Cavscout74

There have also been issues in the past - and I'm not certain exactly where the console version lines up with the PC version - where deprecated parts are still getting picked for contracts on the PC version. The PC version happens to have a new Flea SRB, but to prevent breaking old saves, the original Flea is still in a folder of other deprecated parts and gets loaded in the game, just not displayed. If the game selected the deprecated Flea for the contract instead of the new one, that is why it won't check the box - you actually don't have the Flea its looking for. You can (at least on PC) use the search box in the VAB/SPH to pull up recently deprecated parts. Also, the contracts can be flaky sometimes and just don't want to complete correctly. Only fix for that is to delete the contract and try something else or (for the PC version, not sure how the console version works) use the cheat window to complete the contract.

You need to aim roughly 90 degrees ahead of the Mun's current location. This also works out to just after the Mun becomes visible over the horizon if you are doing it by eye without a maneuver node. When you get the node in the right place, you will see the orbital path change to show the intercept

Well this sounds familiar. Been there, done that. That is where KAS comes in handy - launch up a small probe with a bunch of parachutes, use an engineer with a wrench to remove the chutes from the probe and attach them to the return capsule. It works well. Alternately, if you have a docking port on the capsule you can just dock the probe with parachutes to the return capsule - although I would make sure to use auto-struts to strengthen the connection.

True, but its only a few drops per gallon, not covering your food with it. The article indicated at least some of these idiots made themselves sick trying to keep from getting sick. Actually, it reminds of me a little of one little chapter of Stephen King's The Stand - after the epidemic, there was a mini "epidemic" that killed off survivors of the superflu who were incapable of surviving on their own.

I just saw a news headline saying 40% of Americans surveyed by the CDC tried to use bleach to disinfect their food to prevent Coronavirus transmission. I've always been proud to be an American, regardless of our faults, but seeing that article, I may have to move. The only saving grace is that only 502 people took the survey. I just need to figure out how 196 people (39%) that are obviously too stupid to live managed to turn on a computer, connect to the internet & fill out a survey. Oh, wait, facebook, that's how.

Got some more rover exploration done on Duna today, then a few launches - another probe for Eeloo, then a combination snack supply and ore return lander was launched to Minmus. It was quite a bit larger than my previous one, requiring a 5m launcher but it was fairly tail & skinny for a lander due to using fixed landing gear to clear the very large engine needed for the ore load it would be carrying. As it turns out, too skinny. On landing, it bounced, rolled over and nearly smashed both my crew return pod & Minmus rover. Also, some idiot in the VAB installed the decoupler upside down, which didn't help anything. More Duna roving to seek out another anomaly This was probably doomed from the start, but I thought I could pull it off. The upper white section (roughly from the bottom of the RCS ports and up) is full of snacks for the Minmus base. The lower white section is empty, with room for up to 3100 ore (for a contract to return 2100 units from Minmus to Kerbin). The middle section is just a fairing & decoupler, then the lower orange is LFO for the 3.75m vacuum engine. It was a little sluggish, but I still thought it would work right up until it bounced & rolled. I had to edit the shot to brighten it, but see how close it ended up to the crew pod & rover (on the far side of the fallen supply ship) So, my choices are blow it in place and try another mission with a better design OR build a recovery vehicle, launch it to Minmus and attempt to pull/drag/push this thing back upright. So, I just happened to have a wide, stable, and very strong rover I recently built for another mission. Just strip off unneeded gear and replace it with some assorted robotics, a pair of KAS winches, and for good measure a grabbing unit in the tail No time to test it tonight, but stay tuned......

Parachutes will not work anywhere except Kerbin, Eve, Laythe and (poorly) Duna. Well, they work on Jool too, but there is no surface to land on. For a non-atmospheric body (like the Mun) your main options are (other than attaching to a lander like @AHHans suggested). 1) Sky crane (rocket attached to the top of the rover that detaches - either to be reused or fly off and crash somewhere) - this one just uses an upside down decoupler on top the rover, once landed, leave the engines running at low power & decouple. Once staged away from the mass of the rover, the sky crane flies off to (hopefully) crash somewhere safe. Here's another rover being landed by skycrane: 2) landing cradle - build a platform with engines & fuel tanks with the rover docked to the top. Land the cradle & drive off. I've done this for smaller designs, but I'm really excited about a large one I recently made. I turned the cradle into a relay as well. This method is harder to pull off and less efficient (since the cradle will generally have more mass than an equivalent skycrane won't). It DOES give a little extra protection to your rover during landing though. 3) Make the rover with built-in landing rockets - I've not done this much except for a few combination fuel tanker/rovers designed to bring fuel from a surface base to a station. And I've never really made one I was happy with.

