HeadHunter67

How much time... six years?

There are advantages to that - but the limitation is on the size of the station. If you have to build a 1000-part monstrosity to launch it, then the part count advantage goes out the window. It's possible to make a modular station that keeps a low part count - experience has shown me what I can keep, what I can omit, and how to best use what I need. But yes, the rigidity is definitely a factor.

It's already been done. The Merlin engines for the Falcon rocket are completely American in manufacture. They're already in service, in case you hadn't noticed. I think it's safe to say that by 2020, the United States won't depend on anyone else for rocket motors. It only took SpaceX four years from its founding to produce the first Merlin engine, and only six years to make the Merlin 1C engine. What do you think we can come up with in six more years of innovation?

Interesting little plugin. It would seem to go nicely in my FAR/DRC install. If I'm reading correctly, it's Toolbar-supported, right? I agree with others who think that crew capacity used vs. available should factor in - one Kerbal in a 3-man capsule has room to exercise and shouldn't count as "cramped". Also, I feel that the Hitchhiker can should allow crew the opportunity to exercise. If they can put a treadmill on Zvezda, there's room for one here.

I make my stations modular. The hub has docking ports on each face as well as power generation and a modest supply of fuel and monopropellant. Then I make each of the "limbs" of the station: one for command and habitation, one for science and communications, one for docking and evacuation, one or two for refueling, etc. Generally, each of these modules is about the same mass as the others so that the station is balanced. Assembly is done by a robotic RCS tug. I don't design the entire station in one chunk and then break it down for launch, but it's really not necessary with my approach.

Thanks - not sure exactly how to do that, though. I am not at all familiar how it works, I just use the thing.

This looks like it might be a suitable replacement for TAC Part Lister.

It may have been mentioned previously, but has anyone else noticed the textures for these parts look really blurry when running Active Texture Management? I'm just using the basic, not the aggressive version.

Thanks, that will be helpful as I noticed I now have a couple designs that I can't load in career due to the old fairings. I'm having another issue and I hope someone can help me out. I made a nice little two-stage lander that works wonderfully, but it requires fuel lines. I can't drop it onto the interstage fairing base unless I use SelectRoot to set the bottom engine (or decoupler) as the lander's root part - which screw up the fuel lines. There's no way to fix them because the decouple shroud is in the way. Can anyone suggest how to get a pre-built lander onto the fairing base? The normal root part is the top docking port (because who honestly builds rockets from the bottom up?) so when I try and bring it in, it snaps to the command module's bottom node (where the fairing's top node should be). This causes the rocket to spring and bend, which does not happen when the command module is simply anchored to the fairing's top node. I hope this made sense.

Most users overlook the fact that the Squad and NASAmission folders are also within GameData, and occupy a little over 780MB combined.

I always called them "KerBills"...

Actually, such a thing was built in 1997 and is in storage: "Due to Russian financial problems, Zvezda was launched with no backup and no insurance. Due to this risk, NASA had constructed an Interim Control Module in case it was delayed significantly or destroyed on launch." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interim_Control_Module That is very much true - but it's easy for people to overreact and flip out when they don't take the time to think about it. I've seen this topic discussed elsewhere and a lot of people just don't comprehend the facts. Simply put, this whole thing is an empty threat on Russia's part. They can't take their ball and go home, because no one is dependent upon them.

Same here. I've wanted a good 2-man lander can and this fits the bill nicely.

I think you may have made the first stockalike parts pack that I intend to use in entirety, in all my future builds.

Indeed - no responsible space agency would select recruits by Facebook votes or fund an ongoing mission on ad revenue and reality TV. So this sounds like one big publicity stunt.

OK, I just finished a free-return flyby of the Mun with it. Beautiful. I love the way the service module and decoupler separate from the main stage - almost like the old Saturn interstages. I do agree with Onslaught about the exhaust on the service module engine - but it's such a minor detail and even if that little thing seems a bit odd, it's still every bit as beautiful. I'd love to see more parts get gussied up like this! Between this pack and the KSPRC retextures, my rockets look modern and sexy, not like junk!

Exactly - which means it limits how big the station can become. I am sure Russia doesn't want to pull out of the ISS just so they can fly "Mini-Mir".

And the really cool thing is, it gives you more time to pay attention to the actual docking procedure - and when you are able to do that, you will eventually start to learn other things that help your docking too! For instance, watch the navball as you manipulate the position of the DPAI's prograde marker. I would dare to say that with enough use, a pilot could begin to dock in IVA with the navball only (I'll still keep the DPAI though because I just love the way it works!)

I haven't had a chance to fly a mission with it yet, but I installed it last night and looked it over in the VAB. It's gorgeous and it's made me fall in love with the KerbalX all over again. So much nicer to look at and I really like being able to change logos in the tweakables!

No doubt... but let's be serious, anyone who has the knowledge and intent to do so, isn't going to be bothering with using this plugin in the first place!

I will be following this with great interest!

The really interesting thing is how wrong you actually are. The Russians own Zvezda, Pirs, Poisk and Rassvet - hardly a "station" to any spacefaring nation. The USOS would hardly "die out", as life support is provided by the Tranquility node, and the station is powered by the solar panels on the truss. While the ROS currently handles guidance, navigation and control, that doesn't mean that Zvezda is the only means for doing so.

I basically voted for the most courageous one, the one with the highest Stupidity, and the one with the best scores in both.

One could as easily ask why both of them independently did a Saturn mod... my answer would be that I prefer to use FASA as a collective USA historical space program, whereas Denny's got just a part of that (and I'm not sure what issues OLDD stuff might have).