Neowulf

So track Kospy down and talk him back into it.

Community desire cannot override the license. Infact in this case Majiir can't even override the license. Literally the only thing the community could do without the copyright holder's (by the license: Kospy, Winn75, and zzz) input is recreate KAS from scratch. New models, textures, and plugin. It would require a talented programmer and a lot of hard work, but the fear of loss driving this call to "take KAS from Majiir and give it to someone who would update it" would be minimized.

The entitlement is strong with this one... You know no one is forcing you to use it.

Yay no lambdamines! I can actually parse the source. Pretty simple stuff actually, most of the complicated code deals with the buoyancy asymmetry for pitch control. The actual "make slow to save" code is 90% in the gui area, determining if the vessel meets the speed, buoyancy requirements, and landed/splashed requirements. That could easily be copy/pasted into a new module for the station keeping logic. The vessel slowing is done in persistentParts(), but that's just a simple vector damping. It would kinda work for station keeping, but attaching another would most likely add enough speed to cause it to exit out of the persistentParts code and leave it unlanded. I can see a lot of people forgetting to re-enable station keeping and losing crafts when they change scenes. I don't know exactly what could be used to anchor a part to a world coordinate, but it looks pretty simple otherwise. Adding options to a part's right click menu in unity looks pretty simple, and most of the logic could be piggybacked from the HLenvelope code. Just a minor alteration to HLenvelope, add an if to the onUpdate and add a couple public methods to expose some info/toggle the state. Sorry if this seems like I'm poking you to hurry on it. I'm just rambling happily since I found some source I can actually read.

Those => things. Best I can tell you're creating a quick little function inside another function, but when I read the articles on how they work I get flooded with marketing jargon and examples of "x fun x => x + x (*) => x x;", which apparently equals 2 but all I see is pickle...

I've been meaning to learn C#. But every time I take a look at other people's source to see what I'm getting into I see liberal use of those lambda expression things and my brain just goes kaput and begs to go back to nice and easy pointers from my C++ days.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/53961-0-24-HooliganLabs-Mods-on-Curse?p=1318391&viewfull=1#post1318391 JewelShisen is going to look into a station keeping module that will make permanent in-atmo bases around jool a possibility.

Awesome. You just turned cloud cities and helicarriers from dreams to something to look forward to in the future.

So in the karbonite thread it was pondered if there was a way to have a ship stay in the atmosphere of Jool long term for mining purposes. That spawned this idea, and I was wondering if it would be possible. A station keeping part (big ol' fan?) that can be activated on an airship with a low enough surface velocity (less than 1m/s), causing it to root the ship in place (marked landed) in exchange for a large amount of EC/s (amount dependent on vessel mass?). If the station keeping module deactivates from either user interaction or lack of resources, it disables the lock so the ship is flying again.

Would that be an invisible sphere that blocks the line of sight for comm links, or an "Anything below an altitude of 10xradius cannot connect to the network"?

Physics range limit for one, auto-splode layer for another. I don't know if jool actually has a surface mesh but I know no parts can reach it if it does.

HL airships needs a stationkeeping feature. Slow to a stop, hit a switch, and if you can keep it powered with EC for a minute or so it assumes you've got the power to consistently run stationkeeping fans and creates an invisible joint linking all airship envelopes to the ground like a launch clamp and marks the ship landed. How epic a karbonite harvesting cloud city would be...

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/63628-0-23-Beastly-Science-Scoop-O-Matic-and-more%21-%28JAN0214%29?p=1284958&viewfull=1#post1284958

As a long time modded minecraft player I would like to say the answer to this and frankly any question dealing with the necessity of curse alternatives is always "YES".

I'd like to chime in a suggestion on the chemical formula. C8H10N4O2, or in kerbal k-standard: K8H10N4O2 It contains the carbon, hydrogen and oxygen needed for pretty much any fuel/oxidizer formula that stock could be, and the nitrogen needed for monoprop. Plus it can be solid and its liquid form is already associated with boosting energy. Yes, caffeine.

Easy to figure out. If cost of parts without parachutes * recovery percent > cost of parachutes * recovery loss percentage, then you stand to gain from the recovery. Or simply, if the parachutes lose more value from recovery than you stand to gain from saving the rest of the parts, then you're wasting money sticking them on. Worth taking a look at fuel tank costs in relation to this. You could add a decoupler between the engine and the tank, stick chutes on just the engine, and have a cheaper chute cost to recover just the expensive engine.

Stick it in as a config option. Would be nice to be able to use this and EPL+kethane/ORS to build disposable science or resource return ships I can just chuck at kerbin from orbit and not worry about as I work on transfers and whatnot.

I was thinking a special KAS container that had a way to spawn/recycle grabbable/storable parts in its inventory. A parts bin.

Darn. It's such a fun teaching tool.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/30673-0-23-Spherical-and-Toroidal-Tank-Pack-%28Updated-01-12-14%29

According to his profile page Majiir has been offline for almost 12 hours. I don't really see that as dead and abandoned... I was going to use a heavily sarcastic reply, but I don't know how literal the people here would take it.

The career I was playing on suffered a crippling blow when my orbital construction yard blew up due to physics errors cause by part count lag (5-1 slowdown just focused on the station itself). So I modified my EPL install to basically get rid of rocket parts (actually remove all metal containers and the rocket part builder, then changed the smelter to go directly to rocket parts and changed the resource definitions so rocketparts were as dense as metal). New game and my new orbital construction yard has all the same ship construction capabilities at a fraction of the part count and no slowdown yet. Please tell me the post from about a month ago stating rockletparts might be going away is the plan. Fluffy rocketparts and an extra intermediary resource (metal) may seem better for realism, but dealing with it hurts gameplay.

Impacting object just has to be focused on, not necessarily controlled. I get get 6 impacts out of my simple rocket design: 4 micro-probes (core, engine, tank, dock), the carrier probe, and the transfer stage that got everything to the body of choice. Just start out with a decent orbit, retrograde to impact, release the bottom stage, get the probe cluster back into a stable orbit, then focus on the spent stage and follow it down to the ground. Then release and de-orbit the micro-probes one by one, and finally the carrier probe.

TACLS isn't stopping RT2 from using a 6 kerbal vessel from being a science transmission endpoint. And "drop the other mods" is a poor solution to a small realism problem in a realism themed mod. I use TACLS with remotetech to give each other meaning. Either mod by themselves just encourages avoiding the harder vessel control scheme. I posted because it's a simple idea that adds realism to fix a problem, and it never hurts to ask. Though if it is a bad thing to ask I'd rather just learn C# and make the change myself. I learned java to do that with a minecraft mod.

Yeah, that ground station entry is what gave me the idea. I was also thinking an antenna that had the same stats as the space center groundstation along with the "needs to be landed on kerin" requirement, but that might make things too easy. Though, .24 is supposed to add an economy, maybe the ability to create new ground stations could be an option. Pay cash to build/upgrade groundstations across kerbin. It is something I considered, but TAC Life Support makes that a bit hard for the long term and it doesn't provide a science transmission endpoint.