Muka

Future plans: (...) Collision detection to make sure you are hitting the ground. (right now, you can actually put the part anywhere) (...) You can use function ray-cast (You can find it being used in landing gear) to detect distance to the ground on part activation

Rebind keys for rover control since same keys are used for yaw/roll and pitch. In high gravity bodies that's not the issue, but on ones with lower gravity force reaction wheels have enough force to sometimes filp Your rover

Why would You want that? It's better to change setting every flight that not change them at all

C7 needs to see this... At last I can make planes with more realistic post-stall maneuvering

Ekhm... He DID added RCS tanks. Look where he put that horizontal fuel tank

BATTLEFIELD GOTHIC YAY! I cna\'t wait for this

@mixxorz At warp speeds >2x physics are disabled. Totally. Even collision between ships at higher warp isn\'t simulated. As long as orbit allows You to keep warp speed above 2, there is no point in trying to create collision based docking. @OP And no offence, but I honestly doubt it that anyone will join plugin team, which is lead by someone who doesn\'t know much about programming. As long as it\'s non commercial there is no point to try (tho You might surprise Me if You succeed ;P )

Still it\'s impossible to synchronize orbits so perfectly, that ships would be floating next to another without any relative movement due to simplified orbit calculation, different ship masses/sizes etc. (I don\'t want to discourage You from doing it, I\'m just pointing problems, which make it so difficult)

Both has been done. Check out Kosmos and NovaPunch Remix Pack - there are some customisable pods. There was abort decoupler (worked trough context menu like jet engines do now) in previous release...

Part gravity doesn\'t works above 2x warp, so this was is no-go. If You intend to create docking before Team KSP deos it, you should do something like decoupler - except it should work opposite like joining w ship to one, and that the problem (due to on-rail system) .... Edit: If you want to add transferring of resources.... Well, it\'s better to wait for official docking than to do it itself. Devs doesn\'t wanted to add placeholder docking for reason, does They? I\'m not good at programming, but I know how it works. And docking is a LOT of work

So?

@noneyabidnis Just look at My reply at page 3. All math is done there if You want to compare

I dunno what happened to my head, but I\'ve developed simple mathematical formula (I hate maths ???) for anyone who needs/wants to know range of bigger radar when mounted on satellite. Char ,,a' stands for altitude of orbit (assuming it\'s perfectly or nearly circular, if it\'s not, margin of error can be bigger) given by km above sea level. Formula for scan radius: 2nd root of (150^2 - a^2) = X (km) Formula for scan area: PI*(150^2-a^2) = X (km^2) Due to uneven terrain and simplifications this is not perfect, but should be accurate for about ~1-0,5 km in range and ~100km^2 on area. Also formula works (obviously...) on ranges from 0 to 150 km. I hope someone will find this useful ;P EDIT: If You\'ll put radar dish on cricular orbit of 80 km,area scanned will be 0,71(5) per cent of it\'s original performance, this gives us 50579,6417227956711392485584708 km^2 of covered area and scan radius of 126,88577540449520380193772746089 km (with performance in radius of amazing 84,590516936330135867958484973927 per cent!) . On ground You\'re getting 70685,834705770347865409476123789 km^2 covered and... duh.... 150 km of scan radius ;P

I would gladly make translation to polish ^^

Kerbals inside are awesome, but textures suck.... >

Struts... use them

Ok

Juz to wczoraj zrobilem. Teraz czekam na odp od HarversteRa

What's our margin of error? I mean what eccentricity should be?

Nie ma co kombinowac. Lepiej napisac do HarversteRa i zapodac pomysl ;P O, i poprosic o polskie znaki na forum, bo zle sie bez nich pisze :-\

Je?li ?pieszy si? wam do t?umaczenia, to ch?tnie pomog?