It'snorocketscience

That's cool. Maybe if I search harder I'll find a mod that puts a launchpad on the Mun. If not, maybe I'll go learn how Kerbal Konstructs works and make one myself...

I've only seen Kerbal Konstructs stuff on Kerbin... you're saying that mod works on other planets too?! That would be so cool...

I tried it and the scan radius is tiny, about 10* max. To catch any anomalies it must orbit high above the planet, but then your markers are really, really far off because of this.

Could a mod reuse the extra launchsite features (like the island runway and desert airfield) and put one on Duna or the Mun? I know Extraplanetary Launchpads lets you do this already, but that adds extra parts that break saves and craft sharing. I want to know if I can directly launch a ship on The Mun using that drop-down launch menu in the VAB. I believe the console version of KSP has something like this already, so it has been done before.

So all probe cores have a random chance to detect "?" anomalies on the Kerbnet Access map, some more than others. When does the game "roll the dice" for this random anomaly detection chance? Is it done every time the game loads, or every time you turn on Kerbnet Access, or...? (I wish to know how it works so I can find anomalies quicker without cheats. I personally dislike the randomness factor, and would rather spot the anomaly the first time I fly over them.)

All KSP parts have a max impact speed/tolerance, above which they break. But you can hit water much faster than that and still survive. Is there any pattern to this? Like, some hidden x3 impact tolerance buff for hitting water instead of land?

I might've found a bug or mod conflict with Tracking Station Evolved. That mod groups spaceships into handy tabs depending on what SOI they're at. It works with stock and OPM planets, however the combination of this MPE mod + OPM + Tracking Station Evolved breaks *all* modded planets and makes them disappear from the menu. The minor planets also don't have that colored blue/red/purple/etc circle that Kerbin, Duna, and all the other planets have in the map view. This bug should be easily reproducible by installing all three mods with CKAN. If that doesn't reproduce it then I can share my logs on request. Aside from this minor annoyance, nice mod! I really like the challenge posed by the tiny SOIs and odd orbits of the dwarf planets. They adds gameplay depth in a way the big planet packs with their large SOIs and boring orbits don't.

Hello again, what do you mean by "will break saves?" I installed the mod for the first time on a backup of my 1.12.3 sandbox save, and it worked fine. Then I uninstalled the mods (to see if my crafts would still load without it), and everything still seems fine! I built and launched a rocketparts workshop with the mod installed, and it still loads after having removed the mod. So I can't find any permanent effects from running the mod on my save. I guess what I'm trying to ask is if I can run this mod and still export crafts to my vanilla friends without issues. Based on those tests above, it seems to work, although my science lab still retains that "rocketparts" resource even after I removed the mod...

Hello! I noticed the thread title says the mod is v1.12.3, but CKAN says 1.11.9. If the 1.12.3 version is only a pre-release then the forum title should be reverted. Or if the 1.11.9 version on CKAN is outdated then it should be replaced, in my opinion.

Question: If I change a tank with this mod, then send the craft to a friend with a vanilla install, will it still work? I really like simple mod concepts like this one, but for the sake of compatability and share-ability I hope fuel-swapped tanks still work elsewhere.

Sorry for the necro, but as these mods are still operational, I have a feature request for PLUM: Add the option to calculate terminal velocity, i.e. descent speed with 0 parachutes. In Eve 's thick air, parachutes are often unnecessary if landing in the sea, or using strong landing gear (but not always - that's what testing determines and what PLUM should determine). On Tekto of the Outer Planets Mod (Titan IRL), terminal velocity is so low that some objects can land with no parachutes or engines at all! The air is dense yet the gravity low, so terminal-velocity falls are quite survivable. But I would rather test this with PLUM than Hyperedit

Sorry for necroposting, but will crafts created by this mod work if shared with other people (who DON'T have the mod in their savegames)? Or does it break craft-sharing?

So while stripping off some extra parts off my Mun lander, I started having trouble re-attaching parts. The situation: The problem: I'm trying to re-attach the "twitch" engine in these pictures, but the game won't let me for some reason. I'm really baffled by this - the engine should be light enough for Bill to lift (0.08t), and it isn't obstructed by other parts, and Bill is certainly close enough to attach it to the lander, right? I'm not sure why the game isn't letting me do this. If anyone has any guess, I'd be really grateful. Thanks! Note - The re-attachment was working fine a few minutes prior - I re-attached that exact same part to the lander earlier while landed on the Mun before removing it again and getting stuck where I am now.

I'm surprised this doesn't have any comments, considering how much effort appears to have put in. Well then, I'll go first. Very nice work!

