HeadHunter67

I love these parts - while the Interstellar mod looks interesting, I have zero interest in playing "Kerbal Star Trek Program". I'd rather not have antimatter and Alcubierre drives in my KSP.

I'll give this a try - I really like the concept of a tech tree, but it makes no sense that some things are so far down the stock tree - like ladders?

I'm not sure how to use what you linked. Some advice, please?

I still haven't gotten to use the 0.22 subassembly feature (keeps telling me "nowhere to attach" or something), so I can't say whether it's better. I knew what I was doing with this one at least.

Thanks for the updates to this! I just got back home and I'm looking forward to earning a bit of science for my achievements. I did back up the .dat but I'm going to start fresh so I don't miss it for the ones I already did.

The new one is FAR better! So what if it won't fit on a 1.25m part? If you've got a smaller craft, try a smaller antenna.

Mine is called KRASH - Formerly Kerbal Rocket and Space Headquarters, now Kerbal Rocket and Science Headquarters!

Are you talking about multiple surface samples from the same biome, or are you unable to store samples of different surfaces in the same pod?

Oooooh - glad to see this for 0.22 Career Mode!

Did you recover the debris? Because sometimes, that will do it.

I can get behind that - especially since on most of my craft, the MkI is all I'd ever need. I don't need assistance with rendezvous or docking, and the Mk3 would only be needed on interplanetary ships. I like that idea!

I own both versions. The Steam copy updated in seconds upon launching the Steam client when the update release was announced. My store copy took somewhat longer - the first attempt to download was very slow and eventually timed out (on a 50+ Mbps connection). Tried it again and it only took a couple of minutes.

Take your time with updating the Science module - I know when it's done it will be a quality part. You've never failed to amaze us before.

Are there any config geniuses out there that can help turn this wonderful science module into a part that's really capable of generating Science in career mode? (And probably place it on the tier following the Junior?) I really want to build a scientific station with this on it.

The biggest and best is the first to update? Today just keeps getting better! Thanks so much for doing this.

Thanks for updating this to 0.22 so fast! It seems a natural fit for career mode, where one's accomplishments really become meaningful.

In. the. game. I don't mean to sound contentious, but that's the only reckoning that matters to this discussion. "Efficiency" is ambiguous. When I say "by what metric", I mean specifically what significant, measurable statistic that actually affects something in-game. I've already explained why aerodynamic efficiency is only relevant as regards fuel savings, because time-to-orbit doesn't matter if the same amount of fuel is expended. Right now, there really aren't very many such significant metrics in-game - the most relevant one is, of course, delta-v. Is there another means of measuring "efficiency" that actually matters in-game?

Art by Aaron Diaz (from the Dresden Codak webcomic): This is going to be my flag for career mode now.

Well, that's because there's a lot of ambiguity. How do you propose to decide what's a "better" build? Who arbitrarily decides?This is why I keep asking you about what metric you are going for.

But if you want them to use the same delta-V, then that purpose is purely academic for the point of the game - unless you're impatient. If you use the same amount of fuel to get to orbit either way, then a more aerodynamic build is purely academic - which was my original point. So again I will ask - in what measurable way would the change in performance make a difference in the game?

In other words, the forums?

Think about how many useless and meaningless threads would have been avoided if they didn't announce a date. But because they did, we get inundated with "Y U NO OUT YET?" threads all over the place since yesterday.

OK, I'm starting to understand where you are coming from, now - though I hope you can see how I'd get the wrong impression from what had been written. So, aside from the debatable dV savings, what should the measurable effects of a more aerodynamic build be? For the life of me, the only other metric I can imagine is atmospheric efficiency - such as what we can see in KER. And all that really affects is terminal velocity and how fast one can ascend. Is that alone reason enough for using FAR?

So... you were sleeping, but you expected them to come in in the middle of the night and update it, for all the sleeping users? First of all, it's not even explicitly announced as a release date - and even if it is, that doesn't mean "midnight" your time, or even their time. Some time today is the best you can hope for. This is why most forums have a rule forbidding 'when will it be released?' questions...

I fully support this idea.