Search the Community

KSP Version 0.1.1.0 Windows 11 (22H2 - 10.0. 22621) I7-12700k, 3080Ti, 32GB DDR4-3200, 2TB M.2 SSD. Expected Behavior - stranded ship on Mun (10-15km away from arch) to remain in position whilst rescue ship is launched and brought to same location. Observed Behaviour - Stranded vehicle is stable and landed, able to EVA fine on the Mun. Return to KSC to launch new rocket to rescue stranded. Switch control via map or tracking station, to stranded vehicle or even get within a certain distance to said stranded ship and it is suddenly under the surface of the Mun, falling. Occasionally able to EVA Kerbal and use jet pack to reach surface level again but then unable to locate Kerbal after switching back to rescue rocket. Replication - As above, every time I load save file this will happen, never able to complete successfully. Fixes / Workarounds (if known..) none known. Mods - none, vanilla game. Any files are available on request.

Hi there, i'm trying to construct a modular surface station concept. This has been my last try: The vessel in the middle have had a ground anchor, it exploded as i docked the third vessel. After i docked the fifth vessel and joined using the KSC tracking station it was kicked few hundred meters up in the air, parically exploded and broke apart Managed to set up four vessels again, next time when i used the tracking station to control it, it was trown up and broke in two parts and exploded again The effect seems worse when i use the KSC tracing station to jump on it, compared to when i approach slowly with another vessel My question now is how may we build a vessel that reduces this effect or how to make it more robust against it or reduce the effects causing it? Already searched the forum and other places on the internet about it - there are few outdated opinions about it, some say more struts, other say less autostruts... As you can see i've got 20 landing struts and 24 wheels, all "locked autostruts heaviest part" - if there's any problem with it, i surely triggered it. May more "real" struts or more ground anchors be a solution? Or may it be better the other way - most flexible joints and no struts? Or is or it solveable with RCS / reaction wheels and SAS? I'm also playing on a DarkMultiPlayer server, that makes it worse i guess. But i think this effect takes place in vanilla as well? Looking forward for ideas, kind regards, Michel_0 KSP Version: v1.12.3.3173 Windows player x64, 1.12.1 Making history, 1.7.1 Breaking ground, Win11 x64 EDIT: The vessels got big reaction wheels, plenty of RCS and liquid fuel thrusters. I made sure to shutdown all thrusters, turned RCS and SAS off before i left the station (and it still was as i rejoined).

In Team Galileo's JNSQ system I'm planning a Jool Five mission, including rovers and landers for each body. All five Jool moons are exhibiting a checkerboard pattern that I've only seen once before on JNSQ Moho, in Kopernicus 1.8.1-1. That seemed to be fixed with a dev version Sigma88 let me try, at least until I cheated a craft out to Tylo: This pattern seems more pronounced the brighter the daylight. For the sake of troubleshooting I removed EVE and Scatterer. I still have Distant Object Enhancement but that's only supposed to affect the sky box. It's stock graphics and lighting at this point. I've tried this on a couple different PCs, including a Gen4 Core i7 with a GTX 1080 card, a Gen8 Core i7 laptop with RTX graphics, and a potato laptop running an AMD Ryzen and discrete Radeon graphics. I get identical results, but this only starts happening past Dres. It was worse in KSP 1.8.1 / Kopernicus 1.8.1-1 as it occurred on Moho as well. On a lark I swapped Tylo and Minmus thinking it might be the distance to the sun, but the above screen shot happens in orbit of Jool or Kerbin. Any ideas where I should start to troubleshoot this? I could always go back to KSP 1.7.1 / Kopernicus 1.7 but I really like the 1.9.1 features too much.

I've gotten my rover as close as I could to the point on the map, but I don't know how to exactly aim for the area I need to be. I've been moving a bit NSWE and taking EVA reports but nothing seems to activate the contract. Am I doing something wrong? When I click on the marker on the map I get an option to "Start Navigation" but it doesn't seem to do anything! At the very least I feel there should be a visible marker in the world, like for my other crafts and flags and such.

Hello, So im looking to have a ksp war mess around thing but I’m kinda feeling done with the map of kerbin because it’s been done lots and because I kind of want a navel ish theme. Anyways my question is, can you change what the surface of kerbin looks like to a more island ish themed thing. My idea is like an island chain where you land on islands and all that. Thanks in advance and and feel free to recommend any navel warfare mods or just genral good war mods

Seen in a few videos a mod in use which added rocks and trees and such on planetary surfaces. Unfortunately I can't remember what the mod was called or what the videos were, and Google (or forum) search is completely useless, indifferent of the search terms used it keeps pointing me to totally different topics (adding planets, or parts, etc). Can someone please point me to the mod in question, this is driving me crazy with frustration..

There is a problem I have frequently found myself in that perhaps you have too. Say you are landing on a surface with low-gravity, but the surface is at a slight incline, you hit it at a weird angle, and your lander tips over. Or suppose you are in a rover on that same low-gravity environment, you get going too fast, hit an uneven part of terrain, go spinning in off the surface and land upside down. Well, you could just over-build all those things so that never happens or can right themselves if they do end up in that situation, but what if you have crew with you? Why not use them? Something I have tried to do, but found it awkward and difficult, is to get a Kerbal under an edge of something I am trying to flip right-side up and either jumping or using an EVA pack to thrust upward, but the force imposed by them is usually hampered because it cannot get a firm purchase on the object I seek to impart that force on, often deflecting off, wasting the effort. It struck me as a little unfortunate because crew ought to be able to use their bodies to perform mission-necessary actions: they already do that with flags, and surface samples, manually deploying solar panels, and fixing broken tires. Why not flipping overturned components? This does not feel like too much. Super-Kerbal levels of strength are not necessary if the gravity is slight, and often all that is needed is a good "nudge" so the reaction torque and RCS (if applicable) can get going. I was thinking, a Kerbal on EVA who is firmly grounded on a surface might be able to right-click a nearby part and perform a "Lift Up" action, which would impart a small force on that specific part in a direction normal to the surface (as determined by gravity.) This would allow clever Kerbals to figure out how to maximize the effect by selecting a part where they have good leverage from the center of mass. If we want to go wild, maybe make this a function of Engineers who have a small jack in their toolbox (they already fix broken tires so we can deduce they have that on hand.) Based on what I know of the engine, this should not be too complicated, but let me know if I am off-base here.

