Gargamel

But, @MarvinKitFox, You do bring up a good point in one aspect. I never did account for rotation in my initial Challenge. I think I might amend the challenge to include setting up a target within, say, 50 km of the launch platform. But I also have some ideas that may pan out for hitting the launcher. Of course, I also think shooting straight up, and waiting for the launcher/target to complete one rotation is also a valid score. But please, next time, before you accuse somebody of being a cheat, which I take very seriously, consider their motives. What could I possibly gain from cheating in the initial attempt at a challenge? Let alone my own challenge?

Sit on it for a bit. Somebody more knowledgeable might come around in the (US) daylight hours.

Try the kerbal approach to this. Quicksave first. Click release, the unarm, then time warp and see if they drift apart or explode. If they drift apart, good. If they explode, reload the quicksave. Probably won't work, but it's worth a shot. Little bird in the back of my head is telling me this is an old old bug. Never grab a port with a Klaw. Grabbing a Kerbal with a Klaw used to shatter the universe IIRC, but they fixed that one.

Errr.... If you actually read the post, It says that 1) I did use hyper edit, to place the launcher, and 2) When you time warp after hyper editing a vessel, sometimes it gets hit with a glitch that shifts it's orbit somewhat, and I stated that happened and that I was supposed to land to the west of my location, and because of such I am not scoring that entry, but using it as a "proof" of concept. Hell, before the glitch hit, you can see in the pics I posted my orbit was going to slam me into the side of a mountain, way short of the target. Perhaps you should read first, accuse second.

Of course this is do-able. I've just invented suicide by ICBM. Laughing at myself now, thinking this was a novel idea. Still a fun idea for a challenge.

This is basically putting the DLC on layaway. We get an annual update, but we pay monthly for it. At the end of the year, we've paid a bit more for the DLC than we would have in a one time payment, depending on the costs. But a paid monthly subscription for an offline, single player game is ludicrous to me.

If you put the panels on one end of the station, but have them pointing out radially, and then orient the station normal / anti-normal, the sun will always be at the same angle to the panels in relationship to their axis of rotation, so they would never rotate. Like so: It would probably work if you put them in other spots along the station too, as long as the station is oriented the same. But for locking the actual rotation of the panels, I know there's some mods out there that supply fixed panels for stations. As for locking stock panels, I'm guessing a module manager guru might have a good suggestion for that.....

HOLY FLYING JEB, IT WORKS! First Attempt! 1500+ meters! But I'm not going to count my score, as the hyper edit orbit glitch struck, and shifted the arrow from it's initial trajectory, to one farther around the moon, so initially I was going to fall short. But as a proof of concept, it's totally do-able!! With some tweaks, it should be a very close shot! That's a bunch of parts from mods, just to make the base easier to assemble. The tip of the arrow is an NRAP adjustable mass payload. Only needed 3 sepatrons. Launch! Un-glitched initial orbit: Just cleared the mountains after launch: Here I come! Flyby! "Landing" just over 1500 meters away: Now I'm looking for someone to help me draw a badge. Perhaps a target with a ship crashing through it? Thinking about giving it away to anybody who can hit within 500 meters!

Hey LGG, Another suggestion. It might be most appropriate as an add-on to this mod, or just worked into this one. If I'm sending up a shuttle vessel to a station, R&R will populate the ship as it sees fit. But I only need lets say a pilot and 2 scientists, but the 2 scientists weren't in the original crewing of the ship by R&R. It'd be nice if there was an optional window that I could specify the number of each role to fill the vessel. So I could click 1 pilot and 2 scientists, and R&R would pick the most appropriate ones based on it's criteria. Also perhaps in that same box, being able to toggle the level priority. So if I'm crewing a mission specifically to gain XP, I could have it pick the 1 pilot and 2 scientists that are the lowest level that meet the rest of the R7R criteria. Or each role would have it's own toggle. ------ One other note. I've had to add a lone probe core, named AAA, to my save directory. The first vessel loaded in the load screen for launching directly to the pad from the KSC scene was being populated correctly by R&R. But after scrolling down and selecting a different vessel, with the same command pod, the crew would be different. I think it might be ignoring the first crew assigned, and working farther down the priority list. The AAA vessel prevents R&R from selecting any crew until I have picked the correct ship for launching. I can open a bug report if needed.

Don't hurt yourself on my account! I knw you're busy with everything, including Real Life. But yes, 1.3.1 please :D. And what constitutes a minor change? Every time I've made changes, it results in a numbering reset, which can get confusing if I have multiple Vessel-01's in flight. But if I can identify what the limit is, I should be able to make changes under that limit, launch and revert, and make more changes, yes?

That is also viable too, where the cost of transferring the payload and the tug would be too high. For like a Duna station, you could have a dedicated tug docked at the station (with an assortment of docking ports and claws available to it). Then using a smaller transfer vehicle, send the payload to Duna, and catch it with the tug, then have it placed on the station.

