Greenfire32

Asking a question and then supplying a possible solution is by no means "spreading misinformation." OP: I'm inclined to agree with the thought that something may be blocking the hatch in some fashion. Most likely a bug in terms of the game figuring out where parts really are and are not. If there are parts attached to the top of the pod, try moving those further away from the hatch. As I haven't experienced it myself, that's really the only advice I can give at this time.

Nailed it.OP: Or you could put a penalty on all modded entries. Just an additional thought.

A forklift is a relatively simple vehicle. However, having never driven one, I wouldn't trust myself at the controls. I can't speak for the OP, but I held off on a modded KSP until VERY recently because I didn't trust myself enough to NOT break the core game. So there's one reason.

I prefer e-books simply because I can have my entire library in one device, rather than take up the amount of space required for a bookshelf. That said, e-books that require an activation code or a "subscription" aren't really all that great. I prefer my e-books to operate on the same level as physical books (ie: if it's mine, it's mine).

I absolutely love the look of this. Thread=subscribed

design better rockets, minimize your trash-print, and ultimately lead a better space program. sometimes just getting more skilled is the right way to approach things. however, a "clear debris" command/button for when muliplayer finally gets added is a definite must. Debris in singleplayer is laughably manageable. But when there's many people in the same universe, then it could get interesting.

First off, the sheer part count alone would make this an impossibility. Not even wackjob could wrangle such a beast. Secondly, anything inside the atmosphere that is more than 2km/2.5km away from the player is deleted....although technically the bridge would be considered "landed on Kerbin" so...not sure how the game would handle it.

While yes, the KSP Engine technically classifies all moving objects above surface level as "in-orbit," that doesn't actually mean that once you leave the surface you're "in orbit." Just because "if movement=true, then orbit=true" is in the code somewhere, does not automatically mean that all movement is orbit. The game has to simplify it like that because it's not a full-blown NASA-Style simulator. It's just a game. So, yes, it takes shortcuts where it can. Orbit is not orbit, unless you're in orbit [/off topic]

Given that your orbit is so shallow, if you get out and push at Apoaps (highest point in orbit) your EVA pack should be *just* enough to get you into the atmosphere. I'd shoot for about 40,000 and then let physics do the rest. Now the more important question: have you got parachutes?

While I get the general sense of what you're saying here, I have to point out that if your trajectory crosses into the surface of any given body, you are not in orbit. Likewise, you are not in orbit the second you leave the ground. To the OP: If your craft is out of fuel (in orbit around the sun!) you're only option is to send a rescue craft capable of rendezvous and return. Otherwise, your crew is pretty screwed. You can try the "get out and push" method, but since you're orbiting the sun that method is no longer practical. Your rescue craft needs to have more fuel and more power than the derelict one. Otherwise, you end of up with two crafts in need of rescue like you mentioned earlier.

Yeah, I just didn't know if you were trying to access the store log in through the forums or not.

I do a lot of Apollo-Style Mun landings. One time, before I got the hang of it, I had my command pod in orbit and had my lander safely touched down on the surface. Once it came time to launch the upper stage of the lander and rendezvous with the command pod I came to a startling realization: due to how I had my fuel flow set up, I had 60 units of fuel left in my upper stage. Not enough to make orbit, but enough to get close to the command pod. So, putting myself on a ballistic trajectory I headed for the longest sub-orbital path that would intersect the command pod and prayed to the Kraken that my plan would work. The computer said I had roughly 4 minutes of sub-orbital flight. Once within about 5km of the command pod (3 mins left), I ditched the upper stage and started burning EVA fuel (Jeb of course) in an attempt to slow myself relative to the command pod. Once under 2km I realized that I was still going way to fast. I let Jeb get 800m away from the pod and switched vessels (1 min 30 secs about). From the pod, I turned around and burned retro-grade. Slowing myself enough to not make green paste. Unfortunately, now Jeb, the upper stage of the lander and the command pod are now all on a sub-orbital curve (estimated 45 seconds). In the end, I was able to get Jeb back in the pod and return to stable orbit (estimated 6,000m above munar surface). Unfortunately, the upper stage of the lander (with all my science equipment) had to be sacrificed to the Mun. I was so close to the surface when it impacted, that I could see the explosion from the command pod. But Bill, Bob & Jebediah safely returned to Kerbin & I made it a point to always double check fuel lines from then on.

