phunk

I used them to build a massive eve lander, that was basically a mobile launch platform, carrying a large asparagus rocket, that was supposed to drive to higher ground. Didn't use enough of them though, and they broke too easily. Planning on making it even bigger and trying again.

Stuck on Eve after landing a spaceplane there without bothering to check if the atmosphere had any O2 first.

Yeah I know, just annoying to waste a hotkey that I'll only press once before launch and never again.

... that none of the "internal tanks" actually exist in the game code. The part configs define what resource a part holds, and it would be no harder to make those tweakable than what they've already done. If you want an X200-32 full of xenon or something whacky like that, it's trivial to create one. This took me about 2 minutes:

Actually, direction matters with some parts, like the quad adapters. If you put 4 engines on one tank with a quad adapter, fuel will flow fine, but if you have 4 tanks and 1 engine, it will not flow that direction.

Will tweakables give us the option to lock gimbals during construction?

Not always. For example, an FL-T400 holds more fuel than them MK1 tank, and has lower dry weight. Remove the oxidizer and it's a better choice.

Would be awesome if we could switch between preset thrust limits with action groups...

6 in a hex pattern is not impossible to dock. It requires more precision than one, but it's not impossible (as long as they are in the exact same pattern on both ships). My last big ship was held together with just 3 large rings between each section, and that held together just fine through Jool aerobraking. So 6 might be overkill.

But it doesn't change kerbin's radius, so I don't think it's an accurate simulation.

Had the ship that I had sent to laythe & tylo, minus its landers, sitting in orbit with nothing to do, so I gave it a new job. Detached the fuel & engine module from it, flew it to my "too many parts to finish building this" station (that's holding about 800 tons of fuel), and refueled it and flew it to eve. I now have 158 tons of fuel in eve orbit, waiting for the manned mission I'll send next.

First, as always, backup the persistent file. Search for the name of the ship in the file, then search forward from that point for a part with a resource like this (for example, the probe core or a battery): RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge amount = 0 maxAmount = 10 Then change the amount to the max amount, and you'll have a full charge in that part.

On small ships, the difference in mass can make the poodle worse than the lv-t30/45.

TWR alone isn't enough to judge efficiency, but in this case, the 30 is more efficient, as it has the same ISP as the 45 but has higher thrust and lower mass. The only advantage the 45 has is thrust vectoring.

Yeah I see that too.

True but they only have a unique Id after you've launched an instance of them. The problem is in the load/save functionality of the VAB. For example if you do the following: 1) Make a copy of ship.craft to newship.craft. 2) Load newship in the VAB. 3) Edit it and hit save. Unless you modified the ship name before you saved, you've just overwritten the original ship.craft instead of newship.craft. The problem is that the loader dialog displays the filename, so you see newship in the list after simply copying the file. But the save button uses the ship name to chose the filename to save it to, and the ship name listed inside newship.craft is the same as the one in "ship.craft". So it's best when copying a craft file to also edit the name in the file to match the filename.

I'm a unix guy so I didn't know windows find worked like that, thanks. Just keep in mind, doing it with find will remove symmetry from all of the parts in the ship. Also I'm not sure what would happen with the loader if you had two ships with the same name. So you may want to either replace ship.craft with newship.craft, or if you keep both, open newship and edit the first line to give it a unique name.

Standard disclaimer: Backup your saves folder before you attempt this... It can be done. Save the ship, exit ksp, edit the .craft file for that ship, and remove all of the "sym = " lines from the parts in question. Each of the symmetric parts will have a "sym = " line pointing to every other part it's symmetric with. So if you have 6 way symmetry, there will be 6 parts, each with 5 sym lines to remove. Start ksp and load up the ship again, and the parts will be exactly the same except no longer linked to each other via symmetry.

First thing I'm doing when I get home from work is muting the ksp music. I know I play too much because I've got that damn song stuck in my head.

Never saw the one on minmus, but I saw one where someone flew through a ring that was orbiting kerbin in the opposite direction.

Sitting alone on the bridge of a half built ship in LKO, waiting for the rest of the parts, fuel, and crew to join him before leaving for Jool.

That's not an error, that is the semi-major axis. I think your error is in calculating that radius. ETA: As Meithan mentioned, it's the average of the apoapsis and periapsis, plus the radius of the planet.

They won't be the same. The semi-major axis is not measured in reference to the planet, it's measured from the center of the orbit. Kerbin's radius is 600km, that means a 250km circular orbit has a semi-major axis of 850km. A 250km x 150km orbit will have a semi-major axis of 800km I believe.

5) Are you at the same altitude when you cancel out the relative velocity?

Most importantly, make a backup copy of your save game folder first. Then open the persistent.sfs and locate the vessel in question (search for the name). Here's an example from mine: VESSEL { pid = 34fe768006834368af05c12d2bcba24c name = Jool 1 type = Probe You should just need to change the type from "Probe" to "Debris".