LGG, I've been using this fork in 1.3.1. Just now I brought up what would have been the 10th flight of a vessel, and it number it -0A. Which I thought was odd, I didn't recall setting the number system to Hex. This is the first listing of Myros-0A in the logs: [LOG 22:17:40.728] 5/1/2018 10:17:40 PM,AmpYear,OnVesselRollout [LOG 22:17:40.730] RenameVessel, vessel.landedAt: LaunchPad [LOG 22:17:40.734] template: {[name]}{-[launchNumber]}{ (Bloc [blocNumber])} [LOG 22:17:40.736] vesselName: Myros-0A [LOG 22:17:40.912] Flight State Captured I reverted to the KSC scene, and when I went to open the settings menu for Launch Numbering, the game crashed to Desktop. Now I'm doing another 15 minute load of the game to see what the issue is. Also a request for you or @Damien_The_Unbeliever, instead of doing bloc numbers, if I do a very minor edit to the vessel, I'd like it to just continue with the numbering scheme in the name. Optional perhaps?

I missed your initial post, but no, I don't have this issue. I would suspect from the deafening silence nobody else does either. So something's wonky on your end. The first thing that comes to mind is a pop up blocker. Sometime around then they fixed the wiki "Accept TOS" pop-up. Maybe something is weird on your end with a pop up blocker that is preventing the whole page from loading. Try allowing that page to show pop ups, and possibly dump your cookies and such. Perhaps @ManeTI might have some insight.

As emphasized above by @JadeOfMaar, it's Kerbal SPACE Program. Most of the engines are included to facilitate the building towards space planes. Show me a prop powered spaceplane, and you'll have my backing. The vast majority of the stock game is geared towards space flight, and that is the design model Squad seems to be working under.

There is speculation that the 'rushed' release of 1.4 and the DLC was due to the end of TTI's fiscal year. They wanted to get it out and show the sales for this year. I think if the timing had been better, the QA round would have happened.

I am one of those. There was no incentive for me to do so, and the offered expired a long time ago apparently.

That's why I think I switched from sandbox. There was no drive, no onus to progress. Contracts and suh are helping with that. I think I also got frustrated with the science gadgets not doing anything!

No, it doesn't. The Tug Boat that puts each module there does. Each section of my stations only have a handful of parts, the rest of the workings are on the detachable, reusable, recoverable space tug launch vehicle. Consider each station module a payload to be delivered, not a vessel itself. The only thing I've ever had to add was occasionaly some RCS ports on the docking end of large unwieldy sections. Step 1) Build your complete station in the VAB. Include Konstruction ports. 2) Remove all the modules you will be launching later and save them as sub-assemblies. 3) Add a launcher to the remaining core of the station. The core will need the vitals you listed above, but usually won't need RCS, just SAS to keep it from wiggling. You will launch directly into your desired orbit. De-orbit the launcher/engine sections, this thing is intended to be stranded. 4) Make a SPACE TUG. Go heavy on RCS and SAS wheels, it'll need the tourque. Top it off with a docking port of your choice, and have a fairing right below that. 5) Slap about 30t (or the desired amount, I have a whole line of tugs designed for different payload masses) of dead payload on top of it to allow you to build an appropriate launcher to match: 6) Remove the dead payload , and save the vessel: 7) Now anytime you want to launch a module to a station, open up this vessel first. Grab one of your subassemblies from the sub assembly menu. Notice how few parts it has, and for me this is an overly complicated module, as it is for a landed munar base: 8) Now, as you have previously found out, Konstruction ports don't work as intended if they are the root part. And in the sub-assembly you have just built, they are just that. So click the re-root tool, and re-root to the part you want to attach to the Tug: Notice how the cupola module is now the root, and attachable, part in this sub-assembly. Drop that onto the top of the SPACE TUG. 9) Now save it as something else other than SPACE TUG. You want the space tug save to be a naked vessel you can call up at any time. 10) If desired, add RCS ports to the far end end of the module to dock. This will help with docking and translation. 11) Add fairings to flavor. Because this module was short and light enough, I added a second one, so I could build the station symmetrically, and reduce the number of launches. Notice I connected each cupola directly to the docking ports, without using a second port. If you are adding a module that has docking ports on the end, you can do the same thing. Non similar docking ports (ie a jr connected to a Sr) are coupled, not docked, but will work just fine in flight. But once they are separated, they cannot be redocked: 12) LAUNCH! Since your Tug has all the vitals in it, your modules won't need probe cores, and the tug will handle all the flight operations. If possible, launch directly to rendezvous. If not, plan ahead so your tug with the payload will have enough DV to rendezvous, dock and be recovered (if desired). 13) After rendezvousing with the target (I'm using the first module as my target, I don't have any valid targets in flight at the moment), dock with the target: 14) After getting the desired alignment, and docking, you can then weld the Konstruction ports. Then select "Decouple Node" from the Tug's Port menu, and decouple the tug: 15) Profit. If you noticed I have chutes on all my stages. I use StageRecovery to recover all the spent ascent stages, and with the tug also being recoverable (aside from the docking port and fairing, which tend to burn up in re-entry), the vessel is almost 100% recoverable. Initially, it is a little time consuming to build the tug. But once it's done, it's just plug and play for launching each module. In my design, I adjust the thrust limiter on the SRB's to get the desired TWR for the variety of payload masses I will encounter. This method of orbital construction keeps costs and part counts to a minimum. Check to make sure you are using the correct version of Kon for the version of KSP you are running. CKAN lists Konstruction for me, but I am still running 1.3.1.

