kalor

One other thing. Is it possible to print out the available memory on the selected volume?

Hmmmm. In order to learn the system I am writing a small "testing" script. So when a new vessel is on the pad, I "run test." and it will cycle through tests of power levels, fuel, etc, etc. Two things about it... First, you were right about the "active" stage. Any way to have it look at a future stage? (IE, the stage that I haven't activted yet, stage 0 when on the pad) Second, I thought I saw something about adding parameters when running a program (IE, I could run test (1,2) to have it use those variables.) Is there any documentation on how to use this? I would like to use 1 as a variable for fuel, 2 for battery (to give the values I have the test script check for). would it be something along the lines of "run test(fuellevel, batterylevel)."? If so, how do I then use those variables? - Nevermind, found the post Thank you for your assistance!

so... unless I completely missed something, this: print stage:liquidfuel. Should return how much liquid fuel I have, listed by stage? Using print ship:liquidfuel. works just fine, and returns the proper number. the stage listing appears to do nothing, always returning 0. Am I missing something?

I can agree with the corporate espionage portion, it's just an idea that illustrates what could be done with interactions amongst multiple companies with individual rep systems. I had the thought last night, regarding the rep system, that perhaps removing the "general" reputation wouldn't have the desired effects. I kind of see it the same way, that the reputation is how the Kerbals see the program. What I think is more in-line with what I was thinking is leaving the general reputation intact and as-is; this would be the populace. Each company could still get their own reputation factor with the player's program. The impact of raised or lowered reputation with each company could vary widely, from simple things like higher probability to get a contract with that company (or lower...), probability to get the ability to test things further down the tech tree (it seems, from what I've seen, that currently prototypes are only one step out, maybe two, from your current progress... though I may be wrong), changes in what they are willing to pay you for your testing services, and so on. If dynamic reskinning (I know some mods do this, but its another example ) were to be integrated, perhaps certain levels of reputation with a company would allow a player to add the company logo to a part, or apply a custom texture, representing your achievement with the company. Just a couple ideas. A newsticker would be cool, and would definitely accomplish part of what I am after there. I like the idea of a newspaper or something similar, because of the ability to be pushed to front-page (or back!) page news by your actions. Just another little thing that monitors performance and progress, and gives a subtle, non-game breaking reward for doing well.

Roger that, I'll do that shortly

I'd be game for that too, though I still feel strongly about the escape velocity - Maybe a combo event, "The great escape"... All bodies + escape velocity in one craft :>

Angaraka's engine heatshields highly resemble Reeses peanutbutter cups! Awesome series, nice pics, and great designs!

Possible mod interaction issue. the FASA and ESA packs seem to become unstable when installed with MechJeb2. I've reinstalled several times, and finally removed mods, one at a time, leaving those I knew to be stable (sadly, ESA and FASA were on that list... I've spent a full day doing unstall/reinstalls ). Eventually, I worked the other way. Installation of mods one at a time. Finally, after being able to duplicate the crashes, (they are pretty consistent, though WHEN they will crash is a bit less so.), it comes down to MJ and FASA/ESA not playing nicely together. Symptoms: When adding MJ202-AR case to any craft while FASA is installed, hard CTD. Adding any FASA part to a craft while MJ parts or embedded MJ functionality is installed varies... leads to either hard CTD or *MASSIVE* VAB lag. This was duplicated numerous times. I will get a crash log when I have time to, if you need it.

I'd really like there to be a reason for the courage and stupidity stats, as well, and, with specialized roles, these stats could perhaps be worked into to impact what they do... IE, a high courage Kerbal might make a good pilot, high stupidity would make for good "grunts", ie, non-specialized Kerbals, and low stupidity would make for the best scientists... using your examples.

That would work, for the purposes of this type of mission. Overall though, I think that if there is an end-point type mission, it should be something spectacular, while also still fitting into the progression of the game. A sort of culmination of all the techniques, technologies, and skills a player has picked up along the way, with a small dose of logical progression tossed in.