JNSQ includes its own EVE config - that was actually the mistake I made on install, I copied over the config I was using from a stock game & it caused graphics glitches trying to fight the JNSQ-EVE config. Also, they have their own complete dV map on the first page of the JNSQ thread. In my stock career, my Duna crew finally arrived back at the outpost after several days cramped in the Buffalo-Duna rover investigating an anomaly and driving the full length of the western canyon. They are getting a few less-cramped days at the outpost before they will be sent out again to check out another anomaly to the south. The four craft of my Moho support mission got underway finally. There is no manned mission yet, but when there is, they will have a robust support infrastructure in place. Only took shots of the two ouposts, but the crew station and the giant MoRo rover departed as well. Finally, I lost my Laythe Glide-Rover after losing signal during atmospheric flight. Designed to deliver a moderately sized rover safely to the surface, it lost signal a few minutes after the entry phase and was stuck in a steep descent. Last images showed a beautiful sunset through the clouds. Mission control had expected the recently arrived pair of long-range relays to provide sufficient signal strength to maintain control, but both ended up in the wrong position. More accurately, I wanted to land the darn thing and didn't have a lot of time, so I just did the reentry burn and didn't check where the relays were. Three years and 2 days down the drain.

What little KSP time I had today got my brave Duna explorers up to investigate an anomaly, then spent the night on site. I got to sunrise before having to log off, so they won't get back to their outpost for another day. Rolling across the red hills. They got a late start, so they had to stop for the first night, only about 15km from the anomaly. Getting an early start at dawn That left them time to stop & pick the blueberries First glimpse of the anomaly, a dot on a distant hill Cresting the last hill before the anomaly, starting to get a little detail

That is another advantage of JNSQ (that I recommended to @PTNLemay a few posts up) - its a 2.7x stock scale which is challenging but doable for stock parts, resizes the stock planets and adds a few more. No fiddling, no coding, it's all pretty easy, just install like any other mod (including dependencies), read the install directions (unlike me), and it should work. Even my install mistake didn't keep it from running, just created some graphics issues that were easily fixed once the mod makers saw what I did wrong when I asked for help. It does put a pretty big load on your computer, but still less than a RSS/RO install. For stock scale, I usually run a hard career with only 20-30% science, funds slightly higher, and mostly just use the research labs for looks to keep from blowing through the tech tree before getting past Mun. I also don't do serious biome hopping - I'll get data wherever I land, but I won't send a dedicated mission to farm every science point on Mun & Minmus. I also use some mods (and a few MM patches) to extend the tech tree as well.

The planet pack JNSQ also rescales the system to 2.7x scale without needing Sigma dimensions. Rescales all the stock planets and adds a few more. I've only scratched the surface playing with that pack, but it is beautifully done.

Well said on both of these. Beyond what Snark & Superfluous J said, it's really too early to tell. Some of the snippets that have come out look wonderful, others concern me a little. But so far, its too little to make a decision yet - and even if I had full info right now, some things could change by release time.

I've never really messed with rocket/jet vehicles, but my fastest wheel-driven rover hit around 80 m/s - it actually snapped off solar panels due to aerodynamic forces at speed. It was tougher than the runway - lost one wheel (of 10) and kept going vs blowing up a runway section. It was actually a mobile Mun mining base, but testing the prototype on Kerbin was more fun than using it for its intended role. Deployed version on the Mun. The forward Mk3 cargo bay hides a pair of Hitchhiker cans for crew quarters while the aft cargo bay holds a pair of large drills & convert-o-tron 250. Oh, and to answer the "did it explode" question - it rolled over multiple times at ~80 m/s, broke off all antenna & solar panels, but was otherwise pretty much intact

Finally got my ongoing career moved over to 1.9.1 and running mostly smooth. I also finally got the manned mission to Duna landed and getting them ready for a long drive to check out an anomaly. Details here After dawn, they got back out to set up surface experiments:

