Search the Community

Hey guys I have a solar probe with a Communotron 88-88, a Starlink relay network around Kerbin, and a giant relay rover about 2 km north of the KSC. I expected the comms to go either via relay then to a station or via the Relay rover to the KSC. What ended up happening was the comms came from Harvester Massif via a satelite, went through the planet to the rover, then finally yo my solar probe. Sometimes this also happens on rockets that have Communotron 16s, and that decreases signal significantly. Can someone please explain to me what is going on and how to fix it?

Any challenge beyond the base “fly to Planet X, return to kerbin” is self inflicted, and with almost 400 hours of play time, this is becoming more and more apparent as I play. This game has so much potential and I would hate to see it missed. Ksp 2 is missing a lot of more minor features that were present in ksp 1, that really add a lot of enjoyment to the game through interesting design challenges. Most notable ones from the top of my head: -kerbal levels -kerbal roles -probe core levels -kerbal G force limits -part pressure limits -reentry plasma blackout -comment occlusion While fairly minor additions, and potentially only difficulty options, these add a lot of interesting challenges when it comes to designing a craft, and flying mission profiles. These features are minor additions compared to science or reentry, but they a huge amount of gameplay through making the player design their way around these challenges, and they elevate the game beyond just flying from A to B. Kerbal levels: incentives the player to bring more kerbals with them, and to rescue those that are stranded. Brings a sense of physical loss on top of the present emotional loss when a kerbal lithobrakes too hard. Currently bringing more than one kerbal is at your disadvantage, and rescuing one brings you no gain, using probe cores makes no logical sense. If I lose a kerbal, the ksc has an infinite stock of free ones at my disposal. If jeb is my only 5 star kerbal and he gets stranded, it is my highest priority to go rescue him; I want to bring more kerbals with me to level them up, so if one is lost, it doesn’t cripple my agency. Both cases encourage me to design unique landers, that I otherwise would not build. Higher level kerbals increase the stakes of a mission, lower level kerbals increase the difficulty; completing both missions have a higher sense of accomplishment than the current game. This is something independent of science mode, and could even work well in sandbox mode. Kerbal roles: Gives more personality to a given kerbal, creates more incentive to bring more kerbals with you. Pilots have manoeuvre node access, scientists can run experiments multiple times, engineers increase part efficiency. I am reminded of the time I few a mission with no sas because I wanted to bring a scientist, so I could do experiments multiple times; was one of the hardest missions I flew, and some of the most fun I’ve had in the game, something that is lost. This would require a bit of a rework of the current science system though unfortunately, but I think it would be well worth it. Probe core levels: greater sense of advancement through the tech tree. Currently a probe unlocked at tier 4 is no better than one unlocked in tier 1, defeats the purpose of even having any other probes. Flying low tech probes makes you appreciate the high tech ones. Kerbal G force limits: Adds a fun layer to flying crafts and even aggressive reentries. The G force indicator and even Kerbal animations are already in place, they just need to have some actual gameplay function now. Part pressure limits: Makes jool and deep ocean expeditions dangerous, could have higher science payouts as a trade off, potential for specialised parts, similar to the u-dunk-it science part. Reentry plasma blackout: Added layer of realism to probes, extra satisfaction when control is regained. Teaches the player to build stable reentry crafts, and also teaches them about a real life phenomenon. Commnet occlusion: intuitive way that probes function, visual indication of how far a relay can reach. Intricate commnet constellations are lost since a single high power relay is basically all the comms set up you’ll ever need for the whole save. Ksp has always been about designing solutions to challenges presented by the laws of physics. I worry that these are being simplified in an attempt to make on-boarding easier. It would be disappointing to not see these features added before 1.0

