G'th

Today, we have another trio of missions following the return of Spacelab 2 to Kerbin. Spacelab 2 Return Spacelab Program Year 17, Day 106 Spacelab 2's end came to a close after their 30 day mission in anticipation of ASTP-2, set to begin next month. Their mission comprised mostly of legwork to prepare the station for ASTP-2, verifying the integrity of the station and sprucing up the interior. They awoke that day ready to leave, as the station had become cramped with so little to do in the latter days of the mission. The crew readied the station for dormancy, and transferred over to the command module. Undocking went smoothly, with Flight Scientist Matt Kerman snapping some pictures of the station as SLM2 gained distance from the station. Matt would continue snapping pictures until Richming smacked him for not having his seatbelt on minutes before reentry. Spacelab 3 Spacelab Program Year 17, Day 136 Spacelab 3 was to be the first true mission to Spacelab, as it will mainly constitute the Kermerican half of the second Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. Headed by Apollo 17 veteran Erfin Kerman, the mission will take place over a period of 3 months, with the Kussian and Kermerican crews sharing the space station. Though the mission would prove to be an important step for KS/KSSR relations, it would ultimately be the last big collabaration between the two nations for the foreseeable future. Apollo-Soyuz Test Program 2 - Soviet arrival and docking. Spacelab Program Year 17, Day 136 AARDV-3 - ATSP-2 Spacelab Program Year 17, Day 166 The flight of AARDV-3 would be the first of many flights of the Autonomous Automated Rendezvous and Docking Vehicle to resupply Spacelab. Based on the Apollo Block III Service Module, the Aardvark (as its come to be known) carries a payload consisting mostly of life support supplies and scientific equipment. Also included was an experimental EVA extension pack, meant to allow extended EVA operations free from handholds on the station. Not only would this experimental piece of equipment allow easier construction of the Spacelab Maneuverability System (a series of ladders and handholds to make frequent EVA's more feasible, as well as allow for eventual non-pressurized cargo to be delivered to the station), it would also serve as a lifeboat for Kerbalnauts on EVA in emergencies, as it will allow a Kerbalnaut thrown from the station to return. The EVA-X pack would see its first use with Commander Erfin, taking pictures of the station from 20m away, giving those back on Kerbin a full view of the station*. *As my screenshot style is mostly aimed at being IVA only or as something that could reasonably have been shot from a camera on the craft, this is how I explain the glamour shot of the station at the end.

LOD would do wonders for visuals in this game. Especially for planet creators, as then they could do real jungle type worlds and not have it be crazy hard to run.

The testers are rallying. Hopefully Mike and Jeast can work things out.

Unless you have rockets pointing the wrong way, capping the nozzles shouldn't do much, and if anything will be detrimental as you'll be carrying pointless weight.

Where do those green house looking bits come from? Also , epic ship!

I get it on occasion, though for me it always clears up if I alt-tab.

I think everyone needs to take a step back and breathe. The situation with this mod is not near as bad as you guys may think. And in fact, I think going forward (presuming the mod hasn't died completely again) management discussion should be behind closed doors. IE, PM each other you fools! It appears to me that things here are getting too muddled up over whose working on what, how to coordinate changes and releases, etc etc and its mixing in with us testers, who in reality should only be providing constructive feedback on whats being introduced. Testers, while its nice to have a working version of the mod, our job isn't to just get in on the early releases. As much as I want to be playing with the mod, I only load it up when I'm specifically testing it. None of us have a right to be upset because one iteration of the mod is broken compared to the last. Constructive feedback is telling the dev's that the new aero isn't working properly just as much as it is telling them HOW it isn't working properly. It is also constructive to discuss the purpose of the new aero, which Mike has already touched on is an effort to support less parts for the Orbiter with the eventual point of a one part orbiter. Deconstructive feedback is telling the dev's you're not going to test the mod anymore because you can't play with it with the current iteration. Its also deconstructive to insert yourselves into the management of the mod, but considering the situation I don't think any of us can or could have helped that (I fully admit that I may have been responsible for starting this mess with my over-eagerness to test the new version). What's being developed here is my opinion fairly unprecedented. What's available right now and what could come in the future if you guys stay on track is lightyears ahead of what this mod originally was. But back to Mike and Jeast, as I said earlier, you guys need to talk to each other. I suggest getting together before working on anything else and just hammering out the issues. Get coordinated, and get a road map set up. Releases should be a coordinated effort between the two of you. Any release beyond a coordinated one shouldn't be considered a release, be it unofficial or otherwise. 1.7 is in essence WIP of a release rather than a release outright. As far as I'm concerned, and as several us have pointed out, 1.6 is the last release that should be considered ready for gameplay use. 1.7 is pure tester fodder, and nothing else. Another thing to consider is to split development, with each of your guys' contributions not affecting the other's. Anything that will overlap should be worked on together. So, as far as this aero mess goes, finish it. There's no reason to revert to the old one going forward, as consolidated Orbiter parts are in fact something that would be useful to have for the eventual Official release. Having the orbiter be less split up will keep FPS up, will behave more realistically, and most importantly will look much better. If there's one thing about this mod that's persisted since the very beginning, its those seams on the orbiter's belly. You guys should get together and hammer out the aero under the new system. From there, any larger overhauls of any part of the mod should be a coordinated effort.