It would be just as intrusive as the "There is debris on the Launchpad. Clear debris and Launch?" dialogue. So not very intrusive at all

Welcome to the forums! I took a crack at doing a flag for you. Full Size: Flag Size: Ship is by ddavis425 and was found via google search. I'm sure he'd have no problem with it being used, but should you choose to use my flag, you might want to make sure he's ok with it as I didn't get permission to use it in the first place Original ship was posted here on July 27, 2012. Kerbin and Mun Textures are from the game, everything else (lighting effects, star field, etc) was made by me.

First off, apologies if this has been posted already. If this is the case, mods feel free to lock/merge this thread. I was building in the VAB last night and went to save my craft that I had spent the better part of an hour working on when I, for some dumb reason, accidentally clicked the "new craft" button instead of the "save craft" button. Yes, I know they're in different locations and are different colors, but it still happened. To make matters worse, I had not yet test-launched it so there was no "Auto-Saved Craft" to fall back on. As this was the first time I had ever done something like this since picking KSP up way back in .12 (I think that was the version...?), I was pretty surprised to find there's no safety to that button. My suggestion here is another warning dialogue box along the lines of "Are you sure you want to do that? The current craft has not yet been saved." or something similar...if that's even possible... I know, I know. An error between the chair and keyboard was the real issue in this particular case, but as it stands, the "New Craft" button deletes whatever's in the VAB and gives you a black slate without any kind of fail-safe in place. You click that button, you get no take backs. I have not "tested" the SPH to see if the issue is there too, but I'm assuming it is as the two building are very similar.

I doubt it's an issue with your IP address. Quick question: are you logging in through the forum and then going to the store? Because the forum log-in is separate from the store log-in, so that could be the issue as well. Even if your forum username (email address) and password is the same as your store username (email address) and password, you should be logging in on this page: https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/kspstore/index.php I really don't know what the problem is, but in any case, the support staff will be able to help you better than I'll ever be able to. Good luck.

You'll just have to email support@kerbalspaceprogram.com and give them as much of your store info as possible. Like your store ID (if it's different from your forum ID), your store email (if it's different from your forum email) and possibly your password. I'm 100% sure the folks at KSP have that info on file and would be willing to hook you up with a new set of login details provided your info matches what they have. Other than that, there's really nothing anyone on the forums here can help you with.

If you can see the full face of the moon from the surface of Earth, would it not stand to reason that you can see the full face of the Earth from the surface of the moon? And yes, KSP's orbital mechanics are more than good enough to get accurate evidence. Though I don't know what good it will do you. Conspiro's only see evidence that supports their ideas.

Agreed. Moar boosters?

I rather like the throttle at 50% Saves me having to throttle up at the start of every launch. Now if you want to talk about why I have to turn SAS on every time...

By the way, /victorian Gentleman needs to be a thing. Can we please make that a thing? Here's hoping the remodeled aero parts mean a redesigned aerodynamic system too (looking at you, FAR).

That's my theory on that as well.

Because once you're in orbit, you're no longer fighting against gravity. Once you've put yourself in a stable orbit, doing more burns requires much less fuel as opposed to just going straight there. An example would be: changing 5m/s while on Burn-To-Target costs you 5 units of fuel. Changing 5m/s while in stable orbit costs you 2 units of fuel.*And then there's the issue of launch windows and rendezvous. If you don't leave at the right time or if there's more crafts coming with/docking to you, then you need time to set all that up. Plus, if the mission is more complex (like say you're launching a "mothership" that will do flybys and leave smaller satellites in orbit around various planets), you'll need more time to calculate maneuver nodes and such. *Numbers arbitrary in the case of this example. While the exact numbers aren't correct, the concept is. As long as you waited for the correct launch windows, it is possible to achieve the same fuel efficiency as going to orbit first. But by and large, its easier to launch when it's convenient to the player, not the planets, and that's another reason why we go to orbit first. Because of the Oberth effect. Putting yourself in a stable orbit means you have an Apoaps and Periaps. Burning at Periaps (point closest to planet) means it will take less energy to raise your Apoaps (because you're already at your fastest at Periaps) and by extension, less fuel. The 20 extra units of fuel it takes to get into stable orbit will actually save you the 100's of units of fuel you're wasting by burning-to-target. The idea is to get to the mun (or any target) with as much intertial assistance as possible. If you burn-to-target, you get zero help by means of gravity and are acting 100% on the internal power of your craft and aren't using your fuel reserves as efficiently as you could be. TL;DR Players like time to plan out missions and it's actually more fuel efficient in the long run to get to orbit first.

Currently, communication satellites are in the same vein as space stations: largely useless and pretty much just for show. You'll need a mod to give them a purpose like DeMatt suggested.

I have landed on the Mun many times and on Minmus only once. Beyond one robotic Eve probe, I've never been anywhere else.