Andrew Hansen

Heehee... I landed my first RAPIER SSTO on the Mun! I don't think they're overpowered. Mostly, they make it easier to get into orbit with their auto-switching mechanism. It's almost like having MechJeb built right into stock KSP!

Landing a Plane (horizontally) on Minmus By the way, once B9 Aerospace is updated I'm pretty sure I'll make an episode 8 of Colonizing Kerbin's Moons. But until then, I'll post other fun stuff - like landing on Tylo with ion engines (from the NearFuture mod).

How to Build a VTOL SSTO with B9 Aerospace

Hey everyone, Again, the next video is taking some time to release. Besides having some issues with my VTOL SSTO that's supposed to be able to land and return from Minmus , I am looking for ways to improve the FPS of my videos. I have decided that CamStudio has served its purpose and I must invest in a better recording software now. In the upcoming video (episode 6 of Colonizing Kerbin's Moons), I'll invite you to share your opinions on what software I should buy. Currently I'm quite interested in Bandicam, but if you have a reason why FRAPS or some other program is better (or a way to make CamStudio use graphics acceleration ), then please let me know. Also, expect to see a change in the types of videos I release. From my analytics in YouTube it appears that people enjoy watching short videos about hard challenges and insane piloting skills more than series in which I attempt to colonize the solar system. Still, I'll finish up my existing series (perhaps in two more videos) before moving on.

Poor Tylo. It was so lonely in the stock game because it required so much Delta-V to land on. And now, it'll be even lonelier - with its formidable atmosphere, outrageous amount of surface gravity, and pricey ascent Delta-V. I really wanted to try NovaSilisko's challenge though, so I used HyperEdit to try descending into its atmosphere (with Deadly Reentry). Apparently it was harder to land on it than I thought.

Strangely enough, yes. I just tried it. The intake tells me that there is "no oxygen," but the jets work fine! EDIT: There's something weird going on with my save I think. They work on Eve too! I didn't change any settings... it could be a bug caused by Alternis Kerbol, but I'll have to try and see if it's actually caused by that mod. I have a few others installed too. Apparently they only work sometimes. They worked at first on Eve, but now they don't anymore. Strange stuff.

I have a silly question. NovaSilisko, what do you mean when you say "comet"? Like, that it has a tail behind it? Or perhaps that it's not on rails? Or simply that it has an elliptical orbit? Thanks very much! By the way, I attempted to do your challenge of landing on Tylo with Deadly Reentry, but even after stacking piles of heat shields on top of each other, either the capsule would eventually blow up after all the heat shields exploded or the Kerbal would die from excessive G forces.

That makes sense to me. I'm not sure if that's the way it is in the game, though, but if it is, then wow! Some interesting facts about Uranus there. I didn't know that. I just knew it was the gas giant with the lowest escape velocity, but I didn't know Earth could theoretically orbit it.

Well, in short, no - the planets could not scientifically exist in the orbits they do in Alternis Kerbol. Kerbin orbiting a gas planet with less mass than itself? No way. But it's the same for Krag's Planet Factory, the Rescaled Solar System mod, and even in the stock game - especially in the Jool system. Tylo, Laythe, and Jool all have 0.8 Gs of gravity, so it's inconceivable that Tylo and Laythe are orbiting Jool. And imagine all the real-world things that would happen to their orbits when they get a close encounter. I understand what you mean though. It would be great to have a more mathematically accurate universe to play around with in KSP, but so far there aren't really any mods that do that yet, at least for the planets.

Banned for populating Low Kerbin Orbit with satellites made out of lead!

Hey, that's good news. Here I was waiting too. I guess I'll have to replace all the SABRE engines with RAPIERs though.

Wow! What a blessed Christmas gift. I know just recently I was thinking to myself, man, it'd be awesome if Kerbin was located around Jool. If this works I want to complete your challenge (to land and return from Tylo) and record a video of me doing it. I'll probably put it up on my YouTube channel or something.

Right click and drag your mouse to move the camera around. Left click on parts and snap them under or on top of stacks. One is the VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building) for building rockets, and the other is the SPH (Spaceplane Hanger) for building airplanes and spaceplanes. You can build rockets in the SPH, and spaceplanes in the VAB, but each of them has custom buildings tools that make it easier for those specific things. In the spaceplane hanger the symmetry is different than in the VAB. There you only have two times symmetry, which is great for making planes. On planes, you'll usually have two wings on either side of the plane, so you only need two times symmetry. Also, it auto-orients parts to face forward in the Spaceplane Hanger which makes things easier because you will most likely be launching your planes horizontally down the runway rather than vertically. In the Vehicle Assembly Building you build vertical rockets and have access to symmetry levels up to 8. Like you said, the game is a work in progress. They can't continually update an in-game tutorial at this stage of development. But as others have said, watch tutorials on YouTube. I'd recommend watching Scott Manley's tutorial videos.

