HvP

At the very least, a space station in orbit around a planet should add to the planetary data available to the player. For example, if the station has been crewed or fitted with an advanced probe core with a Kerbnet connection and has been in orbit around the planet for X months then: The chance of discovering a new anomaly increases which then may become marked. Surface biomes become mapped in more detail. Geographic points of interest become discoverable and marked for exploration (including marking out areas of flat level ground for landers and bases.) Additionally, perhaps... Orbital stations can be "paired" with ground ore refineries to automate refueling. Crew members who set station endurance records get experience points (but only after a crew transfer.) Stations with luxury accommodations and higher electricity generation (for entertainment) can offer higher cash reward for tourist contracts.

You didn't mention it, but did you make sure to download the most recent update to the "Breaking Ground" expansion? There is often a bugfix version of the expansions when the base game gets a new release. KSP 1.9.1 requires Breaking Ground version 1.4.1.

By the end of my 1.8 career I had developed a fleet of reusable booster vehicles for various payload tonnage and sizes. Some were used more than others, but all of them had stage recovery capability built in to dramatically lower operating costs. There were variations in payload adapters for different diameters and different side booster configurations, but I'm only showing a couple of those variants in the screenshot. The naming scheme is organized by (tons to LKO)-(payload diameter)-(Medium, Heavy, Super-Heavy, or Ultra-Heavy Lift Booster) plus a series name. From left to right: 010-25-MLB 'Khanda' 025-25-HLB 'Excalibur' 055-37-HLB 'Nothung' 075-37-HLB 'Gungnir' 100-37-SHLB 'Mjölnir' 125-37-SHLB 'Mjölnir B' 200-37-SHLB 'Narayanastra' 400-37-SHLB 'Narayanastra B' 600-50 UHLB 'Armageddon'

Scatterer just hasn't been updated yet to work with 1.9.x KSP. It's a very complex mod and changes that were made with how KSP uses the scene camera in version 1.9 means that the mod needs some work to become compatible. There is work being done but it isn't finished yet. Be patient, and you can check the progress of the mod HERE.

I've been saved by cargo bay doors a few times after toppling over. Although, the segmented folding doors on the newer redesigned service bays don't provide much leverage unless you are on particularly low gravity bodies like Minmus. Toggling landing legs is often a handy option in such cases, of course, especially now that you can remove one or a few of them from symmetry to provide asymmetric action. Granted, the most effective strategy is to build a lander with a wide stable base so that it doesn't fall over in the first place. But that comes with its own difficulties when trying to launch a less aerodynamic payload.

You may find this mod useful: Docking Port Alignment Indicator. It gives you positional information for all axes of your ship in relation to the targeted docking port.

Hello @Chequers You seem to have a pretty good grip on the game, and congratulations on your progress so far. As far as when it's best to start using 2.5 meter parts, I think that the increasing diameter and weight of your payload are the primary factors which demand such larger sizes. And there are usually choices in every diameter which scale efficiently with the size of those diameter stacks. You shouldn't confuse size with efficiency. The most efficient engines in the game are 1.25 meters in size if you consider the ISP or "fuel efficiency" of an engine. What the smaller engines usually lack is maximum thrust, but even this isn't always true. The "Vector" is 1.25 meters in diameter but has one of the highest thrust outputs of any single nozzle engine in the game. You pay for this compact powerhouse, literally, as it's very expensive. As you unlock more of the tech tree I think you'll find that there is usually an engine to fit your current stack size which will efficiently move your payload. There is never going to be a hard and fast rule as to which specific engine to use for your payload, but the goal is always to achieve the minimum required thrust to operate your vehicle while maximizing delta-v. Sometimes this means using a larger engine which provides a higher absolute thrust. Or sometimes it's better to cluster a few smaller, and potentially more efficient, engines for similar total output at higher ISP efficiency. You won't always get a performance increase just by attaching a larger engine. In some cases, a larger engine could reduce efficiency due to its extra mass. Also, the environment in which the engines will operate is crucially important. A lower stage booster demands high thrust, but efficiency is secondary since it will usually be discarded before you leave the atmosphere. But an interplanetary transfer stage doesn't necessarily require high thrust because you have plenty of time to complete your maneuvers in orbit - maximizing delta-v is key. A surface lander however will depend on a high enough thrust-to-weight ratio to safely touch down, while also having an engine bell that isn't so long that the landing legs don't have clearance to touch the ground. But the game gives you several options to experiment with - there is no one right way to do it. So in short, my advice would be this. A larger engine isn't necessarily an "upgrade" if you already have an engine which fits the size of your rocket that is getting the job done. Factors such as the diameter and weight of your payload, the ISP or fuel efficiency of the engine, the environment the engine will be used in, the weight of the engine itself, if you need engine gimbal for thrust vectoring, and whether or not it's possible to achieve similar results with multiple smaller engines or one large engine... all add into the decision of what parts to choose. It might seem a bit complicated - it is rocket science after all. But luckily this is a game which encourages experimentation and rewards novel approaches with the satisfaction of designing and flying your very own space craft in whatever way you personally like. Fine tuning your craft is certainly part of the fun, but there's not one right way to do it.

