KerbMav

But we can always ship materials up from KSC, cant we?

2001 does not suck, it is differently awesome. Some things become clearer after watching 2010, some things only wikipedia can answer, the rest demands reading the books (which I have not done yet still.) And I agree, there are movies you got to see, even if only to understand the references in other movies. The Godfather - it took me ages to get to see it, and I was mildly disappointed - not that it is a bad movie, but it lacked originality for me because every other gangster movie borrowed from this Mother. If you are ever on this side of the globe, you can have mine - but wrong region code probably.

Next up would be reputation? A persistent crew system with personal files? Overhaul like they did with Mun, additional biomes and making sure anomalies are always visible (in any graphics setting)? Idle animation for Kerbals? Handing some money to ..., ..., ... for them to make their mods compatible with KSP stock source? (I was about listing some names/mods, but it would have been either to many, unfair or some might have even forgotten, so ... )

I am fairly certain I am using the newest version (from your OP in the other thread), but I will check this afternoon. Edit: Yes, version from 18/5. It is not a bug/problem really, more an inconvenience, but a logical one actually.

Wow - that would be an awsome setting for a space game ...

My hoppy astronomie knowledge tells me I would think that binary star systems would "share" not only their barycenter but also their planets and the whole family would orbit said barycenter.

That's it, mark this day, from now on KSP is on par with Star Trek and Star Wars, the fans debating background lore and correcting each other!

Does this also happen if you add KER to the command pods via ModuleManager? I never use the parts and do not have this issue.

As long as a decoupler - fresh or used - is in the current stage, KER does not display dV/TWR. This happens with my crew pods which I edited to be self-decoupling as well as with decouplers on top of orbital stages that I want to deorbit. I have to move the decoupler into an extra stage to fix this - I gather this is the only way to handle this anyway?

I would have expected more of a mess actually - if we take into acount how much distance there is between one red dot and the next ... "Funnily" I am as well - but seemingly to a different degree, as I can distinguish them quite good this time ...

Quite something in- and outside of the game: First I expanded my Nukes-use-Kethane cfg mod to make the Kethane tanks equivalent to the stock LF/OX tanks, so I would have the same dV as if I were using a stock assembly for my interplanetary Explorer II. Then I hacked (or unhacked?) a faulty docking port to get my Kethane tanker over from KSS - to limit the number of parts in my 2.3 km³ cube of space. After that it was time to launch the lander-cockpit module and the drive stage of the Explorer II to dock them with the mission module already in orbit. I am pondering if I should exchange the lander-cockpit for a slightly different design though ... not that much monoprop for instance ... Rendezvous of tanker and Explorer II to transfer Kethane and monoprop - also Bob and Bill came over from KSS to joined Jeb and two rookies for some maneuvers at Mun and Minmus - checking all anomalies there - before returning to KSS to drop of the two then junior kerbonauts, refuel and start their year long voyage around the Kerbol system. Still on my to-do list: Built a plane able to visit all the anomalies on Kerbin.

The newest DR is from 5/5 - should the new parts not be in the config?

The quick and dirty worked for me - after getting the whole parent number right - and at least one of the ports involved was able to dock (and undock!) on another vessel later. I would really like an addon that can show you the ID of a part in the game though ... but I am getting better at reading the save file.

I hope I: - switched the nukes to Kethane - working! - set density of Kethane to that of LF/OX - should be correct! - changed Kethane tanks to same dry mass as equivalent LF/OX tanks - third party verification requested - changed Kethane tanks to hold the combined mass of LF and OX as equivalent tanks - third party verification requested @PART[nuclearEngine] { @MODULE[ModuleEngines*] { !PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel] {} !PROPELLANT[Oxidizer] {} PROPELLANT { name = Kethane ratio = 1.00 DrawGauge = True } } } @PART[cl_large_nuclearEngine] { @MODULE[ModuleEngines*] { !PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel] {} !PROPELLANT[Oxidizer] {} PROPELLANT { name = Kethane ratio = 1.00 DrawGauge = True } } } @RESOURCE_DEFINITION[Kethane] { @density = 0.005 } @PART[kethane_tank2mExtralarge] { @mass = 4 @RESOURCE[Kethane] { @maxAmount = 6400 } } @PART[kethane_tank2mLarge] { @mass = 2 @RESOURCE[Kethane] { @maxAmount = 3200 } } @PART[kethane_tank2mMedium] { @mass = 1 @RESOURCE[Kethane] { @maxAmount = 1600 } } @PART[kethane_tank2mSmall] { @mass = 0.5 @RESOURCE[Kethane] { @maxAmount = 800 } } @PART[kethane_tank1mStandard] { @mass = 0.25 @RESOURCE[Kethane] { @maxAmount = 400 } } @PART[kethane_tankExternal] { @mass = 0.1 @RESOURCE[Kethane] { @maxAmount = 60 } } Size of Kethane and LF/OX tanks is not the same/equivalent - but it is only marginal and I do not care.

Well, it is everyones responsibility to backup ones save file before ... But you could also let the program make that backup for the user ...

One source for this problem - as I see it - is the self-imposed restriction to implement nothing that generates anything over time: no pumps gathering x resources per second, no bases building y stuff per day, no stations sciencing away ...

I have this occasionally - it caused me to add explosives to my docken ports (decoupler module to docken port part.cfg). I also always wonder if anyone would be able to hack a small program that can parse the save file and find/edit the appropriate lines.

That's what I meant. So ISP should be way lower?

Case closed, next!

Thank you! Edit the tanks ... !!! But what does ratio do for me then? PROPELLANT { name = Oxidizer ratio = 1.1 } How much mass it pulls from which fuel type?

I use them more and more, especially for lifting heavy things. But I do miss the times of tying up lots of 1.5m tanks to get rocket pyramids to Mun! Where could they be toned down? Is it one part replacing a couple mainsales to begin with or do they use not enough fuel to feel balanced?

To much KSP and other games, to much activity on the weekend, to many other series to watch - I only managed to get to episode 2 in ... months ... and only half of Space Brothers first episode - the subtitles do not make it any easier for me ...

You have my vote on this one. Tilted Kerbin axis, equally inclined orbit for Mun to keep easy accessibility for new players and reduce eclipses. My head has issues imagining how it would easy accessibilty of Duna though - our Mars equivalent being the most likely next target after Mun.

Just skimmed the OP and thread but I agree in general, yes. Just one thing to note: I think just antenna range - omitting occlusion by planets or position of receiver on kerbin - should be implemented at least.

I offer a solution for one of your problems that opens up a completely different one though. Solution: FTL would be only available outside a stars SOI, so inside the SOI of the galactic center, which would have to be introduced to make other star systems in the same universe possible. The new systems would be handcrafted like Kerbol's to offer equal gameplay for all players in a vanilla game. Additional systems could be modden in for personal flavor. Problem: Is the KSP universe (the numbers in its coordinate system) big enough to place another star system at a reasonable distance? Which would not even be sufficient, as the two star systems would need enough space to rotate around the galactic center! Suggestion: Upon activating the FTL the vessel is moved into a new persistance file, that of the new system, in a very exotic orbit around its star. The player would have to leave Kerbol's SOI to activate the FTL, the game moves the vessel into the new system's persistence file in the same save game folder and either offers to load the new system right away or the player gets to choose which system is loaded when he start the game the next time. UT would have to be the same in both systems if return missions were to be possible and science to be transmitted back home, so time passes while you are playing in the new system - which opens up a kerb load of other problems, especially for players that use life support mods, but that is not my concern.