Galane

And with the changes, MechJeb can't land on it, and it lands beside the KSC runway instead of on it. "What?! They've gone metric again without telling us?"

My first and so far only one is called Plane the First.

A Kerbal one can use the docking autopilot on to get back to the ship when he goes dutchman on an EVA.

What'd be nice is if KSP did dynamic loading of parts and textures as the focus changed from location to location, vehicle to vehicle. I could do without the spinning parts in VAB and SPH to have more RAM for the game to work with, and for more mods. Working with data larger than the available memory has a long history in computers. Overlays, paging, 'windows' as used by the old Lotus/Intel/Microsoft Expanded Memory System or LIM-EMS that used rapid paging in and out of single 64K chunks of up to megabytes of RAM. I had an 80286 with 12 megabytes, running Windows 3.1 in Standard Mode. Only 512K of that was on the mainboard. The rest was on 16bit ISA cards. These days I routinely work with single image files larger than that. Look back at what CP/M software could do with a mere 64K RAM for the OS, the program running and the program's data. The original Word Star (written by one guy in a few months, in Z80 machine code!) was extremely well optimized so it could be used to work with document files larger than 64K, and do it all at decent speed from floppy disks. Nearly 4 gigs of space to work with is positively gigantic, if managed well.

Alan Aerospace Recycling and Packaging. All our aerospace parts are recycled, and the assembly building doubles as a cardboard box factory. The elements of the heraldic thingy of some supposed long ago ancestor of mine. A cockatrice, which fits perfectly with the mish-mash nature of the company, and two sable chevrons on an argent field.

And here it is, the 16,000 unit Large Rover. Nobody could think of a name, the only thing the staff could agree on was that the name shouldn't have a K in it. "What are we going to call it? With the horizontal Kethane tank and the only pieces of the Kleveland 2M/3M design we kept were the girders and end wheels, can't call it Kleveland 4M." "It's a big rover." "Not a clue." "Quite large, in fact." "I got nothing." "Positively huge, biggest booster AARP has built yet." "Nothing from nothing, carry the nothing..." "It's a really large rover." "It's 10 minutes 'till closing time, how about we just call it 'Large Rover' for now? All in favor?" *All say* "AYE!" Large Rover landing. Not wanting a repeat of the previous rover-on-rover action, I clicked a little distance away, which proved to be 2.5KM and only a few meters outside a crater. Whew! So I drove over to take a group photo. Disabled the four front wheels then used periodic tapping on S to keep the speed in check, only using the brakes below 1.5M/sec. The booster, but with a 16K Kethane tank on top. With Large Rover onboard it's 499 parts and lags a bit until the first stage drops. My first use of Quantum struts. They hold the third stage rock solid with only 4. I put six on top of the third stage to hold the rover, which is perched on with a radial attachment so the connection is pretty small. Many of those parts are struts binding the first stage together. I tried using Quantum struts but for some reason they wouldn't keep it together and using them to bind the first and second stages together only resulted in them popping the connections when physics kicked in and the rocket settled on the pad. So back to strut spamming. Woohoo! In orbit with some juice still left in the second stage. I can fill that up and go places! I can go to... oh poo. I forgot to install a Kethane converter. Hmmm, still have some headroom with the lighter payload, could pull those stretchy tanks out a bit and still get to orbit with the second stage on... The second stage is the core of the first stage used to launch all the previous rovers and the big scanner satellite to Minmus. Hooray for the new subassembly feature! Made the launcher build much easier for Large Rover since I already had a powerful stage that won't rip itself apart, only had to debug the first stage. But for some reason, one of those Skippers and its orange tank will sometimes rip loose with the heavy Large Rover as the payload.

Here's Large Rover on landing approach to Mun.

The bridge, it tantalizes the adventurous nature of the common Kerbal. They yearn to risk its tight clearances and sharp turn - in any sort of vehicle that doesn't depend on ground contact for support and steering. 10 points for flying under it with any sort of vehicle and not crashing into any of the R&D buildings. +50 for a manned vehicle. +75 for a rotary propeller vehicle. +100 for a jet propelled vehicle. +500 for a liquid fueled rocket propelled vehicle. +700 for a solid rocket propelled vehicle. +1000 for doing it without wings. (Not for slow hovers with a VTOL vehicle.) Wings may be installed for the approach then jettisoned, which could make the next score a bit difficult. +500 for a safe landing anywhere after going under the bridge. or +550 for a safe landing back on the KSC runway or launchpad you started from. No points off for taxiing from the launchpad or runway to a different takeoff position, but the takeoff must be outside the R&D center. Highest speed under the bridge is trump for ties in points. Note: Propulsion modifiers NOT cumulative. Use the number for the highest valued propulsion installed, which must be active during the flight under the bridge. The propulsion scored must be the primary motive power at the time of the passage, so simply sticking a couple of Seperatrons on a prop plane doesn't score 700 points.

