Cavscout74

As of 1.11 (?) it didn't work correctly. Most things still worked, but it caused issues with the construction mode and the MH round pods - when you decoupled the pod, it stayed "attached" to the base by what felt like an invisible rubber band. Went through a reentry with the spent stage staying exactly the same distance (~400m IIRC) from the pod the whole way, including floating in the air above the pod after splashdown. I haven't checked back in a while, so I don't know if the KJR folks ever were able to work it out.

I'll use three sometimes in the early career when limited to 30 parts, but any other time I'll use four if I use any. When I do use just three, it is almost always fixed fins for passive stability rather than controllable fins.

Do something like what I've been tinkering with: - JNSQ system - modified Tetrix Tech Tree - TacLS - Kerbal Launch Failure (or some other part failure mod) - Build time: I use a spreadsheet to calculate build time based on cost with reductions for reputation and building upgrades, but KCT works as well plus whatever part mods you want to include. Hard career settings with part pressure & g-force limits turned on, signal required for control & plasma blackout on. Adjust the money/science/rep rewards to taste. The 2.7x rescale from JNSQ makes everything I'm used to wrong. Think I have enough dV to reach orbit? Think again. Think I have plenty to get to/from Mun? Wrong. It has been a new learning experience. Also, JNSQ makes reentry actually dangerous for a change. Even Mun/Minmus returns, you're seeing >5000 m/s velocity as you enter the atmosphere. All the planets have been reworked to some degree, plus a set of new ones to explore as well. Granted it doesn't give a specific goal, but it does make the stock system feel new again. EDIT: I haven't tried 1.12, but JNSQ was still working fine in 1.10 & 1.11

Not on my game computer right now, but if I remember correctly - hit Esc, click settings, at the bottom is a button marked "advanced settings" or something like that. Click that & it will take you to the same settings windows you had when creating the save. One of those tabs has the "Fuel Transfer obeys crossfeed rules" option, near the bottom left on whichever tab it's on.

Am I the only one that half the announcements for KSP2 make me less enthusiastic for it?

If any group deserves a free copy of KSP 2, it would be some of the modders that have added so much to KSP1 over the years. And that is a small enough group that it shouldn't have a significant impact on income from the game.

Did you not sacrifice enough kerbonauts to the kraken or something so he has to extract the sacrifices from Kerbin directly?

That makes some sense - although these are drogues. The thin JSNQ Duna atmosphere won't even allow main chutes to deploy - even the drogues set at 0.02 deployment pressure deploy at less than 5000m. But sticking a pair or so of the radial drogues to the nose instead of on top of the radial tanks might work better. The weirdest part is this basic design with minor changes has been my normal Duna lander for years without any of these issues going into the thicker stock Duna atmosphere but the near vacuum JNSQ Duna is giving me fits

Tried yet again to land on Duna. When that still didn't work, made some edits to the lander design & cheated it to Duna to try. Same result The first try was actually going somewhat ok - but I started braking too late and slammed into the ground at about 80 m/s. And it was still getting hard to control after parachute deployment, which makes no sense to me Redesigned lander taking a try - it was more stable right up until I deployed the chutes At that point it started spinning around the long axis again, then tumbling. Makes zero sense, the chutes are adding drag to the top (aft end) and the fuel is set to burn from the top tanks down to the bottom, keeping as much mass as possible in the bottom (front during descent). And this one had more fuel and had burned less, putting more mass up front than the original lander. And the rotation it picks up should stabilize it more rather than cause it to tumble on all 3 axis.

True, but it never has in the past. And it didn't for the small base I already landed on Duna. Mounting them correctly would have them too far towards the tail too. Which might work if I had more than a few seconds before impact. I appreciate the help btw, not trying to be difficult. Just having an odd problem that isn't making much sense. I'm thinking more and more that I will need to do an almost entirely propulsive landing and not worry about the chutes. That might leave me short of dV for the return to orbit though - but if I land close enough to my outpost, it has some left-over fuel from it's landing. Here are the two designs for comparison - and bigger outpost landed mostly safely, just breaking a single gear while the smaller lander keeps losing it when the chutes deploy. Outpost: Lander:

Actually it descends tail first & the brakes are as far up as I can make them without extending the radial fuel tanks. The gear deploying makes it slightly wobbly, which makes sense as they add drag to the "front" during descent. But it is still ok right up until the chutes deploy, then it goes haywire - and it spins around its long axis initially. Very fast along its long axis - which you would expect would stabilize the craft (like a bullet), but then it tumbles. Maybe that is just a result of trying to regain control, but that phase only lasts a few seconds before the ground rises up to smash the lander. I think I just need to do an almost entirely propulsive landing because the chutes deploy so late. Gonna try again but then I may just need to redesign the entire lander. I've used the same basic design for stock Duna, but JNSQ Duna is not being cooperative.

