kurja

Screen Scales protractor tool maybe?

Came to this subforum to start a discussion about a similar mechanic. +1 to the general idea. Problem with the current system is that the contracts are there only for the player to make money, they don't provide anything else really and Career is still just a sandbox.

what version is the demo these days?

Does the sun ('kerbol') act this way in 1.0? I have not tried it but I expected serious heating effects now that temperatures actually matter..?

Right click a decoupler / separator in sph/vab and tweak the separation force. Cheaper and lighter =)

...what "aero display"??

a thin 2.5m fuel tank for landers an engine thrust-wise between poodle and skipper those can be 'made' from smaller parts, but then the part count gets real high real quick and laaaaag. I don't know about adding a stronger 1.25m engine, I mean, smaller engines are weaker and bigger ones can be stronger, seems about right to me. Or if such an engine was added it would have to at least have a horrible vacuum Isp or something else to balance it out versus the larger engines.

Well, damn. Did not know that. Must have hit it accidentally when rotating a part.

I find transmit speed to be hardly ever critical, so I use the tiny one - because it's simply the best in every other way, small crafts actually benefit from the lower transmit speed / ec cost per packet. And ofc it's cheaper, smaller, lighter and can be placed pretty much anywhere. I was kinda hoping there would be some incentive to use the other antennas because they look good

Have any of the antennas in the game become distinctly more or less useful relative to each other? The big ones transmit faster than the small ones, but consume at least the same ec / data unit, is that the only difference?

I noticed this: which appears to be vab symmetry in sph. I could do three, four etc symmetries as well. A new feature that I don't understand, or a glitch/bug...?

thanks, that answers it.

There's really no in-game information on how the various air intake parts work and the few numbers that are given seem similar. Circular, shock cone, ram... What difference does it make which I put on a jet?

Did you try using your previously successful manned suborbital craft, just replace the capsule with the probe core (and maybe add batteries and solar panels if you have them)? If that doesn't work it's probably due to lack of control authority, try adding torque wheels or rcs?

apt-get will download only the needed resources/libraries aka dependencies from the ppa; that's one of the nice things with linux, many programs can share the same assets. The system does a wonderful job at keeping track of dependencies, so when you remove a program the assets that are used by other programs are left in place as needed. Apt-get installed software will also get automagically updated when you apt-get update && apt-get upgrade (what the normal, automatic system updater does in Ubuntu and such), so the individual programs do not need up-to date checking, which imho is a huge nuisance in windows.

Well KSP just isn't very demanding on the gpu, was my point. Or were you talking in general, lower fps in linux than windows? I don't play many games but until a recent proprietary driver update I always had low video performance with linux using an oldish nvidia gtx560. I don't have a windows install I could compare to though.

GPU support might be an obvious issue but that wouldn't usually be the bottleneck with KSP; can you speculate what might be causing this FPS drop?

I switched from win to ubuntu linux about three years ago, haven't been looking back since really. It's not that difficult to get used to if you're at all computer savvy, and if you're not, put a Windows theme on your linux desktop ui and you'll never know the difference

An observation: folding solar panels of the un-shielded kind, can no longer be retracted after deployed. Had a couple of these on a duna lander. Had.

Ah I missed that... browsing on a phone. Sorry.

One thing that could help would be to use fuel tanks that aren't half empty?? Especially on the lower stage launching with less fuel makes no sense whatsoever, you have like twice more thrust than you need anyway.. why are you draining the tanks in vab?? On the last stage you need very little thrust really, you can have more fuel & a small engine there.

Here's another method that's maybe a little neater, using docking ports http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43621-How-to-have-engine-clusters-in-upper-stages You'll want to put some struts around there though since the docking ports aren't as rigid as decouplers.

Hm okay thanks for the tips, I succeeded. The fairing generation seems to be a little finicky, need to click back and forth a bit to get it to close the fairing on an above part for some reason, such as here, it just wouldn't.

Do the new stock fairings always have to end in a point? I've been trying to wrap a midsection of a rocket in a fairing but it doesn't seem to work... Think lander module in an apollo-style rocket. Is it possible to use the stock fairings in this manner?

I haven't checked in current version but isn't the 'test' button still available in action menu? So it's not even necessary to start the engine, just fulfill the parameters (altitude, speed etc) and click 'test'.