HeadHunter67

But you just argued that you want a craft with FAR to perform exactly the same as one without. So what's the point? You clearly don't want it to change a craft's aerodynamic performance... unless you meant something different, in which case you might have spoken about that instead of going on about something else entirely.

That's what I dislike, too. A legion of people who think a release date means the product will be available at midnight - GMT, or their local time at the latest. Why do they DO that? To me, at best, a release date means the product will be available at some point on that date - possibly very late in the day, but almost certainly NOT at midnight. I know, right? Nowhere did they actually explicitly say "0.22 will be released on 10-16-2013", people just assumed that because there was a date below the video. So if it doesn't come out today, all these people will feel like a promise was broken, even though one was never made, because they may have misinterpreted something they saw. THAT is exactly why announcing release dates is a bad idea. And that's the problem with allowing speculation in the first place. People discuss their wishes, those wishes become an expectation, that expectation morphs into an implicit "promise", and when that "promise" is unmet, those people get angry and alienated because someone else didn't give them something they wanted - even though there was never an agreement in the first place. I know forums want to encourage open discussion, but this has happened time and again in so many other places. Fair Warning.

I'm not even taking the announced release date on faith - it's rare for any game or update to be released on an announced date. Even if they've got it all ready to go, things can happen. I'll trust the date when I've got the update installed, and not a moment sooner.

If that's what you want, why use FAR at all?

I have wanted to use my space stations to Do SCIENCE To It since I began playing. Looks like I may finally get that chance.

Well-said.

There's gravity in space, of course. But the "heavy end" of a ship doesn't fall measurably faster than the other to any significant degree (feel free to do the math on the difference in gravitational acceleration of, say, 500 tons at 100km from Kerbin's surface as compared to 50 tons). Tidal stabilization might affect it - but only if that weight was pretty far off to one end (and I'm still unsure it would work in KSP). Again, plug those lengths into the inverse-square law and tell me how far apart those masses would have to be from the moment of inertia, for there to be a measurable difference.

Perhaps you could make versions of them without the thrusters, and with other components of comparable mass as "dummies" to balance the cargo ship - then remove them and put the real ones in.

It shouldn't make a difference, except when under thrust. While in unpowered orbit, the craft is in free-fall - and of course, the effects of a body's gravity on different masses is insignificant on the scale of a spacecraft.

Thanks for taking the time to make this guide! There is a plugin called SelectRoot that does this, for those who don't feel comfortable editing a .cfg file.

I don't think anyone's rushing him, we're just brainstorming and having fun with the concept. I'm sure kerbtrek has enough mental discipline to overcome this peer pressure you perceive.

I had that happen to me once - due to a staging error I accidentally blew the LM fairings when ejecting a spent stage. The CSM separated and I had to dock while the rest of the craft was still ascending. I managed, but I don't think it turned out to be more than an abort-to-orbit.

...because, without similarly themed parts, no one would likely use this neat idea? I men, seriously, are you going to use a cardboard capsule on top of all that "real" rocket hardware? I'm loving all the other creative ideas this is spawning. I suppose people who just want the capsule can wait patiently until kerbtrek has it ready.

Since the tech tree (at least in its present configuration) only deals with parts, it's reasonable to conclude that any mod content aside from parts will be totally unaffected by the new R&D system. There's no reason to expect differently.

Greed. IMO, every single one of the problems the world is facing comes down to someone, somewhere, wanting more than they need or deserve. Overpopulation, famine, disease, poverty, war, crime... can all be traced back to that one fatal flaw in the human condition.

Thanks for the advice - I wasn't aware that such a thing even existed. It's in a section of the forum that I don't think I've ever visited. Now I know... "half the battle", n'at.

Which didn't seem to stop someone from distributing it in a mod pack on Spaceport without permission. I don't understand why people do this - anyone who could install a mod pack can just get the mod and install it themselves - so the only rationale I can see is that some people want to ride someone else's coattails. Reminds me too much of the whole Technic fiasco for Minecraft. I wish Spaceport had a Report button.

Great idea on the chute! My wife thinks the heat shield looks like a Jiffy-Pop container... which actually would be a good way to cushion a landing, and the Kerbals would have a tasty snack post-flight! I told her animating a heat shield that "pops" during descent might be tricky, but you guys might know how to do it.

Probably in the same way as has been discussed in this thread, further down the very same page as your post.

Some time before November 31st... I personally guarantee it.

I just did a launch test with this CSM and I agree that it will become my new favorite CSM for standard use. The abort sequence works flawlessly, the decoupling of fairings and adapters are likewise problem-free. The LV-909 seems incredibly fuel-efficient, though KER does not calculate its delta-V at all. Now, I just need to figure out how to couple this to a Procedural Fairing assembly for a lander (basically, how to keep the adapter out of the way of docking) and I'll be set for the perfect Apollo-style mission! Well, if only I had an authentic-style lander that would fit into a 2.5m fairing cylinder without bulging...

I am trying to think of other things that would fit into this sort of theme - landing legs made from old springs, stuff like that. (Also, duct tape is good for seams!)

Those are both great suggestions! This reminds me of that '80s movie Explorers where the kids build a rocket from junk.

That's what we used to call "Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair".

Great job, my friend! Glad to see this released!