Ruthgar

Looks similar to my current general purpose lander I'm using on the mun/minimus just a little bigger/smaller in some ways (for multiple landings per missions, no refueling) Best screenshot I have of it right now, with the two detachable rovers connected to the top of it. (rcs to lift them off, and flip them. Current rover as seen there works fine on Min, but underpowered for rcs liftoff on Mun, but does have enough to just flip off the lander.)

True, had suggested the "salvaged" vehicle idea as it would be somewhat realistic for if/when we start setting up permanent bases on the Moon, Mars, etc... there will be three types of ships, ones constructed completely from what's built here on Earth, one's built from parts made at the bases, and one's that get made from the reusable salvaged parts of the original ships

Just call him Bob 'Duke' from Hazard County

Very nice, have you thought about some type of lander transport, assuming you have access to the clamp-o-tron or the docking ports that is. If so, build a small depot station up in Mun orbit, dock your transport ships there, and after you transfer all the fuel they have left into the station, decouple the transport engine/tanks, along with activating a series of those tiny srb's setup so they fire in reverse to the stations orbit. The now debris parts now fall to the mun and destroy themselves on impact. Then you attach your orbital tug up there to the payload, then move the payload under the lander transport. Dock the tug, launch the lander, land at the mun base, drop the payload off, position the payload where you want it, hook it up, then either leave the lander at mun base until your next tranport arrives at the station, or send it back to the station now, dock it, refuel and wait. If you don't have access to the clamp - o trons and dock o trons, I can understand why you're accumulating a debris field. One roleplaying suggestion in that case is make a list of what is still intact, build a juryrig ship out of that list of parts back in the VAB, then edit it onto the mun near your base, and then delete those debris items. Or just break out the space tnt again

Built a few rovers that are completely separate from any type of engine system aside from RCS (useful for keeping stable when Bob suddenly sends one airborne, think he actually cleared 100 meters there on the mun) and I'm glad my lander could bring two along as Bob....kinda smashed the deployable solar panels on it, and all it has left are the basic fixed panels. Here's a few screenshots of them on the Mun. Rover 1 after the panel smashing, and airborne in this picture. And here's Bob in his brand new Rover aka Rover 2 Like I said, these are the first dedicated rovers I've ever used off of Kerbin, usually have made a lander/rover before. I'm finding these things to be a little more difficult to use. Also find myself quoting Talladega Nights a lot "Oh we're flying through the air (AGAIN) that's not good"

ouch, had that happen to me a few times, even on Kerbin if the ship I'm flying has taken a beating, or deployed the chutes too early (during or before the atmo burn) One thing I do in carreer mode if I've got the tech already is to install a drogue chute opens up at a higher altitude as a default, plus doesn't slow you down as quickly, which reduces the shock to your craft. Then I usually have multiple sets of chutes as I tend to land my landers back on kerbin intact nowadays. I have one set that deploys first attached to the upper non-science section and usually set to 1k altitude deployment (current lander is X shaped with the science and command module hanging below the center of the X) then I have a double set attached to the top of the sci/command module that I activate once the lander rig set is fully deployed, the command module and other science mods also have one emergency chute each (2 on the 3 man pods) that I activate IF anything happens to the rest of the lander and/or chutes. Have found that without a drogue chute, you have to stagger your chute deployments going into hi-grav, hi-atmos planets like EVE, otherwise you need to strut your reentry vehicle to hell and back. By staggering, I mean only open one chute at a time, wait 5-10 seconds, then open the next, once you have your speed down to around 50 it's generally safe to open the rest. Even using this method I still have suffered a 10-20% loss of landers doing a non-powered descent. And I still use parachutes on those doing a powered descent, just wait till the atmo burn is done, the power up the engines, once my speed has dropped from using the engines, then I deploy chutes, then cut the engines.

Only just started doing modding myself, but yeah those two mods are scary. I've used the time acceleration to stop the random wobbles that larger craft sometimes develop for no reason whatsoever. Only used it once or twice to stop a ship turning when it was REAL close to others up in orbit, and I knew I hadn't saved in WAY too long.

