AlexinTokyo

I don't know if there is any interest in this, but I have created a Module Manager config that patches the SCANsat parts to allow EVA construction and transporting parts in cargo containers: Also available as a gist at: https://gist.github.com/alex-d-boyd/97360d6dee6307458b962dac6cda9fbc in case copy and paste doesn't work. Just save the file as text, with the extension '.cfg' anywhere in the GameData folder and Module Manager should load the patches. Requires Module Manager (obviously), but as SCANsat itself also requires it I imagine this shouldn't be a problem. I have given packed volume values that seem reasonable (and appear somewhat in line with the stock parts, but they are in no way canonical. If people like the idea, I can open a pull request to have this included in the mod itself, but I don't want to bother the maintainers unless I know there's some level of interest. If you have any questions about the patches, or for some reason they don't seem to work, please leave a message here for me, and don't bother the mod maintainers.

I don't think the level is a problem (at least I seem to recall that my engineer was only level one or two when I first completed one of these). It may be the ground contact that's the problem. The way I got around the clearance issue was to basically use a jack; I attached a hinge and hydraulic cylinder to the side of the rover, and very slowly used it to lever the vehicle away from the ground. That way I could not only attach the wheels (although getting the correct facing was still a bit fiddly), but I also avoided the rover flipping into the sky when the wheel spring physics kicked in. Another point: it seems that all repair/EVA build contracts are bugged; the contract vessel ID and that of the vessel itself don't match, so you have to edit it in the save file in order to complete the contract. There's a post here on the forums about how to do that, I'll see if I can find the link (but actually in a meeting right now, so...)

It is worth noting that the arms are extremely susceptible to movement of the craft mounting them, and the "Vehicle moved - scan aborted" error can be massively frustrating, especially when you've got full brakes locked hard on every wheel. For this situation, I recommend the "Parking Brake" mod, which will lock your rover to the ground and prevent all movement.

I've found that switching away from the craft (to space center) and back works to reset the transfer bug.

I have just tested and confirm that this works both when you switch control and then create the node and when you create the node before switching control. I guess the game saves the manoeuvre node to the active vessel when the current vessel splits. As far as I know, there is no way to transfer a node to a new control point automatically, but you can use the Precise Node mod to do this. This mod shows, and allows you to hand enter exact values for the UT time of the node and the Δv for each of the three axes (pro/retrograde, normal/anti-normal, and radial in/out). So if you accidentally undock before switching control to the interplanetary ship's control point, you can copy the numbers from the node on the station, create a new node for the ship and paste the numbers in. You will then have an identical node for the ship, and can burn away to your destination.

Correct - I expected to be reduced to minimal control only, but that is not happening. For a test I magicked a copy of the same ship into Duna orbit, and it functioned as expected - no fine control and no manoeuvre nodes. I have another probe on the way to Eve, which correctly lost control when I retracted the antennae. So it seems it might be failing to update the control settings on passing out of range? Although as I say I did experience loss of control due to occlusion previously. Will keep testing. Edit to add: Turns out that changing the difficulty setting to 'Require Signal for Control' then changing it back rectifies the problem. So it _seems_ to be an issue with when signal is lost - sometimes it applies the changes correctly and sometimes it doesn't. Not sure if this is mod related or not, however.

I have an asteroid catcher probe I launched which is on it's way out of Kerbin's SOI. Because I'm an idiot, I forgot to put any antennae on this craft, other than the basic one built into the probe core. The probe is now out past Minmus, and reports having no connection to KSP, but I can still add manoeuvre nodes, and access fine throttle and attitude control. Based on the difficulty settings (Enable CommNet / NOT Require Signal for Control)) I expect that I should not have access to this level of control, but SAS 'point-to' capability and full or zero throttle only. This has certainly been the case on other probes I've had behind the Mun etc. in the past in this save. Am I misunderstanding how out of range probes work? Is this a difference between out of range and occluded? Is this a bug? Or is it potentially a mod issue (I don't have any mods specifically for comms; full modlist in the spoiler below)? I searched the forums, but this doesn't seems to have been reported before; is this happening to anyone else?

Without wanting to hijack the thread; is this correct? The fuel lines allow fuel to pass one way only, so the outer tanks will feed the inner and outer engines, but once exhausted, fuel from the inner stack will not feed to the outer engines (which can then be discarded along with the empty tanks. With decouplers set to allow crossfeed, doesn't the fuel flow both ways, meaning that your centre stack feeds the outer engines once the outer tanks are emptied? Can you get somehow get the decouplers to have the same behaviour as the fuel lines (allowing onion staging with no lines), or am I misapprehending some aspect?

Thanks for reminding me of that (I 'Liked' that post in 2015. Have to practice this tech a bit, but I recall it worked really well.