Hello @Pirate Roberts I think I found a way to fix this for you. See if this works. Make sure that KSP is not running and go to your KSP installation folder. By default it's called KSP_win64. Navigate to the settings folder for Kerbal Engineer which is "\GameData\KerbalEngineer-1.1.7.1\KerbalEngineer\Settings" In that folder you should see a file called "GuiDisplaySize.xml". Go ahead and open it with a text editor like notepad. Look for these lines: <SettingItem> <Name>increment</Name> <Value xsi:type="xsd:int">0</Value> The >0< in the last line indicates the size of the interface. In your case it probably shows a negative number. Replace the number in "> <" with a zero. Then save the file. The next time you run KSP your data display should be back to normal size.

I don't know about a mod, but in case you didn't know you can use physics time warp even during an engine burn. To do this, hold down the "ALT" key (on Windows PC's) and keep it pressed while tapping the period key "." to advance physical time warp. It only goes up to 4x acceleration, but that's because all of the physical interactions on your ship are still being calculated, unlike with regular time warp when your ship is "on rails." Also, you can alert the mods to accidental double posts by reporting those duplicates. There is a "report post" link that shows up if you hover over the top right corner of the post's box. Just tell them it's an accidental double (or triple) post in the text box that pops up. (I've already submitted the report for the ones above.)

You should start by making sure that your control surfaces are only assigned to discrete inputs. By default, all control surfaces have yaw, pitch and roll turned on no matter where they are located on the plane. This means that your elevators in the tail will also try to roll the plane, compromising your pitch control - and your ailerons in the wings will also try to move the pitch of the plane, compromising roll control. If you haven't already, right-click each set of control surfaces and make sure that they only control the inputs they will be best suited to. The buttons in the right-click menu will allow you to disable any input that could interfere with their function. In conventional aircraft designs this means that the ailerons at the wingtips only have roll enabled; the rudder in the vertical tail fin only has yaw control enabled; and the elevators in the horizontal tail stabilizers only have pitch enabled. There are designs such as delta wings, flying wings, and v-tail designs that need to mix these controls, but that will realistically mean some compromises.

Now that's the start of a really good sci-fi thriller. I say you should nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Hello @BlockGaming06 So you're ready to take that interplanetary leap? Fortunately, it's not really much harder than getting to the Mun, but it does require slightly more planning and a little waiting. If you've been to the Mun then you know that you have to start in a circular orbit around Kerbin, and then start a long burn at the right time along that orbit so that your path crosses the Mun at the same time the Mun will be there. Well, that's basically all you have to do to get Duna but on a larger scale. Instead of waiting for your ship to be in the right spot around Kerbin relative to the Mun, you have to wait for the planet Kerbin to be in the right spot around the Sun relative to Duna. There are guides to help you time the transfer burn correctly such as this interplanetary calculator or the image below: In that image Kerbin is the blue planet and Duna is the red one. You'll want to go to the tracking station and time warp until Kerbin is about 45 degrees behind Duna, like in that image. You can ignore the position of any other planet you aren't going to. This is the most efficient orientation to start your transfer burn so that Duna will be on the other side of the Sun at the same time and place you will cross its path. You'll need to bring enough fuel for a larger delta-v change, of course, but Duna isn't that much more expensive to get to than the Mun. It's important to remember that if you want to go to planets orbiting further away from the Sun then you need to add orbital velocity. This means that you should burn in the same direction that Kerbin is orbiting the Sun to speed you up relative to Kerbin and put you in a higher orbit. In the case of a normal eastward orbit this means you start your burn on the night side of Kerbin. The opposite is true if you want to go to one of the inner planets from Kerbin. You would then burn on the day side of Kerbin to "go backwards" compared to Kerbin's orbit around the Sun. This causes you to slow down relative to your path around the Sun and you will drop into a lower solar orbit. At first, your rendezvous maneuvers won't be very precise, but you will have plenty of time to fine tune your approach by making other small maneuvers along the way for a closer approach to your target. Just be aware that Duna orbits in a very similar plane to Kerbin but other planets may require some very expensive inclination changes, especially Moho. And don't forget to bring enough fuel to slow down at your target if you want to orbit or land. Dipping into the atmosphere to slow down is possible with some planets like Eve or even Duna, but there are a lot of variables to consider, such as how thick the atmosphere is, how steep your approach is, and what kind of heat shields you brought with you. This covers only the barest basics. There is a good tutorial with diagrams HERE Or if you'd like a video, there's always a Scott Manley vid for that (although it's a little old and some info may be a bit out of date):