So, currently, your space program exists in (forgive the upcoming pun...) a vacuum. The only goings-on are at KSC, or your spacecraft. What I would propose would be a few features, all designed to place the experience into a setting with meaning. Working them into the currently existing features is a huge bonus, but some features might exist purely based upon the experience they provide. First. I would like to see a modification to the reputation system, splitting it into "factions"; ie, the companies represented as entities in the game currently. You might be absolutely adored by Rockomax, but Jeb's Junkyard might despise you (maybe you bring all your rockets back intact? ) This *could* lead to some more interesting missions (or not, depending!) such as: *Corporate Espionage: Deliver the (in development part) to *company* headquarters (which of course, doesn't currently exist), or alternately, deliver the part to an orbit of X,Y,Z, where our agents will retrieve the part. *Cooperative Venture: *Company A* and *Company B* would like to collaberate on a project. You need to use *item1* with *item2*, and see if they perform as expected. And so on. Second, another "invisible" faction, "The Populace". The Kerbals not employed by these companies (or, if that isn't an option, maybe the Kerbals that aren't the BOD for these companies?) Your success rate (or spectacular failure rate, depending), milestone acheivements, etc, impacts this rating. This rating could do a number of things, all more visible, detailed below. Third, News and Media. Perhaps integrating the Second suggestion, the Kerbin Weekly News (or whatever) could report on your space program. Your rating with the populace and the companies (or even overall, if the others aren't implemented) could adjust the page your article is found on... if at all. This would add another personal goal for some players - make the front page news! Fourth, though this one is a bit less likely, a sort of marketplace for craft designs. When the player designs the craft, they can choose to "keep private", ie, not sell the craft or design, and produce it only for their use, "Sell vehicles", where they sell the finished product to other companies, or the populace, or "Sell design", where the design of the craft itself is sold off to competitors. The player could set the asking price, and interested companies could make bids. The bidding amount could fluctuate based upon your reputation, flights of the craft, etc. I'm sure there are a lot of other things that could add more to make the space program seem to fit into the overall world, but those are the ideas that jumped out at me the most.

I think that a good "way to go, pat on the back!" type mission would be a worthwhile goal to strive for. Something logical, within the progression laid out, and different than anything we've seen prior. My vote would be a mission to send a colony ship on an escape from Kerbol trajectory, with a sizable colony (including whatever supplies, crew, resources, etc are needed) on board. Mission completion upon exiting the star's SOI. Probably a VERY, VERY long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navigation_light#Spacecraft_navigation_lights - Spacecraft nav lights. Now that that is out of the way, here's my take on the idea. Currently, in a single player form, the nav/aviation lights serve a minimal couple of purposes. 1. Eye candy. Does this need explaining? 2. Can be useful when making docking manuevers, in case the target craft has drifted out of alignment, PARTICULARLY on longer-duration and range missions, where every bit of RCS fuel and LFO are accounted for. Ok, so those two purposes, don't justify the need to get Squad to add in nav lights. There is a mod that works, and fills the role (though with some limitations, as noted in previous posts.) Looking at the features and plans, however, we all can see that Multiplayer KSP (WOOT!) is a planned feature. Now, in multiplayer, this sort of system would be much more important. Not all spacecraft belong to the player, and, as of yet, we don't know how they will interact. Regardless of how they will interact, however, if two player's spacecraft will be sharing the same area, knowing orientation, direction of travel, etc, will be vital. Imagine the rage of two players that put up multi-hundred ton payloads, only to have them collide in orbit, because they couldn't tell which direction the other player was travelling. Very, very frustrating. Which, of course, is where navigation lights (and standards, though who knows if players will adhere to them...) comes in. My overall stance is that, currently, mods should fill the role of the nav/aviation lights, and when multiplayer is becoming a reality, THEN Squad should look into making them a stock part, and integrating them into the game.

Perhaps as an expansion to the contracts, another look could be taken at the "campaigns" you can find in the wiki, and a way to work them in found? http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Campaigns - Just as a thought. Some of them could be worked in pretty easily, some might be more difficult, but I think it might make the game better overall.

Hehehe... new plan for the day.... *ahem* anyways... If I had to guess, I would look for the cfg for the things a Kerbal CAN activate externally. I don't have KAS installed atm, and don't remember offhand what parts you can activate externally, but you might look at the pipe end points and ground anchors, specifically at the "link" ability. Not sure if that is considered it's activation action or not, but it is what I can think of offhand. Hope this helps!

