CAPFlyer

Oh, and I can\'t forget - this is my new satellite kit. Sorry Nova, but I think I like these parts a little better, even though I\'ll probably do a little mixing and matching occasionally since the textures seem close enough. BTW, don\'t forget the Fixed Camera module for your telescope and any probe cameras.

Because that plugin would be unnecessarily large, especially if you weren\'t using all of it and wouldn\'t allow for easy removal unneeded functions of the module if Squad integrates that feature directly into the program.

I would double check this, but I\'m pretty sure with 0.15 there was a new variable added to the CFG that allows you to set the crew without a module at all. Check the stock pod CFG. I know I\'ve got a couple of 'unmanned' pods (one for Silisko, the other I don\'t remember where I got it) that have 0 crew which I modded a while ago when either 0.14 or 0.15 came out. I\'m not at my KSP computer right now so I can\'t tell ya for sure how I did it. BTW, I\'ve been meaning to ask, are your Kerbal meshes compliant with the new Kerbal model that has been described by the developers in the 0.16 Development thread and the 0.16 Animation thread? I ask because when 0.16 comes out, your meshes won\'t be needed in game since those will be present and if your dimensions and theirs don\'t line up, it\'ll make for some interesting results.

Uggh... more great video from CCP telling me I need to find the money to friggin\' rejoin EVE Online. DUST 514 keeps getting better and better and will be awesome once it\'s live. Might have to find the money for a PS3 or XBox360 now too. Not to mention Inferno looks amazing too with them finally dealing with missile animations. I need money!

Read the post more closely 'trbinsc'. Harv clearly stated that moving around the cabin won\'t be in 0.16. 0.16 will only be adding the necessary framework for the 'in cabin' views and interior meshes. Everything else comes down the road.

Yeah, there\'s a ton of news and it\'s all in the KSP Development forum. There\'s a 46 page and counting thread just on the 0.15 update.

This is consistent with the landing rockets used by space probes and upper stages of some rockets. They can only be ignited once, but they are liquid fueled, so not all propellant needs to be used and 'custom' flightpaths can be obtained.

If you read the rule, then you\'d realize that as long as within the RP forum you establish that all players agree for IC PM\'s to be subject to public release on that forum, then you\'re covered. Guys, instead of telling the mods that their rules are stupid or saying that you might be banned for this or that rule, try actually reading them and UNDERSTANDING THEM. There\'s a reason they added 'with out the consent of both parties'. It means that you CAN repost something as long as the other guy\'s okay with it. It\'s not that hard to get their okay for it if it\'s something IC/a joke/etc.

How does that get around the problem of hollow collision meshes?

Remember that time acceleration is available in KSP to offset the time need for mapping missions. Additionally, I would hope that in the future the module could be running even when you\'re not focused on it (like in the real world) so that you\'re flying other missions while the mapping is going on, again, just like in the real world. NASA didn\'t stop launching rockets just because the first Surveyor mission had launched. There were other things they needed to do once Surveyor was in orbit of the Moon before they could actually use its data. Things like the Gemini and early Apollo missions that needed to prove the systems before the ultimate goal could be reached.

Has anyone asked Mu if there\'s any way for terrain data to be read from orbit? If there is, then that\'d be the way to fix the issue. Maybe he can do something in a future release to allow it too. Having 'Mapping Missions' would be important for the final KSP release, so it\'s something that benefits everyone.

Actually, you are listed. Right under KSP Roleplaying. Sectional Moderators don\'t get a 'title' change since they\'re not a moderator everywhere. Most forum software requires you to setup a special title class if you want to do that, it\'s not an automatic group.

The engines of the shuttle were angled the way they were to ensure that sufficient thrust offset was created to balance the asymmetric drag and lift of the combined vehicle stack. No matter which way you pointed the ship, the shuttle would tend to 'pull' the stack. The head down position was to maximize leverage of that asymmetric drag to help with the gravity turn so that you were spending the least amount of fuel in maintaining the ship\'s attitude possible and thus wasted energy. The proof of this is that later in the program, they began rolling the shuttle 'heads up' about 5 minutes into the flight to allow them to utilize satellites to communicate and track the shuttle\'s ascent as it passed out of range of the tracking station in Bermuda. As the shuttle was no longer having to offset the thrust of the SRB\'s, there was also a net 'push' to the stack as the ET drag in the atmosphere would tend to require an 'up' thrust component to offset, even if minor, again, to the advantage of a heads-down shuttle until high enough that atmospheric drag was no longer a major component. As for Energia/Buran, it also rolled heads down, just as the Soyuz stack does. It\'s a fairly 'universal' maneuver.

Thank you for looking into this. Here\'s something that kinda irritates me with MechJeb but not to a huge extent because we\'re still waiting on the full rebuild of the atmospheric flight model(s). Roll should not be ignored or left to pilot input. The moment you put lifting surfaces on a rocket you must control roll as part of maintaining its proper path. Imagine if NASA tried to launch the shuttle and instead of pitching head\'s down they rolled only 90 degrees and had the ship essentially flying on it\'s side. Now try to maintain the pitch attitude and yaw it along the path. You\'re fighting a lot more resistance to movement doing it that way because you have a lot less control authority. By pitching \'heads down\', you not only increase the comfort of the crew, you also put all the control authority on your side. The upward-canted SSME\'s have the most movement available when on the bottom of the stack, you have the body flap, the elevons, and the SRB gimbals all working for you. Additionally, the lifting surface of the wing and the combined SRB/ET stack helps to stabilize the entire stack by pushing it forward. People seem to think that a rocket can really launch in any direction. There\'s a reason that the designers always have the rockets roll 'heads down'. There\'s a function to it. It not only minimizes the felt acceleration for the payload (whether human or mechanical) but it also makes sure that on those vehicles that have lifting surfaces they\'re used to the maximum effect.

