jost

You can try to reduce delta-v through multiple Moho flybs/ gravity assists:

No worries mate. I know you were quite busy with your finals. Well the long mothershop is the result of Kerpollos "everything needs to be launched from one launch" rule. For the same reasons I coudn't do multiple landings at Pol for mining. If I attempt Jool5 again I would use a quite different mission architecture. Concerning the level: I aimed for 3rd level but didn't get when a "reusage" of Kerbals is allowed or not. So I launched with five kerbals to see whether It might work or not (if not no worries). Since Jeb Level says "rules are the same" this would mean I achieved 3rd level too. On the other hand you said that's 2nd level. So I'm not quite sure, whether the ruling is correct or not. Anyway: Thanks for maintaining this great challenge. It always inspired me from my beginnings in Kerbal. If I do it again I would propably use a mission profile with a dedicated Tylo Lander/Rover combination or a Miner with higher TWR (so it can land on Tylo too) in one of my Career Games (which mains to plan with LifeSupport). At the moment I have no interest, I found the quickload/try to land/repeat procedure a little bit to grindy Even with MechJebs assistance

@JacobJHC Don't want to poke the bear but can you have a look please? It's fine If I'm disqualified I just want to know whether I need to redo it. Although I won't complain if the KERs delta-v readouts are enough

As @HebaruSan said: "Ambitious project! " But if it's not working at the moment I can understand it. However I don't agree with "it treats Mac and Linux as a second class citizens, with minimal documentation and support. " I can't say anything about the Mac port but I'm running Linux and it runs pretty smooth. What's the problem with 32bit? In my understanding a mono app should run anywhere with a recent mono version. Concerning the metadada: It's a good idea to use the existing format, so basically reimplementing CKAN just in a native port for Mac OS X. First you don't need to reinvent the wheel, second it minimize compatibility issues. However I think this conflicts with the idea of a "more flexible/extended interpretation". If your implementation behaves differently at a critical point this will mean, that the same *ckan file can't be used for both implementations. I doubt that most modders will care about this so in the end they will just support one port (the one with more users). To avoid missunderstandings: This is not a critic of your implementation or the modders. Everybody of you is doing it for free, so it's understandable to use the time in a efficient and (ideally I mean it's a hobby) fun way. Especially "infinite recursion" sounds like a smoking gun for me: Infinite recursion can be a problem by itself (e.g. Mod a points to Mod b which points to Mod c which points to Mod a->The actual dependency is not fetched If a modder expect the behaviour of your variant but CKAN behaves differently this can lead to confusion at the end user. Both together can lead to support nightmares for the modder, the CKAN guys and yourself. Or did I understand what you are trying to achieve with this feature? What's your rationale behind it? Edit: Aha I see the CarbonPort of mono is just supported for 32 bit, meh: https://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/supported-platforms/macos/ They mention a GTK# port however. Although that's not very Maclike has anybody tested to build and run CKAN with it? Regards, Jost.

I can't help with your question but at the risk of liquiding you off: Why do you doing this project at all? It's possible to manage multiple installs with ckan as well . And I imagine that it will be quite messy to maintain two package databases. CKAN already has a history of causing problems thus some modders don't support installation via CKAN. I expect that just another tool like it won't make things better in that regard. That being said, if you want to continue I would suggest to just create a new frontend (aka a nice and polished MacOSX friendly interface), but use CKAN for the actual work by calling it from your GUI. Since ckan has a command line mode this should be pretty easy to implement. Just call "ckan list" to get a list of mods, let the user select one from your GUI and then do a "ckan install mod". Then you would have the best of both worlds. Just my two cents and I hope you don't think to hard of me. Just some constructive criticism. Good luck with your project and happy hacking!

I had the same question to bring three kerbals to Laythe surface and back: Most important were reducing drag, getting rid of not needed parts and launching from a higher location (e.G. Highlands or Midlands biomes instead of sea level) Another point was to play with the gimbal settings of the engines (Vector is great for Eve lifters, it's gimbal not so much) A good way to test your design is to try whether it can return to orbit with GravityTurnContinued (seems to work better on Eve than MechJeb).

I don't know which one is better, I usually fiddle with deep space manoevers until I get an capture with one of them. Laythe atmosphere is nice for lowering AE after capture though

Done: https://imgur.com/a/CG093Wr Still a lot of images (79), but at least a lot more reasonable than the 147 in my complete log: https://imgur.com/a/MuS2Bxf There is just one issue, according to the rules: I didn't realized that KERs delta-v readout is not enough and would have to repeat the whole mission to fix this. Alas I don't have the saves anymoore to do the screenshots according to the rules. So I guess I'm disqualified, ain't I?

No problem. I have another problem though: Since Kerpollo doesn't need to have the resource tab open when KER delta v display is present I actually have no screenshot with resources tab open at all. The delta-v readouts can be seen though. Since the rule is quite clear I guess I'm disqualified ain't I? If not: What parts are interesting? My guess is delta v before after each step (landing, launch, rendevouz, transfers), right? Regards, Jost

Hello, I had the same problem: Key was to reduce drag by getting rid of of draggy parts (e.G replacing decouplers with hard points) and using GravityTurn Continued since my piloting skills suck Also important: Use Vector and/or airospike engines and use a higher biome for liftoff e.g. midlands or highlads Regards, jost

In hindsight my own report is quite big too (around 140 images: https://imgur.com/a/MuS2Bxf? Should I do a highlights album (just containings delta v readouts, before landing, during ground operations and after redocking)?

Sun Ra: Space is the place no pun intended

It's not USI-LS but MKS. Your error is unterstandable since MKS uses USI-LS and was written by the same modder. I have a similliar problem in my career (without MKS), which I'm fixing by editing my safe file. Make a backup and try it yourself, I don't see any reason that woudn't work.

I woudn't restart just to change some parts. I'm not @JacobJHC but a copy with some exchanged parts it's still a copy for me Think about what you want to achieve. A ultimate mission with minimum part count and/or delta v? With or without ISRU? With minimum time/maximum science etc? Should the missions split in Kerbin orbit (e.G. one dedicated submission for Eve and Moho, one for the outer planets?) Afterwards design the optimal machine for your mission and have fun

Great job thanks @ManeTI!

This. Imagine you created a images album for a website ( as everybody did before ingurl was a thing). One image get broken. Result: Album is not working as expected although most of the data is just fine. So you upload the insge abd the slbum is working again. I guess something like this happened.

Hm, the error message was "table co-remembers is crashed" Since the forum propably uses a database for storing the content, account information of the users etc I would guess that one of the tables got somehow broken. Normal course of action would be to restore it from a backup. Regarding "We do not know what happened. "? Does this include Squad? Did they just restore the database from backup or was there some kraken which just vanished after a few hours?

I actually thought the same after my posting and can confirm that it seems to work. Still need to test the values though. But I guess they are correct since the math havn't changed in the update. The planets are still at the same place.

Updated my mission report to include descriptions: https://imgur.com/a/MuS2Bxf?

Can somebody confirm this? I didn't expected this because of the Unity Upgrade in 1.8

Good luck with your final! Take your time there is no need to hurry up

Thanks

Hm, the github Download link gives an 404 error. Anybody knows what's going on?

Great job. Just curious: How do you mange to make the hinges work? They consist of reverted solar cells but how did you get the mechanics done?

I was surprised too It needed some iterations of MORE BOOSTERS to work. Thanks for reviewing!