RexKramer

Watching.

I've had good results using the Claw to secure vehicles in cargo bays. I put a claw on the rover, drive up the ramp, and clamp on to the front of the cargo bay. This has worked well even for fairly heavy rovers, like miner/refiner units. One downside is that I haven't figured out how to build ships with an active Claw attachment, so I have to launch the rover separately, then drive it onto the aircraft. Works fine, but would be a problem loading onto a verticall launched rocket. That would probably also work if the Claw was mounted to the aircraft instead of the rover, haven't tried that yet.

That is a really interesting question, unfortunately I don't have a copy of 1.0.5 to test that out on. Here's a couple of suggestions though- 1. Make a BACKUP copy of your 1.0.5 save file, in case something goes wrong. 2. As omelaw stated, probably simplest to bring your entire roster back to Kerbin. Not sure if this is completely necessary, as you are editing the save file anyway, but will make things easier to diagnose if you run into problems. 3. The Astronaut Complex is limited in how many Kerbals you can have, until you upgrade it. So dumping a large roster of Kerbals into a new career could potentially have issues. The Kerbal 'limit' in the AC can be exceeded in certain situations, and you may be able to edit your roster into a new career with no issues. Having your original game backed up would be wise however, just in case. 4. In a previous version, there was an issue when a Kerbal was fired or otherwise removed from the roster, but had completed a milestone before being fired or killed. I think that issue was cleared up, but another reason to have a backup of your original save file in case issues arise. Excellent question! Please report back with information regarding how your transfer turned out, it will certainly be helpful to other players.

I've used Goo canisters or radial RCS tanks in the past. The basic aircraft wheels work great too, makes it easy to reposition if needed. Honestly, now I normally land on the engines. I find if I can't get my descent rate less than 2.0 m/s then having landing gear isn't going to help much anyway- because of the bouncing and attitude changes.

When you're conducting burns to transfer from one body to another, you want to have maximum thrust. You lose efficiency with long, slow burns because less burn time is spent at the ideal burn location. As your 5 engines have nearly identical ISP, I would certainly run all 5 for transfer burns. Also, during landing a similar principle applies. A 'suicide' burn is usually more efficient than a long, slow burn down to the surface (although also more risky..). Since you said control is difficult with all 5 engines going, perhaps you could use all 5 engines during most of the descent, turning off 3 engines for the final touchdown phase. When I send a huge mining/refining operation out to Jool, it's normally very under-powered, with 2-4 LV-Ns. The nukes are very efficient during long burns. However, the burn to escape Kerbin is very inefficient with the low TWR. So, for the Kerbin escape burn I bring a Mainsail. The Mainsail allows a more efficient escape from Kerbin, and makes it easy to get a boost from the Oberth effect. After I've left Kerbin and am coasting to Jool, I jettison the Mainsail, as it's no longer needed.

It looks like there was a fairing over the cupola, I'm wondering if that is causing your issue. If you still have the vessel saved in the VAB, try the following: Launch the same vessel, and look to see if the cupola requirement is checked while sitting on the launchpad. If the cupola requirement wasn't checked, return to the VAB and remove the fairing. Send it back to the launchpad and again see if the cupola requirement is checked. Please report back. If the fairing is causing the issue, it shouldn't be. Posting a link to your craft file may be helpful.

You are not clogging up the board. You had an excellent question, which was clearly stated. Additionally, the title of your question clearly reflected the content. That makes it easier for other players with the same question to find an answer using the forum search function. Welcome to the forums, and welcome to KSP!