Nice, yeah I just tried using MJ automated horizontal speed kill program while coming down from orbit...............yeah, after MJ completely screwed up my orbit (went for a .5 degree variation over the mun equator to a 30 degree variation... and oh yeah impact in 90 seconds now) I've firmly decided that I'll only be using MJ at all for info purposes and to just generate my initial intercept window, I'll be doing all of the controling myself from now on. Yeah, I'm using kerbal engineer as well, and actually managed a nighttime landing on the mun with just a 10-15nm/s horizontal velocity thanks to it. I'll look into getting that mod here in a bit for the life support. Already 30-40% into the tech tree of a new career and it would feel like cheating to install it right now. Gonna have to setup alternate game files so that I can have my vanilla KSP, and the various mod state KSPs Did have a little bit of a problem deploying my rovers there on the mun, underestimated the gravity effects of it, and how much rcs is needed to conteract it. Np, game was quicksaved, so instead of lifting my rovers off the lander with the rcs, just used the rcs to flip them off the rover. First landed upside down away from the lander, and had to use 25% of the remaining mono to get it back upright, 2nd rover landed too close to the landing gear and got hung up in it. Took about 10 mins to get it unstuck, but no damage that I can see to the rover, or the lander. Time for Bob to go for a drive.

Very nice, I've just started with installing mods into KSP, and had two questions. Are you using a mod(if so which one) to get your ships down that close to each other, or are you just that damn good? ( I know you had rover wheels on them originally, but you can see in the descent pics you were still getting down real close ) Second question, which mod are you using for the life support stuff? Great pics btw.

Built a simple rover or two, and I think a 'Unique' deployment method. It'll definately work on places like Minimus and Ike, but it's getting tested on the Mun after an orbital quicksave in case the initial series of test fails, then we'll go try Minimus If we have the fuel left. Yes, they are mounted on top of the lander UPSIDE DOWN. The plan is to land and release them one at a time, then use their RCS jets to lift off the lander, then flip over, move away from the lander, then land..........Bob, the master EVA specialist you see in the picture thinks they should just hop in the drivers seat and take them down from orbit......I think Jeb is close to agreeing with him.

Woohoo, just finished a Minimus/Mun mission using the same lander (no refueling) made two Minimus landings, and 1 mun. then made it back to Kerbin with 453 m/s left in the tanks, 300 something in atmosphere. Delibrately used aerobraking for the first time this mission as I was down to those vapors of fuel left in my lander. Took 5 orbits starting from Mun distance before the aerobraking was enough to deorbit the lander. Here are the pics of the Minimus 2 lander/mission. 1st landing Group photo op 2nd landing... and the results of letting Jeb drink and fly Close up on the 2nd landing, yes it is at a 45 degree angle according to what I saw on the navball. 3rd and final landing of the Minimus 2 Do we have to go home??????? One last EVA for Bob my EVA master after the 3rd aerobraking. This game is just too damn fun to ever let go I think

set up a fuel tank or empty shell with girder or modules positioned at equal angels to each other in a Y shape. On the end of the Y arms are docking ports. Also add one more strut in the center of the Y angle that will be facing the roid if done right, and you have a fairly round roid, you can have a hexagon shaped station up there with multiple arms attached to the roid, and you can then use the outer arms of the tank Y's to attach whatever else you want. And that's my design idea, while slightly drunk.....ok more than slightly, but this should give you a good basis to build without having to worry too much about in the docking ports/clamp-o trons will bend enough.

Landing gear on the base of the rockets, multiple rovers with clamp o trons. launch the rocket, extend the gear, clamp the rovers on with the o-trons, then raise the landing gear. This is a POSSIBLE way to move the rockets in vanilla. Think there's a mod that someone used to build a giant rover capable of actually picking up rockets and positioning them on it's own without assistance, but can't recall the details about it.

Technically submarines have had airlocks since before WW2, as the purpose of an airlock is to equalize the pressure from inside to outside the craft or vice versa for the purpose of personel or equipment entering/exiting the craft. Course aside from special ops missions, the only time they ever actually used them as airlocks, was to try and escape their sub as it was either trapped on the bottom, or sinking. But yes, Skylab, then the Shuttle, then Mir were the first three dedicated craft to actually have airlocks in space. though I think there was an orbital test of a lander during the early apollo missions to test the viability of actually using the lander to depressurize it, get out, get back in, then repressurize it. All while it was attached to the command module. SO technically the Apollo program might have had the first actual airlock, in the form of the lander attached to the command module.

