Gilph

You are my hero

This. In my new 1.2 career, my mun lander was similar in the upper stage. Had command pod. service bay full of experiments, no materials pod. Used a 400 tank with a terrier, had four 400 around it with decouplers, and put the landing legs on the outer tanks. I think, with adding another 200 in the center, it was over 5000 deltav. Don't autostage dropping the four tanks until you lift off for the last time, as they have the landing legs. As above, the Oscars, Thuds, and Sparks should not be needed

Search for the Kestrel lifters on kerbalx. I use them all the time. can usually add or remove tanks to get them just right for your crafts.

Hi, Not sure this is similar to the rescue kerbal in orbit issue, but I had a rescue mission to rescue a kerbal in EVA on Minmus surface. The EVA countdown started when my rescue ship was still in orbit around Kerbin (according to the LS status screen), so it was way out of physics range. Thankfully, I nerfed the EVA timeouts when I started doing rescue contracts, so he was OK when I got there. Issue? Thanks

Sure...I have to get new contracts, all the old ones are done. Will post shortly. Thanks

Hi, Noticed an issue with scanning contracts (not using the Scansat contract pack mod). Usually, if the contracts ask for a percentage scanned, the current value is also displayed (like: Low res altimetry: 12/85%). Now, the current percentage is almost never displayed in any of the different views (contract icons in toolbar from VAB, KSC, etc.). The only way to see it is to go to Mission Control and view the Active tab. It seems like I would see it when the scanner starts, and the contract first recognizes that it is in progress, but goes away after scene changes. Does that sound like an issue? Thanks

@The Space DinoHi, For Mun, if you are not interested in reusing the vessel, I've had success in using a center fuel tank, and installing four smaller fuel tanks around the bottom of it with decouplers. Then, attach the landing legs to the outer fuel tanks. When I land on Mun, my outer tanks are emptied on the way down. When I lift off, I decouple the empty tanks (including the landing legs) to remove the weight, increasing the delta v of the return ship. Using a terrier engine, I can do a lot on Mun early in the tech tree with that design. It's not really asparagus staging at that point, but dropping the empty tanks and landing gear right after liftoff sheds that weight at just the right time. Hope that helps

No stutter here. Went away in x64 version after 1.1. 1.2 unmodded is very stable, and I agree the prerelease testing and transparent bug tracking seemed to have made a lot of difference. The atmosphere changes aren't to my liking, many of my rockets flip backwards unless I do ridiculous things with speed control that I never had to do in any previous versions.

OK, Thanks for the reply. I am not having any serious issues that impact play, so it's all fine. I started a 1.2 career and should be landing bases shortly using USI-LS. Have to decide whether I prefer TAC or USI eventually. USI is such a large mod in total that is looks a lot like a different game sometimes, and that could be a good thing. But, will always keep KPBS. It is really a great mod. Was never really interested in trying to retrofit rocket parts as bases, but KPBS really makes bases fun. Thanks

For me, I'm still playing a 1.1.3 career mode with a whole bunch of mods. Not all have been moved nicely to 1.2. Also plan on doing that for a while, as I am using TAC-LS/KPBS combo in 1.1.3, and decided to use USI/KPBS in 1.2. Your version 1.1.5 was the first to support 1.2 and had the fixes I asked for regarding the storage rebalancing. But, I kinda wanted them on 1.1.3. Is that not possible anymore? Not a big issue, more of a nice to have.

Hi, Ran into a bug for 1.1.3. I had the contract to do the multi scan on Mun and Minmus, where you had to destroy the previous low res scanners. Did the low res part and contract was OK. Then, sent a station to Mun, and it thought it was the multi scanner. When I actually sent the multi scanner, It recognizes all of the orbit and inclination steps, but would not change vessel to the probe, it kept it as the station. Would not complete correctly. In reading the file, the vessel ID of the station was crossed with the name of the probe in the Tracked Vessels section. The ID of the probe was not used anywhere. Had to unload pack. Have some save files if needed. Thanks

@Curveball Anders Hi, I know some have reported this, but I check the calculated data and the data that gets uploaded, and it uploads correctly. I have not seen the garbled error. My issues seem to be only in the burn part of the porkchop/transfer burn. The porkchop seems to calculate the correct departure time, or close enough. The burn parameters are somewhat close, except the radial piece. All of the other utilities work really well and are highly accurate, so I don't think it's a Matlab issue. Since I've been trying to educate myself on orbital mechanics, my only thought was that when you input the burn data into MA, it optimizes for true anomaly (if you follow the tutorial steps), and the transfer burn without MA uses mean anomaly. Since the porkchop/burn was somewhat designed as an input to MA, maybe the MA optimizer provides that final tweak. Still working my way through it.

