gmeine921

Thank you! Never explored that menu previously

Have a sandbox save from IDK which version offhand. Been playing through the new latest and greatest with no issues and a few smaller mods. I'd like to give the new launch site(s) a try. Any ideas on how to modify save file to be able to gain access to them? Made new Sandbox test save and it has them. Comparing the 2 sandbox files has the only difference being gameplay items (ships / records / crew) and a different seed. Can post my save file if anyone wants to take a look.

random quirk, if you place a strut on say a part of a rocket and the other part on say a satellite and the strut places itself on a hinge, an attached piston will start rotating. Mods: kw,b9, rt2, Kerbin Shuttle Orbiter System, rcs sounds (although i doubt that makes a difference). remove fairing before launch and press y. after laughing and reverting to the VAB, remove the struts on the satellite and repeat holding y on the launch pad. if this isnt a new issue, i must have missed it, else it gave me a good laugh anywho, thank you for the quick update. great mod. thank you for the great work https://www.dropbox.com/s/gubki215s62bxs4/CS%20-%20001.craft

Is it possible to make a txt file (or point out where in the mod the info is) with update information for each body (as in sidereal days, and gravitational parameters along with scale heights and atmosphere heights)? Edit: mod is awesome and wish to convey many thanks

I think it would be interesting if they went into a bit more on the statistical level of spacecraft design. Ie you lose a certain amount of power per year for your solar cells and your rtgs (due to the half life of whatever element is inside) and the concept of having batteries degrade over time. Or you have to prove certain technologies like engines on the ground before they have a reliability of 99%. It would also be interesting if they brought in the design of space craft heating. Just an idea for later, to make certain people's gameplay a tad bit more difficult. I'm no comm specialist (space craft structures and thermal design spec are my specialty), but it would also be interesting if they brought into account the concept of errors in data transmission. Again, this would be interesting and not for them to worry about now. On another sadistic note, i think it would be also interesting if they added the concept of random disasters. Like how the Mars Observer went "kaput". If they got into "procedural fuel tanks", it would be cool if you could choose how your tanks were designed, like with having gas pressure systems or capillary systems or turbo-pump systems and you could optimize a open or closed cycle engine system and how you could have the tanks designed, with shared bulkheads or... basically different geometric configurations. just some random ideas off the top of my head. can't wait till the update though

wikipedia has a decent section on orbital mechanics. launch basics TWR at launch > weight (or you dont leave ground) Marginal benefits of more fuel for a heavy spacecraft. reduce weight in late stages to increase spacecraft effectiveness in general, mr scott manley has some decent videos where he talks through some orbital mechanics. the maths needed may not be available in most high schools, but most community colleges and universities have classes that may help (differential eq/calculus)

random idea, would it be possible to add in the dangers of a nuclear accident. ie, some big freaking explosion if say a nuclear reactor happened to be on a craft that met an unfortunate end. probably something difficult to add, but an idea.

Some of my space Stations: My Munar orbiting kethane refueling depot. ~130 KL of Kethane and ~48 KL of Rocket fuel mix. Kerbin orbiting space station. transitioned to the next station and remaining part deorbited or used for targeting practice First attempt at a drydock. Not the most structurally sound vessel. but she got up there and thats what counts. And the crown jewel of my station armada. 6 launches to get everything correct. my attempt at the ISS. holds ~30 crew, not necessarily comfortably

Another idea, if i sent you a few part files and my persistance file, could you render say my above space station being built by several kerbals on IVA?

curious what you mean by dry dock

Not necessarily a request, but an idea. I attempted to make a space station that was similar to the ISS in complexity. I was curious if it would be possible to render this, not necessarily this view, with some EVA kerbals like an actual ISS mission. Just curious. I can send the persistance file if desired. Edit: another possible idea, EVA fixing something in orbit of another celestial body not named Kerbin

Album of several of my stations. Took many launches to build and much patience

@Apatheticjester nice. but random querry, how do you have such high-res stars? Cant find any option that would include that high of star density

with 0.21... managed to fenagle it into some odd orbit. 77 km. took multiple on the fly adjustments of the ascent path using mech jeb... needless to say, the torque on the command pod(s) need to have torque off to make the craft safely launchable. at least thats what worked for me. great ship. impressive as always

what was the trajectory for a good launch? I added only 8 small solar panels, a normal docking port, and a single RTG for 0.21. Also replaced the aerospike with another of the jets. I take off at about 90 m/s and climb for the first 20km at about 45deg. but, as i switch to the other engines, my climb rate switches pretty quickly to below 0 and I cant finalize it. any advice?

Option A: wait for a planetary window. (recommend waiting and not having a ship in orbit for longer than a week when on time warp waiting) select planet. [MJ (mechjeb)] transfer to another planet (create and execute). once burn completed, wait during transit. [MJ] circularize at periapsis. Option B: manually through mech jeb (aka brute force). select mun. [MJ (mechjeb)] hohmann transfer (create and execute). burn prograde at periapsis manually (or drop node and execute) until you are on an escape trajectory. once in an orbit round the sun, [MJ] hohmann transfer to the planet of choice. [MJ] fine tune distance as desired. [MJ] circularize at periapsis

the Gotha plane is amazing. anyone done the Me262 yet? or the 163?

Some of the aircraft I have been working on (KSP version 0.20). A10 thunderbolt, B1 Lancer, F16 Falcon, F18 Hornet, and the U2 Spyplane. Some differences compared to their realworld counterparts, namely they mostly utilize the F22s engine courtesy of the B9 pack. The reasoning was that even though it doesnt have the highest thrust, it accelerates down the runway much nicer. the A10 doesn't have much fuel nor does it have the GAU-8, so the CG is a tad back compared to reality and the gear has been moved accordingly. It also has an ejection system that almost always works. The B1 has 4 thrustvectoring engines, courtesy of the B9 mod. these make the plane a joy to fly even when fully loaded. the wing sweeping wasnt able to be incorporated. however, I was able to achieve a speed of 1100m/s speed at about 13km altitude. The F16 has more payload than the F18 model, but it is incredibly touchy when maneuvering. The F18 was annoying to take off but i decided to add some SRB's to simulate the carrier steam catapult launch. Cant remember if i had some difficulties with the U2, but i do recall that it i able to circumnavigate at least 1.5 times before running out of fuel. I wanted to incorporate an ejection system into all of them, but was unable due to aesthetics. the B9 fuselages arent the same shape as the decouplers, and i wanted to maintain the shape for aerodynamics. lemme know what ya think