Boomerang

Just popping by to say that I love these parts. Even better than the new Mk. 3 parts. Kinda odd that the functional crew hatch on the cockpit is the same as the decorative one near the attachment node, but it looks cool if you've got a hollow section there.

Just another voice who'd be really happy to see a version of this for .90. I'm desperately missing being able to change the snap attachment angles.

Alright, I'll keep snooping around for that fix. And I've noticed for me that the Cmd+Left/Right Arrow doesn't want to work in the game itself (but it did during the loading screen). I'll just have to train myself to Cmd+Tab out of the full screen game instead of Cmd+F. Thanks for the help. Any idea if OSX users have filed the full screen issues as an issue with Squad/if one more person doing so would help? Ugh, I've tried moving the dock all around and activating the dock hiding feature and it's still popping up over my game window if I let my cursor stray too near the edges.

Thanks. Also, because Yosemite introduces that pseudo-fullscreen mode for more applications, I'm having a hard time using my google-fu on another problem. I noticed that when I ran KSP in full screen, cursor movements towards the bottom of the screen would bring my dock over KSP. Ditto for movements at the top of the screen making the header bar appear. Not necessarily game-breaking, but hella annoying, especially when trying to move things around in the bottom of the editors. I've had a nose through my System Preferences panel and I haven't managed to find a way to disable that sensitivity yet. Any tips?

I actually took the dive and went with Yosemite. I've only tinkered with KSP a bit so far but, fingers crossed, it seems stable so far. My problem is that now going between full screen and windowed mode makes my game display all funny. If I'm full screen in the editor and leave full screen mode, the parts list gets shifted towards the center of the screen. And if I'm not in full screen mode while in flight, then Cmd+F into full screen, the flight UI gets all vertically stretched. I'll nose around to see if I can come up with a fix, but if anyone else already knows of one, I'd love to hear about it.

So how are other people's experiences with KSP on Yosemite? I've been running on Snow Leopard for ages and a couple other programs are pushing me towards updating. I've seen a few people complaining about Mavericks and Yosemite both with KSP, but I don't know if there are any common problems or if it's just a vocal minority. Ideally I'd rather just get Mountain Lion, but that's $20, whereas Yosemite is currently free.

I don't know whether this has come up before, but is there any chance of Engineer using a more stock-alike font? At least for 1.x.x? Maybe it's a bit nit-picky, but the Engineer font is less bold and ends up looking squished together, especially since my less-than-wonderful resolution forces me to use the smaller GUI size. Edit: Nevermind. I'd been running an older OSX. Updating to Yosemite makes the display for this look much neater.

Well, it would be illegal if someone were to attempt to redistribute a mod after unlocking it for x64, against the license. Hence the 'personal use' emphasis. And just about all of the other warnings are because most of the tangential discussions on this topic have been leading to a lot of tense, if not hard feelings between various groups around here. I love that someone's put up this sort of tutorial and immediately laid down the law with regards as to the exact purpose of the thread.

Eh, just do you. No one worth taking seriously is going to think less of you for playing the game the way you enjoy. It is, after all, a game. And I'm mostly in the same boat, if it makes you feel better. While I can appreciate the work that's gone into FAR and the issues with stock aero are terribly obvious, I'd rather have to deal with cheesy physics than add even more dev time to all my crafts. And NEAR is just FAR sans aero failures and the tools required to fine-tune your crafts. As for the future, I very much doubt Squad would implement anything as demanding as FAR is. Aerodynamic shielding seems to be in the works, so that parts in cargo bays have their drag reduced. Hopefully we get that and some more sensible aerodynamic features that allow players to continuing building craft in mostly the same ways we can now.

You might need to have a snoop around your keyboard settings then, if it's not letting you use F12 even when KSP is in full screen. Might be able to disable the Scroll Lock and other such functions assigned to the function keys.