Update 06:267 Under wandering stars I've grown By myself but not alone Manned Launches: No manned launches this update. Unmanned Launches: Only 2 new unmanned launches, one a test of a Moho mission and the other an actual Moho mission. Aircraft: No new aircraft operations this update. Debris: Ongoing Missions: ***Operation Morning Star*** No new updates on this expeditions ***Operation Red Dawn*** With the arrival of the complete expedition and first successful manned landing, Operation Red Dawn fulfilled the dreams of countless young kerbals. JLR-3-1 - Inserted into a south polar orbit around Jool on 06:202. An orbital correction is planned for 06:287. Laythe Pancake Lander - Performed fly-by of Tylo on 06:202 that led directly to a Laythe fly-by on 06:205, which in turn led straight into atmospheric entry. A command glitch caused both HG-55 antennas to open during entry, resulting in structural failure but the backup antennas survived and have sufficent signal (barely) to transmit data back to KSC via relays. Jool Voyager - Arrived in Jool's SoI on 06:145, performed a Tylo fly-by on 06:212. The fly-by alone got a Jool Pe near Vall's orbit, but nearly 180 degrees away. Further course corrections at Jool Pe & near Ap achieved a Vall intercept on 06:265. Jooldiver - Performed fly-by of Tylo on 06:212, just 2 minutes ahead of the Jool Voyager. A course correction at Tylo Pe put it on track to a Laythe fly-by, where a further course correction set up an aerobraking pass through the edge of Jool's atmosphere, which occured on 06:224. Upper atmoshperic data was captured and transmitted back to KSC and the second braking pass is on 06:229. Final dive on 06:232 carried it down as low as ~1800m above the reference altitude before signal was lost due to structural failure. Laythe Glide-Rover - Arrived in Jool's SoI on 06:222 and set up for a fly-by of Tylo for 06:282. JLR-3-2 - Orbital insertion performed on 06:240. Correction planned for 06:282 JLR-3-3 - course correction planned for 06:241. Jool intercept expected on 08:210 MoCS-01 - In LKO, waiting for Moho transfer. EFS-Mo-01 - In LKO, waiting for Moho transfer. Vall Lander & Relay Mk 1v - Expected to reach Jool's SoI on 06:418 Laythe Ocean Explorer - Expected to enter Jool's SoI on 07:020 Eeloo Voyager - Arrival in Eeloo's SoI expected on 07:023. Eeloo Landercan - Eeloo intercept expected on 07:042. Bop Lander & Relay Mk 1v - Jool encounter planned for 07:058 Laythe Large Remote Rover - Jool intercept expected 07:160 Pol Lander & Relay Mk 1v - Jool arrival planned for 07:270 Other: I moved my save onto a KSP 1.9.1 install with (so far) no problems.

After getting the Schnauzer fixed by replacing the cfg file, I decided to look on the US2 thread to see if anyone else was having octocore problems and it turns out I wasn't alone. Replacing the beta-2 release with the beta-1 release broke everything, so then I went further back and replaced it with whatever version I was using in 1.8.1 and everything is working fine.

One thing to be aware of no matter how precisely you try to set up the initial transfer, you almost always have to do a small mid-course correction to actually get where you want. You aren't producing an instantaneous impulse of the exact dV at the exact maneuver node, you are producing it over seconds or minutes (or possibly hours for ion engines) before and after the node, which causes your actual course to diverge slightly from the ideal from the transfer planner. This alone is fairly small (usually <100 m/s) and is not the same as the "mid-course plane change" option of the planner.

My Duna expedition began arriving in my career, with the first Kerbal (in this career) in orbit around another planet. I also had my Jooldiver probe complete its mission, descending to just 1800m before imploding from the pressure Mixed between Jooldiver's multiple aerobraking passes and final dive, my Duna crew vehicle, station, rover, supply ship & lander all arrived and entered Duna orbit. The crew transport and lander are both docked with Duna station. I ran out of time to find a good landing location - the rover will go down first to confirm a good resource concentration and fairly flat area, followed by the outpost (arrived a few weeks ago), and finally the lander. DDL-01 (Duna Disposable Lander-01) coasting to closest approach with Duna Station

KRE is a great mod, but I would be thrilled to see some larger legs in stock instead of needing a mod. The BG robotics can somewhat fill that role, but 1) they can be twitchy (I'm currently dealing with issues with locks being ignored and/or not changing state between locked & unlocked on multiple craft) 2) It's extra paid content that some people may not be able to afford or may not want and 3) robotic parts can quickly skyrocket your part count.