An alternative history of an alternative history of NASA Eyes Turned Skyward So as some may know, I've been teasing an Eyes Turned Skyward playthrough using KSP. My original idea was to follow the ETS timeline from Skylab on, with all the appropriate predecessor craft and debris in place (Such as the LM's and SIVB's ejected into solar orbit). However, after having my save end up corrupted twice, alongside my ever growing interest in the actual ETS spacecraft, I've decided to skip most of that. Instead, I will create an alternate history to that of ETS. The idea here is that I will start with Spacelab (and I'm going to actually advance the game time up to that equivalent timeframe. Day 1 in my game will correspond to Freedom 7) and follow the timeline roughly from a US perspective (All non-US launches and missions outside of Station modules will be skipped or modified), and will basically follow a "No Revert" rule for every flight. Essentially, I'll keep to the timeline as much as my piloting skills will allow me to. Also, to keep things interesting (as much of ETS is just time spent on a space station), my version of the timeline will see an increased interest in a manned Mars landing. As such, as time goes on I will be sending more craft to Mars/Duna than the original timeline had, and the Artemis and Orion missions will have more aspects to them that will support that end-game mission. Doing this this way allows me to start playing with the ETS specific rockets and spacecraft out of the box rather than trudging through the only slightly changed history leading up to Spacelab, and will give me something to do once I catch up with ETS. It will also finally have me landing a Kerbal on Duna, which is something I've yet to do. ------ Now for some technical jargon about how I'm going to be playing, because it won't be a typical Career mode playthrough. Naturally, I'm going to start the game with everything unlocked and ready to go. I will also have a communications system ready to go around the Mun and Kerbin. (Though the Mun's isn't that great) During the playthrough, and particularly once I reach the Artemis missions, I'm going to be cherry picking certain contracts that will be interesting to do. Indeed, the Artemis missions will largely be contract landings. Orion is going constitute the bulk of my Duna testing, as I'll design my version of Orion around what my Duna missions will look like, though it will also serve as a semi-permanently manned outpost. I do have some precursor craft in place, but all you'll really see is Apollo 12's landing site. The mod list I'm using is incredibly extensive and a lot of it consists of kitbashes and my own personal config edits. Much of the ETS specific rockets and spacecraft will largely consist of rockets created out of those edits (as that was what it took to develop crafts that resembled those crafts and performed to a similar level), though none of them are "cheat" parts. I edited configs to create parts that would come close to matching the performance of the ETS crafts. A Saturn 1C in my game is going to have the same relative capabilities of the timelines S-1C, for instance. All missions will follow the timelines mission time, where available. Missions will be spaced out the appropriate amount of time as well. The main reason for actually bothering with time is because 1, I want to actually bother with resupply missions. 2, it'll throw curveballs later on as I'll find transfer windows that wouldn't necessarily be available at the start of the game. ---- Mission List: Saturn 1C Demo Flight, Spacelab 1, and Spacelab 2 - See Below Spacelab 2 Return, Spacelab 3, ASTP-2, AARDV-3 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ To begin with, we're going to do a trio of missions. SATURN 1C Demo Flight Spacelab Program Year 16, Day 229 The development of the Saturn 1C rocket was crucial to the Spacelab program, as it would serve as a replacement for the older, more expensive Saturn 1B. This demo flight successfully placed a 20ton mass simulator into a 150km orbit (that was designed to come down quick and safely), demonstrating its capability to reach the intended altitude of Spacelab. Spacelab 1 Spacelab Program Year 17, Day 75 The launch of Spacelab was one that was a tense moment for many astronauts just as it was for all those in Mission Control. Everyone remembered the problems that plagued Skylab during its launch, and Spacelab could be prone to the same failures. Launched on the final flight ready Saturn V, the space station is to be visited by its first crew later on in the day. The launch would go on to be near picture perfect, with only the loss of signal with the onboard cameras*, leaving flight controllers slightly worried, as they wondered if they should trust Spacelabs computers on whether or not the solar panels had deployed properly. Spacelab 2 Spacelab Program Year 17, Day 75 First manned mission to Spacelab. Commander Richming Kerman, Command Module Pilot Meller Kerman, and Flight Scientist Matt Kerman are to be the stations first inhabitants, and will perform checkout of the station in preparation for the stations later missions. They will spend 30 days on station. Due to a launch delay caused by a flux in the technical jargon intake valve and a slight diagonal breeze*, the launch would miss its initial window and SLM2 would take an extra two hours on orbit before rendezvous with the station. *In reality I only saved the pictures of the deployed station for SLM2, so that it'd look cooler. *In reality I forgot to wait until Spacelab was in a proper position for an efficient rendezvous, but as I'm going with a no revert rule, I rolled with it. The dV required was well within the limits of SLM2.