Well, there seems to be a lot of dev info on Discord that did not make it onto the forums. Not that I've been asking about CommNet for months without getting any answers. Such is life for second hand forum citizens.. you're either on Discord all day or you don't get to talk to the devs. I can only thank providence that Dakota is still engaging with us here. Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:17 AM i hear there are some questions about commnet and im here to answer them if they're here Spork Witch — Yesterday at 2:18 AM yeah! I was asking about whether occlusion and vehicle links were implemented at this time. I was told occlusion / LoS is not, but that if there's a commsat in range, you'll bounce off that back to kerbin. Further, is there a distinction between transmit-only and relays? I notice we have all the old commsats, wasn't sure if they ALL function as relays now, or if there's still the same split of RA=relay, others are Tx only. Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:23 AM Generally All antennas are relays by default, they can bounce signal back (we didn't like this distinction) Line of sight is not a thing, there is only distance as a concern Connectivity between vessels is a simple matter of ensuring that they both have antennas that have ranges that qre equal or greater to the distance between them. So if 2 satellites are 100 km apart, they both most have antennas of rating 100 km or higher to connect Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:26 AM Commnet and occlusion was extremely forgiving by default settings in KSP1 and we didnt feel there was a significant difference between soft occlusion and no occlusion for EA launch. Lots of the depth people would want requires a set of supporting visual and planning tools that are a fair bit of work to design and build Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:32 AM I think there's a thing I wrote in a devblog of everyone playing KSP with different goals in mind - everyone has a thing they prefer, whether it is building vessels, making comm networks, etc. We can always take player feedback into account in driving plans and make changes at that point. Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:33 AM dev hat off, I hate commnet and always turned it off in KSP1 Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:34 AM I mean that goes back to need - a question we always need to answer is that, given all the ways people play the game, should you 'need' to do any particular thing? That could significantly impact what someone else wants to do. It's a fine line Spork Witch — Yesterday at 2:37 AM which is why it was always a toggle, but KSP is also about education. Learning about line of sight communications, and the need to set up satellites in particular orbits is a REAL WORLD learning thing, and also an orbital mechanics one, a core focus of KSP. The easiest way to properly position satellites is to launch them all at once, using resonant orbits. Without this constraint, from occlusion, you remove the one thing in the game that would actually direct someone to learn about these things. Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:39 AM Yep, understood Nertea, Destroyer of Fun — Yesterday at 2:35 AM I think I could say with some confidence that increasing commnet complexity has to come with more viz and planning tools Nate Simpson — Yesterday at 2:39 AM A lot of us like all the detailed line of sight/relay features in Commnet and it's definitely a thing we want to revisit, but as always we're having to balance multiple priorities. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ That being said, here are all the current antennas in the game, for comparison purposes:

I noticed a bug where Iose commnet connection after undocking, if I keep it undocked and quicksave, then load the save the commnet connection is restored

I just remembered that this isn't a feature in KSP 2 yet. Any guesses on when this will be added? (probably not for the first couple of patches) Same time as re-entry heating maybe, or that it'll be when science mode is released

After docking with another spacecraft the CommNet (even if not required from Settings) loses the signal and the ship begins to spin out of control. During launch, the next stage is launch the Escape Tower System: I press spacebar and works, but after few seconds, the ships begins to go out of the screen and loses the control.

I really like the idea of seeing the range of the antennas. In my opinion something like this should be in KSP2 (of course the circles should be spheres). This is from the KSP1 mod called Antenna Helper.

Having played with KSP on hard mode, I found it quite annoying that you don't get full CommNet coverage of Kerbin when you are in orbit unless you are very high. I kept losing control of vessels with only probe cores when I was launching or attempting to do a re-entry burns, so I thought that I'd create a map so I could see the altitude you need to have CommNet a signal when in hard mode (or when you've set the Occlusion Modifier to 1.0). I ended up creating two, one for orbital heights (75km to 250km) and one for surface heights (10m to 60km). Each colour patch indicates where there is no CommNet signal at a given altitude. The most interesting bit is that there is a large CommNet blackspot East of the KSC, just about the place that you might be attempting to circularise and it goes very high, this means that launching a vessel with just probe cores onboard really needs a relay satellite to be in place first. Looking at the map, it looks like an initial relay satellite might be best launched into a polar orbit giving you much more time (via North Station One) to circularise before you lose connection. I've done a bit of testing and it does seem to match the reality of the game. Hopefully these will be helpful to people Orbital Heights Large (4096 x 2048) and Small (1024 x 512) Surface Heights Large (4096 x 2048) and Small (1024 x 512)

I’m constructing my solar commnet, and am currently at Duna. I need precise orbital info, unfortunately, it just shows me LOCKED. I would expect this with bad signal or a weaker probe core, but i’m using the 2.5m one and my signal strength is 96% bouncing through Relay 3, 2, and my refueling/comms station before going to the KSC. It says unloaded on them which I imagine doesn’t make much of an impact, but I don’t know.

