sjwt

FANTASTIC, I wish someone had of advised me of that earlier, I just though I was shit at placing things

THANKS! I have never been advised of that.. I will try it out right now!!

Open up the file 'T1-un.craft' in word pad(when dealing with your crafts, all ways back up the files after you have gotten out KSP) Please note the way the file is devided up, for this example their is the MK1 Pod, one Fuel tank, followed by 2 tanks in symetry. The first tank is set up with the POS as '-0.4698442,11.53677,0.002250103' that middle number is the hight. note the next two tanks are at '...,11.47266,...' you just need to change 11.47266 to 11.53677 for both those entry\'s.. save the file and exit notepad, load KSP and look at the craft.. it should now look like the attached 'T1-fix.craft' Now the number decimal places is not fixed, you may only get 4 numbers sometimes, that do-sent matter if you are changing from 5 points to 4 or the other way around. When placing stacks of fuel tanks, just place the top single ones, edit them, then all the ones below will be at the same hight, same with engines, no point editing them, just make the top item in the stacks the same and everythign that connects directly below will also be the same. When dealing with large numbers of symmetrical tanks, I have found its easer to use Find-replace to change the numbers, but be warned, if something unrelated happens to be at the very same pos in any of the 3 axis it will be replaced if you forget to have leading and trailing commer marks in both the find and the replace feilds. Now you can put more tanks and the engines below those three ones.

I have been asking for a way to do this for ages, we need to be able to lock any one or two of the X,Y and Z axis in the VAB. Hopefully it comes with the new assembly set-up in 0.16 You can manly edit the .craft file, and alter the POS line for each item, as you add things to the craft, they come in at the bottom of this list. So you would make your top stage, and get that as level as you can, at say the 1st fuel tank, and surrounding ones, then set them up the same.. I will post some examples for you..

Mission 6 has been flown, HEADLINE: SKRAM takes to the skys, and skrams paint off new craft.

But dose it require return to Kerbin, Kerbin OR the Mun or neither?

As a note, all the Altitude (including 11,400kms) Say \'and descend safely\', I would assume this means Kerbin(not land at the Mun), But I could be wrong. The rest of the missions that don\'t say \'and descend safely\', I would guess can be done with remote control and no return needed.

I used two, because you can still roll the craft to go the other way, but one is totally unusable.

RCS Is Tech 3, at lest on the spread sheet Tog sent out, but is listed as 4 on the first post.. interesting, good thing I looked at both before saying anything.

The Death Star? Something Large: Check Incomplete: Check Blows up at the drop of a hat?: Check Check Check! Been their, done that!

Have you had a though about the Sat missons and unmaned craft? I would consider a requirement of three Sats minimum around Kerbin before a mission can be flown to the Moon, and 3 around the moon before a landing can be done to remove any chance of radio black out.. 4 would guarantee that the Sats don\'t have to be placed perfect, then you don\'t have share save files and you know that their will be no bad luck communication drop outs.

Turn 5 is in, am I the only one who adds as the final note in his emails \'The crew will survive\' as if its not a given with the tight the fuel budgets? <G>

I was going of the stated minimun return, the point is you need to move away from a return that is only based on the cost of the ship, you need to factor in at lest a difficulty level or something else, otherwise no second round mission will make much more profit than the 16.5k mission until we launch powersats(at lest 6 missions away) or someone just adds and extra 10 boosters for no reason to their ship..

Nice landing, welcome aboard!

Below is the payout for 16.5k using tech level 1 at a return of 7300, VS the average cost of the current rounds missions, as you can see, we would be better off still doing 16.5, and that\'s before the current mission payouts drop too much and not even using better tech! 16.5k 2578 Orbit 2513 Polar 1147 350K-E 2167 Until we get to power sat missions, the cost of a mission wont go up enough to justify doing a new mission on round 2, unless someone throws extra stuff on a round 1 mission to game it (Which I don\'t plan on doing) I Suggest you require 4 Power-sats in orbit around Kerbin before sending Unnamed to the Mun, and that 4 Must be in orbit around the Mun before landing an Unnamed on the Mun, remember they don\'t have to be launched in separate missions, but I would suggest the payouts not be linked ie treat carrying two as a different mission to carrying 1. With 4 around a SOI you can than just assumed they have been well placed and that the mission will run with out a radio blackout. No need to share a file, you can just set up four and four up at your end and no issues.

Indeed, unless the plan is to have us repeat the 16.5k mission over and over until one of us can than afford to put a Kerbal on the Mun!

Thanks, however you forgot to link to the map in the description!

The only other way to make money is hope someone else is doing the same first mission as you but spending much more on their craft. A quick look at the table on how much everyone spent, and you can get a good idea of what they used, I relay do think you need to increase the pay out for being first, and increase the per turn drop off, else we will all end up doing the same mission, the 16.5k or any other mission that someone spend too high a budget on. Also not sure why, but STCatto seems to be down $2,200 from last round.

I vote yes, but I\'m not the fox.

That\'s odd, I herd the ocean was made of pure mineral oil.

This weeks Kerbal thoughts for the day are bellow... 'Back in my day, we where doing the calculus on slide rulers and drawing the frames, by hand.. A really good KSP player could get 5PPD (Pages Per Day)' 2012-04-25 'One day it was not their, then the next day the Mun appeared, now our little planet has been coved in funny tall green things, truly we are blessed by the great God Squad with wonderful miracles, what more proof is needed?' 2012-04-24 'We choose to go to the mun in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are fun' 2012-04-23 'More is less, less is more.. Planing and fun that is, more planing is less fun, less planing is more fun!' 2012-04-22 'Getting all members of the crew happy at once it a challenge worthy of anyone' 2012-04-21 'You can design a ship based around the efficiency or lack therefore with one of four things, Fuel, Weight, Cost, Humour' - 2012-04-20 'It is not funny when Kerbals die on the Launchpad, it is harlariouse!' 2012-04-19 Previous quotes are over at... http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=10455.0

Back in my day, we where doing the calculus on slide rulers and drawing the frames, by hand.. A really good KSP player could get 5PPD (Pages Per Day)

I have given in and started using Mechjeb.. I swear its because it makes Tog Fox\'s job easier.. that\'s why!

Shiver me struts, that\'s a nice looking ship.

Didn\'t you know, we use Nitro to lube the lander legs!