Its a problem with launch clamps in general. Its a bug in stock KSP as well.

Oh the nostalgia!

While I agree with Jeast on the whole organization bit, I don't necessarily think its a bad thing to continually add on to the mod at the rate it is. I do however question the necessity of combining the wings and control surfaces into one solid model, as opposed to keeping them separate or perhaps going with something that made a bit more sense. (such as combining the wings with the cargo bay and leaving the CS's as separate parts) To me, it doesn't seem as if that sort of thing needed to be touched on to the degree it was. While aero still needed tweaking, throwing out the old system for a new one and then not taking the new system to a more complete state wasn't a good idea imo. Granted, some of us were pushing to test the new bits that were added along with it, so may be some of us testers are to blame, but even so. That being said though, the biggest issue I see with you guys on the developer side of things is just a lack of teamwork. Mike is spearheading forward like a bat out of hell with jeast and whoever else is helping (i'm not quite sure who else is working on it at this point) are just kind of being left in the dust there. What I would suggest (even though it may be difficult, as it seems some of you guys appear to be in different time zones) is to set up a Github like Jeast is suggesting, but to also communicate more on test releases. I believe all the contributing developers should do a huddle before pushing out a test release. This way, everyone can verify what changes are being pushed through, which will in turn help speed along development as bigger issues like broken aero are seen earlier and perhaps fixed before the next release, and will help keep everyone on track with whats coming and going from the mod, as well as give a clearer timeline for development.

Well my main mod install is a huge kitbash of bits and bobs from almost every mod in existence at this rate lol. ModManager applies over 20,000 patches by the end of loading xD so its likely something somewhere gummed up the works.

I'll play around and see if I can recreate it.

Well it didn't crash the game, just left it completely bugged and unusable.