Yes it is, I'm even happy to finally be using all the crap I learned from being in the USAF and working around SRBs and such space crap as a perifery to my actual work in the AF. Word of advice for anyone else trying to figure out the orbital mechanics stuff on their own, don't take shortcuts on your equations. If an equation says multiply by 2.2 and you can only remember the 2 and not the .2, yeah that's when things get difficult. Getting into orbit, not so much, getting to other planets.....yeah you suddenly find yourself building super-transports that should have the fuel to take you anywhere in the system, but because you flubbed the equations....yeah you wind up wasting at laest 30-50% of your fuel.

UGH, just almost smashed my computer as my antivirus/spyware crap software deleted half of the mods I have installed simply because they "HAVE NO REPUTATION" online. Soooooooo, time to temporarily disable the programs, load up all the mods, then add them to the damn exclusion lists. Would be easy to install IF THEY GAVE YOU THE DAMN OPTION TO EXCLUDE FILES THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO LOAD ONTO YOUR COMPUTER. But no, my damn spyware/virus programs don't give you that option. You have to load your program, THEN add it to the exclusion lists, HOWEVER because it's not on the exclusion list, by the time you click on the program to add it IT'S ALREADY DELETED, AND CAN'T BE ADDED TO THE EXCLUSION LIST. SOOoooo, would it be wrong of me, that I'm considering building the biggest hodgepodge of parts up in orbit and then deorbit it to where said software companies would be located if Kerbal was Earth? Just for a figurative burning them in effigy type moment?

Hey, any landing where everyone is able to get out and live...is successful. Engineers on the other hand are usually more concerned about the craft, so yeah they would consider that a fail

Well, about to get back on to KSP and back to my current mission to Minimus, and perhaps the mun afterwards. However should I be worried as I've had a few drinks mixed with rum...the Kraken black spiced rum. Might it summon the Space Kraken? ah well, we shall see.

Have to be careful with the super tanker transports, I accidently wound up building one as my interplanetary transport, and had I actually known/used the delta-v maps and assist mods, I could have probly cruised everywhere in the system on a single fuel load. However as I was doing the brute force method of orbital transfers......I was losing at least 30-50% of my delta-v in waste loss. Damn thing also took about 5 mins to turn a 180. Did learn a lot about what to do and not to do in building constructs up in orbit. Most important thing, a maneuvering tug that is a simple capsule, docking clamp, mono tanks, batteries, solar panel or two, and rcs engines, lots and lots of rcs.

And also remember, failure is always an option, I've found that I've learned more from my failures, or at least been encouraged by the failures to learn how to prevent them. One of my earliest failures in the game, was launching a large central stack ship with a bunch of boosters at the base of it. Ship loaded up on the launchpad, I immediately cycled up the throttle and hit spacebar, then watched as my entire central stack just collapsed in a ball of fire as the rings of boosters went flying into the air. Turns out part of the problem was no struts on the ship at all, the rest was how physics loads in the game. Aside from your initial gravity turn during launch, the process of loading your ship onto the launchpad and then turning the physics of the world on is the most stressful time of the ship. So nowadays I always wait at least 30 seconds for my ship to stabilize after physics loading, even if it doesn't appear to need it.

Yay more lets play!!!!! and OUCH, sorry to hear that

According to my ScanSats that I just put up, it is.

well, was getting a satellite into position around kerbin just now, had just perfected it's orbit when I spot something off in the distance, a fixed dot where as the rest of the universe is moving around under time warp, this dot.....isn't. Took me a few minutes to realise this was Minimus, then a few minutes later what comes into the picture, but the mun. So, I waited till they were both lined up with my satelite, then took a picture. Look a half inch above the Mun, and about 5-10 degree off top center off the mun and that dot there is Minimus. Guys... seeing that line-up happen by pure coincidence, even if this is just a game......guys I think the only thing that would be better than that is to be actually up in space and seeing something like it in real life with your naked eye.

deleted, moved to correct thread.

Sent Jeb off on another test flight in a new career with a new lander design, complete with landing rocket assembly ejection/abort option. When good ole Jeb saw that the downstages simply didn't have the power to finish getting him into orbit, and his lander engines did not have the strength in them to get him there without burning all his fuel, he went along with mission control's decision to test the ejection/abort system of the engines....while the ship was at a perpendicular angle to the travel path. So Jeb ejected the engine assembly while it was under power so that it would pull away, his chutes ejected as well to slow the command module down, then suddenly all mission control could pick up were three separate beacons from the now separated science jr modules as the ejected chutes pulled the command module into one of the legs of the lander.........Jeb's now recovering in his personal hospital room.....I think he spends more time there than on missions for some reason. Ah well, can't wait till he's better, have a new ship for him to test.