Starwaster

That's what you're supposed to be doing. Hohmann Transfer Fine tune (you can put in a periapsis to aim for) Once on approach, check periapsis. If unsatisfactory, raise periapsis. Otherwise proceed to step 4 Circularize at periapsis. (for airless moons, 10km-14km)

It's a known issue. Something changed in 0.22 that affects the joints. Not even KJR stabilizes them If you switch hatch mode it gets a little better. Do it on both ports.

There is no part file; it's part of the scienceDefs.cfg file. All science results for EVA activities are defined there. You would have to either modify it directly (which is very bad, don't do that) You can also modify the config node via ModuleManager. See the Probe Science link in my signature. Basically you'd do something like this in config file: @EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[evaReport]] { !RESULTS{} RESULTS { // Your results here. } } Note that I deleted the existing RESULTS node, which is probably not the right way to do it. But at the time that I wrote up the probe science files it was the only way to do it. (I deleted then reinserted a copy of the original with my additions) I think ModuleManager 1.5 might possibly allow access to the RESULTS node now. (the reason I couldn't before was that RESULTS is not a named node...)

Someone better tell NASA quick.... they've been relaying science data through the orbiters....

Re: G-force tolerance of parts. I was playing around with the code a little bit and I've been playing for a couple of weeks with the following in effect. double gTolerance; if (part.Modules != null && part.Modules.Contains("ModuleEngines") && damage < 1) gTolerance = Math.Pow(UnityEngine.Random.Range(11.9f, 12.1f) * part.crashTolerance, 0.5); else if (part.Modules != null && !part.Modules.Contains("KerbalEVA") && damage < 1) gTolerance = Math.Pow(UnityEngine.Random.Range(5.9f, 6.1f) * part.crashTolerance, 0.5) * (25 / (part.mass + part.GetResourceMass())); else gTolerance = Math.Pow(UnityEngine.Random.Range(5.9f, 6.1f) * part.crashTolerance, 0.5); The end result is smaller parts tend to be more resistant. Scaled at around 25t. Less than 25t is getting a bonus, 25t even is treated the same as before and over 25t is penalized. It may still need tweaking and it's probably not scientifically accurate (or if it turns out to be then it's coincidence...). Crew pods that don't burn up have come down in one piece even if the crew is a thin green and red paste on the aft bulkhead. Rockets on ascent I've found that I don't throttle back have crumpled. (which is in fact how I noticed that MJ was not respecting acceleration throttle limits for certain KWR engines) Also, question time... I sent a probe to RSS Duna and it came in pretty fast and yet I noticed the heat shield didn't get hot enough to burn even 1 point of heat shielding. In fact it wasn't even warm enough to cook an egg. (well of course it was warm enough to cook an egg but very slowly....)

Or how about having to travel through a space-time that's totally flat, and warships that enter your bubble can attack you but you destroy them and hey guess what? The mass of all the wreckage is still hanging out in your bubble slowing you down.... (Crest / Banner of the Stars)

If you're willing to take a request (a simple one I hope) how about a fuel tank with flattened (yet slightly rounded ends) such as on the old Space: 1999 Ultraprobe? (not totally rounded like on the back of some of the fuel tanks) Or actually, even just an end cap that could fit onto existing tanks....

Sorry for replying to this out of order; the other issue had my attention. The reason suggested making them still clickable with a warning about needing research is that if you just gray them out, you'll still have just as many posts but they'll be about why they're grayed out instead of missing. But if the player gets feedback from the UI as to why he2zhe can't click then they'll be less likely to come here and ignore 69,105 posts explaining that he had to research. (Trust me I've done tons of tech/customer support)

:Final matters more than order. Never rely on order.

ok looks good so far.

Confirmed with only KWR, MJ Also confirmed not to be present in last September's unofficial release. Haven't tried 2.10 official. Staying off computer right now due to stormy weather.

Sarbian, in build 114 and as of at least build 106. (or earlier) thrust stats are not showing up for several KW Rocketry engines. I can't test them all at this time but the Griffon XX and several others I tried are affected. Anything that depends on knowing thrust or acceleration will fail, such as throttle limits. I'd think it would affect landing too but I cannot try that right now. if I had to guess, I'd suspect the thrust vector transform which is named differently in KW Rocketry since its re-release a while back. Created an issue for this on Github.

Californium rounds. Now all we need are the damper boxes to keep the munitions from decaying before they reach the battlefield...

He's said elsewhere that all of his work is free for others to use.

I concur. Don't want tech requirements, sandbox.

I'm starting to think all main menu items should be present at all times but when you click on one that's not researched a popup warns you that it needs researching. With maybe the name of what needs researching along with its icon. (If you want to get fancy)

It's rocket fuel. It's a Russian synthetic. (I was going to make a sarcastic reply about how you stick it in the rocket, light the fuse and run.... or maybe about how it makes things go up....)

Kerbal computer science is more advanced than it looks. They can compress even the largest MJ2 software package down to 69,105 bytes of data and transmit it to all craft in space instantaneously, so they all get the upgrade. Including the latest firmware for the onboard espresso maker.

cryogenic tanks have reduced boiloff. for zero boiloff (ZBO) you need radiators for active cooling. the mod comes with some but they have no texturing. the interstellar mod has nicer ones that I posted a patch file to make them work with this mod. search the thread for radiator and you'll find it. if you cant I'll repost it but I cannot right now because I am posting from my ipad

Chute open??? Aren't we optimistic! I don't even get that far. I'm having trouble steering my capsule so I come in pure ballistic. I haven't tried again lately but I'm going to try doing something to offset the mass... or perhaps I'll stick a B9 airbrake on one side, but I'm a bit concerned that it will be too much drag and maybe cause the capsule to flip. Maybe some little fins? (just thinking a bit unorthodox since these are Kerbals and not the Apollo space program... Though you're probably right about the initial trajectory but they never made proper orbit to begin with so I couldn't do much about that.

Just replicated your test but with a 6 way hub instead of another Karmony module. As in your pictures it drooped, sagged and wobbled horrendously. (I have two between each Karmony module and the hub) Activating hatch mode on just one of the ports (the one attached to the Karmony) had an immediate stabilizing effect but it still drooped a little until I also switched the one it was docked with to hatch mode. btw it's logical that removing hatch mode has no impact because activating hatch mode involves animation of one of the collision bodies IIRC. That collision body is always there no matter if you remove the MODULE that animates it or not and in its default position, which is where it causes the problem. (I think it's some kind of torus that opens up to allow the hatch to be clicked on) Test Update: Switching back to docking mode doesn't cause it to go back to wobbling....... hmmm.

That's what amount and maxAmount to, they specify how much the tank can hold. I think you're making it harder on yourself than this actually is. You have three resources, You use TANKDEFINITION to define that it can hold those three resources. Then you define the three actual tanks that contain each resource with TANK, one for each. I'd show you examples but I'm on my iPad and cant go from memory righht now. Look at the files inthe RESOURCES folder for examples.

You have to specify amount and max amount for each resource. MFS has no provision to limit their totals other than keeping them from going over max. to add them you need a TANK_DEFINITION that defines the three tanks you will need for your three resources. Then you need to define the TANK for each r esource. look in the resource folder for real fuels for examples

Please clarify, I have no idea what that means. An orbiting craft HAS to de-orbit. If it does not de-orbit it cannot land.

Tanks need to have the ModuleFuelTank MODULE added to their part configuration. The way part addons work makes that a requirement. Adding the MODULE code is trivial and is done via ModuleManager. If a mod or parts pack is said to be supported then MFS has configuration files that set up those tanks for MFS support.