Porkchop Problems V2: Hi. Tried to do a Vall to Tylo using the porkchop/burn, and got very similar results from my Minmus/Mun issue already reported. Have screenshots and logs available if you need. This time, I noticed two things in common with the last time: There was a reasonably large radial burn and the burn point seemed to be in the wrong place. So, I moved the burn point exactly half of the orbital period forward, and got a close approximation. Set the normal portion to 0 and lowered prograde from 355 to 270 to get a 450K pe to Tylo. So, I think the issue may have to do with the burn point being almost 180 deg off. Not sure if the weird radial component is causing it or is a result of it. Please let me know if you want the data. I can put screenshots in a Wordpad and also post the output_log.txt. Thanks Edit: Think I may have found something. Reverted back to 1.5.5 vanilla with no updates. Deleted and recreated bodies.ini. Got a great result from Duna-Kerbin. Will not install any of the prereleases. Thanks

Sounds good...so, based on my needs at the moment, I will keep Resource Biome Lock and disable Require Narrow Band. Only use the narrow band, SAR, and Multi to get the best scan of resources, slope and biome close to the equator. Place it in polar orbit if I wish to eventually map the whole planet, knowing it will take forever because I'm only using one satellite and I need to scan at different altitudes. One more, if I may. The surface scanner only checks for ore, but there are many other resources. Does that mean that only ore can be accurately calibrated? I use KPBS for bases, and there is a self-sufficient life support option on bodies that have water, because it has a water drill. It also has a water narrow scanner and a water surface scanner. Will using them affect the ScanSat results and increase the water concentration accuracy? Thanks

Hi, new ScanSat user, since the kerbalmaps site may be down for good. Started scanning Mun. Wanted to make sure if I understand correctly. I disabled stock scanning in the options The M700 now no longer gives an instant scan, you need to cover the planet with scanning polar orbits to get the low level representation of resources? And, this is no longer a prereq to finish this first before other scanning? If I was just interested in resources close to the equator, do I really need to do this step? If not, what step initializes the resource concentrations for a body? The narrow band scanner still is a dynamic scanner, meaning that if you want to look at a hi res resource section on the surface, the scanner must be within range? Does this mean there is not an option to scan the planet for resources in a high res fashion using the narrow band and have it store that information in the maps? The surface scanning item is still used to calibrate the accuracy of the narrow band? And only needs to be used once per biome, anywhere in any biome location? If I am not interested in anomalies but still want slope and biome at the moment, and I am finished with the tech tree, I only need the SAR and Multi? The SAR is for slope and the Multi for biome (not using anomaly)? Thanks

Thanks for the info. Will fix that in the next update. Hi, it looks like any setting does not get preserved in a scene change. The enabled/disabled settings work, but if you set a any conversion level other than 100%, it resets back to 100% on a scene change, including the Habitat and Hub settings. Also, the CO2 Small Container has the same CO2 capacity as the Waste Products Small Container. Should that be double the amount, similar to the Waste and Waste Water Small Containers? In fact, should it be slightly more? I wanted to lower waste water and increase CO2 and waste storage. If I replace 2 Waste Products Small Containers with a CO2 and a Waste container, I have the same amount of waste, half the amount of CO2 (or, assuming it's a bug, will have the same), and no waste water, with the same mass. I lose waste water capacity, but no gain on CO2 or waste. Thanks

There are two things: First, you need the flexible corridor part on both ends you want to connect. Secondly the corridor is restricted to a lenght of 10m. So if you want to make it 20m you'd have to put a part with flexible corridor ends between. Thanks for the response. @DStaal was kind enough to help me with this. It was user error...did not know that a flex port could not attach to a regular port. I did manage to scout a small corner that had 1.03% water right at the very south edge of the flats, so I drove the base there and just attached the water mining section directly (love those perfectly aligned wheels). Now I can drill both ore and water on a nice flat section without moving. They can survive for a long time. Thanks

