RonaldRayGun

Thanks, read with interest and agree with your sentiments ... besides what bar-steward makes you drive all over minmus in a bleedin rover .. I mean what's the point except testing my tolerance to tedium?!

Definitely finding some issues with triggering the next 'node' with several missions. With this mission I have a vessel landed on minmus which wont trigger the next node (finding the dig site) i'm 45m from the designated spot . The vessel is a lander with the rover part attached. There is also a vessel orbiting for the homeward leg. I can't for the life of me figure out why a test mission earlier using a different vessel worked fine but this one doesn't, the design is similar. So I just landed the orbiting vessel instead of the lander (and rover) and it triggered the next node .... a bit bizarre. It seems as if the game isn't keeping track of the correct vessel parts * All the Vessels were part of the same launch rocket, as is the normal way of doing things! *

It is MORE time consuming... as per my post.

The problem with this challenge in my humble opinion is that it's very time consuming. It's a good idea but not everyone has the time.

My entry, 2001 themes and the highest TWR. Not the fastest at 2060 m/s .. though :-( [noparse] [/noparse]

My entry - simple space plane - whiplash booster [noparse] [/noparse]

Well business is business in my book

I'm just trying to get my head around the fulfilment of 'hardware' contracts and whether i get penalised for recycling the 'base' for other things immediately after the completion .... let me explain An example of this type of contract is: Build a base on planet /moon X that supports Y kerbals has a .... etc etc to be handed over to the <insert non memorable name> corporation on completion. Now in this example it's easy to use it to build a Kerbal transporter with a docking port that then just undocks from the 'base' takes off and is used for other game play. Effectively the contract has paid for the new hardware which i was going to build anyway plus you get the profit you would have got as well. A win - win?

Thanks @Berlin that did the trick ... i had no idea i was running the 32 bit version!

it's odd, i have some logs for the 64 bit (up to the 22nd of April) then it seems to have switched to 32bit. I only use KSP via steam

KSP crashes when i use the mod, approximately every 15 mins. If i remove the mod(s) the game stops crashing...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qedyn4vnagtt11f/output_log.txt?dl=0 Is this what you need? I've installed the medium res version. Unity Player [version: Unity 5.2.4f1_98095704e6fe] mono.dll caused an Access Violation (0xc0000005) in module mono.dll at 0023:101195ba. Error occurred at 2016-07-10_121114. E:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\KSP.exe, run by nick. 35% memory in use. 0 MB physical memory [0 MB free]. 0 MB paging file [0 MB free]. 0 MB user address space [82 MB free]. Write to location 0081b000 caused an access violation. Context: EDI: 0x00400000 ESI: 0xd5eea700 EAX: 0x0000fca0 EBX: 0x00000001 ECX: 0x0081b000 EDX: 0x00000000 EIP: 0x101195ba EBP: 0x007ebdd0 SegCs: 0x00000023

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qedyn4vnagtt11f/output_log.txt?dl=0 Is this what you need?

@Berlin Many thanks for this mod, it looks great .. however (latest steam version) i'm getting non graceful crashes, usually within 15 mins. I'm not a programmer but happy for any instruction to find the issue. I'm using the medium res build. I did see that perhaps scatterer may not be stable in 1.13? Other mods installed: Engineer, Planet Shine, Rocket Real Plumes, Chatter Windows 10, 64 bit, 16Meg Ram, decent(ish) gaming rig.

Not able to create a manoeuvre node happens to me all the time. My comment would be rather than adding anything to get around the problem the actual problem is fixed!

I Agree with the OP, i often use docking ports on the last stage which might be a poodle and fuel tanks (so i can recover fuel and reuse them) I also use ports on inflatable heat shields. The other issue is you cant rename the 'debris' as they have no command module so you can't say "poodle engine stage - don't delete!' instead you have the name of the original craft and the tedium that is going through the debris list. My preference rather than having a new category would be as i implied above, a way to rename the debris.

LOL, i'm hoping!

Indeed, it's a problem when you are sending modules which you then assemble on say Pol or where ever, the point is you need an 'adaptable' connector that has some tolerance in. Otherwise it's very tedious, for low gravity (pol again) i just use RCS thrusters to "adjust" the height of a module that then "docks" on to the next one

Thanks for clearing that up!

My mistake then i guess, when i read the description is says "no fuel cross feed". It still wouldn't have worked well as i have vehicles "docking" although by the sounds of it you can just run into an open claw.... not particular pretty if that's the solution.

I play stock ... i know i'm old fashioned ..... I use the Space Hanger for creating the alignment. However i need docking ports for moving fuel and ore around structures and rovers which you can't do with connecting components using the claw. It's do-able even on Pol but it's messy.

OK, so docking ports work fine in space and are fit for purpose but when trying to create ground installations on moons ... i'm thinking POL in this instance they are pretty difficult to align as with most moons or planets the ground is not flat. There seems to be no easy way to adjust the height of anything .. i.e can't use landing legs to adjust height or wheels etc, basically you got to mess around trying to make it work. What would be useful is a docking port that have a small amount of alignment movement, i''m thinking it could have a flexible connector that could move X / Y / Z by half a meter. Hence Umbilical Docking Ports

That guy is a genius. YouTube channel subscribed. That guy is a genius. YouTube channel subscribed.

In all seriousness there could be a call for a 'capsule' which could take a small payload such as a rover and could survive a high energy impact

Whilst contemplating the rescue of my Kerbal from a particularly ill judged Tylo mission, I realised what a total pain in the bottom Tylo is. It came to my mind that the only way to slow down on this moon without burning tones of fuel is to hit the ground ....slowing said ship to a stop sans fuel. Which brought me to War Of the Worlds ... the proper version not the Tom Cruise one, in which the Martians landed by 'crashing' into the surface of the Earth. This to my mind is a perfect solution to my Tylo issues. All i need now is a new part that can handle the gentle surface braking of about 2,000 m/s. Possibly some paracetamol could be included for the occupants of the 'lander'