If there was a dislike button.... I have 15 minute load times..... And a '65 Mustang with a a 500hp engine is a 50 year old car, but still fast as heck.

Absolutely! Some of my best images of the moon were taken at half moon. The mountains and ridges stand out very distinctly on the horizon. I'd also suspect that it is strong enough to take a look at Jupiter and Saturn, One of which is just a bit to the west of the Full moon tonight. I'm guessing it's Jupiter from the brightness, but I haven't looked it up. If Galileo could resolve the major moons of Jupiter, and the rings of Saturn, you should be able to also, I'd like to hope. Better yet, until you get some experience, or a Mentor with experience, just don't look at the sun.

But they do explode upon landing on the rare occasion..... (OMG.... I went to google "Landing Gear exploding upon Landing".... majority of the first two pages of results link back to the forums LOL).

Why May 10th?

Kerbonaut Archery Challenge! (Updated: May 13 2018) The Challenge: "Launch" a vessel from the surface a body (without atmosphere), travel around the body, and "land" as close as possible to the launch pad. Either the "arrow" must complete one orbit, or the launcher one rotation of the moon. Rules: 1)The vessel shall be uncontrolled, aside from SAS (No RCS). No orbital maneuvering engines of any sort. 2) It gets one burn initiated at launch, and no corrections of any sort, no throttling either. Burn starts, burn ends, nothing else. 3) No changing the direction or Angle of Attack of the arrow once it has been launched. The burn must take place along one vector. 4) If an entry is of the "straight up" variety, to keep pedants out of the game, the launcher must complete a day/night cycle to count as having completed a rotation. 5) All mods are allowed that do not violate the spirit of this challenge. Hyperedit and Vessel Mover are practically encouraged. No editing of the craft or pad once the 'arrow' has been fired. Basically it has to act like an arrow shot from a bow, as in the picture. Questionable entries will be debated by the masses, disqualified entrants will be fed to the Kraken. Scoring: Distance from Launch point upon first landing, in meters. Hitting the pad counts as a perfect score (0). Scoring Modifiers: Mass drivers will receive a .25 multiplier bonus. Manned Arrows will receive a .9 multiplier bonus. Vessels that do not use any positional editing (launched from Kerbin, landed, and then fired), will receive a .5 multiplier bonus. Launching from the pole of a body will incur a 2x penalty. All modifiers are cumulative, so a non edited, manned, mass driver would receive a .1125 multiplier to their score. (These multipliers are subject to change as true difficulty becomes more apparent). Since the "landing" will be more of "Extreme Lithobraking", try to grab a screen shot right before or during impact. Only the first impact will count, and distances in the screen shot after the impact will not, so spam that F1 key. It is encouraged to have an altitude over terrain indicator visible in the screen shots so we can confirm the validity of the claim. Near miss fly bys will get lots of oohs and ahhs, but no bonus points. Only impacts count for scoring. SCORE BOARD: 1) @DoctorDavinci 5900

Simplify your design. I've thought your stations overly complicated for a while now, but haven't said so, cause we all play our games the way we want to. But break it down into a simpler design. I'd recommend jumping over to sandbox for this. Get a simple, orbitally constructed station in space. Figure out what else you want to add, add a few of them, work out the bugs. Work these bugs out when there's only a couple bugs to work out. If you go for the grand design, then you'll have a harder time figuring out what exactly is the issue. But also, In my experience, I've learned that high part count stations are bad. Annoyingly bad. I've made beautiful, complicated stations with 300 parts. Lights, science, antennas, moving dohickeys, etc. It may take a bit to load, and the FPS isn't that great, but it works. Then I dock the first 50 part shuttle to it. Ok, I can deal with this. Then a 60 part ISRU. Umm this is getting ugly. Then another 40 part shuttle. OK, this is unplayable now. Keep the stations simple. They don't need many features, a lot of the ships that dock with them will bring redundant items with them. Set a simple list of goals to accomplish with your station, and see how simple of a vessel you can make, while still reaching those goals. It will make launch and construction easier, and improve overall gameplay. Once you've gotten a knack for station building, take those lessons you've learned over to the career game.

Step 1.... Step 2... Outa likes for the day (Already!?), so have a quote instead SS.