Kobymaru

Hi guys! Rather than starting a new thread, I figured my request would fit here quite nicely. I don't really want to make a new Mod myself, but I did want to poke around in my favorite mods. You know, easy fixes, help debugging, help porting to newer KSP versions, adding some features and the likes. Turns out I am completely lost. Here is where I am currently: I'm fairly good with C++ and Java, but I don't know C# yet. But how hard can it be, right? Also, I don't know anything about Unity except that it's a C++/C# Game engine. Basically any help and pointers (heh) would be appreciated, but here are some specific questions: - What IDE do you use? I have access to Visual Studio Proffesional SuperduperHype 2026. Is it any good, or should I use another one? - .NET vs Mono: So there are two frameworks for C#, and Unity/KSP uses Mono if I understand correctly. Can I use both for development or only Mono? How to configure my IDE for that? - Anything else you want to tell me, really. The first step I want to do is to compile a stable Mod (like MechJeb or something). The second step is changing a string to "Hello World" or something. If you guys could get me this far, I'd really appreciate it.

In order to answer my own question, from another thread To summarize, I opted for FAR to Stock Universal meaning *.81 for all Isp's.

So I am not the only one! Glad to hear. Well, propulsion isn't even the problem. It's taking off and landing that's a problem. Nice! Cheap Rover. Add solar panels or batteries, stick it in front of a rocket plane and you get an A1-surface visual survey mission. Sorry, what are Katamari vessels? Except sepatrons aren't low-tech

So KSP is fun, right? Especially since the newest update. So I tried to get some funds for my Mun project, and I resorted to do some visual survey contracts. That turned out to be surprisingly hard with low tech. Here is my pain: Also, how do you get a plane in the air without landing gear? There is only one solution. MOAR BOOSTERS: http://i.imgur.com/RsEo6D9.jpg

What I want is launches to not get too easy, while not paying too much for it. Having all my Spacey-engines nerfed seems not fair, but an Atmospheric of .36 is just way too little. Is there anything special about those numbers?

Hello, sorry to hijack the thrad but I have a somewhat fitting question. I am a new FAR user and I installed KIDS. Which settings should I use, - Far to Stock Universal (all Isp *0.81) - Far to stock Atmosphere (Atmo Isp * 0.38, Vacuum Isp unchanged) Mainly, I want to know what other FAR players do and how they handle the Delta V requirements drop.

Hi guys, I have a question: I made a huge Jool Mission waaayyyy back, and I started it a long time before I knew about this challange. Now I found this thread and I am trying to decide wether to enter or not to enter. Here is the problem: - It's a multi-launch mission and I have no screenshots of any launches or of the assembly of the vessel. I do have all of the craft files though. - Some moon landings are not as rigorously documented as others. Op said I can satisfy that for only 3 out of 5 moons. For one, (Vall, I think?) I have only the "pretty pictures".Should I still bother to submit an entry? It seems to me that it's quite a bit of work both for me and for OP (or his substitute judges), and it would be a shame if this were in vain. In my opinion, I "did" the Jool 5 challenge though, so it'd be nice to have that nifty little ribbon and an entry in OPs thread. Also, all of this started in .23 and it stretched all the way into .25. Is that a problem?

So today I bumped a little bit into Pol.

Colliding with Pol looks like this: http://i.imgur.com/VUfH7Ow.png

Hi! Do you still take requests? If yes, could you turn this into a drawing? Year 59, Day 96 After an unsuccessful attempt to create an automated lander that could withstand even Eves gravity and pack enough punch to get back into Orbit, Kerbal engineers overanalyzed the failure to such an extent that they were absolutely confident that they fixed all of the problems. Thats why the next mission that went down well was manned by one couragous little Kerbal, called Jonemy Kerman. After mounting the monstrosity, he descended down to the ground and landed safely. On the way up however, he plainly ran out of fuel - probably because of the too low TWR. He plummeted down and managed to land roughly but alive back on the surface. At the moment, he is waiting for his permantent temporary new home, the caravan to arrive. What a brave little Kerbal.

I would say impossible, because "aerobrake" implies that physics for it are calculated, but that only happens when you switch to a "vessel". Atmospheres don't exist for crafts that you are currently not simulating.

If you're asking if it slows you down, no. But the Jets provided with it have RCS thrusters in reverse direction for brakes. You can toggle forward/backward thrust with Action group 1.

