with Remote Tech would be awesome, but sadly it seem that the authors of both mods didn't manage to find a common ground. Having some coding experience, I'll try my luck doing something about it, but it will take some time.

When you modify a big chunk of code, the chances of broking something are huge. You have hundreds of variables roaming around and a single typo can have totally unforeseen consequences. The only remedy is a lot of testing. So when you see a feature suddenly broken, there are 99,5% chances it wasn't intentional Then it's like cleaning a room : you're more likely to miss the dust that settles in hidden corners, under furnitures and so on... I guess that's what happened there

If reaction wheels were so simple to use, all real-life spacecraft engineers would prefer them to a RCS which requires amongst other things a complex plumbing setup and at least one (relatively heavy, often two) propellant(s) tank(s), usually extremely corrosive and hazardous materials. Monopropellant is a possibility but hypergolic propellants (that react spontaneously when mixed, like NTO/MMH) are very common, as they are more efficient (have a better ISP).

You'll probably have to wait a few days then, until the mods are updated

Seems really weird. I highly recommend a full de-install and re-install. Also, which version do you use ? Steam (32, 64), Win (32, 64), MacOS, Linux ? Always be very specific.

Something between Size 1 and Size 2 (for rockets) could be interesting. 2-crewed capsule, very nasty SRBs... Not sure if a whole set of such "Size 1.5" parts would be necessary (tanks, engines). Maybe adapters for the capsule and a some decouplers would be enough.

Well, current version of KSP is 1.1.2 now, so you might want to try with it

IMHO commands pods should have some integrated RCS thrusters rather than overpowerful reaction wheels. It makes plain sense, as they already have an internal Monoprop tank. It would also help to limit the part count. You would be able to toggle them on/off, so that they wouldn't interfere with other RCS thrusters in your ship (which still would be necessary to achieve translational control which is highly recommended for docking purposes). That already would help balancing things. Cost of the almighty Reaction Wheels parts should be boosted, so that they would be a bit less interesting that the Monoprop RCS.

The X-15 spaceplane landed on steel skids. It was heavy as hell and glided like an iron. Skids however allowed very high speed landings (around 225 mph) on the salt lakes (harder than concrete) in the Mojave desert. So yeah, the structural girders in KSP make nice skids The drawback is their mass (0.25 tons each, if I'm correct), which is much heavier than the more "traditional" landing gears. Use a drogue chute at touchdown, the drag will not only slow you down but make sure you don't go sideways. The X-15 had none (the lake beds were very large), but the Space Shuttle had one.

To make yourself an idea of the "reentry terror", watch the final scenes of Apollo 13 (Ron Howard, 1995). Quite a realistic movie.

lol... This afternoon I destroyed an entire section of my Mk2 runway by hard-landing a 6-tons jet... Which is pretty light ! The plane bounced and I managed to land without a single part missing... But even early wooden-decked WWII carriers were stronger !

I use tourists to "fill the holes" when extra seats are available. Typically, if I send a Kerbollo-like spacecraft to the Mun with a light 1-kerbal lander, there is an extra seat for Munar orbit. The pilot performs the munar expedition while another guy remains in orbit to manoeuver the spacecraft if necessary, and also to make sure the tourist doesn't eats all the snacks. That's a way to make flights a bit less expensive, if not profitable.

Those engines are excellent, provided you have the patience (and the tools at some point) to plan efficient trajectories with them (like spiraling to escape Kerbin SOI). The limit is that you can't use time warp which engines on, which ruins a bit the purpose of those. JAXA probe Hayabusa was powered by 4 of them running almost all the time. In a few years, it managed to make a soft touchdown on an asteroid, then drop a (alas empty) sample reentry capsule into Earth's atmosphere. Though there were reliability problems, (the probe finished the mission crawling with 1 damaged engine and 3 out), it showed how capable are those little technological wonders.

KSP doesn't simulate non-spherical gravity sources. And it doesn't takes the Mun tidal effect into account. If you are curious about those matters, try Orbiter So yeah, in KSP the data is simple : you have a sphere (Kerbin) with a given density and a given mass. From there, Newtonian physics apply straight to the letter.

The best one ever was to "land" tourists on Kerbol and back (for quite a ridiculous fee, of course). But I think it's fixed now

I think that a joint effort between RT and KK is really worthing the cost. Both are great and seem obviously linked : what is the point of a realistic signal processing system if you don't have the infrastructure with it ? Tracking stations are a must, and KSP bases in general should be able to "share" the signal information (well, they are Kerbal, but I'm sure they have telephone lines all around the planet, if anything better !). I'd even add that making connections with a mod like TAC life support would add even more greatness to it ! There are tons of possiblities : building farming areas (raw food), transformation industries (raw food --> snacks), oil rigs (crude oil), refineries (crude oil --> rocket/jet fuel), chemical plants (oxydizer, purified water), recycling plants (waste --> money)... In fact, I'd gladly enlist in such a project. I have some coding/modeling/texturing experience (Orbiter...) and worked in the games developpement industry, so if you need a helping hand...

There is definitively a bug with the recruitement costs. The amount of Kredits deducted from your cash does not match what is displayed. Well, I'm playing in Hard mode, might be the reason. But still, it would be convenient to know the cost before hiring the next guy !

Well, I always wondered how so many Kerbals could end up stranded in orbit, so I wasn't fond of those contracts... But it seems you're right, I don't see any of them either.

Agreed, but I think a couple of us would appreciate a nice debugging session resulting in a solid patch - before - the (not too) long break.

I think its honest to have some drawbacks when playing in Sandbox mode. They took the pain to offer Sandbox, Science, and Career modes. The way I see it Sandbox exists to give total freedom about experimenting new designs, having fun flying something in particular, but also polishing your skills in various situations. Really, if you play the easiest mode of the Career mode, you'll still make fast progress and will experience few limits. And you still have the Science mode if you don't want to be bothered with money at all. So yeah, while I hope that those modes will be polished in the future, I think that devs found a decent compromise, and that wasn't easy, as players all have different expectations : a lot of freedom, with a few hard rules.

Nothing really out of the ordinary, sending tourists in orbit (and most often, recovering them). Other than that recovering science around KSP, and performing atmospheric surveys. Some of my Kerbals still have to work their Courage stat a bit.