If you play KSP with both stock planets and the modded planets from the Outer Planets mod, you probably use the Combined Community delta-V map to get the dV numbers for all planets, be it modded or stock. Unfortunately, Eeloo gets moved around in the Outer Planets mod, and after a few miscalculations and several ruined missions, I decided to tweak the chart to show the figures for both the stock AND the Outer Planets versions of Eeloo. Enjoy! NOTE: 99% of the work on this map was not done by me (see credits in the top left). This is just a little Eeloo fix so this map works for both modded and stock KSP. Original map here:

I know this is an old thread, but this just came out on Stratenblitz's channel: So with this thing, you can reach orbital speeds with nothing but props, and push yourself into orbit with ion engines. This is big! Somebody's gotta build a Jool SSTO with this In my case, I probably won't be using it as I don't like buggy tech, and it's somewhat... well, ugly, to be frank. Stock parts are strong enough as they are, in my opinion.

Probably not for a while . I got a lot of work to do this month, plus flying and filming a prop plane is time-consuming because props can't spin with timewarp active. Also, on a side note, the fairing improvements in 1.10 are super handy - you can eliminate drag from exposed engines but leave a hole in the back for the rocket flames to come out. (It was possible to hide rocket engines inside fairings before 1.10, but they look horrendous to me .)

Is anyone else having issues using Scatterer in 1.10? I'm thinking of making a bug report, but maybe the mod just isn't compatible with 1.10 yet and I should wait...

Have you guys had the chance to test it in 1.9? If not, do you have a .craft file I could use to try? It looks like piloting it is quite challenging, but I would like to try it anyway. Also, if the prop TWR is good enough, it should work on Eve or maybe Duna. @Mephisto81 I was reading through the older posts, and realized I might've missed your post... is this a challenge entry? If it can make it to LKO without dropping any stages then it's set. I also would be very excited to see this if it's a working Eve prop SSTO. By the way, I must thank you a ton for the service bay tip. It cured my headache from trying to deal with prop drag!

Very nice! I'm really happy to see a good peak of eternal light site. It makes for a very unique base location, even if it's far from science. Your entry qualifies for the 0-10 degree flatness bonus and the polar bonus, and it does indeed add up to 103.68 points. I will update the leaderboard to rank it as time goes on. Currently, it looks like you have the best spot, but I think I might've just found a good equatorial location to steal the throne... I'll get back to you on that. - - - - - Edit: Your entry at -2.938, -23.575 is worth 67.68‬ points. Not bad, but try placing the site closer to multiple biomes. Scoring: --- End of edit --- A biome is an area of land on a planet or moon that lets you collect Science points. You can only repeat Science experiments a certain amount of times before they stop returning Science, but travelling to another biome lets you earn more Science. The KSP wiki has a map of biomes on each planet, and your own game's cheat menu has a "Show biomes" option. Unfortunately, Breaking Ground features and ore deposits don't count in this challenge. They are randomly generated in each game, so if other people wanted to try out your spot, there's no guarantee they could mine ore or find the Breaking Ground stuff. But don't worry, your spot earns a good amount of points for other things! It qualifies for the equatorial and flatness bonus for sure. I'll calculate the score soon. Edit: @RoninFrog I could do that, however there is one issue. If Ike is visible, and you're near the equator, Ike will sometimes get in between your solar panels and the sun or your antennas and Kerbin. You could get around this problem however by moving North or South so that you can still see Ike but Ike won't block the sun completely... let me know how it goes! - - - - - @TheFlyingKerman I got around to scoring your site: Your entry is worth 95.04 points. Good location! Scoring:

Surface Coordinates (Lat/Long) to Distance Calculator Have you ever wondered how far and long you would have to drive a rover to get from one place to another? Maybe you're planning a Science rover expedition, or maybe you want to place a base within driving distance of other bases or new Science biomes. Either way, here's a simple spreadsheet that calculates distance between two points on any planet/moon in KSP: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11ahybKKvft5v7hfzkBEnTdFKhT_f-YsI3ITXKMeZDUw/edit?usp=sharing Make a copy of the sheet and you'll be free to make your own calculations between any two points on a planet or moon in KSP. All landed crafts will show their coordinates if you hover over them in map view. Note: The spreadsheet doesn't account for hills or elevation on planets. Coordinates must be in decimal format, so 2* 25' 48" N 17* 22' 40" E would look like 2.2548 and 17.2240, while 2* 25' 48" S 17* 22' 40" W would look like -2.2548 and -17.2240. Enjoy!

