Tokay Gris

Nah. Not really. Just something that fits into the whole thing. I did not test it before. That is the point. The FIRST test I have to do with a thingie that is "new" (to the RP-Kerbal) was "get it up and start it there". Yes, of course. They want that test done, so i do it. But it kind of breaks the feel of the game, I think. Let me put it like this: It's like somebody in my job would give me a drug to test. But would say "we only pay you if you test that drug in a bypass operation underwater on a space station with only an AMBU®-bag" (guess what my job is? ;-) I beg to differ. Especially in SciFi, you need some working explanation. In Fantasy, you can use the "deus ex machine"-method. But in good SciFi, you can't. Oh, you can, but then you end up writing bad SciFi. Look up "Xenu" sometime... THAT is really bad SciFi. You have a point anyway. Maybe this should rather go into the suggestion box. Some kind of consistency testing for the contracts.

Hey, I love this game. Of course it is still Alpha. And its not about "fleshing out". It is about the sense of such contracts. I mean, it would make sense if you first had to test a booster on the ground. Then test it with a "payload" of some kind. But as it is, I had to test boosters with a Kerbal on top. Jeb likes that, of course. But it does not make sense. I still am grumbling over that "test big booster at 1000m with 300 m/s speed"-contract. Who would ever do that? Untested on the ground, untested to lift anything... the first test is "lift it up, get it to a speed hard to accomplish, then start" (300 it was, I think, at 1000m? Can be done, of course... but WHY?)

So, maybe the new career mode isn't for me. Granted, I am just starting the career, so maybe it gets better. But the contracts I did get so far are a little... hm... unrealistic? Why on Kerbin would I want to test a big booster at an altitude of 1000m? Not that it can't be done. But what is the purpose of that? The first booster was tested on the ground. Makes sense. You can do that without ever lifting. Just test that thing. But to get that thing in the air with a specified velocity and THEN fire it? And why would I want to test an engine splashed down? Can be done, of course. As far as I know it doesn't even need fuel for that... Same goes for radial decouplers. I can just imagine the face of Jeb Kerman... "You want me to do WHAT?" I kind of reminds me of a hardcore diving certificate we once created... "under the ice... in a wreck... in a wetsuit... with your wife... all at once" So, I will try some more. Again, not that those contracts can't be done. They can. I did some of them. But so far I don't get it. So far cash is not the problem. Doability is not the problem. But my rational mind (sometimes too rational) can't think of a reason to do that. Maybe I should not have accepted such contracts. But this is still a game. I can't tell the guy giving the contract that his test is worthless. Well... Way back when science was introduced, I started a bunch of rockets, sent them to the celestial bodies and did missions... But those missions? Ah well. Just a rant. Maybe it gets better. Or maybe career mode just isn't for me.

Wait. What? You can take existing fuel lines and rearrange them on EVA? Trying that right now! That could actually safe the day! Later: No, that does not seem to work. I can't pick that fuel line up.

That is something I will have to do for that mission. Since I arrived at Moho with barely enough fuel for the return but wasted it on landing the cruiser, there is no other way. But maybe I can save the other missions. That should teach me to RTFM.... Thanks anyway!

To show you the problem: This is the cruiser and it has little more than fumes in the tanks. Beneath it is the kethane rover I brought with me. As you can see, the converter is on top with the kethane tank below. And the four fuel tanks radially attached. But no fuel lines from the converter to the tanks. So no fuel production.... P.S.: And before you ask: The RCS-tank is empty, since I thought about refueling capabilities for monopropellant as well. But what I did not anticipate was that radial fuel tanks with no direct connections get no feed from the converter. Oh well... RTFM, I guess.

You misunderstood me. But I was hoping for you, since until now, you always had the right answer. The problem is that I do not have fuel. I have kethane. But the fuel tanks that the kethane converter is supposed to fill are not directly attached to the converter via fuel lines and are not getting filled. If I could connect just one to the converter, I could transfer fuel just fine. But I do not have fuel.

