Vicomt

Is there an issue with outer planets installation via CKAN? I get the following CKAN exception when attempting to update it The following inconsistecies were found: Kopernicus pre-alpha-09 and OuterPlanetsMod 1.7_Beta_2.repackaged0 conflict with each other, yet we require them both! at CKAN.RelationshipResolver.ResolveStanza(IEnumerable`1 stanza, RelationshipResolverOptions options, Boolean soft_resolve)

So I had to look it up on http://pastebin.com/CYzvhutY, and as I thought, my son's name is (almost) possible, his middle name being "Edwin" as a tribute to his great-grandfather on his mum's side. I guess I'll be adding "Harry" to the list of possible first names, then wait to see if he ever turns up

Whilst my mining operation may not be as large or well built as some of those monsters, I'm quite proud of it....

First two things I noticed, you need to move your landing gear backwards, they need to be slightly (but not far) behind CoM, that'll sort out the "sitting down" on the strip. Then you need to sort out the CoT, it really needs to aim through the CoM (probably also behind it), or you'll get thrust induced pitch going on On a general design note, I know you're doing a replica, but your version feels slightly short, but that might just be my aesthetics kicking in

Thanks for starting the discussion I normally tend to follow a middling path between the two, historically, I've done the 5 & 22, not even realising there was one inbetween, likewise, the 33 and 56 I've always missed, though not by design. Part of the reason for this is my playstyle, I *really* don't like the stock aero model, so I wait to play until FAR has been released. This has the (un)fortunate side effect of making dV to orbit lower, hence my early tech rockets tend to be TWR monsters (RT-10 + pod + antenna + chute), so they go much further than is required to do some height-based contracts. I'm also quite lax on TWR/dV at the start as I don't get TWR/dV readouts until later in the tech tree (yes, I don't want to hand-crank all my dV calcs thank you). I think the ability to skip contracts is good, however I'd like to see more of this information given to the player through the game, rather than go through blind, maybe a "contracts we'd like to give you, but we don't think you can do it yet" page in mission control?

but how do people know the details of the next contract without going outside the game? I only barely know them and I've been playing since before they were introduced.

Yeah, that's what I thought. And tbh it's fine, if you've got enough knowhow to get out of the atmosphere you don't need those little contracts, it might be a good idea to get knowledge of this mechanic out to a wider audience though, it can leave players (like me) a little on the low side funds wise. maybe the contracts should show any conditions like these?

specifically the "reach X height" contracts. I started a new career, did the new vessel and 5k contracts, but the 20k, 55k, and atmospheric escape contracts never appeared. The orbit contract is still there, but it's going to be a helluva stretch to do it with 33K funds and very little science (I may not be as good as some rocket builders) could it possibly be because the rocket I used to go over 5k was waaaaay overblown and actually went straight up to 170k+ (RT-10 with a pod on top) before it came back down (I use FAR). possibly because I went so high the game though I didn't need the contracts? Mods - I've put this in general to see if I can get some feedback, if it turns out to be a bug, then feel free to move it. Addendum: if you pass the limits of the next explore contracts before you've seen them, you won't get them, this is confirmed. can a mod please change the title to "PSA - Contracts disappear if you satisfy their conditions before you unlock them" or something similar

Very nice, I've looked at doing something similar in the past, although I've not used any resource mods yet. did you build all this in career? what did it cost?

any chance you could show us side and top views of that little beaut? preferably with com/col showing

Last night I.... a) crashed my Minmus rover and turned Hendrin in debris. Got my Tylo/Laythe/Bop landers and interplanetary stage eaten by the kraken c) managed to land my newest drone plane destroying ONLY one wing in the process. ups and downs.

Chiming in with a similar problem, B9 & SP+ PWings (not tested others) will not attach, although the logs indicate that something is adding the number of parts for the craft, and the wing stays detached and floats with the cursor. I also see NullReferenceExceptions in the debug logs. Win7x64, KSPx32, 16GB ram, KSP process running at about 2.5Gb, Mods are: B9 Editor Extensions KSPX MechJeb NEAR P-Wing KAC

Yeah, mine had to have docking ports as well, I slipped some juniors upside down under the tanks so that I can connect a rover (with an upwards facing port on it's snout/back) but the rover will be going separately, hopefully with a Duna-Plane of some kind.

I'll go with my best (and most recent) mission, a a Fine-Print Duna Base Contract. I so enjoyed designed and flying the Duna base mission. now I'm going to have to do more. Contracts: Explore Duna (stock) Build a Base on Duna for 6 kerbals, include power, communications and research bay (Fine Print)

Today I finalised the design for my next pair of contracts, well, the lifter's not finished yet, and there's been no testing, but hey... what could possibly go wrong?

For JDCollie (and anyone else interested), here's my Badass (lol) SSTO

I don't have any pictures with me atm, but I'll try and get a couple when I get home tonight. Some of the non-clipping purists among you will definitely not like my engine cluster though

I landed my first SSTO Spaceplane this weekend after rescuing a Kerbal from orbit. This may not seem Badass enough to most of you, but I've had problems with Spaceplanes ever since I started playing KSP, I've only very rarely got one to orbit, and NEVER landed one successfully before. Due to the plane's central forward landing gear being mounted lower than the rear wing gear (so that I could get lift on takeoff without angling the wings), and the MASSIVE amount of lift it has at low altitude, I had to float the plane down from about 5km out and 500m up with zero thrust, tweaking the rate of descent by angling the nose up or down. The touchdown was so perfect I almost leapt out of the chair with joy. Yes, I felt like a Badass.

You sir, Win. Were the close calls and smashes deliberate?

The biggest thing I've launched so far is my Eve sample/return probe. 1700 tons on the launchpad, around 600k bucks. I don't know if it works yet as I'm waiting for the window, however I know it goes to orbit and has enough DV to insert the lander into Eve's atmosphere. I only play slightly hardcore. I allow reverts for anything until it leaves Kerbin's SOI. after that, it's final. I just hope that the ascent vehicle can make it.

Unfortunately, if you use FAR, mechleb's aerobraking is less than useless (unless it's been patched in the last few weeks), a fact many of my kerbals know to their cost.

Saw that and thought of this.....

Yeah, I don't know too much about the actual specs for the drives, the only thing I could find with a quick google said they were 24x10N thrust, but didn't specify what type of thruster. Does either Rosetta or Philae have video/still cameras?

The latest article on the BBC has some nice information for those of you who are interested. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27315877 Interestingly, it gives burn times (not accurately) and Delta-V changes, showing just how pathetic Ion drives really are, 8 hours for a 300m/s burn. It's going to be fun to see exactly what happens as a comet approaches the sun, hopefully surprises are in store.

Actually, targetting a low periapsis can be done for very little DV if you're able to make a maneuver in advance. When I launch for Mun or Minmus, I try to get as low a target periapsis as I can from the transfer burn, then a small mid course (or earlier) burn to really nail down the target periapsis. Of course, it's always a trade off, killing a huge amount of orbital velocity only a few KM from the surface gets.... hairy.