Kurtvw

This video shows how close I've gotten. This was in Career mode, and I don't have 5 Meter yet, so I did use liquid boosters rather than inline staging on the bottom end, but all up, I think it was pretty close. Do you have something closer? I'm curious what people have come up with to recreate this design in KSP?

It is better because it doesn't have the obstructed view -- But it's heavier, so I didn't use it for this... This was just a quick dirty demo... In retrospect I had more than enough thrust to lift that one... I have used that camera on rovers though. Just never tried to fly it. The idea was simply that the camera doesn't need to attach to the ship launching, so get creative!

Its a pretty fun mod.. Mostly its for getting cool shots for video. Obviously its really challenging to control the ship from a remote view. And if you watched this one to the end you see that it was pretty much boned by the time I got back to it. If I had the interface showing I could have orbited it, but I wanted to show the cameras. Mostly they are just for dramatic effect... It doesn't add much to game play... Although the Booster cam is a lot of fun - it mounts radially on any part of your rocket with one looking 'up' and one looking 'down', so you can get really cool 'Apollo' style stage separations and such. Haven't messed with it much yet. Still learning.

Its part of the Hull Cam Mod... in the mod you use plus and minus to cycle the mod cameras.

Hope this helps... http://youtu.be/7FSjKEdPGhQ

build it onto a little probe based rover and drive to where ever you want it and set it up... I use InfernalRobotics to give me hinges and rotating parts to get the pan and tilt dialed in (can't adjust that remotely though, so make sure you're happy). The camera will work even though it is on another vessel, so as long as you're within 2.3km of the camera it works fine. Here, I whipped up a little video to show you just how to do it, and its even got a wicked cool 'Space Odyssey' vibe... Enjoy

I never noticed that.. How silly.

I thought that too. But their non-orange suits are a dead give-away :-D

Which was funny, because he got picked for this Mun trip just because of his name... he was my lander pilot, and looked that stressed every moment until splashdown. Well, he was happy on his munwalks... but otherwise, he's a little high-strung. So I'll keep him. those are my favorite guys.

I don't remember ever having all my guys outside at once. It was fun to set up. These are Muning, Shelden, and Hanbrett (Left to right)

Most of my rockets are more serious affairs, but today I decided to just be destructive. I know - its a bit derivative of Danny's videos, but that was not really the intent... The song I originally picked was by a local band that I know personally, but I got a CD BABY copyright claim on it (totally false, but I don't want to wait to sort that out) So I picked some stock 'public domain' up beat fun stuff, just like Danny does... So, ultimately it looks like rip off, but if anything its respect... Danny is WAY funnier than me, and I have no illusions. If you don't know who Danny is, I welcome you out from under your rock, we are humans, and we mean you no harm unless we find out you're tasty! Anyhow, have a look at my new kerbal hurting device.

you're making an assumption that the media folks only had it today... I think thats a bad assumption. I don't believe for a moment that danny screened, post edited, etc his video in less than 12 hours. He would have needed time with the parts to get the ideas for the funny stuff, and so on... he's had it for days at least and probably longer. I suspect they have had it for a while now and were under NDA until todays event. I'm sticking with my Tuesday the 25th (tomorrow) prediction.

Bah, I had such a great fantasy there, and you come around with your 'Facts' messing it all up

My prediction for ARM is Tomorrow afternoon, because since I started playing KSP releases have happened on Tuesday afternoon... It comes in the form of a DevNote that says something to the effect of "Why are you reading this when you could be playing version .xx" So now that that is out of the way, what I want to know is this.... Unity five announced and includes 64bit support, I wonder if Squad had access to Unity5 during the ARM development, and could get 64bit KSP working for ARM or if we will be waiting till 0.24 for that? Finally though... some motion on 64bit! "Unity 5, the latest version of the popular game development engine, was unveiled at the Game Development Conference in San Francisco today. The new update will include big updates to Unity’s audio and lighting tools and 64-bit engine support, according to Unity Technologies. Unity 5 will be available for pre-order starting today, and is accompanied by a trailer featuring lots of flashy light rendering and a wub-wub distortion soundtrack." http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/03/18/unity-5-unveiled-at-gdc-2014/

