What should I do next ?

[Triop]

[Jacke]

[swjr-swis]

A poll asking for a next op from someone named Triop... and it ends at only two options. I am disappoint.

But I will help. It has to be fitting with the other two, of course. You have highest, and deepest... how about right in between?

Challenge: find the stretch of (barely) dry land where you can drive the longest distance in a perfectly straight line while maintaining a constant altitude of 0m. Stock altimeter accuracy will be accepted.

Become famous now. Say no to elevations and descents. Accept your inner ASL. Make that zero-point drive.

[Triop]

@Jacke Why not both ?

Ok, let me rephrase it, which one first ?

17 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

Challenge: find the stretch of (barely) dry land where you can drive the longest distance in a perfectly straight line while maintaining a constant altitude of 0m. Stock altimeter accuracy will be accepted.

Become famous now. Say no to elevations and descents. Accept your inner ASL. Make that zero-point drive

[Jacke]

2 minutes ago, Triop said:

@Jacke Why not both ?

Ok, let me rephrase it, which one first ?

Go from the deepest to the highest in one drive.

Then do it again on Eve.

[Triop]

2 minutes ago, Jacke said:

Go from the deepest to the highest in one drive.

Then do it again on Eve.

You know I'm allergic for everything above 70.000 km, right ?

 

3 minutes ago, Jacke said:

Go from the deepest to the highest in one drive.

I was actually seriously thinking about that for a moment...

But I would revers it then, go from the highest point to the deepest.

It does make sence somehow imo.

[Jacke]

1 hour ago, Triop said:

But I would revers it then, go from the highest point to the deepest.

Why I suggest going from deepest to highest is:

1.  The deepest is closer to KSC.

2.  You're likely to be able to get to the deepest location and back out again, as I think the sea bed will not be steeply sloped, but at the highest, you may have terrain that will block you.  And getting down might be risky.

[Triop]

7 minutes ago, Jacke said:

You're likely to be able to get to the deepest location and back out again, as I think the sea bed will not be steeply sloped

I'm planning on doing this James Cameron style: A diving bell attached to a KAS winch. It would be cool designing a boat that can do that.

11 minutes ago, Jacke said:

but at the highest, you may have terrain that will block you.  And getting down might be risky.

Yeah, I will need some serious power or a clever route to pull that off.

Getting down will be suicide. . . 

[FleshJeb]

We ALREADY went to the deepest point! OK, OK, we got close.

KAS Winch?!? No, oil rig! with hidden mini-sub! This one can reach 800m deep, surely you can do better! (I grant you, I've only ever docked three of those 75+m drill strings together in the field, because underwater docking is HARD.)

[Triop]

20 minutes ago, FleshJeb said:

We ALREADY went to the deepest point! OK, OK, we got close.

O wow, I forgot about that one. . .

20 minutes ago, FleshJeb said:

No, oil rig! with hidden mini-sub!

That is a whole other story called "The Ore Wars". But because drilling ore is so slow in the game it is not profitable.

Some CFG moding could help building a global ore company drilling rich ore all over the planet. 

20 minutes ago, FleshJeb said:

This one can reach 800m deep, surely you can do better! (I grant you, I've only ever docked three of those 75+m drill strings together in the field, because underwater docking is HARD.)

That's a BEAST !

Edited February 23, 2019 by Triop

[Triop]

2 hours ago, Jacke said:

Why I suggest going from deepest to highest is:

1.  The deepest is closer to KSC.

2.  You're likely to be able to get to the deepest location and back out again, as I think the sea bed will not be steeply sloped, but at the highest, you may have terrain that will block you.  And getting down might be risky.

Hmmmm . . . . I could design a ship that has a rover and a sub and do them both in one mission . . .

@purpleivan is doing a awesome crazy mission with a ship with a rover, so why not ?

 

[Jacke]

34 minutes ago, Triop said:

Hmmmm . . . . I could design a ship that has a rover and a sub and do them both in one mission . . .

 

Spoiler

 

@purpleivan is doing a awesome crazy mission with a ship with a rover, so why not ?

 

Exactly!  But cooler still would be taking out a negative buoyancy rover with water jets that goes along the bottom of the ocean until it comes up on shore near the highest mountain.  Then it jettisons its underwater gear (or you drive it a few kilometres, same result) and goes for the summit.

[Triop]

12 minutes ago, Jacke said:

But cooler still would be taking out a negative buoyancy rover with water jets that goes along the bottom of the ocean until it comes up on shore near the highest mountain.  Then it jettisons its underwater gear (or you drive it a few kilometres, same result) and goes for the summit.

[Xavven]

As a Subnautica fan I am going to have to cast my vote for deepest point.

[Triop]

8 hours ago, Jacke said:

Go from the deepest to the highest in one drive.

I'm working on it, like my concept ?

[JacobTheFoxx]

8 hours ago, Triop said:

 

Hold on, how in the world is your kerbal walking underwater? Don't they normally just float to the surface?

[swjr-swis]

4 hours ago, JacobTheFoxx said:

Hold on, how in the world is your kerbal walking underwater? Don't they normally just float to the surface?

Hush. It was right after the holiday feeding frenzy, and Valentina is still touchy about the subject.

[JacobTheFoxx]

21 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

Hush. It was right after the holiday feeding frenzy, and Valentina is still touchy about the subject.

Ohhhh okay, my apologies.

[Triop]

11 hours ago, JacobTheFoxx said:

Hold on, how in the world is your kerbal walking underwater? Don't they normally just float to the surface?

@Martian Emigrant Had the solution:

"I edited the quicksave file.

Found Jeb then scrolled to his resources.

Replaced the "EVA Propellant" with "Ore" (Spelt those ways).

Made the quantity 20 (8 made Jeb sink but very slowly)(20 was a good sink speed and he walks and run quite normally. Jumps a bit low me think).

On the subsequent reload the game added the Eva Propellant back.

EDIT:

I have been playing with the Ore while on the bottom.

With 7.3 Jeb as a slight sink. When he jumps he can swim and eventually touches bottom. Or swim to an upslope and makes contact.

The RCS fails and is stowed on it's own. "

Edited February 23, 2019 by Triop

[Triop]

12 hours ago, JacobTheFoxx said:

Hold on, how in the world is your kerbal walking underwater? Don't they normally just float to the surface?

I found a easier way, a simple mod.

Control makes you sink and shift makes you go up.

https://kerbal.curseforge.com/projects/ker-plunk

It works in 1.6.1.

 

[Martian Emigrant]

Funny that you remember that Ore trick.

I thought that was gone in the "Mists of times".

I was thinking recently about that as I have been looking for something to do and was entertaining the idea of making subs again.

 

And learn how to edit textures in KSP. That or learn to use kOS.

 

So little time. So much to know.

 

ME

 

Edited February 23, 2019 by Martian Emigrant

[Espatie]

If you installed KIS you could carry ballast in the Kerbals own inventory.

[Fraston]

Why not KIS building a base on the ocean floor?

Yes, I know that @Triop is disliking of mods, but KIS in my opinion should be stock _{1. It would be possible for people to use, 2. its just that good}

[Triop]

3 minutes ago, Fraston said:

Why not KIS building a base on the ocean floor?

Yes, I know that @Triop is disliking of mods, but KIS in my opinion should be stock _{1. It would be possible for people to use, 2. its just that good}

Building a base there is a good idea, I like it.

I agree that KIS (and KAS) should be stock, indeed I'm not a fan of mods, but as long as they don't interfere with my flying or driving gameplay I make some exceptions.

[FleshJeb]

1. 
3. That plane on reddit should be named the Llewellyn Dowd