Yesterday I decided to try to move my current career up to KSP 1.9.1 as most of my mods have been updated and the rest were parts-only, and I figured it was worth a try. Almost everything is working, but two parts (so far) aren't showing up in the VAB/SPH. Existing craft in my career load fine, and I can load craft with either part in the VAB/SPH without problem, I just can't launch because the parts aren't available. They also show up in the tech tree in the correct nodes (and are actually marked as unlocked). The two parts are the Restock+ Schnauzer engine (1.875m vacuum engine) and the Universal Storage 2 Eight-bay core. I moved the 1.9.1 version of the US2 core and copied over the version 1.8 part config file and it did the exact same thing. Has anyone encountered this before? Not on my game laptop atm, so I can't post a log, but reviewing it myself, I didn't see any errors regarding either of those parts. UPDATE: Replacing the schnauzer cfg file allowed it to show up in the parts selection, but the eight-bay core is still missing.

The greenhouses won't show up without a life support mod installed - should work TAC-LS, Snacks, USI-LS or Kerbalism. Same with all the LS-related storage parts

Typically, you're most likely to get good info posting in the specific mod you're having a problem with. Also, people are going to ask for a log file (see link below for how to find it). I stumbled on this topic looking for a problem of my own but I don't know if our issues are related - moving from 1.8.1 to 1.9.1, I have at least 2 parts from 2 different mods not showing up in the VAB despite loading into the game (existing craft load fine, & I can load craft in the VAB but can't launch due to parts being unavailable).

Spent some time getting mods installed in a 1.9.1 build to transfer my Out of the Sands career over from 1.8.1. Then pruning unused parts from said mods & fixing numerous little glitches (#autoloc.... instead of names for half of one mods parts, despite not seeing any error in the localization or part cfg's). I still have some parts to prune, and need to look over some new parts a few mods added in 1.9. My career save loads successfully, but with 2 problems: a) LOTS of parts have to be re-unlocked (easy enough to fix, just cheat some extra funds & unlock them all again) b) some parts are just missing from the VAB/SPH but did load into the game (ie no craft failed to load and the saved craft files load into the VAB with the missing parts, but can't launch because they "aren't available") Really not sure what is going on here - one part, I even copied the cfg from 1.8 over the new cfg and it still does the same thing. The only two I've identified this problem so far are the Restock+ Schnauzer engine and the US2 8-bay core, but I haven't done a lot of searching so far, so there may be more. I find it very unusual, because it is affecting 2 different mods. They show up in the tech tree, show up on in-service craft and show up on craft files, just nothing in the VAB/SPH, even searching for them - and I tried several difference searches. The log file doesn't show any errors that I can find regarding those two parts. I though Tweakscale Companion might be doing something, but removing it made no difference.

@Acid_Burn9 Well written & thought out post and I strongly agree. I started off playing sandbox just to figure out how to do things in the game, dabbled in science for a few days & went to career. No, its not perfect by any measure, but it definitely engages me more than either of the other modes. Having to pay for rockets completely changed what I was designing compared to sandbox. Then having to rescue kerbals to expand my astronaut roster encouraged me to learn rendezvous & docking well enough for that to be routine rather than something to be avoided if at all possible. Mods with new & better contracts helped a lot too. The building upgrade levels are pretty horrible - especially VAB & SPH, where you go from 30 part limit to 255 in one step - but the concept isn't a bad idea. The size/mass limits are much better - even in a 2.7x rescale (JNSQ) you can get a kerbal to space on 18 tons with good design. And yes, in sandbox, I built more than one craft with a pile of RTG's as the only power source, because why not. The only time fuel cells were used was big mining rigs when nothing else had the power output to run the drills & converters far from Kerbol. In career, a small fuel cell (actually, a small Universal Storage LH2/LOX fuel cell) is my standard power source for small manned craft, with maybe a small fixed panel or two to supplement it.

What exactly is ridiculous in what I said? I spend almost all my time in career mode because I find it most enjoyable - I use sandbox to test things before using them in career, and I just can't get invested in science mode. Other people may differ, but its how I play and the article said that adventure mode was similar to the current science mode. The article also said there would be optional contracts, and I was speculating what the point of optional contracts was.