jimmymcgoochie

I can't help thinking you'd be better off with a big rocket or possibly several small ones. If all you want to do is pick up some ore from a mining site on the Mun and carry it back to Kerbin's orbit or even to the surface, rockets will be a lot easier than planes. Spaceplanes are only really useful if you're going somewhere that has an atmosphere, otherwise the wings are just dead weight you have to carry around everywhere. Planes are also harder to land when there's no air as they're designed to land horizontally, not vertically. I find it worrying that your plane only reached 90m/s on the runway, that probably won't be nearly fast enough to keep flying for a plane that large. Holding S to pull up will slow you down as the elevons and canards produce a lot of drag when they're deployed like that, you should try to accelerate more before pulling up.

Put a wheel at the back, so that the tail of the plane doesn't hit the ground when you rotate to lift off. Like this (skip to 2:00): Bad enough on a real plane, but on a KSP plane this can easily result in many explosions and no more plane.

I agree with the above- your centre of mass is a bit too far forwards and your elevators can’t produce enough leverage to force the nose up. For a plane that size you should use the larger elevons (elevons 2, 3 and 4 if I remember them right) rather than elevon 1 which has a smaller surface area and so provides less control. You could also try using the Big-S wings and elevons as they provide more lift and control respectively. You could use some larger nose-mounted canards (or more of them) to lift the nose, and/or shift the rear wheels further forwards which will increase the leverage that the rear elevators can produce. If you do move the wheels you may need to stick a small wheel on the tail to prevent tail strikes from over enthusiastic pitching up. another wheel-related trick is making the rear wheels slightly higher than the front ones on the aircraft, which will give the whole plane a slight nose up attitude on the runway and increase lift. You could also add some more wings near the front to move the centre of lift further forward, and if you angle those wings so the front edge is higher they’ll generate even more lift and a bit of nose up which will also help the plane get off the ground and possibly a bit more stable in flight. I think your centre of mass needs to be adjusted, try swapping the positions of some fuel tanks and ore tanks to balance it up a bit. Are you planning to fly it into orbit, or back down, with the ore tanks full? If so that plane will become even more nose heavy as the fuel gets burnt and will be really hard to land in one piece- landing will be easy, it’s the ‘in one piece’ bit that will be the trick! Swap some ore and fuel tanks around and try looking at the CoM with different levels of fuel and ore in the tanks as it can make a huge difference; ideally there would be a setup where the centre of mass doesn’t move much/at all no matter how much fuel or ore is in the tanks.

Yes. It is entirely possible to do it, it’s a common suggestion on the forums, I’ve done it myself several times and the only thing that doesn’t work is upload/download crafts to steam when using the game outside of Steam’s control. You’ll need to download the update in Steam then copy the game files to the SSD and then copy your save game files over to the new version (they’re in the saves folder). If you aren’t using mods, that’s all you need to do; since you’re posting in the “unmodded installs” section I’ll assume you don’t use mods, but if you do or start in future there’s a bit more to it than that- feel free to ask that question then and someone will help you.

Step 1- right-click KSP in Steam, then Manage > browse local files. This will open the KSP directory. Step 2- Go up one level and copy the Kerbal Space Program directory. Step 3- Paste the KSP directory into your external drive. Step 4- Congratulations, you now have a copy of KSP that is completely outside of Steam's control, so won't break mod compatibility with each update! You can now safely delete all the mods out of the Steam version, download previous versions of the game (right-click KSP in Steam > properties > Betas tab > pick the version) and keep multiple copies of the game at different game versions with different sets of mods installed. Steam's habit of updating the game when an update is available will regularly break modded installs so it's always a good idea to copy it somewhere Steam can't meddle. You can have as many copies of the game as you like- I currently have 9 on my external SSD: unmodded copies of 1.7.3, 1.8.1 and 1.9.1; lightly modded versions of those that I use for mod testing and/or bug checking; a 1.7.3 game containing my first career; 1.8.1 with a 'stock plus' career that was meant to be just stock plus cosmetic stuff but ended up with a substantial number of parts mods too ; and my current focus, a 1.8.1 JNSQ career. Whenever Kopernicus gets updated to work in KSP 1.9 I might try and upgrade that JNSQ version to 1.9.1 by cloning the 1.9.1 stock version then adding all the mods from the 1.8.1 JNSQ version, both using CKAN, then copying the save game over; I already did that to bump it up from 1.7.3. If you're going to have multiple copies of the game with different sets of mods or on different game versions, I highly recommend using CKAN as it does most of the hard work to make sure you get the right mod versions for your version of KSP; it can also clone an existing instance, which is why I keep copies of the base game, and can copy the mods from one instance to another even if they're on different game versions, although it will often complain loudly about incompatible mods and you'll have to force it to install them despite its protests; it's also worth remembering that not all mods are on CKAN for a variety of reasons and there are some hidden gems in the mods section of the forums or on spacedock/curseforge for you to discover as well.