KSP Visual Calculator Online calculator tool for Kerbal Space Program Delta-V Planner Click the planets and moons that you want to visit to get a total required delta-v number for the mission A mission can contain multiple checkpoints to visit, each on different planets, moons, and orbital situations (or surface landed) Also provides a step-by-step breakdown for each leg in the journey Shows the delta-v requirements for every possible trip combination (delta-v subway-maps only work when Kerbin is one of the locations) Configure custom preferences such as aerobraking at specific locations, applying a margin of error to your mission, or calculating the most efficient route instead of a direct route Save & export the mission as a JSON file to share with others CommNet Planner Create satellites, relays, rovers, stations, bases, etc. with a custom selection of antennae, then drag those around the screen to see where commnet connections are valid Every craft automatically indicates if it has control or not based on the relay networks it is connected to Use this to plan out communication network constellations, without having to trial-and-error this in-game Set the DSN Tracking Station level at Kerbin to match in-game upgrade progress Set the CommNet difficulty settings to match the settings in-game Add Remote Guidance cores in craft to test a piloted base providing remote control to a rover, even when a connection to Kerbin is out of reach Shows detailed stats such as cost, power rating, mass, transmission speed, etc. for the entire collection of antennae on each craft Save & export the constellation as a JSON file to share with others ISRU Mining Station Calculator Design a mining base by swapping out different parts to see their effects on the system Select the planets or moon for the mining base, adjust the ore concentration, and even add a specific skill engineer onboard Toggle the type of processing that the ISRU will be doing. Only refining Liquid Fuel? Then only turn on Liquid Fuel refining Fuel cells, solar panels, and RTGs can be added for power supply A handy 'Production and Consumption' panel displays the total outputs, and any deficiencies of the system Number sliders control the amount of each part. Use this to adjust the amount of drills, or power sources, or radiators until the outputs are green with no deficiencies Warning messages highlight potential issues in the design, such as not having 'Ore Storage' parts Choose from 73 stock parts Save & export the parts selection design as a JSON file to share with others https://ksp-visual-calculator.blaarkies.com/ Checkout the github repo

A lot has changed since I last posted here. I've now set myself up with a PC and installed a number of mods, including Galileo's Planet Pack (which is terrific, by the way). The pack adds many new outer planets, unreachable with stock antennas, so one of the R&D nodes adds antenna upgrades for the Communotron 88-88 (the umbrella one) and the largest of the relay dishes, which are now rated for 1.00T instead of just 100G. Ever since I researched this node, the CommNet just breaks every time I launch a vessel from the VAB. The craft on the launchpad has no connection to the space center whatsoever. I go to the Tracking Station and the CommNet lines are gone. The logs are absolutely filled with spam, but here's one section: [EXC 19:26:17.574] ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection. Parameter name: index System.ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentOutOfRangeException (System.ExceptionArgument argument, System.ExceptionResource resource) (at <ad04dee02e7e4a85a1299c7ee81c79f6>:0) System.ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentOutOfRangeException () (at <ad04dee02e7e4a85a1299c7ee81c79f6>:0) PartModule.ApplyUpgradeNode (System.Collections.Generic.List1[T] appliedUps, ConfigNode node, System.Boolean doLoad) (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) ModuleDataTransmitter.CommPowerUnloaded (ProtoPartModuleSnapshot mSnap) (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.CommNetVessel.UpdateComm () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.CommNetVessel.OnNetworkPreUpdate () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.CommNode.NetworkPreUpdate () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.Network.Net4[_Net,_Data,_Link,_Path].PreUpdateNodes () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.Network.Net`4[_Net,_Data,_Link,_Path].Rebuild () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.CommNetwork.Rebuild () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) CommNet.CommNetNetwork.Update () (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0) UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object) ModuleManager.UnityLogHandle.InterceptLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object) UnityEngine.Debug:CallOverridenDebugHandler(Exception, Object) The post linked below details a similar issue, but doesn't give a solution to the problem. Can anyone help me fix the problem?

I have a strange problem that I can't figure out what is causing it. I have added the extra ground station setting in the advance options. However, when looking for them in the tracking station I just see a little red x that tells me I need to build a ground station there. That's all well in good but I am not sure how to do that! clicking on it doesn't do anything. I am not even sure if this is default how its supposed to work. Since I have been out of the Commnet loop for a bit playing with RT. I think the mod that is causing this is either Kerbalism, or Kerbal Konstructs/ Kerbinside Re. If its not then I can upload a list of all my mods here if that would help.

