Gargamel

Another thing to consider is the low gravity of minmus. It doesn't lead to a lot of traction, as your rover can easily bounce over some of the mountains if you get going fast enough. I speak from experience. But it does sound like your navball isn't aligned properly, as others have mentioned.

True, but the learning curve required to get high quality prints, suitable for collectibles, can be quite high, and that can be off putting. And most of the cheap printers don't have the fine tuning to do good quality right out of the box. It takes a skilled hand to get one tuned in properly. Yes, you can get acceptable prints immediately, but high quality takes some work. And most people (general public) have trouble typing up a document correctly, let designing and printing an object. In my 3d printer circles, we've discussed this topic a lot, and we predict that printers, at best, will be eventually owned by 2/5 people, probably far less. Unless there are major advances were printers start acting like replicators from Star Trek, where you can just dial up what you want and out it pops with no stress to the user, then printers will remain a specialist's domain, just like other CNC crafts. And there will probably always be a need for commercial print houses, as there are lot of companies that only need one print of something a year or so, like custom repair and refurb shops. There's always shapeways of you are looking for mail order prints.

Wood working is a hobby of mine, and some of the vendors and pundits had some good videos this year. Veritas always does a great AF video, so they are so believable, that even after your done watching them, your not quite sure if they actually sell this thing. If you do a little digging you can find the ones from past years, well worth the watch. Paul Sellers is one of the masters of the craft, and his videos are very informative, but fairly bland, just his presentation style. So I was really surprised he pulled this one off. Sadly, he edited the title.

While letting this thing do a 40 minute IRL burn (7 min in game, sigh....): I was alt-tabbing between screens. I had another screenshot up that I was viewing. Tabbed back to KSP, and wanted to check the map window. Kept hitting alt-tab instead of M, and couldn't figure out why it was just flipping the view angle of the ship around!

Well, I wasn't running them before, but I still can't either. After having tried this, I realized, that when you have 4 nucs producing 3000 EC/sec, and 4 Engines each requiring 3000 EC/sec, that left me with ummm, let me see, carry the seven, yes, 0 extra electricity to spare. Now While I Do have plenty of battery charge to run the converters, I'd rather be close to breaking even while under thrust. As it's a 350 part ship at 1,000 tons, and a TWR of around .2, so not only are they long burns, but my computer drags down to about a 8:1 real time seconds to game time seconds ratio. The games playable, it's just in slow motion. Meaning what is may be a 5 minute burn in game, is closer to 30-40 IRL. So I may not be at the controls the entire time, letting the MJ run the burns while I cook dinner. Now If I am running a converter overheated, or under heated I guess would apply too, If I am not running it at 100% effeciency, am I still getting a 1:1 conversion ratio lets say, but only producing it slower, or does the ratio change? If the ratio is changing, then it doesn't make sense to not run these under optimum conditions.

Yes, I did check the wiki's before asking, and they did sort of steer me in the right direction. But I have found that the 8 large arrays are keeping the converter at the perfect temp when the reactors are not running (well, one is). But with the nucs firing at full blast, there's no way they can keep up with other high temp parts. Added a couple static radiators on the tank that holds the converter, and voila, problem solved. Converting while under burn. Now I'll just leave the Mono, LFO, and Li converters running all the time, and just eat the losses when they come. Thanks for the help guys. And a bit of eye candy if you want.

No, it's around 114, maybe more now, but it'll only carry 6-12 actual crew. It's an interstellar vessel, and I figured it needed a good LS mod. I was referring more to the 64 months bit. Some estimates throughout show normal values, but others (in flight too) show large numbers of months. Well, consider it a polite feature request then. Other modders are adding greenhouse (and other style) snack generators, so some way of including those in the rough estimate numbers would be nice! Thanks!

Hey, @Angel-125, Thanks for picking up this mod, It's a good one! Couple things (might have missed similar questions in the thread, my apologies): 1) What happens to excess soil? Tossed overboard? 2) I'm getting some odd values for estimating the amount of snacks: 3) Are recyclers/greenhouses accounted for in the time estimate? If not, could they be? Thanks!

It used to grab onto practically anything, but there was a good chance that the Universe would implode on itself. So they decided not being able to grab some things might be a good idea.