Not really. Floats and Parachutes need to be activated separately. By combining them (under the current staging system) means they both activate together as you can only activate the part, not sub-divisions of the part. Even if you could combine them, you run into collision mesh problems because floats and parachutes aren\'t always co-located.

I don\'t think capsules will ever have inbuilt floats and parachutes. They should always be addon parts and the solution should be that modders create their capsules with the appropriate parts just as the Squad team will certainly add a functional heat shield once reentry heat is added for the default capsule. The point of KSP to date has been maximum flexibility, I think keeping parachutes, reentry shields, and stuff like that modules is the best way because it lets people use their preferences in how they design their ships.

You also need an 'Anti-Sun' position which positions the smallest surface area/face to the sun for radiators/heat control. Also stations will need to have 4 modes active (Surface - Prograde - Sun - Anti-Sun) since its solar panels will need to face the sun but radiators will need to be turned to present minimum surface to the sun. The only other one I\'d think would be useful, especially for down-the-road is some sort of autotrack function where if PowerSat is implemented on a probe or just an antenna in conjunction with another addon like the Satellite Relay System, the antenna/probe will automatically align with the first target in its relay chain.

It\'s been 3 days since his last post and you\'re asking if it\'s dead? Seriously dude, this isn\'t his day job and he most certainly isn\'t getting paid. So lay the hell off these guys, they do occasionally have lives outside of the internet. I know that might be a hard concept to fathom, but maybe you should try it.

Okay, here\'s the output from my output_log.txt - IsolatedStorageException: Could not find file 'E:\Program Files (x86)\KSP\Parts\ExternalTankSkins\part.cfg'. at System.IO.FileStream..ctor (System.String path, FileMode mode, FileAccess access, FileShare share, Int32 bufferSize, Boolean anonymous, FileOptions options) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.IO.FileStream..ctor (System.String path, FileMode mode, FileAccess access, FileShare share) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.IO.File.OpenRead (System.String path) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.IO.StreamReader..ctor (System.String path, System.Text.Encoding encoding, Boolean detectEncodingFromByteOrderMarks, Int32 bufferSize) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.IO.StreamReader..ctor (System.String path) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.IO.File.OpenText (System.String path) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PowerSat.onPartLoad () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Part.OnLoad () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartLoader.ParsePartCfg () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartLoader.doProcessPart (UnityEngine.GameObject[] mdls, Boolean partLabMode) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartLoader.startPartAssembly (UnityEngine.GameObject[] mdls) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartSerializer+<loadBinaryMesh>c__IteratorA.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 Edit: Found that there was a folder by the name referenced in the Parts folder and deleted it. The addon now works. Looking at the log, your module is queuing a search of the PARTS folder to make sure all of them have a parts.cfg file. This is not normal behavior of the load, so something in your source is calling it when it\'s being loaded. I think that needs to be removed as you\'re modifying the base behavior of the game and that can cause very, very bad problems down the road.

Downloaded and made sure parts.cfg was where it was supposed to be, but it is still locking up at the PowerSat. Using 14.3 (will update to 14.4 later today).

Not only that - LEARN TO BUILD YOUR OWN CRAFT! (Sorry for all caps, but I\'m getting tired of this entitlement mentality here by some users. If you can\'t build your own ship, then find something else to do. The point of this game is to build your own ships. If you can\'t follow the directions in the readme or figure it out from the images, then don\'t be modding the program.)

100% clean install. I even did a full, clean install of KSP just to be sure. I re-downloaded the package twice just to make sure I wasn\'t missing anything. I also noticed that when I download the 1.1a download, there\'s a lot of Odin parts in it and some craft files that are duplicate to the Odin files with different dates, maybe this is the problem?

Tibs, I would also check your CRAFT files. I\'ve made sure I\'ve got clean installs of the latest packages, and I get a 'Missing Parts' in the title and not even the whole Odin assembled when trying to load the ODIN - ARES I craft, and the ODIN NPHeavy launcher throws a glitch for missing the 'miniDecoupler'. On the latter, I checked, and sure enough, the CRAFT file still references 'miniDecoupler' instead of 'NP.miniDecoupler'.

Actually, the Shuttles retrieved the following satellites from orbit and returned them to Earth - Palapa-B2 & Westar 6 were both recovered by STS-51A (Discovery) in Nov. 1984 after initially being deployed from Challenger during STS-41B in February. Their 'kick motors' failed, putting them in the wrong orbits, so Discovery recovered both satellites and returned them to earth. Palapa-B2 was eventually re-launched in 1990 atop a Delta II as the Palapa-B2R. LDEF (Long Duration Exposure Facility) was a free-floating experiment rack that was launched from Challenger on STS-41-C in Apr. 1984 and returned to earth aboard Discovery on STS-32R in Jan. 1990. EURECA (EUropean REcoverable CArrier), similar to LDEF, was launched on STS-46 (Atlantis) in Jul. 1992, and recovered on STS-57 (Endeavour) in June 1993. SFU (Space Flyer Unit) was a Japanese experimental satellite that was launched by rocket in March 1995 and recovered on STS-72 (Endeavour) in Jan. 1996. I believe there were either 2 or 3 additional DoD satellites that were recovered, but as those missions are still technically 'classified', it\'s never been officially confirmed whether the shuttle actually returned anything.

Ahh, okay. Understand now.