Damn! The mission progressed so well... Brought a scienceprobe, a lander a cruiser that I could actually set down on the surface and a kethane rover. And now, when I want to start refueling the cruiser (short on fuel as always with Moho), I find out I can't, because there are no fuel lines between the converter and the tanks (radially attached). So, this mission - as so many before with Moho - needs a rescue mission. Because without the kethane rover there is not enough fuel. Or does it? Well, it does anyway, because on that mission, I did not bring any KAS-pipes. So I can't even try that. Not sure it even works. But would be worth a shot. I do - however - have three rovers of the same type on their way to Jool. And on that mission, I have the KAS-pipes. Does anyone know if those rovers are space junk or if I can fix that problem with KAS-pipes? Will test....

Again: Many thanks! You saved one third of four major missions! (Moho, Dres, Jool and Duna... all in the works and all with identical satellites.)

Wah! Did it! Thanks a lot. I have about ten more of this line of satellites on route to different destinations and was starting to get a sinking feeling that all of them would be failures.... I zoomed in real close, moved the center of view (middle button) and was able to start that sensor somehow from below....

I am currently executing a mission to Moho. Got there all right, although a bit short on fuel. But that is not the issue. I had three satellites with me. And this one gives me trouble: I can't activate the sensor. To be more specific, I can't click on it. This is a S.C.A.N.-Sat sensor, but I have no idea how I can get it to work... Any ideas? Rendezvous and try on EVA? Modify some Hotkey (which I didn't do yet)? Mark that scan as "failed" and forget it?

Two ways: One has been described. Get out and push. Depending on your orbit. Never tried that myself. The second one is more complicated: Build a rocket with an empty seat (either a two-seater with one crew or a one-seater without crew but with a computer), rendezvous in orbit and pick ol' Jeb up. Or - if your vessel has a docking port - bring some fuel up.

Thanks! Found it.

Since I use a kind of "save the whole save" as a failsafe, this question arose. The kethane deposits are different in each save, yes? IIRC they are "created" when you start a new save. But are they also different in a copy of an existing save? And where are they stored? In the persistence-file?

This baby can land and lift off from Mun, Minimus, Ike, Bop, Pol, Val, Eeloo, Dres AND Moho. Not sure about Gilly, but should work. Granted, liftoff from Moho is a pain and far from efficient, if fully fueled. But it does get to orbit. Basic idea is to rendezvous on the ground with a kethane rover, fill up the tanks and then continue on through the kerbal system. Here is Jeb during the test-drive to Mun. Way to the top is quite long. And to topic: All nuclear engines.

Great! Thanks, will try that one. Apparently old but seems to be still working. The starting vessel is huge. But the vessel that I actually noticed this was not that big. It does employ a few mods but none of them old (except maybe Mechjeb. It seems I am always a bot behind on the newest dev-version. 2.2.1 it says.) The rest is KAS, Kethane and the ScanSat. My suspicion is that the latter is causing the problem. Like the ISA MapSat did a while back.

I currently have two problems. One in the VAB and one in actual gameplay. The VAB-problem is this: I designed a modular spaceship. Not "modular" in that it is assembled in orbit, but modular that it consists of parts that are combined through subassemblies in the VAB. So now I have a nice ship that actually works and does what it is supposed to. Except that the "root" part (the part you can click on and move the whole ship in VAB without SHIFT) is a superfluous decoupler on top. And that I'd like to get rid of without rebuilding the whole ship. Is there a way to do this? I seem to remember a thread about this but somehow can't find it again. The second problem is in gameplay. With some ships, the game freezes every few seconds for a second or two. A while back there was a similar problem but then it was the ISA Mapsat. Which I don't have on those vessels. But what I do have - and will test next - is a SCANSAT part. Could it be that this is the problem? It is no mapping part, just the SCAN MapTraq.

