[Why do rovers suck so much?]

[quote name='Van Disaster']Look a little harder:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQi9_K7FBrM[/URL]

Fairly sure someone 1.0-ized it, if not then a new one is being built anyway.[/QUOTE]

What mod is that, and is there a way to do it without a huge ugly box on the side of the craft?

[[Min KSP: 1.12.2] Pathfinder - Space Camping & Geoscience]

Is the 1.0.5 release backwards compatible?

[Why do rovers suck so much?]

I don't even bother with rovers in KSP.

The Apollo rover was folded up and tucked into a tiny compartment in the LEM. Is there any way to do this in KSP, or with any mod? Nope.

Instead you have to "poverty rig" it and make some ridiculous looking craft. I don't even bother landing on planets anymore as there's nothing to do and walking around in low G sucks. I just design and launch rockets and it's getting... old.

[[1.0.5] Harder Solar System (Kopernicus) v1.2.0 11/20/15 - Axial Tilt and More!]

Is there a way to install ONLY the scaling, and not the tilting..?

[[1.1.3] Procedural Parts - Parts the way you want 'em - v1.2.5 July 3]

There was some discussion a while back about the fact that the PP heat shield has very different numbers in the "ModuleAblator" module, which (I believe) result in the very high rate of ablator burnoff compared to stock heat shields. This post has the details. That was from 1.03, I think, but I'm pretty sure it is still true. I changed my own PP heatshield cfg to match, and the burnoff rate became similar to what I was familiar with for stock.

Thanks! I edited the cfg file accordingly. I really appreciate your help!

[[1.1.2] Super 100 Shooting Star & Super 67 Little Star Command Pods.]

Sorry for the double post it won't let me edit.

Another thing I thought of was an "escape cover" for the pods for a LES to attach to.

[[1.1.2] Super 100 Shooting Star & Super 67 Little Star Command Pods.]

Please please please update for 1.0.5 these are my default command pods these days!

Also some ideas I had while playing with this thing that made me think "wouldn't it be cool if it had:

* A parachute cover for the top of the pod that includes space for a Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port + parachutes specific to this pod (the stock radial chutes look bad on it). When staged, the cover would detatch (and carry the docking port with it) exposing the parachutes.

* A thin decoupler that sits between the pod and the heatshield. When staged, it decouples the heatshield and balloons inflate!

[[1.1.3] Procedural Parts - Parts the way you want 'em - v1.2.5 July 3]

This is actually a game side correction for ablator function I think?

Previously the amount of ablator being burnt off was calculated based on the amount remaining, as [ablator remaining] got smaller it became progressively more effective

Now (1.0.5.1024 or 1.0.5.1028) the amount of ablator being burnt off is calculated based on the initial specifications of the sheild

I'm still playing 1.0.4 as my favorite mods have yet to be updated.

[[1.1.3] Procedural Parts - Parts the way you want 'em - v1.2.5 July 3]

Heatshields lose albator very quickly, any fix?

[[1.1.2][1-1-2] May 13-2016 EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements]

Will this still work in 1.0.4? I've been playing 1.0.4 still while waiting for my mods (there's a ton) to be updated for 1.0.5

[[1.0.5] S^3 - SmallSolarSystem]

So, do you NEED RSS for this mod?

I want a Kerbal scale real solar system but not all the realism, just stock.

[KOSMOS 3/14/2015 RD-170 Family Released!]

Ah Christ, another mod I need to DL once I get home.

[Landing AND doing stuff on a planet?]

I'm asking how to get things on the planet to do stuff with. I can land a lander and return it to orbit but as far as building (and landing) rovers or bases, let alone close enough to interact, is beyond me.

[Landing AND doing stuff on a planet?]

Hey everyone,

Now that my design for my interplanetary transfer vehicle is wrapped up, I'm wondering how to get enough stuff onto the planet in the same general area that I can "do" things down there? Like a big rover, maybe some way to set up a base, maybe some unmanned rovers, etcetc. I like the challenge of getting to planets and landing but I find that 99% of the time I get out, plant flag, and immediately leave after taking a few screenshots.

[Having trouble designing propulsion for my interstellar ship.]