Pretty much what @UmbralRaptor said - nice to have the info sometimes. Mostly just to satisfy curiosity. Actual benefits? I guess if you wanted to figure out an exact altitude on a specific planet or moon to deploy your parachutes, then the pressure readout could be useful. Edit: Actually, I did think of a use - if you are using a planet pack, depending on how well documented it is, you may very well not have any data on atmospheric pressure so it could be useful there, same with temp & gravity.

Crashed my JNSQ Duna lander. Again. All was going perfectly until the drogues deployed, then the lander began spinning violently followed by tumbling. Even enabling RCS I couldn't get it back under control before impacting terrain - due to the low pressure, even the drogues can't deploy until close to the surface, leaving little time to react. I really don't understand what is going on, because the outpost that I previously landed - while somewhat hard to handle - didn't react like this to the drogue deployment and the basic designs are similar (2.5m core with quad 1.25m radial landing engines with drogues on top)

Glad I could help

Nertea's Near Future series and Restock, primarily. A bunch of others too, but those are the biggest parts changes

Previously, autostruts to root could sometimes cause issues when docking/undocking as they re-routed to the new root part so this could be intended - or could be a by-product of the docking port rotation

Somewhat successfully landed the surface outpost on Duna in my JNSQ save - one landing leg failed, but it was wide enough not to fall over. For just a second, I thought I'd hit it just right..... But KSP quickly corrected that notion A test run of landing the crew didn't work so I reloaded back before the lander deorbited but didn't have the patience to do that again. I really don't understand what is going on because I thought the JSNQ Duna had a very thin atmosphere, closer to the real Martian atmosphere but my lander (and the outpost) were felt much more like they were dealing with a thick atmosphere. Maybe try again tomorrow.

Posted a new and improved tracked rescue/fire-fighting vehicle to the workshop. I got tired of dealing with the mess that has become regular engines (and the ridiculous amount of cooling they require) so I made this one turbine powered - 150+ kmh on land, 70+ on water, 2 crew + 6 seated passengers + 1 medical bed.

Continued Duna arrivals today. The first up was the Duna-Lynx rover, which ended in loss of vehicle due to a collision between the fairing and rover's landing rockets. Despite impacting at several hundred m/s, a small section of the rover landed intact. Somehow. At least it gives us a target to aim for with the surface outpost. Next up was another fuel tanker, which entered orbit then successfully docked with Duna Station. The Red Lander arriving: The biggest event of course was the arrival of Red Scout, placing the first kerbals into orbit around another planet First EVA in Duna's SoI Other arrivals (life support supplies, station tender, Ike lander)

Ok, just weirdness then. Actually, they house the drills & convertor (aft) and living quarters (front). The landing rockets (thuds) were radially attached & jettisoned on landing. And yes, it was a pain to get there, but was actually still reasonably stable to drive around.

Did you have an engineer on board one & not the other? Or two different level engineers? Nice rovers, btw. I've done my own monstrosities of similar size that were a lot of fun - even on the Mun:

At least for interstellar ships in sci-fi settings, the only way it would be feasible if there was a way for the bank to secure their investment. If ships are in-system only or (for starships), if they require major infrastructure (you can jump x parsecs at a time, but your drive needs part y replaced at a orbital shipyard after every jump) it might be viable. If starships are more like Star Wars - jump in your freighter and take off to wherever with no one to stop you, just need a hydrospanner to fix the hyperdrive if it breaks - I don't think bank loans would be available. Certainly not to individuals The old Traveller pen & paper RPG had some rules for financing ships, but that system relied on an intact interstellar empire ruling over everything. When that broke down in a rebellion (Hard Times expansion), ships operating near the borders of factions started looking at skipping out on their loans more and more frequently in some of the lore & published material.

Lowering Isp would work as well. There was a tech tree mod that had an optional patch that did that, but I can't remember which one. (Give me a minute....) @kurgut Found it: Simplex Tech Tree. Apparently it modifies only the in-atmosphere Isp & thrust curve, leaving vacuum stats untouched.

While I have made all of those at one time or another, staging errors remain the most common. Usually something relatively minor - sepratrons lighting on the wrong stage or a LES popping off early - but I've made some colossal staging errors as well (2nd stage engine accidentally added to an earlier stage). The worst ever was killing a load of 8 tourists on the pad due to staging error - that actually prompted me to not only install but fully test launch escape systems on my manned craft, so at least the tourists didn't die in vain. My first big error was lack of parachute on the very first probe I ever sent to Eve. And since it only had an 88-88 folding antenna, I couldn't even send back atmospheric data on the way down so it was a total waste.

It was