As others have said, there's the technical problem of adding gravity to asteroids stemming from how the game handles physics. And besides that, the amount of gravity that KSP-sized asteroids have would be entirely negligible. Jeb couldn't walk on a Class E, you certainly couldn't orbit one and you'd still need means of grappling to the rock unless you wanted to just orbit alongside it.

There are two separate anchoring systems you might be confusing. There are the two harpoons mounted below the main body of Philae. The three landing legs have auger bits built into them (separate from the sampling drill). The idea was that the the thrust on top of the craft and/or the harpoons would provide a downward force so that the augers could anchor the landing legs to the comet, assuming the surface is soft enough for them to penetrate. From what I've heard, the ESA is saying that the harpoons never fired and there were issues with the thruster. My guess would be that Philae bounced due to a lack of downward, anchoring force from either of those two devises, so the augers never had a chance to anchor to the surface. I would also imagine that the augers attempting to drill into the surface under such low gravity would have pushed the craft off the surface, if it weren't held to the surface by the harpoons/thruster. Again though, that's conjecture on my part. Also, maybe we could stop feeding the 40-post account making utterly absurd claims about the validity of particular fields of science based on nothing more than blind-ass guessing?

I don't have the game open in front of me, but I *think* that somewhere in the part description, in the right click menu if not the mouseover menu, mentions whether or not fuel crossfeed is enabled. And my bad, I didn't see your 100% stock tag. Angling the struts should work fine though!

Unless it's been locked for testiness, there's already been a thread about the EmDrive and other such devices. I would recommend waiting for far more thorough testing about whether the thing even actually works before starting to wonder about how we can make it work better. Edit: Warning, here be testiness: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/97806-Cannae-EmDrive

I don't know if the attachment rules are going to let you do that. Typically if you're attaching things via nodes, the editor is going to force you to keep things flush, only letting you rotate about the central axis. If you're sticking to stock parts though, you could always surface-attach one of the small cubic struts at whatever angle you want the engine to be at, then attach the engine to the root node of the strut. I haven't really monkeyed around with building shuttle replicas, but there are at least a couple mods that have SSME-alike, high-gimbal engines, if you're open to (more) mod parts.

Comets are icy bodies. Because of that, you get the outgassing and tails when they're nearer the Sun. They tend to have more eccentric orbits, but you could have a rocky body with an eccentric orbit and it would still be an asteroid. Edit: And thanks for the reminder about the landing!

I'm fine with little references to it in part descriptions and such. If they want to portray kerbals that way in the advertising shorts, that's fine too, so long as they don't have more people doing video work than working on the actual game. I do take issue with the 'lulsokerbal'/trailer park look of the work we've seen so far. The narrative is that they lack quality controls and high quality parts but still have fairly advanced rocketry knowledge. As it is, it's looking like kerbals were a bumbling bunch of farmers who accidentally stumbled upon a pile of high-grade fireworks, which is too silly for my taste. Some competency would be nice.

My own experience with the KSP subreddit has been almost the opposite of what you've described, but I've noticed that trend of Squad seeming to pay more heed to reddit users than around here.

That's a small enough rover as well that you might want to try testing it without the horizontal ladder segment on top. Just being at the top of the vertical one might get you close enough to get the 'board' option upon right-clicking the seat.

You hypothesized that. And as K^2 said, it wouldn't work.

Mohovian? Eelucian?

If I've babied my rig a bit and it's a good day, I can pull ~20fps as long as my camera is focused mostly into the sky/away from whatever celestial body I'm on/orbiting, or in the editors. If it's a slow day or my camera's focused towards the ground a lot... eh. 8-12.

Can confirm, from having lived in a house with scary-old wiring. God forbid someone turn a coffeepot on when the microwave *and* washing machine were running.

It's annoying, but it looks like we're going to be stuck with it. The DefaultThrottle mod linked on the first page works well though. You can sets the default to whatever you want, any integer value between and including 0-100%, iirc. Shouldn't need a mod for it, but it works.

It's Alt/Option on OSX as well.