That would not be a problem. I have a rig on Mun as well. The tankers are a bit bigger (more engines), but otherwise it is the same. Thats all? Really? Wow.... Since this vessel is supposed to have enough delta-V even if started from LKO, these 100 m/s "won't fatten the cabbage". (Deutsch: Davon wird der Kohl auch nicht fett....) And if the reason for mission failure is a mere 100 m/s, I would be surprised immensely. (I DO know that Apollo 11 was a lot closer to failure than 100 m/s... but this is not NASA. This is KSP... And "Delos Interplanetary" at that. I usually overdo delta-V) Thanks!

Problem is this: I do know that a trajectory from Minimus (refueling there), passing Kerbin, burning at that periapsis will get me to Jool (and the joolian moons) a lot cheaper than starting from Kerbin LKO. But how on Kerbin am I going to plan that? First, I need a window for a Kerbin transfer, I figured. Then before that take the plunge towards Kerbin from Minimus at just the right moment that the vector leaving Kerbin is parallel to Kerbins motion within the kerbal system. There the problem starts: What position needs Minimus in relation to Kerbol be in? The timing is not that important, since Minimus' sidereal period is 12 Kerbin days, so I should still get a decent window for Jool within those 12 days. And the second problem: How do I compensate for Minimus' inclination? I come in at 6° relativ to the plane of ecliptic (IF the point of departure does not happen to be at the point where Minimus' plane intersects with the plane of ecliptic. So say: between 0° and 6°). Do I need to change that during the plunge towards Kerbin? That seems to be the best idea. I won't be able to get a 0° inclination, but that should not be necessary. Important is the vector I come out of. If I leave Kerbins SOI roughly within the plane, I should then get a fairly level inclination relative to Kerbol, am I? Any tips on that mission profile? What should I look out for? I do have a kethane rig stationed on Minimus, including two huge refueling tankers that can land there. I even suspect I could land the whole vessel as is on Minimus (except the remaining lifting stage, of course. The center of the asparagus. I was planning to refuel that and use the 800 m/s it gives (since I have to refuel anyway, so that is just one more tanker) for the first leg out of Kerbins SOI. So the plan is to get that vessel (if refueled just short of 300 tons) out to Minimus, refuel it there using the kethane rig, then do the ascribed trajectory.

True. But I think that can't be blamed on MechJeb. You can't expect that one mod compensates for a thing another mod does.

Thanks. I am not sure it is MechJeb. MechJeb calculates the nodes correctly (I guess), but I think it has something to do with the changed weight and therefore the nodes are wrong. But I will mail them.

My experience is that asparagus landers cause problems because the changing mass and TWR cause a hell of a lot of trouble. It kind of works if the TWR of the stages gets higher. Which means, if you through off empty tanks without engines it works.

Did nail the problem. I don't really know why it is the way it is, but the solution is simple: Don't use Hyperedit. I tested landers that did work before, filled them up with hyper edit and they landed WAY off. They did land, however. Using MechJeb. If I did not fill them up with hyper edit, they worked dandy. Just landed an almost empty fuel tanker that still had roughly 35 tons of mass on Mun. Difference from target: 24 meters. So I assume that the problem is somewhere in the predictions that would have to compensate for the changed mass but don't. And somehow does not compensate for the sudden translocation to another body. The good thing is that with this I am save. I just used hyperedit in the testing phase, not in the "working" save. In the "working" save, I did everything the classical way. Bring vessels to orbit, bring tankers to orbit, refuel, the works. So this particular problem - my guess is the rendezvous problem is the same - should not come up in the "working" save. The bad thing is that testing is not really possible. I actually have to bring that lander to Jool and land. And then rendezvous. Well, well.

I just don't get it. I am testing other designs right now and for some reason unknown to me, they are off by a very long shot. I tested designs that worked before without a hitch, MechJeb did land them within 10 meters of intended target. But it doesn't anymore. Now it is off by 5 to 10 KILOMETERS. And I just don't know why. There is one thing I still have to test. Then I would say I nailed the problem. But so far I do not understand what is happening here.

That I thought of. It isn't. Trying right now a different design... I do have a suspicion. Can't really believe that this specific part is the problem. But am testing anyway.