fommil

It's probably fair to say that this issue and my other issue are dupes, so I'll close this thread... but it is still unanswered.

So how do I change the direction of the control point? I put the control module on the top of the rover, I don't think it fits if I put it on the end.

Can you see this https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-gEta6iMxIFE/VF6yEelvMoI/AAAAAAAAiWo/TcdzJas9el4/w1565-h879-no/rover-deployment.jpg It's a bit of an early draft of the same design: the one I flew had actual side mounted monopropellant engines and a smaller decoupler.

It's all blue. I'm using the same control module on the rover as on the launch vehicle (it is just discarded anyway). Maybe that has been causing me some troubles, I'm guessing it's supposed to be pointing at the horizon?

I've uploaded my craft to here: http://www.filedropper.com/lunar-rover I've never used filedropper before, but I was able to download and md5 matched my upload, so I have some trust in it. I use quite a few mods, such as deadly reentry, ferram and various science component additions. On my setup, I'm able to fly to the Mun with this design no problem. I go to the radial monopropellant as late as I can to conserve fuel. It's probably way over specced because everything below the rover was designed to take an Apollo style Kerbal to the Mun, deploy, rendezvous, and back (and succeeded, which was utterly awesome). I think I know what you mean --- I've encountered a similar problem before when attaching sub-vehicles via docking ports (especially when their control room is upside-down with respect to the main launch vehicle's controller). It would be a real pain to have to select the correct control room on the launch pad. But in this instance you'll see I only have the one (autonomous) control room so that is not a problem. If you delete everything below the rover itself and deploy on the launchpad, the controls are as expected. Re: placing the octo inside the rover, I look forward to 0.26 as that might allow me to do this! Thanks for looking at this.

awesome, even better than engineer!

Excellent! I actually have that mod, but I never appreciated that this information was provided. I tended only to use it during construction. Doh!

I just completed a contract from Fine Print to search for the location of anomalous signals on the Mun with a rover, and it was awesome. But it was really difficult to work out where the waypoints actually are. I can see the waypoints in the navigation screen, but not in flight mode. When the rover went over a bump or something the navball would occasionally show a pink marker with the heading that I needed to go in. Am I just missing something really obvious? It would be fantastic if the waypoints were highlighted in the way that it is easy to see other craft or debris. Best regards, Sam PS: I'm using enhanced nav ball, incase that complicates matters.

Hi all, When landing... especially on the dark side... it would be incredibly useful to know height above the surface rather than altitude. Are there any mods that provide this info? (preferably in the flight screen beside/instead of the altitude instrument, but having it in the nav screen would also be good) Best regards, Sam

Hi all, I built my first rover and tested it out on Kerbin and everything worked great. However, when I delivered it to the Mun[1], the steering controls were reversed! i.e. rolling left actually rolled right. The weird thing is that the animation showed the parts moving correctly in response to my joystick movements, so it felt like I'd encountered a bug. Has anybody else seen this? Also, the landed navball was the wrong way round, when I was pointing East it was saying West. Increasing the throttle moved the rover in the same direction as it did on Kerbin. (The general control of the rover was much lower than on Kerbin, I suspect that is to be expected since the gravity is much lower.) Another thing that bugged me was that when I built my rover for testing on Kerbin, I was able to place the autonomous command module *inside* the rover casing. But when I was building the rover as part of a larger structure, I was only able to place the command module outside (i.e. on top of) the casing. Is that normal? Is there any way to get it to go inside? It gives me more space to place instruments if the command module goes outside. I'm happy to share parts files if it helps anybody answer the above. It was a lot of fun driving the rover on the Mun :-D Best regards, Sam [1]: I put it on the underside of a very small lander that had radial monopropellant engines, big legs and a junior stack decoupler, allowing a safe delivery on touchdown)

Thanks @UmbralRaptor, perfect! I was looking at the individual planetoid pages and this information isn't listed.

Hi all, I have loads of mods and I see contracts about doing things in high or low (e.g. Mun) orbit. Is there a definitive list of what constitutes "high" or "low" for each body? Best regards, Sam

Some ideas for future contracts: 1. put this payload (a provided, possibly non-sci-tree, part) in orbit at Y km around planet X. 2. Same as above but Z payloads all equidistant (i.e. in a basic constellation) 3. take this rich kerbal passenger to X orbit and return (and the money isn't great unless your vehicle is cost effective!) 4. build a space station in orbit X consisting of these parts. 5. send a rover to coordinates Y on planet X and use this probe (and transmit back). 6. (same as above) but with a kerbal taking a surface sample and returning. 7. get to single stage orbit in a spaceplane and return without jettisoning anything. 8. dock with an out-of-fuel vehicle and bring it back to kerbin (like kerbal rescue, but with docking and tricky return flight)

I am considering getting into the rover building side of the game but other than having fun driving them around, do they have any practical use? Do they give extra science points if experiments are carried out, or can they take surface samples or anything like that? What do they do that a simple autonomous lander can't do?

