Evil Acrylic

I Would agree with Raven. It depends on the type of ship you like to build, First time i would say go for pushing as you can make a ship push with out any complex designs. Pulling can be more colourful

I might be wrong but i think it is to do with the weight of it with kerbins gravity. on your first picture the front wheel is already popped as Pulstar said i think you need alot more wheels on there 120 tonnes is alot of weight. At a guess because your wheel has already popped when you drive that is digged in and the force starts the wobble of death.

Have a look at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/28911-Landing-Rovers there is quiet a few pictures on there so you can see how other people make there rovers and should be able to help. Rule of thumb i use for a rover is 6 wheels, make sure it is wider that it is tall and anything heavy is low as possible on the rover. spacecake is correct the wheels do have a maximum speed.

True it would not be 100% accurate but as long as you are not visibly moving it would be 98 - 99% accurate enough to put a test probe into this orbit. By doing this you could cut the amount of sky you would need to look at from 100° down to ~5° . also if you did see it you would have something to roughly gauge your intercept path too.

well the way i would get the information to pass on, is you get fairly close to it then make sure i am not drifting in any of the planes then use the orbital information Tab on Mechjeb as long as you are relative to the Object your orbital details would match the Rocks.

This is uncalled for.. and immature. I am asking has anyone seen it in 0.20 because upto now no one can prove it is still in the game. Unless you can bring something constructive to this post please Flame else where.

Whats getting me is the lack of information about this all the other Easter Eggs people have posted the Cords if you really get stuck. All you get with "Magic Boulder" is "It's in a near polar orbit around Ike, 15km high." if i ever found it i think i would be posting more like which you could work with. Apoapsis 15005 m (1) Periapsis 14055 m (1) Orbital Eccentricity 0.03 Orbital Inclination 81.6 ° Mean Anomaly 3.14 rad Orbital Period 717 s 0 h 11 m 57.9 s Orbital Velocity 298 to 316 m/s MR4Y is right though if it is still in the game there would be a location in a file where all the other bodys are stored ISA map can do the ones on planets so this program must be drawing out of some file? until someone can prove it is still in game i am going to take it off the Easter Egg list as Not in Game. the view is nice though i must admit

The information that i have was it is about 80dec Polar orbit at 15km, So i after a few hours of just looking i have now put up there 2 Remote Tech Sat at this orbit so i can see when the Boulder would have done a complete trip around Ike. After many hours of this i start getting doubtful after reading the guy on youtube used HyperEdit ( I start to think Magic Boulder is Spawned in) and to finish it off i think right Dev Console, and for the last 2 hours i have sat 14km up at 80dec using RCS and never-ending fuel just to see if it truly is there and after many passes of my Remote Tech Sats still not a single pixel :-( After this you can proberly understand me questioning if this is still in Kerbal as of 0.20.

Hey Guys Just wondering does anyone know if "Magic Boulder" is still in KSP or ever was for that matter? I have followed what few vids and posts there are about this Rock and for the last 2 days i have been looking at space trying to spot this i have tried every way under the sun to find this Rock but i have been unsuccessful. so i have decided to start looking does it actually exist?, looking at the log files you can see every moon planet and ship load within the log file and everything is named nicely (thank-you squad :-) ) but that there is no reference to this Rock Does anyone know what file the planet locations are stored in?

I used to have this problem before i started docking differently, As you pointed out its not the RCS causing this issues it is the ASAS trying to keep both the ships on the plane that you set it and you can get some epic wobble on the go lol The quicker way is to get to about 50 - 75 meters away then stop your approach then switch ships then turn the docking port so it is aligned to your docking ship then turn SAS on then back off once its stop turning, then switch back to your docking ship and you have a streight line to dock at when you dock nether ship would need to have SAS turned on. Its actually stress free and much quicker Edit: Spelling :-(

I am a software developer myself and In fairness to Squad you can test test and test even more but at the end of the day you only have so many combination's of platforms you can test on in a development environment, To start with Test on XP, Vista, 7 and 8, there is 4 variables right there to check everything works, then you have different CPU then Graphics cards then drivers all on top of these all this can make a script run slightly differently. Do the math on how many things you would have to check. It is enough to drive you nuts when you are releasing something new and there is a bug that you know you checked. Total Respect to Squad!! :-)

As far as i can see your rocket looks fairly inline, I know those engines have alot of Vectoring power 3Dec if memory serves. Only 2 things i can suggest is 1 Which Probe is in control as in (Control from here) if the docked probe is the master the ship will want to right its self as you are flying backwards make sure the probe that has the currently thrusting engines is in control. Secondly using MechJebs Kill Rot negates this but i have always treated a SAS Module as a gyro to keep things stable but has little effect on your Engine vectors and Control Planes where as a ASAS does this and with the engines you are currently using it should have no issues even if it was off balance.

The way i manage the signal is to have 5 smaller satellites in a geosynchronous orbit around Kerbin i can never get exact so they will drift over time hence 5 of them. then to do the Interplanetary Coms i have 2 large long-range satellites on a large inclined orbit around Kerbin (Roughly between Mimius and Mun) and these are pointed at each planet. Doing it this way the Interplanetary satellites always have coms and because Kerbin is quiet small at this range you never lose coms.. I am sure there are much better ways of this i do it this way because the small satellites are normally the first thing i put in space.

I love rovers and using remote tech its a match made in heaven, i normaly have a fixed lander then drop the rover like 1m nice and softly but i Think the hardest thing i have actually done in Kerbal was using a sky-crane to lower my Rover to Mun (Used Mun for a test platform) SOOOO many fails hehe On the way down Started to lower the Rover Managed to unhook the rover before the lander went haywire Dangling things on the end of a cable gives massive problems for keeping your Sky crane stable, i think it could be how i am doing it though?.

As Vana said you are doing fine it sounds like you are nearly there and he is correct in saying that the altimeter is based on sea level which proves kerbels have found water on the mun! hehe... I have just looked at one of my screen shots of my mun rover and it is reading 2326 on the Altimeter and it is driving around the moon. The best way to judge it i have found is the detail of mun look down the more detail you can see the closer you are and when you can see the small rocks its time to slow up. I use RCS to land not for speed corrections but for when you are just about to land its very very useful to get rid of the side to side drift so you don\'t fall over when you land. i land at about 1-2ms max