Gargamel

Then A) Don't prefetch. or Don't use chrome.

Built a Kethane "super tanker" and refinery. Turns out it holds about 2/3 of the deposit I have at the KSC. Then they both drive fine empty..... but when they're full.... not so much.

My first question is why would a station core not have batteries sufficient to go an orbit or so without a power supply?

Seen a few incidients where Kerbals have been able to survive crashes by ejecting (EVA'ing) right before impact, but at best one survives. Maybe we could get a mod that enables the entire crew to bailout together? Maybe Ctrl-E 3 times or something similar to flight sims would work.

Aside from the flames we enjoy seeing. Sorry Jeb.....

I have a FTL probe (was messing around with cheats and the RCS engines) that is currently doing 10x light speed, way outside the solar system. I've just never bothered to kill it.

As to #19.... Back in college, one of my frat brothers was a Aero Engineer. He and his senior lab partner were working on their final project, which was to design an airliner, from scratch. Didn't have to be original in design, just from scratch. They were sitting at lunch one day, audibly grumbling, when asked what was wrong, one of them said "Well we did the math, and apparently there isn't enough fuel on Earth to get this thing off the ground!" At which time the other one yelled, "Wait! I Forgot to carry the 2!". Side bar: I ended up as a paramedic for many years. Over that time, I developed a list of my own rules for EMS, some are original, some are stolen: 1) If it's wet and sticky, and not yours, don't touch it. 2) Always try the doorknob first. 3) Have fun, but don't make the News. 4) The ratio of tools on an EMT's belt to their experience is inversely related. 5) When in doubt, add more diesel. 2 and 4 (and for KSP I guess 3 & 5) can easily be applied to this discussion, as in: simplicity first.

And your first thought is "Needed more struts"

I can't wait for when the movie comes out.... you'll have to spoof it. You won't want to, but you know you have to. At least when the full trailers come out, your name will be called.

Working on a simple turbo jet booster stage for small (1.25m) rockets. Boosters are so effecient, that after slapping legs on the second (and only stage, since it was designed to be only a bit of ballast and dead weight), it has enough gas to orbit, land on Mun, return, and land upright, without parachutes, on the KSC pad.

Your title implies "planned levitation" exists........

Welp..... there goes any interest I had in Star trek.

Made a SSTOAL today. Single Stage to Orbit and Landing. By accident. I was just testing the core of a new booster I was building, and found it would enter orbit under it's own weight, but yet still had 1k dv left. Scary thing was there was so much thrust (9.5 twr) upon landing, it was in free fall till the engines were lower than the water tower. Then *POOF* Graceful landing at 10g's. Now the engineers are just trying to figure out what to do with it. The crawler can't get to that side of the launch pad, and they don't have anything big enough to lay it down!

Also oddly enough, I have ships with both the neon blue struts and the lighter grey Q-struts. The normal struts are darker. The lighter Q-struts are attached to a sub-assembly that I keep reusing. Again, still using the latest "old" release.

Good to see this is being maintained. I'm using an old version, from .20 or so. Still works ok though.

Been playing KSP on an old laptop that was pretty far under min spec. 2 fps, 1 second in game takes 10 secs realtime, etc, etc... Got a new machine to deal with OpenGL issues, and to be honest getting good frame rates for KSP was my biggest dream of this machine. I grabbed the old install from the old machine, put the entire KSP_win folder on a flash drive, dropped it into the program files of the new machine. (Old machine XP, new Win 7x64). The game runs like a dream. The saves are there, the parts for the mods are there, but no functionality. I installed the x64 version of KSP, but it's having issues (load screen bar doesnt progress, but the jokes change), so I'm going to back to my old install of the x32 23.0 version I was running. Game runs like a champ, parts are there, mods functionality is not. For example, I can place the mechjeb2 part on a new ship, but I get no windows in either the VAB or pad. So it's a two part question. One) How do I get my old save game to work with the new machine? Lots of ships, farthest I've "made it" so far in KSP (rovers on most bodies, 2 interplanetary mother ships in orbit around kerbin, with a 3rd docked to the space station with a fuel tender also docked, beginnings of a moon base, etc). While that may not be far for some, when trying to orbit around 200 tons of payload takes about 1 hour of realtime, and another hour of docking (Hence mechjeb), this is serious progress. Keeping the old version is kinda preferred, as the new version may break or obsolete some of my old designs. 2) What issues with x64 should I know about? (Ie, wheres the x64 halp! thread?)

Are supercars fuel efficient? Nope, but they sure accelerate fast though. There's your answer. It all depends on how efficient you want vs burn time. I have built a semi heavy interplanetary mother ship with anywhere from 3 to 16 LVNs. There is about a 20-25% difference in potential EV with different cluster arrangements. It all depends on how long you want to burn. My computer is so far below minimum spec requirements that my FPS is low enough that 10 real world seconds pass for every 1 in game second. That makes a 30 minute ingame burn into a 5 hour snooze epic. So shortening burn times while still maintaining acceptable efficiency is key to me.

I'm just not seeing the purpose of this. It's easier to just add the smallest tank above the engine. Even when I cluster 8 LVN's, I don't get overheat issues.

The individual part's COM is offcenter, not the rover. I've had to overcompensate to get the COM alilgned. Instead of only having 2 circular batteries, one on each end, I have 12 on one end. Doing a bit more searching, found that it's the origin in the 3d modeling software, and an issue with the modeler.

I'm having COM issues with a mod part. I'm trying to create a rover from station parts. But apparently, the (edit) individual (/edit) part's COM is shifted about 1/3 the way towards one end, making horizontal positioning very difficult. Is there a way to recenter the COM in the part.cfg files?

Hi! Using an older version of this mod, I'm running 23.x right now, but i think my mod version is even older. I'm having issues with the Center of Mass on the modules. I'm trying to build rovers using these parts, and having them land horizontally is a real pain, as the COM is shifted to about 1/3 of the way along the length each module. Thrusting from above is creating torque issues. Is there a line in the part.cfg I can edit to center the COM?

It's part of the core.... I took a look at the persistence file, and I see what you mean. So I guess I'll return my kerbalnauts, and deorbit the station. To be honest, most of the work was getting the launcher balanced to fly right and get a successful launch so MJ could pinpoint the next one for rendezvous. I have all the assemblies saved with their launchers, so It'll just be an issue of 6 launches or so to reassemble.

Even though i thought i double checked each one..... I have an inverted Sr docking port on my space station. I really dont feel like starting over as I've already docked 5 or 6 assemblies. Anybody point me in the direction of editing the craft file to flip the part over? It's currently the only open SR port on the ship, so I'm hoping it won't be too hard to identify. Thanks peeps!

Yup! that did it! Thanks guys!

Thats probably it!! The lander engine, disabled, are on the bottom stage, while the MS engines, enabled, are one stage above it! I never considered that an issue because upon separation they sort themselves out correctly. Standby for confirmation.