damerell

What is "pre"?

No, @TheKspEngineer had minmus above and I meant that; sorry for the confusion. I think probably not - it's basically zipping around the North Pole. The total distance should be at least comparable to a route the long way around. As far as I know, everyone has had to design some kind of amphibious vehicle for Kerbin - easy in KSP!

That would be perfectly fine - it just has to be enough to prove you went, and a timelapse more than does that. (I see the Minmus above, will get to it when I have time, but thanks).

I think there's a fairly obvious next question there, given that you seem to have hit this problem while trying to transfer crew to an Elcano rover, which doesn't want much in the way of guns...

Why use Physics Range Extender at all?

Tylo is really quite flat apart from the crater rims and I think almost any route will do - and you've already decided you want to see the craters (as did I). Elcano isn't all pressing forwards and waiting, to put it mildly, but quite a chunk of Tylo is...

Looks fine to me, apart from the apparent teleportation at 180 degrees West (the north/south position on the edges doesn't seem to match up...) :-)

Quote the error verbatim.

Perhaps I am missing something, but which part of the log told you to "come to this thread and post in the error message"?

Is Statmun small enough that a polar route with engines on the roof to stick you down at the Equator would do?

FWIW I see three typos in the image: "itinerary" is misspelled, "tourists itineraries" needs an apostrophe, and "three tourist to Ike" should be "tourists". I think some people (besides me) would appreciate an option to have the billionaires not to be named after real people.

I was wondering if it was possible to build a rover with a forward beam with a KAS winch at each end (ie, one at the rover end, one at the front of the beam) with a ground anchor suspended between them - then in very rough terrain the rover could winch itself up any slope.

Besides the poles, which I think offer all kinds of horrors? I did rather regret not driving up the vast mountain/crater north of the Crater Lake on Eve... but I would have regretted falling in and being unable to get out more.

I think my usual advice would be: post enough screenshots that we are sure you circumnavigated, post any screenshot you think is interesting in any way or pleasing, put them in a spoiler if there are a lot of screenshots in the main Elcano thread, you probably can't write too many words about the trip. On Laythe, since quite a lot of Laythe looks very much the same, I'd probably incline to map view for a lot of them in open sea if you don't have something like ScanSat BTDT tracking your progress.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/1gr7pbf/has_anyone_ever_circumnavigated_kerbin_just_by/ Ah, sweet summer children. (I replied telling the thread about the challenge, and if you're here as a result, hello! We look forward to seeing your rovers...)

Well, you would have to run all the way around Minmus again (as in, I'm afraid I'm not recategorising it because the craft _could_ have been different)... but I wouldn't bother if I were you. The categories for this challenge are a bit odd; I guess they were copied from the conventional sort of challenge that's about going as fast as possible or using as little fuel as possible, but the main difficulty in Elcano has very little to do with whether or not you have modded parts available [1], it's about good rover design, roving technique, and persistence. [1] Except the Kerbal Foundries wheels... but if I was setting up the challenge today, I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from using _those_.

I hit a very similar terrain void on Minmus, but didn't see it coming and so knocked a few nonessential parts off the rover. I must say this design with the cockpit at the back looks very odd, although of course there's no reason it shouldn't be that way around. Congratulations, anyway, I'm updating the scoreboard.

You qualify for Stock Craft, the middle category, if I understand what restock does correctly. (There's an argument that the challenge should distinguish between visual mods like the ones you list and assistance mods like KER or MechJeb - let alone ones used only to document your position - but I'm not going to fiddle with it now, we've come a long way with the existing categories.) Thanks for the submission. I'm on holiday with dodgy internet but I'll review it as soon as I can.

I think it is worth considering the idea that the "technical team" assigned to keep this forum running is one person's Friday afternoons.

It would be useful for others who might have the same problem if you said what you did that was wrong, please.

The normal procedure is either to load a quicksave or ship a new rover, but no, not to teleport a rover with eg the Alt-F12 menu.

While the wheels and tracks are great, I have never found much use for the landing gear - not least because of phantom forces. ETA: (thanks @Manul who made me realise I'd goofed) I mean the landing _legs_. The wheeled gear is just fine.

On-rails is the opposite of physics warp - much higher rates but the craft can't do anything, used out of atmosphere.

At a guess, you are adjusting the on-rails warp rates while using physwarp, or vice versa.

I did it with kOS, finding no way to do it directly.