My specialty is doing 'Realistic' rockets. When Scott Manley started doing "interstellar quest", I was inspired by the idea of doing all the grunt work the hard way. I use KSPTOT to plan my missions and figure out how much power will really be needed, and when to launch, etc... But after that, its all hand flown. While I have ripped off a few of his (Scott M's) ideas (because some of them are really just genius) most of my stuff is all home grown. It really is a lot of fun trying to limit your vast power using the mods that really make it hard... Deadly Re-entry, Ferram, Remote Tech2, Interstellar, etc... And No MecJeb allowed, and no respawn of dead Kerbals.. I stopped using the TAC Life Support because the parts are too wobbly and really since you can generate anything but food onboard pretty easily it really doesn't make the game any harder. I do use some Asparagus Lifters, but only single layer, I don't make those crazy ones that are wider than they are tall. My rockets are all machines that could really work. Anyhow, thats my gig. I'm a tech geek, so I like max difficulty rubiks cube missions that make my brain hurt.

thanks for taking the time to explain... I'd actually figured this was probably the case, but its good to have you clarify. I've had some of the best luck with KSP TOT for getting me ballpark dialed in on my manuver (as compared with other similar mods). But I wasn't sure if the errors were real or not. Sounds like its working as best it can and as long as it dials me into orbits I can afford, it's all good. For those you you reading along though, I'll tell you there is more profit in adjusting the maneuver time than there is in adjusting the maneuver velocities...

Cool, looking forward to it, thanks!

A quick question, Arrowstar.. Right now I'm using version 11.2 (if you have a more recent one, please do tell), and I'm noticing that a lot of times the orbit it plots in KSP is not what it looks like in the KSPTOT. And I'm confused about the selection for use Mean Anom, and Epoch, Could you explain why I might check or uncheck that? Under what circumstances there would be an advantage? Anyhow, as it relates to the variations, Is it because it often puts the maneuver marker days in advance of the current time? Or should the transfer orbit look exactly as shown? It seems to me that since I'm having it import direct from KSP and output direct to KSP I should be getting exact results. I'm often able to tweak the manuver to get it right, but sometimes its off by quite a long distance, in one case from Duna to Kerbin it shot me into a much higher Apoapsis out near Jool, and with periapsis still near Duna.

After the Jan11 version, my rapiers are still just exploding like crazy... suggestions?

Thanks cilph, you're a boss!

Considering that C# is a full powered programming language, and not just a silly little scripting language, you should probably think twice, and perhaps three times about downloading builds if you don't know exactly who compiled them. They could (although probably do not) contain malicious software packaged with the intended mod. I'll wait for the real deal to be released, or at least a version with a verifiable origin.

I don't suppose you could point me to the most recent stable build? I'd like to start rebuilding my network in .23. Don't worry, I'm a programmer too, I won't mock you if something doesn't work right. Thanks for anything.

I'm not entirely certain that Gemini 8 had any ability to command Agena remotely. Do you have a reference to that? My understanding is that the craft was oriented with its own internal gyro's and that the Capsule only had control over it while Docked. Anyhow, even if there was some relay between them it was at very short range (not more than a few miles). Gemini capules didn't exactly have massive battery array's or extensive solar power to drive any long term kind of communication relay, which is a lot different from what the Command capability in RT2 is intended to do. I think leaving it as is would probably be more realistic. I have already done an Agena type craft in one of my saves and use it to keep my docking skills sharp - Mine is 'Athena' and its in a very nearly perfect 0 inclined 200km LKO, its very handy when I'm feeling a little rusty. And I don't relay anything to it, it is stable on its own.

That nuke thing pertains to weapons, not engines.. Curiosity runs on nuclear power, as does Cassini.the treaty forbids nuclear weapons. Thinking a little more, both Voyagers use a nuclear power system... before anyone leaps on me, yeah, I know they don't have nuclear thrusters, they are using nuclear power to create electricty. But a reactor in space is a reactor in space... Anyhow, I'm not getting in the 'future/past' discussion, just pointing out an inaccuracy..

That is not just a problem for this game, or even just for games generally. It is true in all programming. Your own vision isn't as awesome as they want it. Then they tell you what is they want, so you code that, and then it turns out they actually don't want what they thought. And around you go again...