Having been discussing this, and slowly fleshing out the idea further, I would like to suggest a set of level 4 upgrades for each of the KSC facilities should be available, as well as (as a reach-goal) some way to upgrade the alternative launch sites (the Desert Runway needs an upgrade to its length/width/surface, in particular). Why: - Gameplay progression and "reach" goals for longer-running campaigns by more advanced players (although, these should not be out of reach of any player, they should require even greater Funds cost than the lvl 3 upgrades). - Rule of Cool. Bigger and more impressive facilities are a worthwhile goal in themselves, if it doesn't harm immersion/fun. - Realism. Real space centers, like Kennedy Space, took DECADES to reach their current size/scale. - Mods. Some of the features these level 4 facilities would provide would make some of the harder mods- such as Real Solar System scale-up's, a bit more playable on Career without having to tweak the Difficulty settings yourself. What the upgrades do/ look like: - Lvl 4 Launchpad. Somewhat bigger than the level 3 pad. Located a bit (maybe 10-20 meters) further away from the other buildings for range-safety of colosssl rockets if this is possible- otherwise the default distances should be increased 10-20 m or more (they are too small for realism, and increasing the distances a bit would add more of a sense of scale/size to the space center...) Maybe also adds a big, bare concrete pad nearby that still counts as Launchpad biome (100% recovery) for SpaceX-style recovery missions (the lvl 3 pad is an INCREDIBLY small taget to aim for landing on, and most players, except the truly crazy-skilled ones, just aim for anywhere near the KSC grounds for landing launch stages as a result...) - Lvl 4 Runway. Wider and longer than the KSC runway (currently 2.5 km long, the KSC runway in real life is 4.5 km, and quite a lot wider than the KSC one in game as well. I suggest at least 3.5 km for the level 4 runway, preferably 4-5 km). Maybe a bit thicker surface, for realism of handling heavier planes on it (could also justify then making the lvl 4 runway being a bit harder to destroy than the lvl 3 one). Wider runways will allow players to safely launch wider planes. The runway separation from the SPH should also be increased a bit (at least 10-15 m) for landing approaches of ultra-wide planes, range-safety of massive planes full if rocket fuel, and so wings of huge planes don't collide with SPH if players decide to taxi around near the SPH a bit. - Lvl 4 VAB. Larger/taller inside than the lvl 3 VAB, so players can see more of their tallest rockets (and have less of planes overflow the VAB when they merge really long shuttles/flyback boosters built in SPH, before attachment) without re-rooting of parts and constant shifting of the rocket stack. Larger exterior dimensions too, for immersion/coolness. - Lvl 4 SPH. Longer/wider internal dimensions than the lvl 3 SPH, for even longer/wider planes (having really wide planes that you can't see the wingtips of in the SPH is *particularly* annoying). Larger external dimensions for immersion/awesomeness/impressiveness. - Lvl 4 Tracking Center. Provides higher-powered DSN (so players have a better way to increase this with more immersion/coolness than just pulling up the DSN slider under Difficulty settings. I won't argue the necessityof the DSN upgrade beyond saying it'a both more realistic, and less obnoxiousfor players than building their own more powerful ground-stations on Kerbin and an enormous relay network just to provide stronger comms to Jool, or mods that expand the # of planets beyond Jool) and larger/more impressive-looking satellite dishes for the building. Maybe give the Tracking Center a proper parking-lot too? - Lvl 4 Astronaut Complex. Should provide a discount to astronaut-hiring costs (maybec10-20% off the base cost. 30%? 40%?) By the late-game, when you have a large crew roster, it becomes PROHIBITIVELY expensive to hire more Kerbalnauts (and forces players to just spam rescue-contracts to get more) or replace any lost crew members (w/o respawn). An option to refresh the current list of available hires, for a cost in Funds, for the lvl 4 complex (if you're going to spend a fortune on hiring, maybe you want a Pilot with better Courage, or a low Stupidity scientist? Helps with immersion/fun). - Lvl 4 Science Center. Purely a handout to modders. Lvl 3 center could be given a tech node cost limit beyond anything in the stock tree- allowing modders to lock parts behind a lvl 4 science center (which would remove all limits) for Career Mode balance and realism for futuristic parts taking even longer to obtain... Could possibly be disabled by default (but re-enabled under difficulty options, with a tooltip "just for looks in the stock gsme") if would annoy stock players. Could be larger/ more impressive than the lvl 4 center, so even some Stock players might use it, for coolness. Would of course also be default level in Sandbox/Science modes (so most players would still benefit from the cool model). - Lvl 4 Admin Building. Should come with a moderate (20-30%?) discount to buy-in costs for all strategies, or *maybe* add a few new, more powerful strategies (or allow existing strategiesto be set to 100%- with lvl 3 only going to 80%, and the strategies all being buffed a bit). Would make the game a bit easier if players bought it- but at VERY low Return On Investment (as the upgrade would be very expensive). Besides, most players don't use the Admin building much. This might give players a *bit* more motive to do so. Could also cone with a larger/cooler building model, maybe also a bigger parking lot? (To represent the increased staffing demands of a more mature apace program, and all the complex clerical work that makes modern space programs possible...) These are just ideas for what each of the lvl 4 upgrades could do- amd I'm sure other players could come up with even better ideas! This is a great game, and little improvements like this (or in the case of players who struggle with launching/landing enormous rockets on the puny lvl 3 pad/runway, BIG improvements...) would make the game even better. I don't expect everyone will agree with me on thos, or all the details, but I would like people not to be closed-mindef about this, or respond "there's a mod for that!". Thank you all for reading this! I think some lvl 4 upgrades, as part of the base game, would be a nice way to show appreciation for the KSP community- and by showing players the game is continuing to grow/evolve in a VERY noticeable way to any playthrough, would keep them involved- and more likely to consider buying KSP 2 and any future expansions for KSP as well...

