bitzoid

Yes, that is correct. I belive the physics radius is 2.5 km from your currently controlled vessel. Everything outside that sphere is due to be silently deleted by the game. This has bothered me on several instances. For those who use mods, there is a mod that extends that range, but I hear it can make thinks unstable.

So, after the problem returned and affects my laptop now as well, I found that I can fix the problem by tweaking the savegame. By editing the savegame.sfs, finding the Vesselname and changing the alt property from 9390.4182395086682 to 9392 I could load the base. It fell down a bit, but that isn't such an issue on Ike. This is a temporary fix, as it problably surfaces again when I save/load the base the next time (no pun intended). I'd really like Squad to fix this.

Landed my 10t explorer drone plane on Laythe. Now it's chilling on the shore. This thing has such awesome control due to its relatively large wingspan. Fun to fly.

I intentionally didn't post one in order not to spoil the original challenge. I'll add a highscore for everybody who posts a picture of the design. Because pic or it didn't happen

This should be trivial to implement and I'm scratching my head as to why it's not done by default. But at least having the option to do so would be such a time saver. Either a sorting according to in-game or system time would be fine (ideally both).

It's a quality of life issue not a matter of not being able to do something. Especially when tweaking designs, it is very cumbersome to keep re-doing adjustments. It's something that has bothered me a couple of times, so I thought I'd ask.

Doesn't work. If I hit left shift while picking it up, I pick up the entire vessel. If I hit right shift (alt on Windows) I pick up a copy of the part. Regardless of snap.

When in the VAB/SPH, if you have a radially attached part (say, a tank) and you want to make a symmetrical copy, you can pick it up, hit x (assuming the setting on the lower left corner is set to a simple point) and reattach it. But then I need to place it exactly where it was, which requires me to perhaps translate and rotate the part back to its former position. Is there a way to do this directly? Some key combination, perhaps? I find it difficult to believe I am the only one who is annoyed by that.

Didn't you say originally it was below the atmo?

Usage example:

I was thinking about what scaling factors where necessary to make drop-in replacements between ion and nuclear drives. For completeness I also compared this to chemical engines (represented by the Terrier). So, the question is at what requirements, what tech should be used. As a baseline, I picked 60kN of thrust and added the correct fuel until all contestants reach the same mass. This means that they also will have the same acceleration (when completely full). The result is therefore only dv, with everything else being equal. For the purpose of this comparison we neglect the dry mass of the tank. The following graph shows a comparison of five configurations: ion: 30 Self-sufficient Dawn engines, with enough RTGs (330) to run at full thrust independently from the sun. ion no EC: The same Dawn engines, but relying on the payload providing the EC. ion fc: The same Dawn engines, but being supplied by 15 Fuel-Cell Arrays. This configuration needs a combination of Xenon, Liquid Fuel and Oxidiser. nuclear: A single Nerv engine with fuel to match the mass of the ion baseline. chemical: A single Terrier engine with fuel to match the mass of the ion baseline. Disclaimer: I do not use the Wolfhound because I need all configurations to have the same thrust. Raising the others to the Wolfhound's thrust would make the comparison less useful. Then we add more fuel proportionally, such that the mass of all four configurations remains the same. To read this graph, the scale for dv is on the right side. In the top part of the graph, the exact formula for all five configurations is shown. There are some interesting things do note here, but first, only the RTG/Ion engine intersects noteworthy with others (we can pretty much ignore the intersection at x=36). Mass and Performance The mass at these intersections are: x = 311: 49.5t (1.2 m/s2) x = 416: 54.7t (1.1 m/s2) x = 523: 60.1t (1.0 m/s2) That means, whenever you have a configuration that needs more fuel than 56.5t per Nerv, you should always use Dawns+RTGs (in vacuum). This is only limited by Career-funds. Dawn configuration The turquoise configuration with magic EC blows every other engine out of the water errr... space. Obviously. Using Fuel Cell-Arrays with the Dawn engine isn't necessarily a bad idea, but the Nerv is consistently better. For higher dv requirements, the magic power coming from the RTG gains over the weight of the fuel you would need to power the FCA. Net Acceleration This is difficult to see, but the background indicates the acceleration you get from the bottom, which is the wet acceleration and the same for all engines, up to the top, which is the dry acceleration. As is to be expected the chemical engine wins flat out wrt to dry acceleration (with a whopping 120m/s2), as it burns the most fuel-mass. That's why the background is primarily purple. On the lower bit we see a strip of orange (nuclear), with a dry acceleration of 20m/s2 and further down a dark patch where the ion drives live (ranging from 1.78m/s2 to 8m/s2). This is to be expected. Conclusion What I take from this is that only past 20km/s every non-atmospheric ship should use Ion engines (if money is not an issue). With enough RTGs there is no need to awkwardly wait for the gigantor to fill a huge battery. The graph and computations were made with KRP. See also the forum thread.