I recently started getting back into KSP after a break since basically 1.0 days. I've pretty much got my head around the changes and new stuff, and find the old skills starting to come back. However, I'm having a real job getting my powered landing (Mun, especially) back up to scratch; I seem to either crash (killing my Kerbalnauts) or end up with a ridiculous hang time and burn too much of my reserve fuel (stranding them). Thus - Can anyone recommend a good tutorial (video or text, not fussed) from a (reasonably) recent version of the game, that focuses on powered landing? I have no trouble with orbital mechanics, rendezvous, docking, building ships to a target Δv, etc., so I'm not looking for a "Here's how to get to the moon" type thing. Something that says "Here's four different ways of doing a powered landing on a non-atmospheric body and these are the pros and cons of each," would be perfect. Any and all recommendations appreciated.

I am experiencing the same issue as @TaintedLion and @One eyed Smile As it did not appear to be ono the GitHub issue tracker, I have added it with repro steps: https://github.com/S-C-A-N/SCANsat/issues/385 Probably easier to follow up there than here if further information is needed.

I'd be interested in seeing the results of any experiments you do in that regard, but in the meantime, check out this mod thread for solutions to the spam.

Ten thousand million thanks. From me. Twenty thousand million thanks. From my mouse button. EDIT: It seems this will solve the issue for _new_ science clusters - if you want to reduce the spam from existing clusters in a save, you'll need to edit the same line in the persistent file as well.

I recall seeing somewhere (but I can't find it now so I may have been smoking paint) that apoapse/periapse were recognised-but-not-preferred alternatives to apoapsis/periapsis. Regarding specific terms for individual bodies (like aphelion for the sun, perigee for Earth, etc.) I'll sometimes change the suffix for in game bodies as well. Sun (Kerbol): -helion (same as IRL) Kerbin: -kee (by analogy with -gee for Earth) Mun: -cynthion (I love Apollo terminology) Minmus: -minim Duna: -dune

The installer shouldn't touch anything in the Saves folder (i.e. your saved games and ships), or in folders under Gamedata other than those published by SQUAD (i.e. any mods you have installed. So you should be able to run the installer and go on playing where you left off. That said, I strongly recommend taking a backup of the above locations, just in case. Also, if you have modified any .cfg files for stock parts, contracts, physics, etc., those changes will be overwritten, and you will have to redo them to restore your custom settings.

I pronounce it as follows: Sad-and-lonely-little-space-potato. Alternatively, Drez.

Thanks for all the advice everyone. Turns out the best way to achieve what I wanted was to rotate the wings to reduce sweep, which pulled the CoL far enough forwards. Was able to complete the survey contract, including a rough field landing and takeoff. I did have to use the emergency parachutes to brake on the runway, as I had come in too high too fast, but that was more piloting error than design woe, so I'm calling it a win

I hadn't thought of having only control surfaces with no fixed horizontal stabilizer. I'll give it a burl and see how it goes Re: LF fuselages: I wish! Unfortunately, the basic aviation tech doesn't include any LF-only tanks. I need 90 science (ninety, gorram it!!) to unlock those, and I will probably have other priorities at that point. I'm playing on hard mode (entirely my own fault), and the science isn't so easy to come by. But I will certainly try ditching the stabilizers for control surfaces only.

I'm trying to build a very low-tech (initial aviation tier) plane for puttering around on Kerbin, but I'm having trouble believing the so-called design helpers. I build the basic airframe with appropriate wings, control surfaces, etc., but it ends up with the CoL way behind CoM. In order to bring the CoL forward, I have to mount the wings so they're basically hanging off the cockpit, which looks ... well, see for yourself in the spoilered image below, but 'not great' is not an exaggeration. So is the CoL really that far backward with those winglets as a tail? What part should I be using as a tail? Is there some other way I can bring the CoL and CoM into their appropriate places? Does anyone have any viable, not-stupid-looking, basic-tech-only plane designs?

For completeness: you also need to enable 'Use x 10 UT increment' to get the +/- orbit buttons. Without this you'll see +/- 1K instead.

There is a surprisingly large leeway in orbital parameters for the satellite contracts (although it gets smaller as the 'prestige' rating gets higher). In the situation you describe, the most likely cause is that you're going the wrong way. Check the ascending and descending nodes displayed on the orbit; if they're close to 0° you're going the right way, if near 180° then that's the wrong way. You can also see small coloured dots moving around the orbit indicating the correct direction.

Well, you have a few options: Just use it to keep "score" of how well your missions are doing. Use administration center strategies to convert it into funds and or reputation, allowing you to do more misisons and get more/higher-value/potentially-more-interesting contracts. Install a mod (there are many) which introduces higher-value tech-tree nodes. Start a new career with harder settings. There are probably other options that I missed, as well.

I'm pretty sure you can't set a target in map mode until you've unlocked patched conics at tier 2 (Although you are correct, the wiki doesn't mention this). I'll double check my understanding when I get home from work in a couple of hours, and post the results back here.

Most common: forgot to shut off docking-port fuel crossfeed and didn't notice that my payload lander/probe's fuel had all been consumed by the tansfer/insertion stage engines. Most recent: Scientist Kerbal brought along at great expense to reset Science Jr. and GooTM modules turned out to be an engineer.

I can't recall whether you can right click to set a target, but try double clicking instead. You do have to upgrade the tracking station before you can set targets in map mode, though.