refsmmat

shouldn't it have the upward-pointing landing solid motors?

Thanks for the tip I turned all of them off on Saturday before adding the launchpad, but the Launchpad SAS is probably still on.

I've got a Mun Base with a string of 12 pylons connecting smelter, auger, telescope parts converter, launchpad and Interstellar ISRU. They are mostly linear, with the launchpads branching off from the string midway through. Each pylon has 2 pipe ends and 2 strut ends. There is some vibration in the system and some of the pylons are hovering a little, but they don't seem about to explode right away. I guess the object of building an extraplanetary launchpad is to eventually replace your Mun base with another base somewhere else. I think I can rely on KAS to support the current base until I can use Launchpads to build parts for a new base that is more planned, and that can be more mobile. Connecting 2.5m modules with rover wheels and Clampotron Sr.'s might be even less vulnerable to physics than KAS... then I can move the new base out of render range of the pylon base, except for top-ups. What is the maximum safe number of pylons?

Is there something unusual about the LER Rover drive controls? A and D keys can turn the wheels, and the wheel axis can be crabbed 90° for sideways motion, but I can't drive the wheels using the W and S or I and K keys. Should I have set up action groups? Although I didn't, can I set up action groups after having landed on the Mun?

Saturn V did not "more often than not" have the inboard engine fail due to pogo. Once again, that's a feature, not a bug. On both S-1C and S-II inboard engine was scheduled to cut out before the four outboard engines to soften the impact of staging events. On Apollo 6, S-II engines #2 and #3 failed due to pogo complications, neither of them were the inboard engine.engine failures due to pogo. On Apollo 13 the inboard S-II inboard engine did cut out ahead of schedule due to pogo. The other 11 Saturn V launches didn't have any engine failures due to pogo.