KerbMav

But what if there is no other docked docking port on the craft?

As of now there is no known/possible way to do so. But what I always wanted to know: Is every players Kethane map the same? I watched a youtube video of someone having to rescan the Mun because of an update and his base was no longer in reach of a Kethane deposit - at least that is how I understood him. Else could the maps not be copied over to have a completed scan available?

It is enough to change a part or even an action group and the little guys sneak back into the pod ...

I dont think it poses any problem if everyone uses whatever soundeffect he likes at home, but could we get into trouble if we upload mods with sound from movies and such?

See, that was my question. Thank you!

Someone should make a list with the names of the science nodes as they are called in the cfg files - they are not exactly the same and have capitilization issues. Pick a part in the node you want to assign the new part to and open its part.cfg to chech the correct spelling. (youdidrestartthegameafterwards?)

Simply set a maneuver node, raise AP to orbit of moon, grab node an move it along your orbit, maybe adjust AP again, move it around along your orbit until you get an encounter. Make sure to align your orbits inclination if needed.

Ships are saved for every savegame seperately - copy them over if you started a new save. The ships folder not under saves is only for stock crafts - I think, so do not put your ships from an old save/version there. Stock crafts are disabled for career mode. Something?

The easiest way actually is to just take the last amount of thrust for a craft. Far easier than to let the game check which engines are activated/will be used and in which direction every single one is firing (can be quite an issue in bigger/docked crafts. But what I think would be possible, is a manual option. A button to recalculate the maximum thrust by simulating 100% thrust in the current configuration. Although do not look to me for such a develish task!

Depends on where the ship is coming from and what kind of data ...

The pic in the first post reminds me of my first contraptions - "It has to fly - just a bit more fuel ... some more engines here ... " But these last two look good to me.

Depends on insulation and quality of putty used.

But you should force them, it is such a helpful mod! It is even good for science crazy navigators: Yesterday I plotted a maneuver node - during flight in LKO (not much time acc. there) I got bored and looked for new EVAs - back in the craft I facepalmed, for my maneuver node was gone ... But! I made an alarm for it and KAC has a restore node function! The small things in life ... Just one thing: How do I stop it from adding a SOI alarm for my Kerbals only? Going EVA while travelling on a course with SOI changes does that.

If it is only for testing purposes, you could tell MM to add the tech lines to all parts in the game and assign the values for the starting node. You would have to move the cfg everytime you wanted to play for real though.

Yes, but being a coding noob I would not know where to find it - I never stumbled across the part.cfg for a Kerbal.

No no, I meant literally clicked on the window in your album ... You are clever to limit us to this one craft - I was thinking about using landing thrusters and more then one row of parachutes ...

To empty my brain into your thread once more: Can your mod limit the type of science data and their number (per biome, so every single experiment really) that can go into a pod/part? I am all for archiving log files: EVAs, crew reports, instrument (new-old science gizmo) readouts. Data loss for transmitting these remains debatable, but transmitting also requires lots of power and is therefore limiting at design and during flight, storing them is faster and makes the craft easier to built. Stuffing empty snack containers in the pod with surface samples as the mission goes on works for me too. They should not be transmittable at all, description of the rocks is done during EVA together with pretty pictures and diary entries. Having a container with limited space for unmanned probes to automatically collect samples, OK. If more samples are to be collected the probe either needs more containers or has to unload at a mothership. When it comes to goo containers and material bays I start to bite my lips regarding the ability using them more than once and if the results should be transmittable at all. As an upgrade this feels less like breaking the intended gameplay again. (An additional part with a stack of replacemant materials/goos - doubling as a stasis unit for the results.) Vision: All logs go into an archiving device, more disk space for storing multiple EVAs of the same area, more crew reports, lots of instrument readouts. Samples fit into the crew pods and additional containers - automatic sampling probes need their own container anyway. Experiments require a special part for the delicate storage needed. Capacity should not be unlimited. If this is not possible, multiple storage devices for more than one specific EVA (for instance) are still less demanding than multiple crew pods - which to do the same for the stock game currently. Progression: The need for a different (yet smallish) part and limiting their storage space makes science easier gradually while unlocking the tech tree/new parts, but still sets a different obstacle as to how many parts can easily be stuffed onto a craft. First only the pod for storage like it is now Then a part enabling the transfer of data (and stuff) Followed by a data storage device with space for multiples of the same science Later a secure container for the experiments of the science bays Somewhere inbetween sample collecters and containers for unmanned probes Tried to be brief, I swear, but also wanted to outline some details.

After clicking through the album I "clicked" close on the Flight Results popup "window" ... Now this will be hard! (For me at least.) I only ever bothered with pinpoint landings on bodies without an atmosphere.

So far I have launched survey rockets to land in different terrains on Kerbin, circled Kerbin a few times, built an exploration plane for more precise landings (which was a hell to land, so I shelved that), made a flyby of Mun and Minmus (did I ... ?), shot a probe into Kerbols orbit, sent Jeb into Kerbols orbit parallel to Kerbin for a few days and wasted weeks of his and my time aerobraking at to high an altitude over Kerbin - played it to safe obviously, but 3km/s at PE felt just to much at first. Science yield from this wasnt that plenty, flyby of Mun was to high to get any biomes (not enough fuel for more), though I can already read some of the 550pt. nodes in the tech tree, but still not bought them. Now with the seismic gizmo I should start landing probes on the Mun - somehow I dont feel able to land a can and bring it back yet, I miss the big tanks and engines and my designs often seem to lack dV for anything big - career mode gets me back to learn more, I think!

Is someone bold enough to pull topographical maps of Moon and Mun out of his hat and compare the elevation levels and differences? Although I do not think that a 1:1 representation of the Moon was intended. The craters look convincingly enough and the Moon picture shows some overlapping or one-in-the-other craters too - all depends which crater came first and which is bigger, so a newer crater not necessarily replaces the older one. That said: For me the old surface looked moonisher and I liked it better - not because of its topology but for the lighter color of the ground.

How did you find the surface sample Module btw.? No part could do this before, so I did not bother to look into part.cfg files.

With your nose?

Have you ever walked a Kerbal under the new landing legs?

I wrote about this happening a few days ago - but I honestly thought it would be a scaled down version of a Kethane drill ... how I erred!

Indeed.