KSP: Kerbal Sheep Program Truly a surrealist masterpiece.

I had the same error. After trying both the main directory for my 1.9 game and every sub-folder, just in case, I gave up and went ahead and downloaded the full install. It's possible that it was looking for the default folder name of "KSP_win64", but I had renamed mine to keep it separate from the other versions I still keep. I didn't think to check if that was the problem until after I had already downloaded the complete installation.

@I likeOxidizerrfuel Don't worry if the answers you're getting seem a little unhelpful. It's just their way of saying that your question is incomplete. If you're in a circular orbit and you just want to change the inclination of that orbit then it doesn't matter if you change your inclination at the ascending or the descending node. In a circular orbit there is no difference between the amount of fuel used to burn at either one. HOWEVER - if your orbit is highly elliptical (a stretched out oval); or if you plan to also burn into a transfer trajectory during the inclination change; or if your trajectory is hyperbolic, crossing between different spheres of influence - then it does matter at which node you make your inclination change. It just doesn't really matter if it's called the ascending node or descending node because those names are fairly arbitrary. If you simply flipped the map upside down then you'd just reverse the names. Those are just the places where the plane of your orbit crosses the plane of another orbit or the equator of a celestial body. It doesn't matter what you call those points; it just matters where along your orbit they are.

Those octo-girders with the fuel in them are not stock. They are from the Near Future Construction mod pack. You might want to check and see which version of Near Future Construction you are using. Look in the directory for the folder "GameData\NearFutureConstruction\Versioning" for a file called "NearFutureConstruction.version" and open it with any text editor like Notepad. There will be a change log that lists the version number for the mod as well as the version of KSP it was intended to be used with. Also, when this happens are you seeing any errors in the console log? The next time it happens press ALT+F12 and go to the "Console" category at the top to see the debug info for your log file. Are there any yellow or red lines which mention any obvious mods or errors?

@strider3 I can tell you're very frustrated, and I would be too, but this isn't a problem that most people (or anyone I've heard of) have had with the stock game. I still think it's mod related. You say you are playing in version 1.7.3 - well, the game has been updated three times since then and if you have installed mods that were built for the newer versions of the game then it can cause all sorts of havoc. Even having a version of module manager that isn't compatible with the game version you are running can break all sorts of things. As it stands, my only remaining suggestion is to try running a new copy of the game with no mods at all installed. I'm not talking about just not using the parts on your station; I mean that there should be nothing in the "GameData" folder but ones named "Squad." That should tell us once and for all if it truly is a problem with the stock game or not. And if it IS a problem with the stock game then you should consider updating the game to at least version 1.8.1 which is not only a very stable version of the game, but has a large selection of compatible mods available.

Hello @More_Heat_Shields There are a couple of things I would check first. Start yourself a new sandbox game so that you begin with all parts unlocked and make sure you are looking under the "coupling" part category. A couple (haha) of years ago all of the decouplers were moved into their own category in the parts list. They are no longer listed under structural like in older versions. The coupling category is the sixth one down, between "structural" and "payload." You can also try using the part search function. At the very top of the parts list there is a search box that should say "Enter search." Simply try typing in the word "decoupler" or even the terms "TD-" or "TT-" If they still don't show up anywhere then you may have a problem with missing or misplaced files or folders. The folder path the decouplers are located in is your install folder for KSP, then "\GameData\Squad\Parts\Coupling" and then you should see a list of decouplers and separators in that folder. It would also be helpful to know if you've noticed any other missing parts.

Hello @Kim Hanson Since @Geonovast already gave a great breakdown of these functions, I'll only add a couple of things. Same vessel interaction: In the stock game, by default, parts on the same ship do not collide with each other and can pass through one another if they happen come into contact. Enabling "same vessel interaction" on two parts that you want to interact with each other will cause them to physically collide if they come into contact. It was introduced primarily to allow players to create articulated assemblies of gears, manipulating arms, etc. with the robotic parts in the Breaking Ground DLC without having to split them up into decoupled craft linked together. First hop distance: In a communications network, it shows you the distance between your ship and the first comm-net relay being used to make a path between you and Kerbin. It's not terribly useful in flight, but since the strength of your connection depends on what antenna you are using and how far you are from the next relay or ground station it gives you more exact numerical information about the capable range of your current antenna combination.