Hello everybody, can anybody explain, why I am getting 40% transmit bonus on science data transmitted directly from KSC launchpad? I am using only Comunotron 16(-S) antenna, transmitting Mystery Goo or Thermometer data and no other vessel or satellite is in the game. I haven't installed any game mod. I've read many wiki pages (of course https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/CommNet and https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Science) and I've searched for information here on forum and generally on the www, but all I found is that the transmit bonus applies only while transmitting through any relay antenna. I think that this isn't my case. I suppose the transmission goes directly from the vessel to the KSC. Can anybody explain what's going on here? Thank you!

Probe: 3 OCTOs, 4 com-16 (3 functional) Relay satellite: 3 OCTOs, 3 RA-2 antenna level 3 tracking station The crafts are well within range of eachother. the relay sat has 100% connection to KSC. The probe just lost connection to the KSC minutes ago. It refuses to connect to the relay satellite. I'm getting really sick and tired of my crafts specifically interplanetary probes refusing to connect to relay satellites for absolutely no reason whatsoever, someone PLEASE TELL ME WHY IT IS NOT CONNECTING TO THE DAMN RELAY.

Hello, TL;DR: I'd like to know how to add (and remove) icons from the commnet panel (the panel where you see the transmission status, the kerbal-probe capable icon,...). I see a lot of questions on the web like "why can't I control my ship?", "I can't delete the maneuver node?",... And I see that the commnet icons are missing some important information and we can only see this by opening the resource tab to see there's no more electricity... Also the probe-kerbal capable icon is very confusing : the orange Kerbal icon could either mean "no SAS because no pilot" or "a probe is assisting so you can SAS but you can't do maneuver nodes"... Also a green Kerbal icon means full control but with xp activated a scientist is considered "green" although he/she can't SAS,... The goal of my mod is to remove this icon and add new ones Firstly : does a (recent) mod already adds commnet icons this so I could take a look at the code ? Secondly : I dug a little in the API, apparently a good hint is the TelemetryUpdate class, which includes sprites. So I suppose I need the Unity IDE to create them... Thanks for your help!

I'm playing in sandbox and want to send Bob to ike,is 3 synchronous orbit relays and 1 in sol orbit enough to always get signal? (I will use the biggest antenna)

I'm completely new to KSP and currently trying to set up a CommNet. Is it necessary for the relay antenna on a communication satellite to point at Kerbin? Also, do you need two (relay) antennae, one on each side? (the 1st one aligned to Kerbin, the 2nd one to e.g. a probe)

Greetings everyone! I recently started to built larger communication infrastructures supporting massive explorations towards Duna and Eve. Now I've seen a video by Scott Manley talking about sunsynchonous orbits and was wondering if those mechanics might help in optimizing communication networks. So, is it possible to have 2 different satellites orbiting both Duna and Ike, Eve and Gilly so that the planetary satellites keep a sunsynchonous orbit with their respective moons as the "sun"? Same goes for the moons. Espescially in case of Duna and Ike, who are tidally locked where I could have permanent outposts on their surface both facing each other.