Went to Dres for the first time today and laded my rover base. It's sitting at the deep valley of a ressource rich crater. I hear the weather is nice, there.

No and no. I'll add this to the description. (Generally speaking I hold the view that if a challenge does not specify something it can be interpreted however you like. This adds a margin for "clever" things.)

Build the lightest single-trip craft that can land on the Mun. Rules: Build a stock ship (no mod parts, stock physics). Crewed or uncrewed. Land on the Mun. Nothing may explode on the surface of the Mun. No ion engines. The goal is to minimise the (wet) mass. Highscore: 1.32t by Kergarin

I made a ballistic pole vaulter. It can jump the long side of the pool. Actually it can jump quite a bit further.

Regarding "realism", I recently wondered why probe cores are so heavy. Incidently, I think the answer I got there, applies here as well ... perhaps. One explanation that stuff in ksp is heavier than on Earth was that as Kerbin has the same gravity asl, but is much smaller in volume it must be denser. Denser alloys (containing e.g. lead) shield better against radiation. Because kerbkind has only access to heavy(er) metals than we do, they build heavy crafts but are much better shielded against radiation and such space-nonsense. Regarding snacks: Some stock parts' internal view shows a generous supply of food, so they're fine.

So, in case somebody else runs into the problem (and finds this thread). I deactivated all sentinels manually, then switched to the observatory and waited a couple hundred days. It was rather fun to watch.

Please don't kill any dogs -- any of you.

Haha Yes, well I'm fairly patient and I grew accustomed to working on KRP when waiting.

All right, I opened a ticket while waiting for the game to load the next sentinel ...

I thought it was normal that more objects appear if you have a lot of sentinels (on many orbits around kerbol). If you are sure this is a bug, I'll open an issue in the bug-tracker. I'm now going through all sentinels I can find, turning them off (swichting vessels takes betwee 5-10 minutes, though).

So, I have about a dozen sentinel probes that double as relays in the kerbol system. It's useful to have them for cheap money and reputation from contracts (no launch costs, very little work, often repeating orbits around kerbol). My save has been getting slower and slower, timewarp being a pain, to the point where today I could almost not even load the map view. After a lot of patience, I was presented with THIS: In case it is unintelligible there are 747 (yes, that's hilarious on at least three levels) unknown objects, and I stongly suspect that this is why the game was getting slower and slower. How do I get rid of all of these?

I think I'd prefer a less buggy game instead of more features. Melt that issue list, then add cool features.

The lightest core, the OKTO2, weighs 0.04t. It sounds like not much but 40kg is actually a lot for a small computer system (without reaction wheels!). Granted, the core has some battery and a small antenna, but the 5 EC correspond to approx. 0.5kg (as batteries scale fairly linearly and the 100 EC battery weighs 10kg) and the antenna should weigh less than the C16 (10kg). That leaves about 30kg (probably more) for just the computer. Granted, it has some durable casing but there are lighter parts with comparable resitances. A device such as a laptop would be able to do that job (without i/o devices such as screen, keyboard, etc). But today's sensor nodes weigh (much) less than 1kg. They'd need space-grade casings, sure, but 30kg worth of casing?

So, instead of going to Dres, I released KRP1.4 which can now generate plots of parametised rockets among other features. (Yes, the depicted vessel is maximally useless -- nobody would ever need 13824 ant engines . It is an example for what you can plot.)