searches for "warp to next morning" button on myself

I don't know what my heaviest launch in the stock system was, but yesterday I launched a ~250t payload to a 150x150km orbit in JNSQ which is 2.7x larger than stock Kerbin. The launch rocket was almost entirely stock with only a 1.875m SRB from BetterSRBs and a 5m probe core from NFLV coming from mods, 5x Mainsails on stage 1 and 5x Vectors on stage 2, made orbit with 6m/s left in the second stage at a speed of about 3700m/s. No part clipping or sticking parts inside other parts required either, which makes a change from my usual launchers, but I did use the old trick of sticking fuel tanks on top of the SRBs with crossfeed enabled on the booster decouplers to get some more delta-V.

Your specs look like they should be more than enough to run a pure stock KSP 1.9 (are you sure you don't have 1.9.1?), so there might be something else going on. Try closing all other programs before launching KSP, then open Task Manager and keep an eye on how much CPU and RAM the game is using as it loads. If you see any major drains on either outside of KSP, end the process if it's safe to do so (don't end system processes, it can get ugly!). Try turning the graphics settings down as far as possible and see if the performance improves (there's a mod called ShowFPS which enables a FPS counter if you press F8) If the game still doesn't run properly, look in this folder location: C:/Users/your_username_here/AppData/LocalLow/Squad/Kerbal Space Program (you should be able to copy and paste that into windows explorer and get to the right folder, AppData is a hidden folder so might not show up if you just try to click your way through the folder tree). You should have a file called Player.log and possibly output_log.txt; if Player.log was last modified after you launched KSP, open it up and look for errors (ERR), exceptions (EXC) or warnings (WARN) using ctrl+F. If you see any, upload the file to a file sharing site and link to it here; if not, try updating your graphics card drivers. If none of the above help you, then I'm out of ideas... Try uninstalling and reinstalling?

A very useful little mod! I'm using it in KSP 1.8.1 and have had no issues with it so far, haven't tried it in 1.9 yet but I'd be surprised if it didn't work there too.

I play career mode with the science gains turned down to 10% so that it's not possible to unlock everything without leaving Kerbin's SOI. There's not much of a story behind it except what you make up yourself, but trying to force a story on a game this creative wouldn't work particularly well. Sandbox mode is what I use when I'm testing mods or trying to replicate bugs, I never use it for anything else.

Fusion? Yes. Antimatter? No. Antimatter needs to be created using huge quantities of energy and will produce matter in equal quantities; fusile materials like tritium or helium-3 can be made pretty easily or found naturally in gas giants. Antimatter storage requires magnetic fields to stop the antimatter meeting, and annihilating, regular matter i.e. the whole rest of the spaceship, so the slightest leak will be potentially catastrophic; fusion fuels can be stored pretty safely in liquid or possibly solid form and the technologies already exist (tritium is just hydrogen and liquid hydrogen has been used in rockets for decades). Antimatter will react with any matter it touches, wherever that may be, requiring lots of effort to keep it under control and most likely using power to do so; fusion requires a lot of effort to actually get it started so there's almost no chance of spontaneous reactions. And so on and so forth, but the simple version is this: antimatter requires so much energy to produce in the quantities required for space travel that you're better off using a fusion reactor to power the spaceship than to make antimatter with. Using a tiny pellet of antimatter to start a fusion reactor still carries the risks of premature ignition/annihilation and the problems of storage, whereas using some massive lasers (as in the Daedalus-type engine in the trailer) is a lot safer and easier to do, if a bit more power-hungry for the spaceship itself.