Good Morning, ProStasisX That's great to hear The currency is "Funds", btw, not dollars. 600k is already plenty for a Minmus mission! Recovering things is next to impossible without using a mod. Later in the game, you will be able to build SSTO's (Single Stage To Orbit, usually Spaceplanes) which can be recovered completely. I calculated a launch cost of only about 2000 Funds! That's an ambitious plan, and I certainly suggest you try it - just not that early in a career. You can build a simple Mun or Minmus mission (if your mission can reach the mun and get back, it can definitely go to minmus and back) for about 80K. You will always get a lot of contracts saying (test this part here, test that part there, put a flag here) which you can always complete with less funds expenses than you get from them. I suggest you try the simple contracts with simple missions first, and when you feel you have enuogh funds for luxuries, you can start building larger things. Also a note on all the slingshot/mun base busyness: -Using the Mun for slingshots is generally not worth the hassle. One one hand, you save about 200-300 m/s dV if everything is perfect, but that's at the expense of screwing up your departure schedule and introducing a lot of inaccuracies whose correction might cost you more than 300 m/s - Using a fuel base around Mun for Mun operations is a great idea. Using a fuel base around Mun for interplanetary operations is a bad idea, because it makes all your missions really complicated and somewhat tedious - and you don't really gain much. I suggest you'd rather have a fuel depot in Kerbin Orbit that you access when you need it.

That's the one. It's very simple: install it, press Ctrl-Shift-Click on the part and it's the new root. You can even force parts that are not allowed as root parts. Or if you can wait a few days, you can just use the new Editor Gizmo in 0.90.

I actually have some sort of prelaunch procedure, especially for large rockets and important/expensive payloads. 1. If multiple probe parts exist, select the one pointing straight up and "Control from here" 2. Disable or Enable Torque on Payload SAS units, as required 3. Check staging from the bottom to the top 4. Prepare MechJeb Windows: Orbit info, Delta-V Info (for staging times) and something with "atmospheric drag" 5. Check that my joystick is functional 6. Turn on SAS, Full throttle 7. LAUNCH! With releasing launch clamps and engaging boosters all at once.

What's your part count? A part count of about 1000 parts will bring down even the strongest CPU.

I'm out of fuel, but gladly, the KSC is near. So, I'm about ready to land. Uuuum. Guys? Where's the runway? Where's the KSC? Where is everyone?

I'm afraid not. Maybe they'll fix it when Unity 5 comes out. Maybe. Also, I feel your pain. Will .90 be incompatible with .25 career saves? Transitions .23 -> .23.5 -> .24 -> .25 worked mostly well for me.

I run loads of mods, but I have no Idea which could be burying it. Since I just found out about it, I can't tell you if it's the update.

What the heck is that? It's right next to the KSC, exact coordinates are: 0°06'08'' N 74°34'09'' W or about 1870 m in heading 329° from the East end of the KSC Runway. Does anybody else have that "monolith" or "tombstone" there or is it just me?

Okay, so I "solved" it by sliding The Max Physics Delta-T all the way down to 0.02 sec. Now everything is in Slow-Motion, but at least I get 11-13 FPS. That's enough for smooth keyboard and mouse inputs, and almost enough for no-headache. I also tried the Time Control mod. It is awesome and can get the game to run even smoother (and slower), but thechnically isn't required.

Could you link me up with the threads? Maybe someone found a workaround?

Thank you very much for your help Just in case anyone else cares, heres my output_log.txt: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/98057aa326d38015387d#file-output_log-txt I reduced the installed mods to: - 000_Toolbar - KAS - Mechjeb2 - Universal Storage I can't reduce any further, because my ships use parts from these Mods. Bug is still occuring, more and more frequently. It's getting harder and harder to load my savegame. Please help.

I planned something like a "test burn": first link everything up, then do 2 burns to get to a higher orbit (120km -> 240 km) and see how the craft behaves.

They're not supposed to be 2 Girders, only one. I probably overlooked that. That was actually the point of those radial girders. All of them have the KAS struts attached at the top, facing in axial direction towards the next module .I just haven't linked them yet. I will do so before departure when everything is set in place and the angles are properly aligned. Right now I'm focusing on just getting the parts into space. I also have KAS Struts attached to the adapters of the craft bay, so I can cross-link them. And I have packed enough KAS struts in containers to make a spiderweb from my ship That's a good tip. I will try that.