Yeah, you might be right. There was some bias involved (I really want players to explore for something unique that's never been done before), but the peaks have some disadvantages. For starters, the peaks of light are restricted to the extreme poles of Duna... it will be very hard to earn points for other things because the North and South poles are in the middle of nowhere and have very little biome variety. Also, peaks of eternal light, as the name implies, are usually located on top of mountains. It's quite likely that sites will get penalized for being too steep. But I'll consider nerfing that hefty 64-point bonus if too many entries focus on those peaks. I don't think Ike can eclipse the poles of Duna. I haven't verified it for sure, but I recall watching a normal Ike eclipse (from the equator of Duna) in map view... IIRC only Duna's lower latitudes were affected.

Oh cool, thanks. By the way, what did you think of the scoring system I made up? Does it make sense or are some things worth too many/little points?

Duna Surveyor Challenge - Find the best locations for landers and bases on Duna The vast majority of challenges require you to build something that pushes the limits of the game. This one is different! Instead of building something, you must find something: Find the best possible landing site on Duna for bases and landers alike. You see, some sites on Duna are better to land at than others. Much better. Some are surrounded by rich Science biomes, while other areas border mountaintops, places that act as good launch sites for minimalist missions. The list of handy features goes on - sites near Easter Eggs are cool and easily recognizable from afar. Your task is to pick a landing site that is as close as possible to as many useful features as possible. I’ve created some scoring charts to rank your sites, which appears later on in this post. So, it’s time to go explore Duna! Deploy the mapping satellites, launch the surveyor planes, and pilot those scouting rovers. But what are we looking for, anyway? The judging process - What makes a site good? Duna landing sites are judged based on 3 things: How close they are to useful features, how steep they are, and how close they are to the equator or poles. I have created a scoring system that (hopefully) takes into account how useful and common these features are. Feel free to make suggestions. Stage 1: Closeness to useful features: Feature name: Science Biome Easter Egg Launch Zone (Land above 6.5km) Landing Zone (Land below 1km) Peak of Eternal Light Points earned if <200km: 2 2 N/A N/A N/A Points earned if <20km: 4 4 3 3 4 Points earned if <2350m: 8 8 9 9 16 Points earned if touching: N/A 16 27 27 64 Why distance requirements? What are these features? Why are some worth more points than others? Stage 2: Site Flatness A landing site is useless if it’s a steep hill—your crafts will tip over! Your score from Stage 1 will be multiplied by this table: Site Slope (steepness): Points multiplier: 0°-10° x1.2 10°-20° x1 20°-30° x0.8 30°-45° x0.6 >45° x0 If you don’t know how to measure slope, it’s easy. Simply land a flat object on the surface, turn off SAS, and watch your navball. Stage 3: Site Latitude “Latitude” means how far North or South your base is. In the case of Duna, there are two useful latitudes. Your score from Stage 1 and 2 will be multiplied by this table: Site Latitude: Points multiplier: Within 10° of equator: x1.2 Within 10° of N/S pole: x1.2 Everywhere else: x1 Why are points only awarded for the equator/poles? How to enter: Find a good landing site, plant a flag, name it, take pictures of the landscape and coordinates (hover over the flag in map view), and post it. That’s it! I'll handle the rest, 3 submissions max per person. After you post your site here, I’ll score it using the charts above. The site that scores the highest will have the honor of me landing my very first base on it, and the 2nd and 3rd sites will get landers and rovers… eventually. I’ll send screenshots, but until then, my Duna missions are waiting for you! Leaderboard: Useful links and stuff: You will need to find some maps and do research to complete this challenge. Here are some places to get started: My coordinates-to-distance calculator: - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11ahybKKvft5v7hfzkBEnTdFKhT_f-YsI3ITXKMeZDUw/edit?usp=sharing - I will use this to measure distances to nearby biomes, and you're free to use it too! Official wiki page for Duna: https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Duna Unofficial KSP maps site: https://ksp.deringenieur.net/ HyperEdit mod (to explore Duna quickly) - Nevermind, use your in game cheat menu for that Scansat, ISA Mapsat mods (to map out Duna’s features, slope, etc.) Your own KSP game—use cheats to turn on biome maps, manually scan Duna with probes, and explore! Good luck!

The wings are larger than you think. The wing strakes have a "relative wing area" of 1, according to the SPH menu. This craft has 14 of those wings, so it has a wing area of 14 and weighs 15.6t. For comparison, the Aeris 3A has a wing area of 5 and weighs 8.5t. So my plane actually has more wings for each unit of mass than the Aeris 3A. I also pushed the rules a bit and only did plane takeoffs and landings at low altitude. Duna's low-lying canyons go down to 200 meters on the altimeter and have much thicker air... I did the math and Duna's canyon air should be as dense as Kerbin's air 8km up. That's pretty handy!