I'm away on business for a couple of weeks so I can't test this out on my PC but I've been thinking of a mission outline that relies on proper usage of Commnet. Let's say I have: a rover on Ike with a Communotron 16 (Ike surface facing away from Duna, but in LoS of Ike relay), a 2 satellite highly elliptical relay with HG-5 around Ike (no LoS to Kerbin but LoS to Duna relay) , and a 3 satellite equatorial relay with RA-15 or RA-100 around Duna (LoS to Ike relay and Kerbin) Does the default Commnet allow the rover on Ike to be controlled on the surface, with the signal bouncing from Kerbin-->Duna relay-->Ike relay-->Ike rover? Or do I need to have a relay in Ike orbit capable of reaching Kerbin? Here's what I quickly threw together to illustrate my question: On a side note, would Remotetech allow this connection (signal from point A to B to C and then finally to D, or even further to E), given the appropriate omni and dish antennae?

Hi Guys I started with KSP 1.5 with only 1 Ground Station. And my Probe just lost Connection on his way to Mun. It has enough Antenna Power To put my problem in a larger scale: How can i archive a permanent Connection from Jool (or any Planet, doesnt really matter) if my only ground Station is on the other side of Kerbin? Do i really have to build a Relay satellite around Kerbin with power of same power as the Tracking Station on LVL 3 (158 Gm). Seems a bit overkill to me Just two pictures for comprehension: https://imgur.com/a/eyWjItU Thx for your help

Caveat: I admit that it is entirely possible that I was being too cute for my own good. I've launched my first fleet for Duna, and it includes a ship with a stack of HECS cores each with as battery, a pair of OX-4L solar panels, and an RA-2, with decouplers to separate them. The plan is to arrive at Duna with plenty of delta V, park myself in nice wide orbit, say 4-5 Mm, pop off the first relay. And this is where I've hit a rough patch. What sequence of maneuvers will put me back in the same orbit, but X degrees ahead(or behind) the first relay?

Now I got the understanding that with commnet, one can control an unmanned probe if the command module/probe core have "probe control point". However, the next sticking point is: Suppose Vessel A, B, C are not connected to KSC. Vessel A is a Lander Can Mk2 (aside from MEM and Mk1-3, it also have Probe Control point), with 1 Pilot and 1 Kerbalnaut. vessel B has an advanced probe core and a Cabin, containing a non pilot kerbalnaut Vessel C is an unmanned probe. Based on my understanding, A can control C, and B can also control C, right? If B cannot, would (B') where the kerbalnaut is a pilot allow (B') to control C? EDIT: Thank you. so in my case, Vessel B' will suffice.

Hi everyone, I've picked up KSP again recently and am trying to build a comm network local to Kerbin. For context: I'm playing on pretty hard settings, and I only have a ground comm station at the KSC itself, not anywhere else on the planet. This pretty much means that I need a comm network local to Kerbin itself. I'm at the point in the tech tree where I only have the 5M relay antennas. For various reasons it would be really nice to be able to launch and control probes around Kerbin (and due to settings I don't have probe control unless I have a comm-link). In case it's relevant I'm using the Kerbal Engineer plugin (automatic suicide burn and Δv calculations FTW!) and the latest KSP available for download. My plan was a three-relay-sat constellation at 2.15Mm altitude (so a 2.75Mm orbital radius). Since the three comsats will form a equilateral triangle, that means by the law of sines the side length between any two comsats will be 2.75Mm * sin(3π/2) / sin(π/6) = 4.76Mm. This was based on the understanding that since the 5M relay antennas have a comm rating of 5M, that means the maximum distance two relays can talk with each other is √(5e6 * 5e6) = 5Mm. Since 4.76Mm < 5Mm, they should be in (low-signal-strength) contact with each other. However, I've placed two of the three relay sats (launching 2 at a time, for redundancy) and despite being almost exactly 4.76Mm apart from each other, there's no comm link. They can both talk with the ground station just fine, but not with each other --- the "network" and "vessel link" views don't show a link, nor can I control the one with an occluded link to the KSC. What am I misunderstanding? Thanks! - ethereal