Jestersage

Have KER of course, but have not mount the module onto the LV yet The lighter design is 6.6t and Heavier design is 8.7t, due to one using the LanderCan Mk1 and the other using Cupola.

I am trying to make a mobile base to send to either Mun or Minmus (and possibly even Duna), and so far, I have made 2 version, with the mass difference being 1 ton. While given a very powerful launcher (eg: Jupiter III) it would not be an issue, I am influenced a bit by raptor9's rocket design and want to keep the LV close to SLS or Saturn V, and thus won't be those crazy contraption. In that case, what difference does 1 ton overall? (Obviously will affect TWR, but does it matter?) To expand a bit, what about 2 ton... or even say 5 tons? (the mass of the X200-8 fuel tank)

So far, I have success with modular base using the "base with small wheels" method, aka each module have 4 of the smallest wheel that allow them to slowly move into position. However, I am wondering would it be better to use a "bottom crane rover" to move the base modules? Or go the other way around and Just make a base on wheels?

Thank you.

This is not a discussion but more of technical assistance request. In detail: If I downloaded a part mod, start a new save to try it, then decide to play stock again, can I just remove that part mod's folder and delete the save, so the other saves (started during stock) and any new saves be usable in stock game? I am assuming this is as technical as I can make. Please do not turn it to a POV discussion.

If I am playing a modded game in a save specifically for the mod, as long as I removed the mod, and the save that used the mod, the rest of the game is still considered stock right?

[Deleted so it doesn't derail the thread.]

Great. Alcubierre drive is already calling out on me, saying it's just a little install and only affect one craft... It's sitting in my download folder, waiting to be move to the GameData folder... help? (In terms of stopping me)

Question: Had NASA ever drawn up a situation where the one stay in Apollo gone crazy and head back to Earth by himself, leaving the two on Moon stranded and thus require rescue? I know they have a plan for Skylab in case they need to be rescued, but what about Apollo itself?

Okay... I finally gone ahead to download Hyperedit, and actually used it to land a debris... and this is where I am starting to worry. I first start with KER. Then StageRecovery. Then KVV. Then I just got Trajectory yesterday, and just now I installed HyperEdit. Yet all the time I keep calling this a stock game, except my definition is that "My saves and shareables can be play in stock". So for fellow mod users, when do you realized that you had gone too far from stock? And when you do, do you decide to say "F this" and go all the way and install some exotic mods (eg KSPI) or decide to scale back?

Is ModuleManager required? EDIT: NVM. Tried it myself afterward. Just don't put .dll in there.

From the thread: Which is how I run. BTW, is FMRS still not working for 1.2.2? Or did someone picked up the project?

Despite my signature, my "stock" means "I can share my saves and craft to stock player and it will work, and they can share their saves and craft to me and it will work for me." In that case, which mod are "stock friendly"? So far I have: KER Stage Recovery Kronal Viewer Plannign to use (this will keep my definition of stock right?) Veselview (not the KVV) Trajectory Would like to use: FMRS (seems to be not updated) Are there other mods that will keep my game "stock" as in my definition?

Thanks for the warning Snark. Is the timestamp what KSP used to determine if the craft is "new"?

I am gonna assume some mods have a "Jettison fuel content and convert to wet workshop"?

Question: Do I have to do the building base contract all in one go? I was thinking of using a prefab set from KerbalX, seeing I had used one before and have good result (actually used the set before and love it); however, the lab is on a seperate module from the Hab unit.

I know. i just want to have a higher chance of being downloaded. Does KerbalX provide metrics?

Aside from the off center and price, is there any other reason not to use the Mk3 cockpit as a capsule, or considered bad form? I had recently created an Orion clone based on Mk3, and is debating which one to release. One has its ports centerized, while the other one look better. Would like to hear from you guys which one you prefer. Centered version Front: http://imgur.com/M7DOd7J Back: http://imgur.com/Bbzf5cs Better looking version: Front: http://imgur.com/JjUhU3p

The reason I am asking is that I am polishing up my First to-public capsule, an Orion clone (name choice is between between "Jaeger" or "Weaver"). Instead of going with SLS route, it will be based on the Jupiter/DIRECT, Specifically v.2,'s Jupiter-232. Stock, of course. The version with clipping: (reasoning: to centerize the docking port) Front: http://imgur.com/M7DOd7J Back: http://imgur.com/Bbzf5cs The version with no clipping: Front: http://imgur.com/JjUhU3p

Except if you take each item down one by one (eg: EV-2B), there are items "above" the parachute node...

Raptor9, how did you do the upside down parachute in your capsules?

For all those that does download other's craft: at what point would you consider parts clipping is too much that made you unwilling to download that craft? I have added image link to my craft. Can someone critique the clipping? The version with clipping: (reasoning: to centerize the docking port) Front: http://imgur.com/M7DOd7J Back: http://imgur.com/Bbzf5cs The version with no clipping: Front: http://imgur.com/JjUhU3p

Also, use a pastebin to host your text. copy and pasting from the forum can easily led to formating issues. EDIT: My PC Chrome browser have trouble load the craft file in spoiler. It's that bad. Here's the pastebin link for everyone else. http://pastebin.com/dQLscfF8

Took me a while to realize CB = Celestial Body = Moon/Planets. I was thinking of mounting it in the Service module of my spaceship instead of on a separate satellite, but wondering if that was smart or not. Hmm....

From a Meta point of view, it would seems that there used to be a story that is basically the 2001/2010, which the Easter Egg is supposed to play a part with.