Visari

Nathankell, manager of MFS, DREC, MCE, creator of solar system rescale, among other things.

Sabres indeed, I'm starting to dislike them though, works pretty weird as a jet engine. 1.8km/s @ 35km -> rocket mode -> 5km/s @ 105km. May try again sometime with seperate jet and rocket engines.

Are you using FAR? Any other mods that could tamper with intakes? intakeair? engines? jets specifically? Are your intakes placed right? Screenshots of an affected craft can help. Also, Nathan, I've been testing the .1.2 KMP update with real scale, seems to work fine so far. 40km barrier relative to ksc still works. vessel was normally added upon leaving, no server crashing or disconnect. Though I need a few people to test with me, see if it can handle a mix of regular and rescaled clients. Would be pretty awesome to have something online going at real scales. Going zZz now. will test more tomorrow.

approved. My idea of kerbal science is not finding every holy in which you can do science and with which experiment you can do science there. In addition, it doesn't make sense to do barometer readings on different ground biomes, yet there's only one global low-altitude air reading. Jumping to get the air-biome EVA report? No. It's funny for a one-time stunt mid-air. and then the worst part, going to 4+ places to do lots of science, then getting one more science part and having to go to those places again to do science. :< Essentially I'm clicking a button for a little bit of text. that can be funny sometimes. The player basically finds the most effecient route to get through all the science as it is. What I'd love to see instead, is the challenge of getting to a place to do more specific science there, so the sense of getting those (perhaps actual, factual, true) results/samples back to kerbin.

Power consumption on use, maybe make them stay active for a small period of time before science is 'gained'. But thinking about it, if remote tech is to be used with this, power consumption will be directed to keeping contact more than anything else, so that would balance out power usage I suppose. Plus I understand now you were talking about MCE, of course. Increasing their price sounds like a good idea aswell, to prevent people from hoarding up science experiments to places they can't use them (using basic pod + science to go anywhere and just see if there's science).

I'm actually not at all having problems with planes or intakes. In fact, at 1:1 intake ratio, I can reach realistic altitudes at realistic speeds. SSTO designs are still hard as hell.. planes need to be friggin' huge to carry enough hydrolox or heavy to carry kerolox based orbital engines. Has anyone managed SSTO yet? my record so far has been 5km/s at 105km. Oh one thing that does bug me; re-entry effects at lower-ish altitudes.. I know planes get kind of hot (SR-71) at those altitudes and speeds, but re-entry effects seem overkill. any way to fix this ourselves? maybe via DREC?

#1: This should be a must and a given if realism is to be followed. #2: Great idea, I too believe science parts should be the ones comsuming power, not transmission (as much). In addition, as mentioned earlier, I believe there should be no data loss on any transmission at all, but rather a limit on what can actually be transmitted. #3: This is the first thing I edited in Sciencedefs.cfg after playing 0.22 for 15 minutes. So much better, I hate the grind, or leaving behind science at all when going through the real challenge of getting the science back to kerbin. #4 & 5: As with #2 - either transmittable at minimum power costs using RT networks (probe-capable science with sensors and the like) or return to kerbin (physical samples) imo. Also, I really suggest more orbital science. less flying over biomes, more having different kinds of instruments to measure things at different heights (think of leaving the magnetic field to do solar radiation experiments), with such science being worth more as a step to get manned missions to the Mün. I understand you're not a 3d artist, so for now I suppose placeholder items could be an idea, using either stock sciency stuff or ask permission to modify AIES parts, that has some real good looking things that could make do as science parts. Anyway, just my thoughts on this. I like your plans, keep it up.

I did use AIES and NP2 as part mods to assist in having some more diversity in engines. Also, one can do a lot of science on kerbin using its many biomes to progress just enough for the 2.5m rockets and docking to enable multiple launch rendezvous translunar injection missiles, semi-apollo style, except 2 launches. Also, keeping the final weight down to an absolute minimum helps a lot! My final entry stage was 2.1t lunar lander was 13t docked ship in earth orbit pre-injection was 50t or so. took me over a thousand tons of launchpad weight to pull that mission off.

I spent a very good weekend getting my first 'kerbal' on the 'moon' in career mode using all realism mods. Bill made it back at 3% payload fuel left. It actually took me 2 launches to setup the command/lunar modules. first actual worthy achievement I've had in a long time. still love you nathankell & ferram!

I actually have not one single idea of the whats and hows of re-entry in real life. I'm basing my experience on the earliest version of DRE, where the entries that were too steep killed you with G forces, while entries too shallow killed you by burning ablative shielding. for gameplay's sake, I love this way of having to angle entries and orient the craft to produce lift to skip-entry or stay in atmo higher and longer. whether it's realistic, I don't know :/

true, explorer 3 was like 10kg or so, right? it'd be nice to be able to build those, if we somehow got science in a different way (think of achievements mod giving science), but as it is currently, not really required. Once you complete your tech tree, we should definitely get something like the achievement system to gain science in addition to (perhaps nerfed) regular science. In fact, maybe I could help with the tree. You and I both started making full realism trees, yours specifically more detailed than mine, going deeper into coding with tech levels and such, I love that. Maybe we should combine ideas? My tree has been halted by bugs that require the TreeEdit tool update, but it's finished if you want to take a look. The tree is based on real life progression, starting with planes, reaching Biomes further and further away, getting most sensor equipment early on to prevent the need to grind spots over and over again. goes on to rocket assisted takeoff, using rocket planes, eventually making suborbital hops, sending probes into space, and from there, it's forked into science - rocketry - exploration (life support/construction). contains decent humor, too. the idea of the tree is to be realistic, yet gameplay oriented. I intend to include some alterations to different files to support it aswell, such as the removal of diminishing returns from return-missions in sciencedefs.cfg to prevent annoying grind and give decent sciencegain to the then slower progression rate. so many things to be fixed to make this all work

Indeed, career mode is absolutely fun, be it stock tree (and lots of custom added mods via MMext). It's the first time I had a real reason to save succesful lifter stages as subassemblies. It's quite nice to build a rocket family as you progress through tech. @MedievalNerd: very capable 200kg commsats are possible, going under that can make them pretty useless. Also, another 'bug' that (may) need minor attention after rescales: solar power. As it is, panels have less than 20% of original output when in full kerbollight due to distance. Personally, I wouldn't change it. in fact, I'd actually lower RTGs to new solar power levels or more, since this finally adds a realisticish power generation challenge when capsules consume electricity with life support and commsats get bigger and bigger and need more juice to operate.