Cool, thanks for the fast response, and also thank you for your work on this absolutely amazingly addictive game.

I have installed the DR/FAR plugins to make the physics more interesting. However, it now seems that with some of my rockets, the radial decouplers are no longer powerful enough to push dispelled solid boosters away. The tops of the boosters comes in and then destroys the inner fuel/engine. I've tried adding separator boosters to get the top of the dispelled shells to go away from the main body of my rocket but even with two on the top pushing out and two on the bottom pulling in (to get maximal torque) they fall inwards. This tends to happen with my larger rockets. Is there some extra trick that I'm missing? Is my rocket going too slowly at the point of detachment, or too fast? I have one I'm using right now for a moon shot and it's getting to about 15km off the first stage solid boosters, hitting around 400m/s, and no matter what I do with the radial decouplers the solid boosters come in and destroy the central fuselage. It's all a bit of a pain, because it means I have to keep the empty solid boosters attached to my central section for an extra stage.

Not when it has a science experiment underneath :-P

Excellent, thanks for the hints! I've just made my first successful landing with both Ferram AND Deadly Re-Entry turned on. Two things came up: 1. I had lander legs on my pod, but they were blown off during re-entry when the heat got **really** high, then after the leg blew off the heat started to go down. I guess they are not covered by the heat shield, so without spending a lot of fuel to reduce speed in Kerbin re-entry, it's got to be a sea landing. Or am I missing something? It would certainly be good to be able to get through the atmosphere with lander legs intact. 2. the heat shield has a decoupler. Is there any reason for that? (I can only guess this was so that the hot heat shield doesn't radiate onto the lander once through the atmosphere). On Kerbin, what altitude is a good time to dispense with the heat shield and kick in the parachute? It doesn't really matter in stock, so I always just did it in upper atmosphere. I'm guessing about 10k feels right.

Cool! Thanks, so what kind of speeds are typically OK? Am I being too conservative with 1000-2000m/s (I guess I should work out what altitude that was at, probably about 100km)

Hi all, I installed Ferram (which is *awesome*) and my ship blew up on its first re-entry because I came in too fast. Now I make sure to slow down to an orbital speed of about 2000m/s and things seem OK. But I don't know what the magic is to decide what is/isn't a safe re-entry speed (one could argue that the experimenting is half the fun of the game). I understand that Ferram only models better aerodynamics, so I can only guess that faster re-entry is causing structural failure rather than too much heating. But now I'm thinking about installing Deadly Re-entry too, but there is no real advice on **how** to do a re-entry with this mod turned on (except to have an AP of about 20km). What is this mod modelling? Is angle of re-entry the only thing that matters or does speed come into play as well? I'm so excited by these mods: I've been playing for two major releases and I think I'm ready for the challenge of more realism :-)

Darn, I can't find the parts I need. I really hope you finish the set arc5555 this is such an awesome project! :-) Any chance you could complete for all these parts? (reading from the parts lines in my .craft) fuelTank fuelTankSmallFlat GooExperiment landingLeg1 liquidEngine3 liquidEngine longAntenna mk1pod parachuteSingle solidBooster stackDecoupler I think you might just be missing the solidBooster and the small fuelTank (unless you expect "FL-T Series Fuel Tanks.jpg" to be cut manually depending on how big it should be... which fuel tank size does your image correspond to?) Can you please put it up on github or dropbox instead? It's really awkward trying to navigate mediafire :-(

Darn, well I'm looking forward to when you can post these things... I bought some nice hard paper to print out some of my favourite early ships :-D

This is amazing! Can you please upload (or mirror) the files somewhere else? mediafire doesn't allow downloading of archives and is extremely slow to browse. BTW, what kind of paper do you use for this? I am planning on creating a small ship and I bought 240gsm paper as it seems pretty tough.

Thanks, I've done that. Clearly the original post was a troll magnet. Actually I wasn't very pleased with the edit that was bestowed upon me. I had two separate things I wanted to say and intentionally did not want them to be part of the same message. The stackoverflow approach - where authors approve edits - is far less invasive than this. I have since completely rewritten the entire post because I was unhappy with the merged result.

+1 I agree +1 I agree