Thanks for all the help everyone! I'm sticking with liquid fuel + nuclear engines. Ideally I want my ship to be able to refuel off asteroids (do you even encounter those outside of the Kerbin area?) or at least send a lander onto a moon and refuel.

[How do you set up an encounter with aerobrake trajectory?]

Thanks everyone. Was playing around with your advice and it was all wonderful. I'm on my way to basic competency in KSP!

[How do you set up an encounter with aerobrake trajectory?]

One technique that's very helpful when you're trying to fine-tune your approach to a planet while you're still outside its SoI:

1. Set up your maneuver node to get an intercept with the planet's SoI.

2. Click on the planet in map view and choose "Focus View". This centers the map view on the planet instead of your ship.

3. Assuming that you already got an SoI intercept in step #1, you can now see your new, post-maneuver-node trajectory going past the planet. You can rotate the camera around the planet to get a useful view.

4. Rotate the map view around until you can see your maneuver node in the background.

5. Slowly and gently, try adjusting the maneuver node. Tiny adjustments may make a big difference in how close to the planet your path goes. Try the various maneuver node grab handles-- at least one of them will drag your trajectory closer to the planet. (You can mouse over the grab handle and use the mouse wheel to make tiny adjustments, if you like).

6. Fiddle around until you get the trajectory to where you like it.

7. When you're done, hit the backspace key to return map focus to your ship.

Wait, I can focus on the planet and it will show me where my trajectory will run, even before I'm anywhere near it????

[How do you set up an encounter with aerobrake trajectory?]

Several times tried it with Duna, couldn't get any approach closer than 20m km. I do NOT have enough fuel to get into an orbit now. How do you get an encounter that takes you through the atmosphere??????

[Having trouble designing propulsion for my interstellar ship.]

Overheating problems are easy to deal with. Just attach some of the "active" radiator panels (the ones that fold and unfold) anywhere on the ship. They don't need to be next to the overheating component, they can be anywhere. While deployed, they actively (and rapidly) suck heat out of any components on the ship that are hotter than them. Problem solved. The only question mark is how many (and what size) radiators you need, which will depend on your heat load (i. e. how many LV-Ns you're running).

I'm using 7.

[Having trouble designing propulsion for my interstellar ship.]

What are you attaching the NERV engines to? My understanding is that large parts, and especially fuel tanks, make good heat sinks. You can then attach a radiator or solar panel to the tank to bleed off the heat received.

For example, I'm currently running a Duna mission that uses four of them, each attached to a good-sized LF tank sporting a gigantor. I have run the engines at full power for several minutes (six or more) without overheating problems.

A SpaceY interstage plate. If I add more radiators to the fuel tanks, will those bleed heat off the nuke engines?

[Having trouble designing propulsion for my interstellar ship.]

I have a lander design that can land on pretty much any of the low gravity planets (Moho, Duna, etc), + the command, habitation, and power sections of my ship. However I'm having trouble with propulsion. Here are two designs I had, one with argon engines (near future propulsion) and a fission reactor, and another using nuclear engines. I have problems with both designs

* The fission reactor never gets to full power, so I can't burn my argon engines at full thrust. The burns take forever, and I think this makes my maneuver nodes inaccurate.

* The nuclear engines, even with radiators, overheat too soon for a burn.

Looking for hints for alternative solutions or a fix for what I' doing wrong.

[Tracking Station Going Wonky - Ruining Saves]

It's similar to a problem I've been having: the ships do not show up in the flight gui (as in the diamond selectors don't show up) and the last thing I have done with my install was installing Alternis Kerbol five weeks ago. Must be a OS update or something.

Is there a mod that replaces or emulates tracking station functionality?

[Bugs, bugs everywhere...]

I'm having tracking station bugs as well. The only change I can think of in the past days was that I applied mod updates through CKAN. The last mod I installed was hyperedit over 3 weeks ago.

[Log spam and tracking station broken.]

I'm having the same issue, even after a fresh install.

[Tracking station + orbital survey = bad]

I've been having issues with my tracking station as well, pretty much the same as yours. It first appeared when trying to switch to a vessel that was on a sub-orbital trajectory. I ended up deleting that save game and starting a new one. The last time I encountered the bug was after doing an orbital survey on the Mun. After the survey I went to the tracking station and it said there was "no orbital survey data". When I try to switch back to the probe, all sorts of wonky problems happened.