I actually disabled the clouds because I don't like 'm, I'm using the city night lights only.

So that's the mod causing it? guess I can remove another bug from the rescale bug counter, unless it happens to be a compatibility issue between the two.

to update: I was wrong, it simply happens everytime I open the mapview, no matter what distance seemingly.

I found a multiplier of 15 to be good. Stuff that isn't shielded will blow up in shallow entries. semi-shielded stuff seems to be able to survive if your craft has enough lift (think of spaceplanes). Steep entries will kill crew due to G forces about as fast as dying to heat if shielded. The only thing missing here is the ablative shielding being used up if the entries are too shallow. would it be possible (for us?) to change the rate at which the ablative shielding goes woosh?

to add/update: - Kerbin seems to have similar issues as the Mün; it's flat - Orbital lines disappear if Ap is close to body (during launch, for instance), requires zoom out and back in to reappear (is fixed when you can see the line through the body). - I think the two problems above, combined with the Mün's mapview vs actual 3d terrain, are intertwined. - planes on the runway do not get recognized when launching new planes from the runway, aswhere launchpad does ask you to get into or remove current vehicle occupying the pad. ^this got me thinking, since often when first launching a vehicle, I had no problems with rapid disassembly on pad, while if I restarted a flight or built a new one, chances it went boom due to launchclamps and similar were increased. maybe, just maaayybe, invisible launchclamps that didn't get removed correctly or something? probably not, but who knows. fixed: - KSC is no longer located above water. Also, I'm really excited about this project, and all the other things you've added for us to make things more awesome. Is there any way a person unfamiliar with coding can help out? playtesting, looking for or recreating specific bugs, staying in more direct contact? I'd love to help!

I've rounded up a few screenshots showcasing the Mün surface bug: http://imgur.com/a/DJMFB additionally, could this be the same bug on kerbin? (note the horizon) http://i.imgur.com/PqidHez.jpg

lots of playtesting today. a compilation of issues/bugs so far: - Kerbin/Mün textures are lowres (even if using Universe Replacer with 8k mod or similar). - Kerbin textures present artifacts, especially around lakes (even does this in stock ksp, but far worse now). - original Mün 3d terrain and mapview terrain are textures that can only be viewed at certain angles, they can disappear, you can fly under them. actual terrain underneath (seems about 20-30km below original terrain on average) can be landed on, but is fairly flat. - KSC is located above water. - Buildings in Space Center cannot be easily clicked on, in addition to starting camera being mislocated. - Orbital lines tend to disappear at times - Objects landed on Kerbin can be destroyed by G forces or impact once focused, in one case leaving behind 2 parachutes in the air that were moving at ~450 surface speed, 0 orbit speed, with mach effects and all, but actually sitting still on the ground. - Some part parts of combinations of parts can get excessively wobbly when forces are acted upon them. - This mod is too awesome. In other news, I was 1km/s short of landing my first Mün probe (takes about 15-17 km/s Dv total from KSC, I think) I have pictures of some events, request what you need.

As in mod it to oblivion to make fun to play?

surprisingly, the increased distance from Kerbol without the rescale of Kerbol makes sunrise and -set look way more awesome, not to mention the increased time it takes to set/rise. and these aren't even the prettiest screenshots. the re-entry effects are WAY cooler aswell, makes DRE more fun to play with too. Stockish Koyuz lifter used to get a payload of 3.4t into orbit, starting at 243t launchpad weight, using up 9.4km/s Dv to orbit, keeping 550m/s for orbital maneuvres + more than enough RCS to dock. Loving this mod (also laughing at KLF people orbiting stock kerbin deep within Kearth). Additionally, I believe a DREC heat multiplier of 20 instead of 25 will work, maybe 15.. 10 seems to make this too easy. no idea how to embed an album, so : http://imgur.com/a/KR55S/embed

you get big hug nao. I really like the direction KSP mods are heading in right now. Taking this, with FAR, DRE, TAC LS, RT, MFS RF, hopefully soon to come proper tech tree to actually make a challenging career mode out of this.. This is going to steal so many hours of sleep. Love you people.

I've been doing the career mode starting out with KIDS. loving the challenge! Although the tech tree is absolutely unfitting for realism mods such as these, it's still a fun challenge to even get to the Mün (completing my first DRE, FAR, TAC LS, KIDS FAR -> RL, adj manned Münar return mission was really satisfying). I've been working on a tech tree design that supports realism, especially FAR, starting out with planes, progressing up in a realistic, balanced and fun way to space travel, but it'll be a while before that's usable. Keep up the great work, Ferram!

The station orbited Tylo, carefully lowered to 200m radar altitude above the highest mountain, in near perfect equatorial circular orbit. it's purely the time warp and ship loading that despawns the station, no crashing or smashing involved.

I believe that station had around 6.7km circular. Was a while ago, can't remember with certainty