Thogapotomus

Just wanted to say, with this new update B9 has really outdone itself. Thanks for all the hard work and beautiful parts

When a kerbal gets his head bashed in by a nasty accident I think I can understand why he would be paralyzed lol. Well, if it wasn't for some that survive hitting the ground from orbit

I guess I fail to see where the cost issue is balanced in Sandbox? I posted a comment at the tail end of another one of these discussions that seems relevant, so I'll just leave it here. "At first I thought they were fine due to tech progression in career mode. However after reading through these posts I've changed my stance. I'm inclined to agree that each engine in the game should have it's respective place on the ISP curve and all should strive to stick to it. I do want tech progression though. So the solution for me would be to allow upgrades in the R&D Department. Instead of new parts outclassing old, your science and money could be spent to raise the ISP for all engines across the board. Heck, you could have multiple upgrades for different things like engine thrust, electricity consumption/storage/generation, ASAS torque, RCS ISP, lighter materials, etc. A good one I think would be structural integrity which could go from .23 strengths up to .23.5 strengths. All in all, there has to be some tech progression in career for it to be enjoyable to me. A system like this would still balance all engines while having better payload fractions at the end of a completed career."

That's awesome lol. Now that it's trapped, just need to figure out a way to propel Bop into the sun :s

I agree, but that's kind of how it is now right? The nuclear and mainsail are farther up the tree. I'd be curious to see what Squad think about engine clustering as well. A few smaller engines can net you more dV than one larger engine with comparable thrust with no penalty other than part count. The penalty could be cost, but then we're back at the same issue people have with the new engines.

I used mechjeb to learn maneuvers and it was good to have at the beginning. There were times it still wouldn't rendezvous (or some other maneuver) though and it would burn up all my fuel, so I learned to do it myself. I think once you get an intuitive feel for maneuvers, it's not much use except for readouts, dV micromanaging, and freeing up your hands from tedium. I don't use it now, even though I like all of the info it gives. It just seems that when I have it installed, I want all these windows open for info and it just looks cluttered. I really enjoy the scenery and atmosphere of space so that's the main reason I don't use it. (weird probably lol)

At first I thought they were fine due to tech progression in career mode. However after reading through these posts I've changed my stance. I'm inclined to agree that each engine in the game should have it's respective place on the ISP curve and all should strive to stick to it. I do want tech progression though. So the solution for me would be to allow upgrades in the R&D Department. Instead of new parts outclassing old, your science and money could be spent to raise the ISP for all engines across the board. Heck, you could have multiple upgrades for different things like engine thrust, electricity consumption/storage/generation, ASAS torque, RCS ISP, lighter materials, etc. A good one I think would be structural integrity which could go from .23 strengths up to .23.5 strengths. All in all, there has to be some tech progression in career for it to be enjoyable to me. A system like this would still balance all engines while having better payload fractions at the end of a completed career.

While technically what the OP did can be considered a skip, I personally wouldn't call it that. I'd consider a skip as the atmosphere pushing or deflecting the object back into space. What the OP did was the equivalent of just giving the atmosphere the finger and plowing right through it. He/she was slowed down enough that the orbit was suborbital , but I'm guessing the trajectory wasn't altered much by deflection, but just drag itself. Just my opinion/preference though, obviously. It's kind of like at what point does a pond become a lake? There's technically a set point, but what you'd call the body of water without knowing would come down to preference.

Yeah you're right. I guess my point was that in stock KSP it seems like terminal velocity is fairly consistent with little regard to the rocket you're launching, but with ferram a streamlined rocket can easily exceed the terminal velocity it would experience with stock KSP. Also, as far as I know, the drag losses you experience for exceeding terminal velocity in ferram are less extreme than in stock.

I'm having issues with the toolbar. In the space plane hanger, FAR, KER, and IR are all showing up in the toolbar but clicking on them does nothing. KER actually toggles its color to yellow, but no window ever appears. In flight some work, and some don't (mainly IR). Did a clean install and I have the newest update to the toolbar. I've tried searching for a solution, but haven't came up with anything. Any help would be appreciated. Edit: Now the arrow on the toolbar just makes a tiny black square appear instead of the menu. If it's a mod conflict, I haven't found it. Is there anyway to disable the bar from the individual mods?

