Cpt Kerbalkrunch

Sorry, @Kerbaleo, I didn't see your edit until just now. If you ever want to get someone's attention, you can hit the "quote" button on one of their posts, or just tag them like I did with your name just now. Just type the "@", then start typing their name until you see it. Thanks to @Snark for answering. And it's just like he said to post a pic we can all see easily (I think most of us are on our phones at work a lot of the time and have to be quick ) Just seeing someone's ship can help guys to see whatever problem you're experiencing. I've found that no matter what the problem is, someone here will surely know the answer. We all like to help other players. And I'm pretty sure we all like to see other players' screenshots.

Twenty to 40 minutes? You rockin' a Tandy?

I've had that happen a few times. I'm betting you were working on that rocket for a while, moving things around, adding and removing parts, and changing symmetries and whatnot (which kinda sounds like every rocket I've ever built). Somehow, errors get introduced into the ship and it's basically a timebomb. I haven't found a way to salvage one besides doing what you did and starting over from scratch. @HalcyonSon, I take back the part about starting over from scratch. The ship below is an asteroid-catching design I've used many times, with many different variations. This particular ship was supposed to complete a bunch of contracts (bring a Class D asteroid to Laythe, space station around Laythe, pick up a stranded Kerbal, and a couple others). I decided to swap out my usual Mk1-2 for the Mk2 Lander Can. No real reason; just hadn't used one in forever. The result was that I could not launch the ship with Kerbals on board. Very strange. I found a workaround, and the results are in the video below if you care to see it. I made it for Bewing the Bugsmasher. He checked the craft file and said it had so many errors it was pretty much impossible to figure out how it happened. Strangely, I removed the Mk2, and added an Mk1 Command Module and Lander Can and it worked just fine. I had no explanation, and just chalked it up to "one of those things".

I know. I changed the conversation for some reason. Was plowing snow for 15 hours yesterday. And still thinking about KSP. Just not clearly.

It doesn't exactly waste the ore, the small drill just doesn't get the huge asteroid-harvesting bonus that the large drill gets. You end up drilling all the ore for very little fuel. More of a wasted opportunity than wasted ore. As you said though, if you're gonna grab an asteroid, you can probably afford to use the large drills and converter. (Changed the conversation to drills for some reason. Not much sleep. Apologies.)

Welcome to the forums! There always seem to be bugs that pop up related to mining with each new update (though I've never really experienced any problems), but I believe the shortcomings of the small converter are purposeful. If you had something small and light, but worked as well as something large and heavy, there'd be no reason to use the larger one. I see it as sort of a give and take. You trade mass for efficiency, just like with the smaller drills. Not sure what exactly the issue you're having is, though. Can you post a screenshot directly?

For the visuals, rather than a clash, more likely to be something installed incorrectly or just the wrong version of something. I think I would reinstall and double-check that everything is right.

You have to unlock the maneuver node (right-click it to open it up). Sometimes when I switch views to another ship or the KSC I can't refocus on my target body again. This happens a lot when I target a moon inside another planet. A quick fix is to target and focus on another body, then you can refocus on the planet or moon you want. For Jool's rings, I have a few installs with visual of cocktails, and they all have the rings. I think you need EVE or SVE as well. Not sure which one does it specifically.

For the focus, you have to unlock the maneuver node (right-click it so it opens back up). Sometimes it happens when you were focused on a moon within a planet while it's targeted. In some cases, after switching to another ship or the KSC and coming back, I can't refocus on the body I want. A quick fix is to target and focus something else real quick, then you can focus on your planet or moon again. Kinda sucks, but it works. For Jool's rings, I think you also need EVE installed. I have a few installs with visual mod cocktails, and they all have rings. Not sure if it's EVE or SVE that does it specifically.

I don't wanna sound flippant, but whatever you need to do the job is the best configuration. I usually use three stages, but it largely depends on where you're going, what you're doing, and what you're bringing with you. If you're going far and bringing a lot, you're gonna wanna dump dead weight as often as possible to maximize your efficiency. Someone else may be able to give you a more technical answer. Not sure how else to phrase it. I just see what I need, and try to travel as light as I can without sacrificing anything I want or need to bring with me.

When your Kerbal is in the module near the antenna (don't think I've ever seen it say an antenna wasn't within reach before; maybe a mod?), you should be able to right-click and transmit data directly from the antenna itself, without needing to locate the experiment. The antenna should know where it is.

If you're heading for Jool, you can do my favorite move "the Minny drop". When Minmus is between Kerbin and the sun, right around the time of a Jool window (you can go a week or so late if you need to; Jool's huge SOI is very forgiving), burn retrograde to lower your Kerbin Pe to about 70-75km. Then, when you reach Pe, burn for Jool. I think it costs about 1,200m/s. Combine that with the free capture off of Laythe or Tylo and you've got plenty left for maneuvers.

You probably haven't staged the engine yet, so it's showing a burn time without any thrust basically. Just stage the engine, or if you have already, hit some thrust for a second. That'll straighten things out and show you the actual burn time.