I hope you can forgive me asking a question that has almost certainly been asked many times before, but I don't know the best search terms to find it. This problem has shown up in my other large surface stations using all stock parts. I just downloaded Kerbal Planetary Base Systems and it seems to do the same thing when my base gets big. The only other mods I use are Mechjeb and Kerbal Alarm Clock, so I doubt it's a mod-induced issue. It seems to only happen some of the time and only within the first few seconds after switching to the base. I end up holding my breath hoping it will be stable when I first switch to it. If it doesn't start flailing and explode in 30 seconds or so, the base seems to remain fine until the next time I switch to it. Is there a mod (or some other solution) that will keep my oversized bases intact? https://i.imgur.com/3A7PJPv.mp4 *Edited because I'm new to this whole imgur link business*

Build A Grounded base on every planet and moon (Except jool and Kerbin) in career mode! each base has to have at least 5 kerbals on it at all times, and it has to be a permanent base. they have to be at least 50 meters long and 10 meters high, and a width of 20 meters Cairojack, If you're reading this, This is NOT a single launch Challenge NO CHEATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

***SPOILERS WARNING*** This thread may contain information about locations you don't want to read about on the forum, but would rather discover for yourself at your own pace. If you read on, please don't hold me responsible for giving anything away and spoiling your fun! Friends, I need your help. A few months ago I posted a thread suggesting that Exploration Accolades could be added to KSP as an encouragement to revisit worlds and launch different mission profiles, as well as have the game record some of your achievements. I still think this is a good idea, but I also recognise that KSP has moved beyond that optimal stage of development when features like this stood any real chance of being integrated. So, I thought, why not simply create a catalog of places worth visiting and share it with the community as a giant destination-finder that does slightly better than just reward you with a bit of science when you get there. If there was enough interest, it could even become a massive compendium of lesser challenges, with sig-badge awards galore for the determined polyglobetrotter. The trouble is, I don't have a great deal of time on the one hand or technical know-how on the other, to seek out and find these locations. What I'd really like is for people to respond here reporting locations they've found and tell me how to go there and find it myself. Hopefully I will be able to visit and verify each returned location before adding it to the catalog. Let me clear, this goes a step beyond easter eggs (although they're welcome too). I'm wanting to collect location information for: highest peaks or ridges/deepest pits or trenches, (this might be retrievable from map data, but IDK) river mouths/sources, lakes or pools, major and minor impact craters, the north/south poles, large and small islands hidden/secret valleys anywhere at all that you can reliably see something picturesque, remarkable or unique (I'm thinking of Joolrise, but there must be better examples). anything else that might just be noteworthy enough to be worth a visit Pictures are not necessarily required (in fact in some cases they might ruin the surprise!). What I really want to know from you is: What is it? Where is it? (world and latitude/longitude) Which way do I have to look from there to see it (if applicable)? What time should I be there to get the best out of it? (e.g. dusk, sunrise etc) Lastly, much as I love mods, I'd like to begin by doing this for the stock game only. Using mods to find these places is of course fine. Many thanks in advance.

So a topic I keep coming back to in my mind is surface bases. There is little practical use for them besides contract fulfillment, but the idea of building a long-term stationary extra-planetary surface habitat is fun, a good challenge to set oneself on. Most of the designs I have seen are modular, built up of several attachable pieces, and many surface base contracts require docking ports for I assume this reason. However, the real gordian knot of this challenge for me has always been how to attach all those modules together on the same surface outpost in a practical way. I have done a few experiments at KSC with modular designs, all of which were semi-successful, but none of which I have been able to economically and reproducible implement on actual missions instead of in elaborate practical prototypes sitting just off the runway. If it is not the putting together on the ground then it is the practical transport of the various modules to another orbit in a cost-effective manner and repeatedly landing them close enough to the same site to be practical. The stock game is a little limited in options when it comes to a lot of this. I am not so much asking, "How do I do this?" as wanting to see examples from other people. What are your preferred methods of designing, launching, landing, and assembling surface bases? I want to see how the community does it, hear stories about what other people found practical and what they found difficult. Come share your experience and let us commiserate our failures, celebrate our successes, and teach those of us lurking.

I thought it might be interesting to assign additional weight to a vessel when a surface sample is brought on board. My thought process is that a surface sample requires no outboard science equipment so there should be some penalty to Dv for such a high value science return. I apologise if this has been suggested before, as I seem to be unable to search the forums right now.

I've been working on some parts for a mod I'm making, and I'm having trouble with my control surface part. The part is similar to the delta-deluxe winglet in that it has a built-in control surface, which I attempted to do by having the control surface as a separate mesh which I assigned the module to. It is mostly working, but it rotates around the wrong axis. I tried re-orienting it in Unity, and it didn't change, and I tried re-doing the axes in blender but it didn't carry over into Unity. How can I make the control surface rotate about the correct axis?