There's a few contracts (mostly, altitude and orbit acheivements, as far as I have confirmed) that could use a slight rewording. Currently, "Achieve X altitude" or "Achieve orbit around Kerbin" is the extent. Cool. So, my first orbital craft was unmanned. But the contract didn't complete. Unless this is a bug (if so, please disregard and move to the appropriate place), I am assuming this is because I used a probe to achieve orbit, as well as altitude achievements. I would ask that these be changed to reflect the intent. As such: "Achieve X altitude with a manned capsule"; "Achieve orbit around Kerbin with a manned capsule"; These more accurately define the contract fulfillment requirements. I am unsure of whether or not the orbital requirements around other bodies react the same way as of yet, I will test that and update if necessary.

I did a career mode .24 mapping pass of Minmus, using Mun as a gravity assist, and returned with science to Kerbin, before having to use a non-heat shielded aerobrake manuever to land, since I A- forgot a heatshield, and B- misjudged my fuel levels... only managed to come in to ~49K on the first pass. But I did land, ~100 days later... with all my science intact. And a happy Jeb!

That may be a bit steep for a first pass. I recommend 2 passes, maybe more if needed... set the first PE to 40-ish, it may or may not be enough to bring you all the way in on the first pass, but it will reduce your AP (thereby reducing your speed when you come back in for the next pass) and also lower your PE for the second pass. With enough patience and multiple passes you can sometimes pull a re-entry with no heat shields, so long as you keep engines on your last stage, though its not recommended... I discovered it myself out of necessity Basically the principle I use is that the more time I spend in the thinner upper atmosphere where the parts don't heat up as much, the lower my velocity when I hit that thicker air lower down. It takes longer to de-orbit, so running TACLS and using this method can get iffy if you are low on resources, but it will bring you down eventually. Also note that, at higher altitudes, if you are perpendicular to your direction of travel, you are increasing your drag, and slowing yourself more than if you are facing retrograde. I generally stay perpendicular until ~38KM, with some variance depending on the speed of my entry, before turning retrograde. Hope this helps some!

RE the "unit" of life support vs. "litre" or other, more specific unit... The "1 unit = 1 day" method is, as noted, a simple method, probably the simplest, to go about this. However, not much really changes in regards to complexity. You just need to know how many litres (to use the previous example) each Kerbal uses per day, multiply that number by your kerbal count (just like you would with "units"), and divide your total life support by that number. That gives you the totals of what you have on board. Or, you could just use the build aid I actually like the real-world measurements. I'm just glad the Litre is used, as opposed to the US-specific "minim", equivalent to ~1 drop or 0.95 grains of water Now, back to the reason I came over here to start with... if I am understanding correctly, 0.9 is *NOT* compatible with 0.24 X64, but 0.8 is? I hope so, I want to kill mo.... see how long I can keep some Kerbals alive for!

I'm going to try now, there's no plugin dependencies in the Landers and Probes (the part I'm wanting atm) that I've found to be conflicting, so I have high hopes. Nothing solid yet.

Where are you de-orbitting from, and at what speed? Quite often if I am doing a direct return from Mun to Kerbin, I need to re-enter much higher for my initial aerobrake, sometimes as high as ~50KM. More or less, the slower you are travelling when you hit atmosphere, the lower you can start your re-entry at.

Got the same debug window pop-up (there's known issues with Kerbal EVA's, but I'm not worried about the error at this time...), and am wondering... what's the keyboard control to close it? I do have CLS, not sure if it is enabled at the moment Suggestion for a minor improvement in future builds: close window button, or top-right corner X to close

Question... has this been tested in both x86 and x64 setups? Upon starting with x64 I've had some heavy duty lag after installing these, took ~8 minutes to get to the VAB from the time I launched, with pretty heavy lag all through the machine, not just KSP. Never had it happen with another mod, so I figured I'd ask!

I'll be giving this a try shortly, currently looking for the parts that I like and seeing what is .24 compatible (some of them appear to be, but no notes from the modder), once I do that I'll be happy to explore :>

Nice work, and some great pics to show off too