Running a large list of parts heavy mods on an older/less powerful PC will obviously make the game run slowly. Be ruthless and cut down on your mod use: scrap anything you don’t absolutely need, sacrifice some crafts if you have to to ditch another mod and close everything else on your PC to keep the memory free. Not sure why you need all those mods for the stock solar system, especially KSPIE which is monstrous overkill. I can regularly use 8 or in some cases 10GB of RAM running KSP. The game loads everything in when it starts so having many gigabytes of extras will cause very slow load times especially with a slow hard drive. Again, removing what you don’t need will help with this and you can delete parts you don’t want/need from a mod and just keep the few that you do. RAM isn’t very expensive so depending on your PC it might be possible to upgrade your PC relatively cheaply which will make the game run faster; likewise a small SSD isn’t too expensive and it will make a big difference as SSDs are much faster than a conventional hard drive and even an external SSD running through a USB3 port could dramatically reduce your load times. The best (and cheapest!) option is still to reduce your mod count, getting rid of anything you don’t desperately need and then keeping it low despite the appeal of shiny new mods (or when Kopernicus gets 1.9.x compatibility as planet packs use a lot of RAM too).

Those rocks are ‘terrain scatters’ and can be turned down/off in the settings as they require quite a lot of additional computing. They’re not real objects so there’s no physical interactions with them. Unlike the Breaking Ground objects (ROCs, can’t remember what that stands for) which ARE physically there and which you can crash into, if you have the Breaking Ground DLC installed. Making the scatters have physical properties would make the game unplayable for many so they’re purely cosmetic.

Your plane is too short, the wheels are too close together and the front wheels are higher than the back ones. The rear wheels will land first and friction will pull the nose down, but the front wheels are too high so it can pivot a lot before they touch the ground and will make them ‘dig in’ and flip the plane. The short distance between the wheels and short overall length make it easy to rotate on its pitch axis so you’ll front flip very easily, the wheels are really close to the centre of mass which reduces stability. To fix it, make the fuselage longer, move the rear wheels further back and keep the front and rear wheels as close to level as you can, or have the front wheels slightly lower. This will make the plane more stable on the ground and easier to land as the wheels are further from the centre of mass, although moving the rear wheels too far back will make it harder to pull up when taking off unless you use nose mounted fins or canards to lift the nose. You’re also landing quite fast, it’s entirely possible to get a much larger and heavier plane to stay in the air at under 40m/s. Cut the throttle and glide for as long as you can at an altitude of 5m or so until the plane runs out of lift and drops gently to the ground, then go easy on the brakes- set the front brakes low to avoid making the plane pivot forwards and crashing it’s nose into the ground.

You don’t have any docking ports as others have said above. It’s actually possible to build a much smaller ‘station’ to complete that contract- stick a single static solar panel and a single Communotron 16 to a hitchhiker with a cupola on one end and a docking port on the other, it ticks all the boxes for considerably less cost (although it is pretty useless after that except to throw at the Mun and get some seismic data from a deployed seismometer from Breaking Ground). When it says it must support x number of Kerbals it only requires you to have enough crew space on board, it doesn’t mean you actually need them to be filled by Kerbals!

Staple a ton of Sepratrons set to 50-75% throttle to a decoupler and stick that on the bottom of your crew capsule, with a second decoupler under that to get rid of the rest of the rocket that got you into space (it’s dead weight and will reduce your acceleration). Point retrograde, fire sepratrons, if they don’t pass out use MOAR SEPRATRONS and adjust thrust to get enough burn time to make them black out. As a bonus it will also deorbit the crew capsule. If you haven’t unlocked Sepratrons, you can do something similar with the Mite boosters instead but those are bigger and heavier so it might not work as well; another option is using a Swivel or Reliant with an FL100 fuel tank as that should have a good thrust to weight ratio. Anything that can push your TWR high enough to exceed the tourists’ G limit and hold it long enough to make them black out will do.

I tried to replicate this bug but am unable to do so. What version of KSP are you using, what version of OctoSat and any other mods installed?

Two and a half years too late... Also no, the Vector doesn’t count as it uses oxidiser, and liquid fuel engines refers to engines that either use liquid fuel and air (jets) or just liquid fuel (nuclear).