I was under the impression that staying near terminal velocity on ascent was just a by product of Kerbin's soupy atmosphere and the way drag is calculated in game. Pretty much the same reason it seems most efficient to start the gravity turn at 10k even though that's not realistic. If you use ferram, for example, you can start the gravity turn at launch, and with a streamlined rocket exceed terminal velocity by a large margin with minimal losses as opposed to stock.

You should be able to, since kethane doesn't alter any of the original parts.

Once you are off the runway and in the direction you want to go, try flying by using trim adjustments. It's more useful for holding pitch but can allow for smoother movements overall and it works particularly well with FAR. Hold Alt and press the control keys to input trim. For example, if my plane keeps diving, I'll hold Alt while pressing S until the plane can hold its heading. Playing around with this function can greatly increase your flying ability and enjoyment. Also pressing Alt+X will reset all trim adjustments. This can also be used with Caps-lock for really fine control.

I was launching them in groups of 8 with a probe to meet up with the main collection module and they kept eating my probes electric. Even after I switched them all off though, I couldn't maintain a charge so I slapped a probe gen/reactor combo on. Edit: Do the collectors have to be attached to a tank, or can I just haul up some collectors to help fill the station's tanks faster?

Hey Fractal, any way I can set up an action group for anti matter tank charge?

What I did was just rename the file to HeatRadiatorS and manually dropped it in the electrical parts folder of interstellar. I'm pretty sure you need to keep it separate from the normal radiator folder since they have different models. Edit: I had a question as well. I have 5 separate AM tanks each with their own collector on a ship, but only 1 is collecting right now. Do they pool their collections into one tank first and then fill others?

I think it would also be interesting if they had a captured rogue planet in a polar orbit arount kerbol. You'd have to slingshot off jool to match its inclanation. Or maybe a large comet or something of the sort.

Though you may not need it, it might help to put a vertical stabilizer at the rear as well. Parachutes are actually a good idea too. I might put some on my planes in case of emergencies.

I didn't realize they changed in .22. I never even tried them before as I'd always opt for the 909's. After reading this thread though, I'm going to have to try them out.

Agreed. Tails seem to be severely under rated on space planes, but they help maintain control immensely. Even if you just stick an I-beam off the rear of the plane with just stabilizing wings, (no control surfaces) it'll help.

Although I agree with most of what you've said completely, if my ship was going to take 5 minutes to rotate (or over 1 minute at x4 warp) I'd rebuild it lol. A reaction wheel here and there isn't gonna break your dV budget Also, that's a good picture for explaining RCS locations for new players, Kulebron.

Set up an action group to shut down your engines. Also note, even after your jet engines flame out, they'll still be pouring out fuel unless you shut them off.

Try to transfer your remaining fuel forward if possible to keep your center of mass where it needs to be. Getting out of a spin can be tough or almost impossible if your craft is too unbalanced. Best advice I can give is to lock in your SAS and wait untill the atmosphere gets thicker. Your spinning will slow and when you're getting closer to your prograde vector, throttle up and try to stay prograde till your stability comes back. Then it's just an issue of avoiding the ground while not spinning out again.

It certainly comes in handy. I prefer to use reaction wheels instead, though. Weighs less and there's no limit to how much you use it. Well, you need electricity but one 2.5 meter battery is probably more than you'd ever need. Even if you only have one or two reaction wheels, you can physical time warp and make the turn within seconds (real time). You can't be quite as accurate (less than .1 m/s) during interplanetary maneuvers, but I just make a tiny adjustment burn closer to the target. Probably still more delta V efficient than carrying a few tons of monopropellant for the whole trip. If you need to dock however, make sure to bring the rcs along.

There's a welder mod that allows you to combine multiple parts into one new part, thus reducing your overall part count and improving performance. I haven't used it before, but it might be worth checking out if huge ships are your thing.