It's impossible for the developers to make everyone happy. Some people want some things and some want others. Personally, I'm happy where Kerbal Space Program is headed. I know that when you're in charge of a project, you really have to follow your own path or things won't turn out well. If you listen to what everybody wants and try to implement it, you'll never go anywhere. When you're in charge of a project, you have to have a firm plan laid out about what you're going to do. That's exactly what HarvesteR has done. Also, I don't know if it's just me, but it appears to me that the developers do make a lot of decisions based on what the community wants. For example, there was a lot of feedback after 0.22 about the science system and some changes that would be nice, and in 0.23 we got those changes (removed the ability to spam science, added the ability to transfer science, for a few examples). Additionally, resources haven't been "scrapped" or "abandoned." Right now there's just more important things to do, like finishing up Career mode more. Career mode is what allows players to more quickly learn the game. It adds structure to the game. And if for some reason you don't like Career mode, you're still free to play Sandbox. Adding more game modes is never a bad thing, in my opinion. Regarding additional planets, I think that adding more detail to the existing planets and polishing them up is more important than just adding more. Sure, you can add many spheres of many sizes to the game, but it'll be an exciting day to me when Laythe has volcanic activity added to it. Or when magnetic fields are added. Stuff like that.

To solve the SAS issue, go to the VAB and open up the Ferram Aerospace Research configuration thingomablob. Then click on the control surfaces you are using for rolling your plane (the ones on the outsides of your wings) and change the surface deflection to 10 or 5 or whatever seems to work better. You can also assign control surfaces to be used only for the roll, pitch, or yaw axis. As far as the air brakes go, I'd recommend not using them. I tried for a while, but in FAR they're far (pun intended) less effective than in stock. Just come in for a nice, slow landing without them and turn on the brakes when you hit the ground. A mod I would recommend to make building planes that much easier would be the RCS Build Aid mod. It has the capability of showing the dry center of mass of your plane. Make sure it is as close to the center of lift as possible. What always seems to happen to my planes is that they lift off fine, get to orbit fine (since they are spaceplanes), but when it comes time to land them, they are uncontrollable because the center of mass has shifted too much. Try moving fuel tanks around to get the center of mass to stay in more or less the same place. Below I've attached a video from my YouTube channel in which I fly two SSTOs. The first one is well-balanced, and the second is not. It might be helpful. Happy flying!

Don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure that the only part which uses ResGen is the compressed air nozzle (it looks like an RCS nozzle but uses air instead). It has to use a custom resource to make it work in the atmosphere. I don't think any of the other parts use ResGen.

Voyage to Eeloo - KSP Cinematic (Christmas Special)

I think that for a new update reworking the textures would be really nice. Especially on the really large static envelopes, the low-resolution textures are scaled up quite a lot and don't look all that great. Thank you for taking over the mods, I really appreciate it!

Ahem. No, the NavBall Docking Alignment Indicator.

Well said! And it'd be fun to take a couple on a romantic holiday through the stars as I said earlier (but there's been so many posts I'm saying it again!). With so many responses to this topic in just a matter of a few hours, it seems obvious that this is surely a controversial topic in the minds of KSP players. Many people have been saying that Kerbals are just Kerbals! What's the big deal? They're little green men who can survive forever in space. Perhaps they're fungi. Well, my answer is that as the game develops, Kerbals are going to become more and more human. Once life support is implemented, people will no longer be able to say that Kerbals are plants/fungi. It will begin to seem very strange that there are no female Kerbals. That's why I think this should be implemented. And it really isn't very hard to do so. While they add that, we might as well have Kerbals with mustaches and lighter green colors and darker green, as jcraft said in the quoted text above.

Universe Replacer! Nobody's mentioned that yet.

I love the RAPIER engine. The first thing I did when I started KSP 0.23 was made a RAPIER SSTO! I accidentally ended up taking it to the Mun....

I noticed this too while performing a Hack Gravity test run on Kerbin. I was unsure if perhaps it stayed full just because the capsule was sitting the ground, but I'm glad to have some confirmation that my tests were correct. That's a bit disappointing. But as others have said, it probably means that in 0.24 we'll truly have Kerbals using monopropellant on EVA.

That's an awesome proposal. I personally support the adding of female Kerbals. In answer to all the complaints about lipstick and breasts, my response would be that they could have rounder faces (like the above picture) and longer hair. No need for breasts. I've used Universe Replacer to add female face textures to Kerbals and they already look pretty good. Of course, it depends on the textures. Some of them have lipstick. It wouldn't take much to implement female Kerbals into the game. I mean, a rounder head might be nice, but even that isn't necessary. If just by swapping textures in Universe Replacer you can achieve a female effect, it would be pretty simple to do the same in stock KSP. Also, usually when I play KSP I imagine that I'm creating my base/space station/whatever-it-is for rich Kerbals to go on expensive holidays (ahem, like what HOCGaming is doing) across the solar system. It just isn't the same when only male Kerbals can go. I mean, obviously you need some couples to have a romantic honeymoon out in space!

I don't believe you will run into any issues. But as KvickFlygarn87 said, you just have to try it!