Jimmy Jazz

Thank you kind moderator sir or ma'am. As, for the Ferram aerospace, I've seen a Manley video where a booster is able to fly due to that mod, and that really put me off. Also, I tend to spend most of the time outside of atmosphere...

So? Deadly reentry, TAC life support and RemoteTech are on my list to install. Any more suggestins? Also, are thede any major issues with the modes that I should be aware of?

So, does the core explode do to overheating, or due to atmospheric drag - like the solar panels do?

Hm, I didn't know that there is overheating due to atmospheric friction in stock game. Is it thus possible to blow up on reentry if you go in too fast?

Maybe a collaborative mega project can be started to build a network of solar modules encircling the Kerbol, set in orbit each at a rendering distance from each other. It could be done with one save file to witch everyobe could contribute. The sheer math of it makes me sick, but my realy rough estimate would be that we would need around 100 000 000 of those modules... Well, at a rate, say 50 per day, we would be able to acomplish this in the next five millenia, or so... But the effort alone will make us happy, no?

Let's not forget that atmosphere gets thiner as you ascend, reducing drag and allowing greater acceleration.

I found that the easiest way for me is to try for a direct rendezvous, but I'll usualy let the target ship stay a bit behind me when I reach it's hight. Then it's just a task of geting my apogee sligtly above the targeted orbit and burning at it until I get a close encounter, so the ship later catches up with me. When I get to the encounter I just kill my relative velocity, and voila.

Maybe you can do more tests... The SRB blowing up without a nosecone can be just a kraken related occurrence, without multiple test you can't really know. As for the reentry, it is normal for a body to accelerate due to gravity when going towards it's perigee, or in this case towards Kerbin, it takes time for the planet's atmosphere to catch up and for the object to start decelerating due to atmospheric drag. As for the fins, I think they only help you maneuver the craft that has no thrust vectoring, while they can often add to general instability.

Yes, you're right about the arrangement. I also understand what you are saying, but I'm not relying kn bicoupler to 'merge' back the ship, but on the "control from here" command set on the docking port. E.g. I also have one docking port connected radialy to the body of the lander which is working just fine when I set that command to it, getting the navball repositioned and all, but when I set that comand to my main port it just acts as if it is controled from the main lander can. Oh yeah, another thing, both of the cans are attached to the top bicoupler, I think the botom one is attached to just one of them.

Can't get you pictures right now, tomorrow. But, it's nothing complicated, and it's correctly placed, I can dock and all. It's simply a port mounted on top of that bi-coupler thing, and there are two lander cans on the bottom side. Also, I'm not switching to iva. Unrelared, that mod sounds nice, but I'm afraid it'll mess up my memory and processing power on an already underpowered computer.

Firstly, I have this self-sustainable Mun lander thingy. It has two control modules, those one kerbal lander cans connected with that two rocket sepelarator thing, basically they're standing side by side. There is another connector on top of em that ends with a clampotron which is positioned in the middle of them. Now every time I chose to control from the clampotron the navball is still set on one of the landint cans. Now, I love using the navball for docking, but this issue prevents me from doing it. Secondly, everytime I transmit data my antenna retracts. Is it possible to prevent this?

...............

I don't know about the docking bug, and you might wanna try what Taki117 said, but in other case: 1. Make sure your SAS is off. 2. Move in slowly - 0.2 m/s. 3. Double check your latitude, your docking ports need not only be facing each other, but they also need to be aligned. It can take some players patience and practice to do this. Similarily, check from all camera angles are the ports facing each other directly.

No, as I said, everything was working fine up until that point, it just lost thrust all of a sudden. Anyway, I've solved it! I was converting the kethane that I got at the same time that I was using up fuel - this would get rid of the extra weight, and make my flight more efficient - and it did, but, apparently for some reason that engine stopped working the minute that all of the kethane was converted. I solved the problem now that I've turned off the kethane converter. Hm... wonder why this happened... Could this data be of any use to folks working on this mod? Anyhow, it was a fun experience having this issue out of the blue, something like real life problems that you cannot really predict.

Mod was doing just fine up until now, I've had some bugs with engines producing flames without them being turned on and without thrust, justthe effect, don't know if it's related though. Besides that, thrust limiter is at 94 percent and I've just tried taking off a bit, and again it's not workign, although showing as active in a stage and all... Someone using kethane mod could be of help here...

So I was happily flying my Mun lander/hopper/locust thingy after I had a some fuel issues but landed with near suicide burn that I was real happy about. Got some kethane and refuelled the thing. So as I was saying, hopped to investigate an anomaly my scansat detected near the North Pole crater, everything was going really nice and easy (I mean the thing was already tested on the Mun and flew missions without problems... unless you count Patble and Luner who were little careless about their fuel... damn those were some good Kerbals), when all of a sudden an engine stops running just when I was in the middle of my second landing. Well, there were four LV-909 engines, so naturaly the thing went chaotically out of control.It also took me a while to figure out it was an engine issue. So I panicked as I don't like quickloads, I shut down another engine to balance the thing, but which wasn't quite possible, because, besides the standard symmetry problem, the thing wasn't symetrical to begin with, but had a customized thrust to balance it. So my TWR goes down 50 percent and the thing is really hard to control. Barelly made it to the ground in on piece, ended on a slope... Checked the odd engine, it says 'active' (I tried reactivating it during the problematic flight, but it wouldn't start), checked weather it has fuel-it does... So what the heck?! A genuine engine failure? Kraken sucking up my thrust? Nothing weird on the flight log to answer me... I also still didn't find out what that anomaly is, the only anomalous thign I can see around is one smallish hill that stands out. I have this superstitious idea that my engine stopped when I flew over it. Also I don't know weather it works now, as I'm afraid to take off. Kerbal Control, please advise.

Nice vid. First time I saw someone do this. Keep it up!

There is no such a thing, because of the 'on rails' system while you're away from a ship.

The farther away from the body you're orbiting you do the plane change, the less dv you'll lose. Also, you would be wise to do a mun injection at about 1000km and at the same time a plane change maneuver, just play with the node a bit, and you'll get it. That way you'll lose less dv compared to doing them separately.

I'd also suggest horizontal ladders added to fix that. You're lucky, though, my kerbals tend to go *puff* when they try to climb a ladder.... sob;.;

Ok... Well... that seems reasonable, I guess. Thank you.

I can land a kerbal on his head and.... what?! Elaborate, please.

Banned for endangering the structural safety of the roof of the VAB building.

Ok, before anyone satrs accusing me of being too politicly correct, I must say that it just doesn't stand. Besides, I completely like the idea of kerbals being of no ***. But it just isn't so, considering e.g. thst Von Herman or whatever his name his in the sci building. He has mustache, and that is a obvious masculine trait. And no, it cannot be a sexless kerbal with mustaches, because it is a human masculine trait. The thing is, I really love this game and this, but believe it or not, in this state it is sexist, even if unintended. And please, don't put them in pink dresses or give em make up, just a nice subtle approach to this issue would be nice.

You got me here. Why should I compare the Skipper with the LV-T30/45 by giving it three time as much fuel? That would give it a closer TWR, but also three times the fuel. Wouldn't that make the results uncomparable? I don't see how TWR is the problem here.