I find the best way is to do this: Reduce symmetry back to just one single decoupler. Place one decoupler wherever you want it. Align camera so that you are directly facing the decoupler. Grab a SRB and attach it with your cursor directly onto the face of the decoupler attachment point. Ignore how high or low the SRB seems to be right now. All that matters is that your cursor is clicking only in the very center of that decoupler. Having symmetry turned off makes this task much easier because you usually have a clearer view to click in the right place. Once you have attached the SRB to the decoupler (and not to the surface of the central stack) then rotate your view to the side so that you can grab the already attached decoupler from before. Don't grab the SRB - pick up the decoupler itself. Because you only have one attached right now makes it much easier to grab the decoupler because there are no other parts around the sides that would block your view. If you are not able to change the radial symmetry while holding a part then you should switch to 6 or 8 times radial symmetry before picking up the decoupler. Make sure that you have switched to 6 or 8 times symmetry either before or after picking up the decoupler with SRB attached. Place your decoupler onto your central stack where you want the DECOUPLER to be. Ignore the vertical alignment of the SRB right now. Just worry about where the decoupler should go. Once you have your decoupler-SRB combo attached radially you may notice that your SRB isn't at the height you want it. Simply switch to the offset arrows and move the SRBs up or down to the height you want them. Attach struts where necessary to prevent wobble. I know this seems like a lot of steps for such a simple building technique, but it really isn't. This kind of construction becomes second nature after a while.

Glad you think so, thanks! It's an update of a version I made back in 1.0.5 but once the Breaking Ground rotors came out I knew I'd have to improve on it. The only pity is that time warping at high speeds (understandably) stops the rotor from spinning.

The future of Kerbin is in your hands... "The Time Machine" Get it here before time runs out. Created in Kerbal Space Program 1.8.1 with 136 parts. Breaking Ground DLC : Surface Mounted Lights : TweakScale : Textures Unlimited : Textures Unlimited Recolor Depot

A faithful yet somewhat psychopathic sentient robot, Maximilian was the servant and enforcer for Dr. Hans Reinhardt on board the doomed deep space science vessel "Cygnus." Maximilian is capable of deploying fully functional spinning blades and comes with three pairs of fully articulated arms on rotating shoulder joints. Eight tons and 268 parts requires Breaking Ground DLC, and TweakScale, with Textures Unlimited and Textures Unlimited Recolor Depot for custom coloring. Availabe on KerbalX

@strider3 Ok so we know that the unbreakable joints cheat won't do the trick, and it doesn't look to me like an autostrut issue either. If you still want to test graphic settings then the only ones that should make much difference in space are the "Render Quality", "Texture Quality", and reflection refresh and texture settings. The others really only take effect in atmosphere or on the surface. You might also want to make sure that you have "Rigid Attachment" turned OFF for all of your parts. It shows up when you right-click on a part (may be with advanced tweakables turned on.) While rigid attachment sounds like it would help, it actually makes parts break before they bend and could make the problem worse. Did you have any luck trying a station without any weldable joints anywhere on it? Or even trying a copy of the game without the mod installed? What other mods do you currently have installed and - crucially - are they all up to date. Sometimes problems like these happen because the mod doesn't match the version of the game its running on. When this happens next time bring up the F3 report screen and see if it's telling you about any collisions or part failures on the vessel. And then also pull up ALT+F12 and look at the "Console" category to see if there are any obvious errors being reported in your log. Except for the suggestions I've already given I'm afraid I'm at a bit of a loss to explain this. I'm not a modder myself and I've never seen a problem like this before. But I promise you, it's entirely possible to build large stations that don't do this in the game.

As Rizzo said, in the stock game when you activate navigation for the marker it will only show up on your navball. Although, it can be hard to see the marker if it is over the horizon line of your navball. It helps to have the control point of your rover facing forward, not upwards - otherwise the horizon line is barely visible. A message will pop up on your screen when you get within 500 meters of the site marker. You can do your report anywhere within that 500 meter area. Assuming this is an EVA report then your site should be on the surface, but some contract sites are above the surface and you'd need to fly through the area around the marker. If you want a mod that will show you the markers in the world as you're driving, then consider getting Waypoint Manager.