I had been using a ferry which could transport 8 Kerbals, and had 7800dv. I ditched the two Hitchhiker pods for a single MK3 cargo compartment which holds 16 Kerbals. Dv dropped to 7500, which is still more than enough to get to Jool and back, especially with a fuel operation at Bop. The ship is only 38 parts, I'm trying hard to keep my part counts as low as possible. Electric is a single large battery and two RTGs (only need one, the second is for 'just in case'). There's a single RCS tank. Two large docking ports and a single medium docking port. I added a single 200kW radiator to help keep the 4 LV-Ns cool. Eventually heat still becomes a problem, but it takes a very long time. I also added a single antenna, again a 'just in case' item. The first couple of photos are docking with a SSTO to transfer Kerbals to/from the surface of Kerbin. With all the RCS ports I used, it's very easy to dock. I didn't even put any RCS on the spaceplane, the heavy ferry takes care of all the docking work no problem. Works great, thanks again Warzouz for the idea. As long as I'm sending a ship to Jool, might as well take as many Kerbals as possible. My flight plan has generally been: Start from Minmus orbit with full fuel, then drop to a Kerbin PE of ~300km for the burn to Jool. With the initial low thrust to weight ratio, a Kerbin PE of less than 250km isn't really efficient because it takes too long to complete the burn. About 300km PE gives me enough time to complete the burn to Jool. After dropping from Minmus, it takes next to nothing to escape Kerbin, so almost your entire burn is raising your Kerbol AP out towards Jool. My first trip hit flybys of Laythe, Tylo, and Vall, followed by a stop at Bop for refueling, and finally a landing at Pol before departing for home. However, Bop is a pain because it's off kilter from the rest of the moons. So my second trip had flybys of Laythe, Tylo and Vall, then I went out to Pol (landing) before going to Bop for a refuel. Worked much better, and I was able to use Tylo to get my orbit straightened back out before departing for Kerbin. I have two of these things going now, and am about to launch a third one because I don't like waiting for a ship to get back from Jool. The spaceplane isn't very efficient, but it is easy to get to orbit, and only costs about 6K funds in fuel to get 16 Kerbals to and from orbit.

Well, to dig a little deeper- What mods are you using? Which platform? (Windows, Mac, Linux) Latest version, 1.0.5? A screenshot may be helpful. Also, if you are using sub-assemblies or merging ship files, this sometimes causes nodes to disappear. Anything you can do to narrow down the problem may be helpful. I tried a basic vessel in the VAB, with a command pod, the fuel tank, and finally an engine on the bottom. Does this simple arrangement work properly?

Try holding down the ALT button (modifier key) while trying to place the engine. Holding down ALT forces the part to attach to the node, instead of trying to surface attach.

That makes sense, and I see how it could be accomplished since the Twin Boar is such a long engine. Used to be a problem with engines mounted above the COM would not gimbal the correct way (ex. Sky crane type landers..), that was fixed a while ago thankfully. To eliminate the problem described here, the game would need to use the engine's thrust point(s) to determine if it is above or below the vessel's COM, not the engine's COM as it appears is occurring now. Thanks for the reproduction tip blowfish.

Warzouz, that's a great idea, which I plan on borrowing! I usually have a mining/refueling operation set up at Bop or Pol, so that will make my adventure easier to do.

If you have anything attached to the capsule near the hatch, this can sometimes cause Kerbals to be flung rapidly away from the capsule when exiting. Sometimes even small items mounted to the attachment point on top of the capsule can cause this effect. The issue has been mostly mitigated in 1.0.5, but still occasionally occurs. Seems to be more likely to occur if objects are mounted near the hatch.

Take a look at #5977 (and corresponding linked bug), which is actually new in 1.0.5. I wasn't able to duplicate the results the OP had here, but the lack of roll authority in the twin boar (single centerline installation) is present in 1028. The engine gimbals properly, even with opposite gimbaling with roll input, but no roll moment occurs (make sure you disable reaction wheels to test...) #5977 has a better explanation of the cause of the roll issue. Also, howdy NathanKell!

There is a known bug with the Twin Boar, which results in the engine having no roll authority despite the nozzles gimbaling in the correct direction. However, the result you describe is different than the reported bug. If possible, could you please post a screenshot of the vessel you are seeing this with?