I've got plenty of ships with over 1,000 parts, and my current record is over 1,900 for an Eve lander, but a kilometer long is freakin' nuts. Any bigger and that thing would be out of its own physics range.

Fast, cheap, and reliable? Sounds like my car.

Being a KSP fanatic seems to make Google think I'm a space nut, which isn't really true (of course, they also think I love Emily Browning, which is absolutely true ). They send me every space related story out there. All are interesting, but most I don't bother clicking on for time reasons. However, yesterday I read the story of the Japanese probe to Venus. The pics were spectacular (as a fan of Eve, I'm very interested in its real life inspiration; though I know they're vastly different), but the story was better. In the States, we don't pay as much attention to the rest of the world, so I had never heard this one. Evidently, the engine crapped out during the capture burn at Venus in 2010 and the probe hit solar orbit. In spectacular fashion, they salvaged the mission by using RCS to finally capture back in 2015. I loved the story because it reminds me of the early days of my space program (though not nearly on the same scale, obviously ). I used to put RCS on everything (whether it needed it or not), and several times it saved me when I ran out of fuel and used the monopropellent to get back home. The irony, of course, being that if I had just brought more fuel instead of RCS I wouldn't have run out in the first place. Still brings a smile to think about it, though. For @MaxwellsDemon, these threads will often go a bit beyond the scope of the OP. With a game like this, there's technically no "right" way to play, and not really a "best way" to do anything. Of course, "technically" and "not really" leave plenty of room for interpretation, discussion, and (sometimes) argument. It's a community after all, and each of us loves the game and have our own ideas on how to play. I don't think anyone was knocking your play-style for using Vernors. We just like to discuss these things and give our opinions. When your stuck at work or school and can't play, talking about the game is the next best thing.

Congrats, @putnamto. Your space program just took a huge leap. Now it gets even more fun. With just a few tweaks and a bit more Delta v, that same rocket can get you to Duna and back. Then things really start getting exciting. Enjoy.

We can always suggest certain parts but, in a career or science game, the player won't always have access to them. The reason I didn't suggest a fairing is that, if you look at his screenshot, you can see he doesn't have Specialized Construction. Which means he doesn't have the 2.5m fairing. Better to use a 1.25m lander. It's a small lander. The landing gear is all the wide base it should need.

Sounds like a mod, since I've never seen a contract like that before. Because of that, I can't be positive, but it sounds like hitting the ground with some sort of probecore on board will do. However, if it's destroyed on impact, I'm not sure if the contract will register it or no. Sometimes it needs a few seconds to kick in. You might need to try it. Luckily, landing on Eve is simple for a small probe. Just use chutes.

They turn on together, so you'd have to action group them separately. By doing so, you could actually enable RCS before launch and then just kill them both with their action group numbers, and turn on the one you need when you're ready. You could keep RCS enabled all the time.

Yes (if you want to use them at launch) and nothing. If you want to separate the use of thrusters and Vernors, just set them to action groups. This way, you can turn them on and off at will. Otherwise, you'll need to disable and re-enable them by hand. Which takes awhile.

The short answer is, yes. I don't like to suggest a complete redesign, but there are always more things you can do. @5thHorseman brings up a good point about power. Let me start with my take on mass; I don't much care about it. That probably makes me sound like an idiot, but it's just not my main concern. Ability is what matters to me. I build a rocket to do a certain job. Then I try to make it as light as possible. For me, mass is not the real problem. Unnecessary mass, on the other hand, is the enemy. I see monopropellent canisters, but if you're not planning to dock, dump 'em. I would also dump the reaction wheel and switch out the lander can for an Mk1 Command Module. The mass difference is negligible, and worth it. You won't need as much for the return because you can easily free-return without a shield. As for the Terrier, I would probably have just switched to a 1.25m fuselage at that point. As I said, you won't need much for the return leg. And Thumpers with Delta Deluxe Winglets should get you off the ground and higher up where your Skipper can start to shine. All in all though, a total redesign isn't necessary. You can feel your way around and just make tweaks here and there and see the result. Hope all goes well.

Looks like you've got enough rocket, but I think you can tighten things up a bit. First off, you're switching fuselage sizes several times without adaptors. That's a killer, cuz it adds tons of drag right where you don't want it; at the top of your rocket. I suspect you need plenty of gimbal to keep it under control, which is probably why you're using Swivels and have to have those huge wings to put more drag where it's needed; at the bottom of your rocket. And I would swap out the liquid boosters for SRB's as you said. Just a personal preference. They're cheap and powerful, and getting you off of Kerbin is basically their entire reason for being. I like to take advantage of them. The Delta Deluxe Winglets are great control surfaces when paired with SRB's.

I guess you are doing something "wrong", so-to-speak, but not really what you're thinking. It's not so much the design as the idea. The science jr. is basically made of tinfoil. It is not very hardy, and will often explode on reentry (or be crushed on touchdown, with its puny 6m/s impact tolerance; a quick tip, if you do bring one home, aim for a splashdown). Luckily, you don't need to bring it home. Just EVA one of your Kerbals, right-click on the Jr. and hit "Take Data". Now you have the full science from it and can just dump the dead weight. No need to bring it back to Kerbin.