I think the ideas are all agreeable: reducing grind and removing some of the easy and OP portions of science accumulation. But it has to be appealing to all players. The methods described in the OP assumes that everybody wants to go interstellar, and forces them to do so to progress. I recently read the thread that discussed that a fair amount of players never leave the Kerbin system. Their sense of exploration is limited to the three bodies, whether they prefer to explore Kerbin with SSTOs, build bases on a moderate grav body like Mun, or enable ISRU activities on a low grav body like Minmus. The contracts that give funds and science to travel to specific locations and biomes satisfies their desire for discovery and exploration just fine. Plus, it provides a progression path that a game requires to keep the player interested. The reason why you chose to locally grind some extra science locally instead of creating the Duna science trip is that you chose to do so. I recently started a second career game, and I am choosing to get more Duna science points than grinding Kerbin biomes. I'm still not a fan of the original proposal, although having a sort of world first science bonus would be a good idea. Obviously, the more places you go, the more you should get. But, if you want the nuke for your Mun tug, or an ion for your Minmus lander, there should be a way to get it. Going far away is only one way to explore, and distance is not always harder or more valuable.

Hi, sorry but I do not agree. There are better ways to nerf science accumulation. Logically, I think it's fine that you get full credit per biome per body. Temperature readings from Highlands and Lowlands on a given body should be different, and it's OK to get full credit for both. The thing about Science that is way OP is the MPL, as you get full points for an experiment per MPL. Why repeat full points for an experiment just because a different MPL processed it? I'd rather see that eliminated and have MPL functionality similar to the Spectrometron in Station Science. Schlep the experiment back to Kerbin? 100%. Analyze in a MPL? 80% Wimp out and just transmit data? 30%. It makes science points finite again and gives credit for processing in an actual lab, whether it's on Kerbin or a portable one you brought. But, I do agree that the whole surface/flying/low/high/space/etc thing can use some work.

Hi, Noticed a small issue, If I set the Algae tank to 75% conversion, then I switch to another scene and return, the setting gets changed back to 100%. This is on 1.1.3. Thanks

ummmmm....no. The destination port was the corridor port, not another flex. Seemed to make more sense to me at the time. Never used KAS, only learning it now. Appreciate you following up, will try that out as a test. Thanks PS. this is really a great mod. Got the self reliant Minmus station going, even though it's small and simple. Thanks for your work.

*sigh* Carting is probably the way to go. I can have them very close. I do have 6% ore on that section of flats and the water is right on the edge of the slopes biome in that corner. Thanks for the heads up...i would have been a raging maniac if I found that out the hard way. As an FYI, during the test, i was pretty close. Had both KPBS parts flat on the ground so the kerbal was right next to it, even closer than i needed to be to get the link button to start the connection. I tried using the regular port and the corridor port as a target, and the only menu item was to set the port as target both times (no link choice). I had Kerbal R&D installed, and found that it was causing crashes with KPBS parts, so I removed it and I'm reinstalling everything to see if it helps. Thanks

Hi, Since i got somewhat screwed by the ore scan on Min, only Slopes contain water. So, I have to park my main base at the edge of lesser flats (not to be confused with Lester Flats) and put the water mining section on the edge of the slopes and connect them. On Kerbin, i tried connecting a flexible corridor on one base building with a corridor docking port an another base section 20M away. I would get the Link option when i right clicked the flex, drag to the other port, but no option to complete the link. I am using an Engineer with a wrench/drill. Is that the correct procedure?

OK, have some data. this is with latest prerelease on 1.1.3 with older connect file (which works fine) 1. Recreated and loaded bodies.ini 2. Selected my space station that I want to send from Minmus to Mun 3. Calculated porkchop 4. Calculated Departure Burn 5. Uploaded Maneuver (8 days in future) Note it's not even close 6 Stopped and restarted game - no difference 7. Warped to 2h before maneuver, deleted maneuver, and redid everything. No difference Bodies.ini and TOT log: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AigvIEvgjetqikNBLmuB5BXhIPUS Thanks

I understand, and my POV may not be popular, but if the first paid 3M, and the second paid 100k, that's 3.1M. I would rather have the first pay 2.5M and the second one pay 600k. Same money, but bigger time sink Also, wanted to validate the Spectrometron functionality. The function of that device is to increase the value of transmitted science to 90% of the returned value. So, it is valuable for stations far from Kerbin. All you need to do is to supply the data from an experiment in some way, so a lab is really not required, all I need is either the experiment or the experiment data. Is all this correct? Thanks