Nightside

Patches like these are usually created by the community. Most likely no one who uses that combination of mods has made configs.

I don't think you can have more than one symbol per part. You can have more than one stagable action. If you don't want both actions to stage simultaneously, you must deactivate one, stage, activate the remaining action, move the icon back up the staging list, then stage as usual. Kind of a pain really, since you probably don't want to separate fairings and eject your payload at the same time. Check out pods in SSTU mod for example. Many have decouples and chutes in the same part.

That looks so cool!

I wonder if chance of failure is per part, or per vessel.

Welcome to the forums @mrpotato103. Did you follow Nhawk's instructions and make sure you have every dependency installed properly as well? This mod works for me on KSP 1.3.

It seems people are reading this question two different ways. I think the OP meant the 2nd one: Q1. Is it possible to attach an engine pointing down (towards center of mass) of a planet in order to change its orbit? A1: Not realistically for anything other than an asteroid 1. Q2: Is it possible for a spacecraft in orbit to be burning an engine downward (toward center of mass) in order to maintain orbit of a planet but while traveling at escape velocity? A2: Yes, but. Gravity applies a constant force effectively pulling a small mass towards a larger one. This is similar to having an engine applying a constant force pointing towards a central point. You could essentially orbit a point in deep space like this. The difficulty is that burning an engine requires you to expend propellant, which would change your mass and require constant adjustment of thrust levels (hard to do in KSP). A2.1: Why though?

Understanding some of the more scientific concepts of space travel such as delta v and aerodynamics are not necessary. KSP allows you to find your own designs by trial and error. Try enough, and you will come up with something that works. You may notice that real space programs do a lot more planning and research before launching something since they are limited by money. As a player, I personally am limited in the amount of time I have to play the game so I want my missions to have a good chance of success, and so planning is critical, also I play on a laptop, so I can't build super high part count ships anyway. With the help of a few ingame tools planning the delta V budget has made the game much more fun and rewarding for me. 1. Delta V Map (for the Stock system) - Any trip beyond low orbit will be some combination of escape burns, capture burns and reentries. The delta v required to escape or capture depends on the gravity (mass) of a planet and its radius. You can calculate these things yourself, or just look at a delta v map. If you know where you want to go before you build a rocket, then you need to make sure you build it with enough delta v to actually get you there. 2. Basic Delta V or Mechjeb - Either of these mods show you your delta V per stage while building your rocket. Using these tools you can build each stage efficiently. The advantage of this is that your rockets will look more or less like real rockets, so you can look at real designs for inspiration. 3. Have fun - If building new rockets to see if they work or not is more fun than fussing over some numbers then do that instead!

Ok, that gives a much better picture of the problem, but I have no idea what is happening. Are you sure you aren't running any mods that might be affecting the planets or lighting, such as Kopernicus or Scatterer? Your best bet is to have start the game up with rovers parked on the moon, replicate what you have shown here, close the game and post your log.

@Lord_Archaic, you are on the right track with your design but it needs a few adjustments. The main problem is that the rear wheels are too far back. This will prevent you from being able to pull the nose up and lift off the ground. Take a look at some real planes or load up one of the stock example craft and you will see that the rear wheels are usually attached below and just behind the center of mass. This allows the center of mass to easily pivot. also, the fixed wheels are difficult to tune, you may have better luck with the retractable gear.

Is it snowing?

What a week! I just started a new job and had to catch up with the action. It sounds like the crash was somewhat controlled, so I guess there is no question of negligence on Jen's part is there?

And then there is weather like this... http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40339730 too hot for planes! The question (for any mod that adds realism) is: does this make it more fun? The answer of course depends on the player. A weather mod would add a bit of piloting difficulty, but also a lot of scheduling and logistical work. Is that more fun? Actually, i used to really want weather in the game, but I think I would be happy with a button that let you set wind speed and direction.

Also, If using a part failure mod, then you could have a partial failure.

@cakepie, thanks for this mod, it is has become (yet another) necessary mod for me, like the docking port indicator on the navball. Do you (or any other users here) have a favorite mod that adds airlock parts to the game?

GameData.

@FuzzyHead, @LemonSkin, I haven't had this problem but I do know that recent Versions of Kopernicus have been altering the stock solar panel module. Do you have Kopernicus?

It might be better if it ONLY worked from the tracking station.

I've not experienced this, but I haven't done a lot of crewed rover trips.

Are you using a life support mod?

Thanks, I did figure that out. Is there a reason to auto apply continuously rather than just when the Build button gets clicked?

This sounds like it could be related to a problem I experienced this AM with this aand procedural wings, the game would start to lag wit every adjustment of wing size. Let me know if more info would help.

Hi @Drew Kerman, big fan of KSA. I don't have an answer to your question, but perhaps a workaround. Even though they've improved much in the last releases, I've pretty much given up on the stock gear because I could never figure out what the adjustments were supposed to do, and I would always end up sliding all over the place. I've found that the Adjustable Landing Gear from the Kerbal Foundries mod behave much more like I expect. I've started to reconfigure the gear from that mod to look and work like fixed gear. I remove the steering and motor modules in the config and change the strut and wheel rotation limits to allow for the struts to be angled 45-60 degrees so they stick out like the stock fixed gear Limitations are that the gear are still retractable so I have remember remove it from the action group or at least not to hit "G". Also the gear bays are still visible so you have to clip them to hide them, but this may be adjustable in the config too, but I haven't gotten that far yet.

Great question @XrayLima, got me thinking. What conditions would have to occur before such a mission need be taken? I can think of only two. 1. Capsule is out of fuel and cannot return from orbit 2. Capsule is damaged (i.e. Heat shield or parachute) and would not survive reentry. In in either case, the safest solution would be to send a replacement rescue capsule and abandon the damaged one. This assumes crew could actually transfer between vessels, I don't know if that is possible with current crew vehicles. For the first case, an automated probe that could attach to the "hulk" and deorbit it and then detach would be best. For the second case, I really doubt any hastily assembled in space construction would survive a Kerbin Earth reentry intact. so no, it does not seem plausible to do it this way in reality. But Kerbin is a special place with an easy road to and from space, so they obviously have a different evaluation.

Yeah, something is definitely unbalanced if the most affordable way to grow your organization is to rescue strangers from orbit.

Welcome to the forums @Kiwivenge. Ksp mods add so much to the game, but there are a lot to choose from, and a real risk of installing so many that your game runs slow or crashes because of incompatible mods. When that happens KSP is not fun. So my advice is to start slow and pick mods that will increase the fun for you rather than just add clutter. If you want to design better rockets, you will need a delta-v calculator such as Basic DeltaV by dmagic. If you want to find reliable transfers to other planets get Kerbal Alarm Clock. Good luck!