Welp, I've run it through some tests and thus far the aero is the biggest issue. Seems to me like the figures are reversed. Reason I say is because the orbiter itself flies semi-reasonably if I fly it belly up. It'll stay straight but its hard to get it to pitch. I pulled up the COM/COL orbs in the VAB and the SPH and its listing the COL as being ahead of the COM. With the Boosters and ET attached, it does nothing but roll and pitch down. Likely due to the COL/COM being problematic. As powerful as the wings are (even when aero was correct I did have to turn the CS' until I was ready for reentry), its likely that this relationship is screwing up launch just as much as its screwing up in-atmosphere flight. Had to cheat it into orbit because I just couldn't power through the aero mess. Works fine in orbit, though roll using RCS only is SUPER weak. And not only is that an issue for on-orbit activity, its an issue for reentry as well. While torque does take care of the job, its more realistic to use RCS only to control the orbiters movement in space. Seeing as this is a replica, the orbiter should be able to turn off SAS and still be capable of roll. On that topic, the RCS is slightly unbalanced between the front and back. Up and down translation causes the orbiter to pitch up and down a bit, which indicates one of the thruster sets isn't set to the same strength as the other one and/or that they aren't properly spaced compared to the COM. Also, I have no idea what did it or what conflict caused it, but my first loading it actually broke my test save completely with the "VesselName" bug. I went to a full stock + CSS install and everythings working fine now. But I should report it because my mod install was very stable until I introduced CSS. Again, no idea what caused it.

Indeed, when I last tested the shuttle I found it more responsive at all times to keep roll on the tail.

+9001 As in, awesome!

Skycrane and big rocket. OR, Skycrane and several launches. In order to deploy that to the Mun without giving it thrusters of its own (and without relying on having it tip over from vertical or a very complicated lander) you'll need to rig it to a detachable skycrane. For something that size it'll likely have to be very very large and powerful. The crane will need to be able to support the weight of the rover and have the dV to land it onto the surface. To make it simpler, I would redesign it slightly so you can get an attachment point over the rover's center of mass without disrupting the vehicles use. That way, building the crane for the rover becomes less complicated. There are other options, but they're either absurdly complicated or involve the use of F9 many, many times.

Every time I see a new post in this threat my hopes get dashed when I don't see a download link But I know it just takes time.

Those fuel tanks are ..... And that being said, i still hope this is all still on the backburner for you guys. Much as I've enjoyed doing it, replicating everything using other mods has been quite the ordeal, and I'd love to have real, completely accurate parts to simplify everything. The space station parts in particular are what I'm interested in. The normal spacecraft and the rockets were easy by comparison, and while my version is great, it still isn't quite right.

Oh sweet mother of god that launchpad 0.0 I officially charge you with creating an Apollo era launchpad as your next big project. Holy sweet mother that is some awesome stuff. And can't wait for the update. Eager to test it out with the new changes.

Is that Scatterer? That looks really nice!

Well its not like we're getting updates every couple of hours you know, and regardless, the only thing thats changed for me through the 1.0 updates are my ascent profiles. Just because the aerodynamics change doesn't mean the rockets do. A well designed rocket will fly in the old aero just as well as in the new aero, and be more efficient at that. Simple fact of the matter is, no matter what Squad does with the aero (Short of throwing some bizzare new atmosphere at us that breaks everything no matter how well designed it is), all it will ever take to fly a proper rocket is what I laid out in my big post up there. Doesn't matter if we're talking old aero or new or in FAR. Flying that way is just plain efficient and safe. While I can understand the frustration that come with new aerodynamics, I don't believe that too many people are really putting effort into learning how to fly.

Update on my previous post: The completed redesign of Freedom. Still lacks a couple components, such as the other Canadarms, experiments, various bits and bobs to be done in-orbit, and the truss extensions, but it's practically complete. And the large centrifuge module does actually behave as such.

If you build your rockets right and fly them properly, then there should be no problems no matter how large the rocket is. Like I said in my last post, it may be hard to get used to the new aerodynamics, but it takes perseverance, and trust me, the game becomes that much more rewarding when you relearn how to fly your rockets. And mods really have little to do with it. It isn't hard to build a proper rocket in stock and be able to get to orbit. And as for launching nonsensical contraptions into space, while they certainly have their place in KSP, fact of the matter is that sort of thing wasn't really intended. Whackjobian inventions, while spectacular, are not something that should ever actually work in the atmosphere. And besides, nothings stopping you from launching nonsensical contraptions anyway. You might fail more, but how many times did you fail before you got into orbit the first time? Landed on the Mun? Etc etc? Now, all that being said, nobody would be upset if there was a difficulty option for Aerodynamics. After all, FAR was in essence 1.0's Aero (though harder), and its become extremely apparent that FAR was not a very widely used mod.