Raptor9

The new aero is like the first iteration of the science/tech tree...and the career contracts/strategies...and the tiered buildings. They got tweaked and refined in subsequent updates. Numbers of people post that they're unhappy with the new aero and follow-on tweaks, but seem to forget how those past features came to currency. Squad tweaked and balanced them...and then again. So I hope everyone doesn't think Squad isn't trying to improve it; they're people too.

Yeah, the service bays are awesome, but very weak and cause some issues. Need a little refinement/bug-testing in my opinion.

Not sure if Squad did this intentionally or not, but real-life scientific equipment requires a constant power source, even during transport to orbit. Hubble, Skylab, and other examples that had power issues ran the risk of ruining the onboard equipment if they had lost power before they were repaired. So it's not so much a stretch to say the MPL needs the constant power supply. Again, not sure if this was by design or not.

Every time I turn around Nertea has a new mod out...very nice

If they do, it will probably be after any Unity 5 and/or 64-bit stable releases. I imagine memory is an issue to adding entire planets, so I would speculate Squad would want to see how much resource (computer resource) usage is required to run the new Unity 5 or get a 64-bit version stable first, before adding more "stuff" to it. I am purely speculating on this, I have no real idea if they even intend to add new planets in the future. Even if they don't intend to, they may change their minds later like they did with multiplayer. In any case, I wouldn't expect it in the near term.

Regarding the jet turbine engines, I do feel that there is a gap now between the performance of the J-33 "Wheesley" Basic Jet Engine and the J-X4 "Whiplash" Turbo Ramjet Engine. Almost like we have a 50's era jet engine from an F-86 or F-100 and one from the SR-71. Which is cool, I use them both, but I sort of wish we had a more powerful, non-turboramjet engine like what an F-15 or Su-27 KSP-analogue would mount. That ramjet curve sometimes feels like a runaway freight train when it kicks in, you really have to back off the throttle when at lower altitudes before you tear your jet apart. A third jet engine with performance between those two would be nice. But it's no big deal, just a preference.

I've heard the phrase "The customer is always right" but I draw the line here...

I haven't tried to make a shuttle in the latest version, but here's a few more tips: 1: Piggybacking on what Hcube said about placing the engines further back from the center-of-mass, you're shuttle and boosters might be mounted too high on the fuel tank. If you reference real shuttle pics, you'll see that the shuttle's aft end hangs further back from the external fuel tank. This might help with the gimbal authority of the shuttle engines, and it also helps the angled thrust of the three engines get in line with the center-of-mass when the tank is placed further in front of the shuttle. 2: Especially when making planes/spaceplanes, but also when making craft of asymmetry, you need to make sure all you're force vectors are aligned throughout various levels of fuel capacity. As fuel is drained from each fuel cell, either evenly or sequentially, the CoM will shift, and like Hcube pointed out, getting rid of the boosters will cause a HUGE shift in not just the Center-of-Thrust but the CoM as well. 3: Don't forget what effect the lift-producing parts of the shuttle will have on your flight; as well as if the aero control surfaces should be active during ascent. If they are, they may not have the intended effect compared to the gliding descent profile. EDIT: This definitely goes to show how the STS was one of the most complicated and impressive engineering feats in aerospace history.

aaaaanndd facepalm

These are already in the game. Bottom left corner.

The best thing about KSP to me is the ability to leverage real-world engineering challenges and physics in an easy-to-use interface for building and controlling air/spacecraft designs. The way that Squad implemented the VAB/SPH and flight GUI and control schemes is why KSP is such an attractive software to kids and adults alike. It's a nice balance between "game" and "simulator".

I've been playing KSP since 0.13, but I didn't successfully get an SSTO spaceplane into orbit and back until a year ago. I was trying since spaceplane parts first came out, but I too gave up several times and returned to try again. Persistence is definitely key. My personal design philosophy that seemed to work out was focusing on making good airplanes first. Find out how to make them maneuverable but still stable, powerful but efficient enough to get somewhere, etc. When I had developed my proficiencies in aircraft design, I started making spaceplanes by modifying my fastest- and highest-flying airplanes. Swapped the turbojets for RAPIERs, changed the fuel mix to include some oxidizer, etc. Had to tweak it a little to maintain proper Center-of-Gravity and Center-of-Lift locations, but that's where the airplane design experience came in handy, and it wasn't as frustrating as jumping straight into spaceplanes. In any case, good luck and don't give up.

+1 If a person doesn't want anything to do with spaceplanes, and they just want to build rockets, they don't have to...they don't have to upgrade their runway or SPH from the first tier, they don't have to pay for the spaceplane parts in the tech tree nodes, and they certainly (even in Sandbox) don't have to use any of the spaceplane parts when they build rockets...the same applies to the resource parts, so I don't understand why people are against it. I don't like running parts mods, so I don't. Doesn't mean I don't think modders should make them.

It will be interesting to see if atmo gliders are possible with the new aero update and the rebalance. I think the ion-powered gliders are a good solution for air travel on planets where jet engines don't work.

I think you meant to say full Muns.

I have those Presto-logs from Back to the Future 3...let's get this Hype Train going Doc Brown style!

Not to be a killjoy, but I would expect this Experimental phase to take the longest for three reasons: 1) As mentioned above, this is THE biggest update they have produced to date, consisting of a large number of new mechanics such as resources, aerodynamics, new parts, etc. 2) As Maxmaps and Harvestor eluded to on several occasions, practically nothing was untouched during the balancing refinements, trying to get everything just right and not over- or under-powered. 3) Seeing as this is 1.0, any tweaks and balances (and fixes) will probably have to happen before the update gets pushed out the door. This is the final play, people. Not speaking for Squad, just managing my expectations. Initially I thought ~2 weeks, but then I remembered this is 1.0 ....Having said that..... GET HYPE!!!!! [REMOVED]

I was wondering about that. I logged in and I remember thinking, why are all the moderator's replying...oh [facepalm]

+1 Definitely need that in a future update. It would be so...Kerbal.

I think the aim of the game is to model the complexities with rocketry and spaceflight physics within the limitations of a PC game engine. That level of scientific detail is an example of why the original resource system was scrapped due to over-complication.

1) Re-optimize my SPH atmo craft files and spaceplanes for the new aero-model; learn the new aero-model and build tools/GUI 2) Restart career mode with the new tech tree, contracts, space center Tier, parts, re-balance, and whatever else has been added 3) Explosions....and then for a change of pace, more explosions.

Not to mention if you had a horizontal orientation version of the 2.5m MPL, you could put that in the bay of a spaceplane like the SpaceLab module the real-life Space Shuttle carried. To be clear, I love the new IVA, and I'm not asking or expecting Squad to make a horizontally-oriented Science Lab IVA for 1.0. Just hoping they'll consider it as a possible item for a future update beyond 1.0.

SpaceX Falcon Heavy Flight Animation...awesome

That horizontal IVA is pretty cool too (EDIT: Ven stated he hates it, lol)...I'm still hoping maybe two Science Lab parts in the future, one vertical for Skylab style orbital labs, and one with a horizontal IVA like in that picture for surface ops. I'm no coder, but I imagine it wouldn't be that much more memory usage since they both share external part geometry and textures. They might need part-specific arrows on the outside saying: "this side up"

It's also useful for small moon exploration craft. I call them "puddlejumpers" in my save games, but they're simply a rover type assembly with small landing struts instead of wheels, and RCS thrusters to jump/hover across the surface of places like Minmus, Bop, Pol, and Gilly (although Gilly it's hardly needed, lol).