Try uninstalling and reinstalling the game. If that doesn’t work, go into the KSP folder and look in KSP.txt to see if there are any crashes or exceptions in it. If there are go to C:/users/your-username/appdata/locallow/squad/kerbal space program and find Player.txt, then upload that and the KSP.txt log to a file sharing site and link to them here so someone can have a look at it and figure out what’s wrong.

@MuriloMoreira you will need: https://github.com/Kopernicus/Kopernicus Kopernicus, the planetary system modifier mod. There are versions for different versions of KSP up to 1.8.1 and it's version locked so ONLY works on the specified version of KSP, make sure you get the right one. KSP 1.8 also changed the game's Unity version which means that a lot of 1.7.3-compatible mods are NOT 1.8.x compatible and vice versa. https://github.com/Sigma88/Sigma-Dimensions Sigma Dimensions, does planetary rescaling. As per @Sigma88's comment above, this is compatible with KSP 1.8.1 and earlier (get the right version though!). https://github.com/Galileo88/Rescale/releases Rescale provides configs for Sigma Dimensions at a variety of planetary scales, all the way up to 10.625x which apparently makes Kerbin the same size as real Earth. As far as I can tell this will also work in 1.8.1 but I haven't tried it myself so I don't know for sure. Make sure you get all the dependencies for those mods as well or they won't work. (Normally I'd suggest using CKAN which will install the dependencies automatically, but the versions of SD and Rescale on there are quite out of date for some reason so I wouldn't rely on those.) One alternative to the above is JNSQ which is about 2.7x larger than the stock system and doesn't need Sigma Dimensions or Rescale, but while the same planets are present they're considerably different to the stock ones so if you're only interested in bigger versions of the stock planets it might not be for you. Please note that stock parts will not be enough in larger rescales (apparently they're ~2.5x sized so work best in similar sized systems) and you'll need other mods e.g. SMURFF or RO to make the stock parts work in large systems. There are also mods that add more parts from real rockets e.g. BDB and Tantares and a number of parts mods will support or are supported by SMURFF/RO. It's probably better to start with a smaller upscale to e.g. 2.5x or 3.2x where the stock parts will still be enough and get used to the larger planets and the challenges they pose, before then going for something bigger. EDIT: I just tried it out by adding Sigma Dimensions, Kopernicus and a Rescale config to an otherwise mod-free KSP 1.8.1 and everything looks like it's OK and considerably larger than before . One thing I forgot to mention- for larger systems you will need to turn the power of antennas and the DSN up quite considerably as in the stock system a RA-2 around Duna can't reach a level 3 tracking station half the time, never mind when it's 6 or even 10 times as far.

Pulled it down and the decoupler is there now. However I just noticed that the skeletal adapters with the optional tanks are actually putting the tanks in the wrong place- upper if you select lower and vice versa. Both 7.5m-5m and 5m-3.75m are affected, but the fuel volumes and masses are correct for the variant chosen, it's just using the wrong model. Unrelated, the Walrus engine says in the description that it's made by Kerbodyne, but the manufacturer says Post-Kerbin Mining like the rest of them. Thanks for fixing those misaligned 7.5m parts, they look so much better now (to me at least, I like my rockets symmetrical )

I wanted to put a 0.3125m stage on top of a 0.625m stage but without an adapter it doesn't look right and will generate more drag.

I have 16GB RAM in my PC and it still manages to fill it up when running a game with JNSQ (and close to 100 other mods) in it, I'm surprised you can run stock KSP with 4GB...

Real Solar System doesn't rescale the Kerbol system to the same size as the Solar system. The only thing I could find was Sigma Dimensions, which says it's only going to work in KSP 1.3.1 or earlier.

Most (all?) planet packs use Kopernicus, and Kopernicus isn't compatible with 1.9 yet- it only got updated to work with 1.8 a short while before 1.9 was released, so it might take a while yet. In the meantime, you can either play 1.9 with just the stock solar system, or use 1.8 with whatever planets you like but without the newest features and graphics updates. There are a few mods that rescale the stock system, but a quick look at them shows many are only compatible with KSP 1.3.1 and earlier, I don't see anything that will work with 1.8 and give you a rescaled Kerbolar system except JNSQ, which does some pretty heavy surgery on all the planets (it's what I'm using right now), you might have more luck with 1.7.3 or earlier.