cantab

My understanding is that if the planetary radii are multiplied by x, the orbital radii also by x, and the surface gravity unchanged, then the delta-V requirements are multiplied by the square root of x.

I found this out the hard way myself. What's going on is that a Kerbal holding onto a ladder is considered "flying", something that is commonly exploited to get extra science reports. And an object that is flying low enough in the atmosphere, below about 22 km on Kerbin, is liable to be deleted when it passes out of physics range which includes when you go back to the Space Centre screen. Recovering the ship the Kerbal was holding onto was irrelevant except that it takes you back to the space centre. It's not a bug per se, it's an expected if unwanted consequence of how the game handles vessels in atmosphere outside physics range. But it strikes me that Squad could easily resolve it by letting vessels very close to a planetary surface not be deleted in this way.

For planes you usually want the CoL a little behind the CoM. Too far behind and you'll tend to nosedive, significantly in front and you'll tend to flip. For a repulsorlift craft like that I've no idea. I'm not even sure what horizontal wings would do, except help maintain stability in jumps, in which case you want them arranged much as for an aircraft - your design above will want to do a backflip in jumps. A vertical stabiliser and rudder would seem more useful to help you stay flying straight and turn more easily, mounted at the back of course.

Holy Moly. Now those are landing legs

I must have over 2000 hours in KSP by now. Many other players have hundreds or even thousands of hours. I'll admit mods are a factor, but seriously, replay value is not a problem for KSP.

There's a "Titan Engine" mod, combining that with some giant fuel tanks might do the trick.

So from left to right I'm seeing: Big lander Docking port Rover Absent docking port Satellite Docking port Orbiter Is that right? In that case the best thing I can come up with is to undock the orbiter, then take the lander down with the rover and the satellite attached, and attempt to smash the satellite against the surface of Ike.

I've been doing extensive fps testing lately and I found no measurable difference between stock and FAR. Mind you my test is with a 600-part lagfest rocket to really focus in on the CPU performance. It's also possible FAR is interacting badly with another mod. Look in particular at anything with animated or moving parts, they might end up constantly causing FAR to recalculate the shape of the vessel.

Your licensing is self-contradictory. As per the CC license itself, If you want to apply restrictions like "no mod packs", you can't use that Creative Commons license, and would probably be better off saying "All Rights Reserved. Redistribution expressly prohibited." or similar.

Somebody who posts their riddle out of turn Also, blue paint.

Next time I would advise ignoring 56464 and anyone else pestering for the release, and waiting until you or one of your collaborators can do at least basic testing.

I had some cases when the rocket seemed to be placed vertically wrong when launching directly to the launchpad. One time it was too low, clipped into the pad and went boom. Another time it was too high, dropped onto the pad and went boom. I just took to always launching from the VAB instead. No KCT around, but assorted other mods and an old Kopernicus version so don't set too much store by my results.

The "Kerbin Escape/Capture" node corresponds to an orbit that only just breaks Kerbin's SOI and is then in an orbit round the Sun essentially the same as Kerbin's orbit round the Sun. A node like "Kerbin-Duna Transfer" corresponds to an orbit round the Sun with periapsis level with Kerbin's orbit and apoapsis level with Duna's orbit. If your timing is right that will get you a Duna encounter. Similarly for all the others. "Kerbin-Kerbol Transfer" is an orbit with apoapsis level with Kerbin's orbit and periapsis really close to the Sun. Note that this map, like most maps, assumes you are doing your burns close to the planet or moon in question. Ie when departing Kerbin you would do a single burn from Low Kerbin Orbit to get into your transfer orbit round the Sun.

True for processes but not true for operating systems, thanks to a technology called Physical Address Extension. I blame Microsoft for widely spreading the misconception that 64-bit was the only way past the 4 GB barrier for OSes. It's an issue largely in the past now though.

Was the "Follow" function removed? It's not appearing on mod pages on kerbalstuff for me. I see Unfollow on the mods I already followed.

What did Jeb score in his piloting exam? B minmus. What did Bob get his girlfriend for their anniversary? A big jool. Who at KSC works out the cost of the rockets? Bill. Bill: Whose is that silver thing in the sky? Jeb: It's Mun. How does a kerbal make a chess set? On a laythe. What does a kerbal put on his kitchen walls? Tylos. What's the most villainous journey you can take in the kerbolar system? Eve-Vall. There are parasites on Jool's outermost moon but I can't say any more because discussion of Pol ticks is banned on the forum.

If you want a VTOL that can climb or descend fast in VTOL mode I can think of three approaches. A tiltwing might work by avoiding the issue of having the main wing at 90° to the airstream. A tailsitter can certainly work and climb fast but transitioning from forward flight back to a hover can be tricky and they typically have to descend slowly since descending is basically flying backwards. Or of course you could build a helicopter.

Made this a while ago, thought I'd share it. Proving that FAR is no barrier to making crazy stuff fly! A V/STOL miner and fuel hauler for my ISRU Space Program, inspired by the Caproni Ca.60. Fits in the level 2 runway and SPH limits. Capable of VTOL when lightly loaded, or STOL operation with full tanks with a takeoff speed around 60-70 m/s. Maximum speed around Mach 0.8, it has Wheeslies as well as turboprops but this is obviously not a supersonic design. Flies well except for a tendency to phugoid, nothing I can't control but it means unlike some of my other planes I can't walk away from this one and let it fly itself.

Yeah. FAR defaults to a "Wing Strength" which is typically higher than needed. FAR also changes the mass of a wing panel depending on what other parts are attached to it, and in some situations that can result in truly enormous masses for a single wing piece.

Sounds like an Active Texture Management mess-up. Copy your game somewhere safe then download a fresh copy. I don't advise using ATM any more, but if you need to then be careful and read the documentation fully.

Well, at the moment I think the contracts do a reasonable job of making rovers useful. In particular there are some that generate several survey sites all close together and all on the surface, those are the ones that are obviously aimed at rovers. As far as science goes, well I think the whole system could be a lot more interesting. Adding science instruments to work with ground scatter, along with generally improving said ground scatter, could do pretty well. Even if it would boil down to "hunt for an interesting rock" most of the time. I also think there should be experiments that depend on moving through time and space. For example the barometer would benefit from taking readings at different altitudes, the seismometer would want to be left stable on the surface for some time, and perhaps a new experiment would want you to drive around with it.

Lots of good ideas. I think what I'd like as a "minimum": 2.5m diameter airliner turbofan. With matching intake unless it's a one-piece engine+intake. Electric propeller. Not too fussed about the details, any electric prop would be a great addition to the stock game especially now we can't do ion gliders any more. Jet RCS nozzles, using liquid fuel and intake air. Basically this would emulate the bleed air jets used on VTOLs like the Harrier.

My generic ascent profile: Vertical until reaching 100-150 m/s. Pitchover. Pitching to 80 degrees is a good bet, but it does depend on the rocket. Wait for prograde to "catch up" with your pitch. Click Hold Prograde. If that's not available follow the prograde marker manually. Cut engines when desired apoapsis achieved. Set up manoeuvre to circularise and burn said manoeuvre. If manoeuvre nodes aren't available just guess when to start circularising.

I wouldn't go quite so far, but yes, there are cases where the game fails to predict an SOI transition. KSP uses the patched conic approximation, which means that if you enter an SOI then you must leave it unless something alters your orbit. Floating-point rounding errors might allow a capture like this though.

Bear in mind that CKAN makes it easy to get carried away, and then if you have an issue you've no idea what mod is causing it. So advise more of a step-by-step approach, adding mods a few at a time.