Well, I'm using the near future mods, so I currently have 4 Nuclear reactors running, so each of those have a large deployable radiator on them, plus 4 more large radiator arrays on the 30 or so Li tanks, so cooling is an issue. The ISRU (the 250 as mentioned in the OP), is attached to one of the tanks that one of the arrays is on, so it's difficult to get any more radiators close to this converter. Power consumption really isn't an issue, as I have 50k EC in batteries, and can produce 12k per second (The engines take that entire 12k when they are running). So It seems I'll just have to find a better arrangement for the large arrays so I can get some static ones in close to the converters. Only converting Li, but trying to do it while running the 4 engines and 4 reactors at max. It probably won't be an issue when the ship is adrift, as I'll have 3 of the 4 reactors offline, and the fourth only running at 10% or so. Enough to cover comms, life support, converters, etc.

Searched before asking, but I can't seem to find an answer. My Convert-o-Tron 250 is going over the optimum temp, reducing it's efficiency. I have the converter sitting on a top of a fuel tank, and a Large Extendable Radiator attached to that. I can't seem to get a radiator to attach to the converter, radially nor on it's free inline attachment point. So How do I cool the converter?

Yes, but that page was added in version .23 when the claw was added. Or so says the wiki. If I have learned anything with the wiki, it is not always up to date. And with the recent changes to wheel mechanics, the line about grabbing anything might have slipped through the cracks. If it's in the wiki, there's a good chance chance it's true, plus a non zero chance it's inaccurate, all at the same time. This is KSP, you know.

Heh... misread your post, I thought you were messing around saying you did want a 2000 part ship at max fps...

Heh... misread your post, I thought you were messing around saying you did want a 2000 part ship at max fps...

These guys might have a machine for you.

I have never been to the monolith right by the KSC, even by accident. Nor have I played more than 1 launch in a career or science game.

*insert Beavis chuckles* C'mon.... I can't be the only one?

Jeb. Jeb is a life hack on his own.

Bull Semen costs (by some estimates) around $200,000 per liter. That cost can only go up for mass production, as if anything ever falls under the category of diminishing returns, this is it. I don't know the energy content of this material, and data is hard to find, But I'm guessing this method would be far more expensive than saffron.

I dunno bout that. I'd think this could be a very cost effective method of fueling spacecraft, albeit slow. Cow Farts probably have more volatiles in them than Human farts [citation needed], and Cows are currently a profitable product to raise. The Farts from Cows can easily be harvested (some already are and using it as an alternative source of power). So given the resource is already "free" (or at least not a loss), Cow fart collection systems in most major dairy farms would be easy to setup and run, and it would save space agencies a butt load (pun intended) of money. Not mention the reduction in green house gas emissions. @Dman979 Nice sig. 7-14s (1994) here.

Considering you guys are taking Adam's quote out of context, it is a VERY good description of flying, as he described it in the book. In the book, and I'm pretty sure it was from Restaurant at the End of the Universe, (but I could be wrong, it's been a few years), He is describing the act of flying as falling towards the ground, forgetting you are falling, and then you fly away. He describes resorts where people go and jump off of high places and then a staff member will jump out of the bushes and scare them, making them forget about falling, and then they are flying.

I do believe you have just lost won the "How to lose at April Fools" game. Well aside from 3 seconds of "What The he..." panic mode yesterday, I'll have to thank you for bringing a smile to my meaningless life!

Do you attach to the main body, just to use up the dead space, or do you attach to the decoupler itself? I see both having advantages. Thanks for the idea! @regex, I've done something similar before, but I had an occasion while backing away from the docked part, the booms bumped into the piece and cashed an explosion. I've also found do the same thing with the girders at 90' to the vessel, usually a space tug designed to stay on the station and go pick up delivered parts. The wider stance of the RCS seems to allow for finer control, and adds torque to help control long parts.

That excludes Mars, Mercury, and Venus, either their moons aren't round, or they have no moons, and includes things like Pluto. No, it would in essence set a minimum radius for a planet size. If an object is large enough be considered a planet, and we add another body to the system that is the minimum size, where will the barycenter be? From that, a minimum size of the planet can be determined. But I see what your saying about distance, I'll have to think about that.

I'm tired, and slightly drunk from low sugar, I'm sticking with non fusive. Toss out the star altogether, cause there's rogue planets out there. So what if we simplify it to: Something that is large enough to be spherical, non fusive (ha!), and any barycenters involved result in them being inside the body. And large enough that if another body of the minimum radius of the same density were to interact with this planet, the barycenter would remain within the planet. This would allow for rogue planets, and remove all those pesky dwarf planets that keep messing it up. EDIT: The more I'm thinking about this, the more I'm liking it.