Compared to landing legs that have been used on real spacecraft, these have far too much travel. The two Mars Viking landers had crushable parts to absorb the last bit of landing force. IIRC the LEM legs had something similar for their one time use. I think the DC-X experimental rocket had no suspension on its legs, but on its final test one of the legs failed to extend so it fell over and had an explosion event. Something simple for an emergency extender like a shotgun shell blank would've saved it. Can't tell from the videos whether or not the Space X Grasshopper's legs are fixed or have some sort of suspension. If they do, it'd likely be reusable. The ideal way for the game legs legs to work would be to automatically rise to their full extension after absorbing impact. Next on the wish list is a way to have the legs auto-adjust to aim whatever they're attached to as vertical as possible. There's no way this will work with the new legs. My NEW (Nearly Everything Works) Lander and, well, every lander I've built, won't work. Can the .21 legs be renamed and added to .22, or rename the .22 legs so they won't affect old ships?

I got the Large Rover (sorry, I'm just out of name ideas at this time), built around a horizontal 16,000 unit Kethane tank and two large drills, to orbit. Figured I'd top off the tanks with some leftover fuel in a tanker I'd used to top off Kleveland 3M to go to the Mun. *cue rendezvous interlude music* Got lined up and... oh kerbal krap! I forgot to put the clampotron back on top of the rover after I took it off to access the thin probodyne. I'm blaming This Guy for it. The Large Rover had to be dumped. Rather than simply terminate it in tracking I decided to see if it could land on Kerbin and survive at all. Answer, no, but it left about 30 pieces of debris on the landscape. Will get pics of it once it's on the Mun. So don't forget to check that all the parts are installed before launch!

First rocket Snafu 1 Modified a bit Snafu 1a A bit more modded Snafu 1b Three trials with fuel pipes to see which could go the highest straight up. Dropping the main engine went highest. That's where I discovered fuel pipes won't cross over separators and decouplers. Resorted to a small hardpoint to bridge the stack separator. Snafu 1b crossfuel Snafu 1b crossfuel 2 Snafu 1b crossfuel 3 Next was modifying the Snafu series for solid rocket motors Snafu Solid Snafu Solid F (I'd have to load it to see what the F is for, probably for a Fuel upper stage.) Snafu Solid K (K for Kerbal-rated, the prior two versions were unmanned.) Currently at 74 various rocket powered vehicles (that I've kept) and one rather bad airplane since 07/30/2013. Doesn't count all the iterations of getting many of them able to achieve the tasks I set out to do!

Just saying what has worked for me. I have some crazy nightmarish asparagus launchers with one Skipper smack in the middle. They'll wibble all over the place, unless that one Skipper has its gimbal locked. Look up Pilot Induced Oscillation or PIO. When a flying machine develops a bit of a wobble and the pilot's reaction time is not fast enough and/or overcorrects slightly, attempts to bring the machine under control only make it go more out of control. The cure is to either keep a firm hand on the controls without trying to do any correcting, or if the vehicle is inherently stable, let go of the controls and allow the vehicle to stop oscillating. The same seems to apply in this virtual world. A rocket with an oscillation period and/or magnitude that exceeds MechJeb's ability to control with the available control systems on the virtual rocket will constantly overshoot the correction inputs. Something else that seems to be a control issue with KSP is that aside from the throttle it all appears to be full on or full off with moving aerodynamic surfaces and engine gimbals banging back and forth, lock to lock. Control would be much smoother and gentler on the virtual hardware if there was even one stop between center and full movement. Two would be even better. What you get with snapping back and forth is parts ripping loose (such as Mainsails under orange tanks) like the tailfin on that Airbus which crashed in New York, October 2011. The flight recorder showed that the pilot was flapping the rudder back and forth, stop to stop, without any pause in the middle as prescribed by the Airbus flight manuals. Would not have happened to a Boeing because Boeings are built to take such abuse by pilots whereas Airbus' design philosophy has long been to design the aircraft to be 'just enough' to do the job - as long as the pilots also adhere to the limits. (Look up the Airbus crashes caused by their initial idea to save fuel by not allowing full throttle takeoffs or full throttle override during landings. "I'm landing here. You don't need full throttle. Oh, hey! Trees!") So what it looks like to me is that locking the center or central group of engines (or an outer ring of engines) provides a steadying thrust vector that does not wobble about, helping to bring the rocket back onto the desired vector after a control input, while also reducing the need for corrective control inputs because of that always aligned thrust. Sort of like the tailfin and horizontal stabilizer on an airplane provides a constant alignment force while the rudder steers and elevator pitches. (Unless your aircraft is a deliberately unstable fighter jet with a control system and full flying fins that maneuvers by allowing the aircraft to be unstable in the direction the pilot wishes to turn.) What I can see may be an advantage of locking central engines is the non-varying thrust vector is all aligned directly with the center of mass and having the engines farther from the center do the steering gives them greater leverage and thus a stronger control authority.

I can do the Squad one on .22 and still get most of the textures replaced?

Try locking the gimbal on the center engine before liftoff. That's what I learned to do in .21 with MJ. Seems that steady line of thrust not wobbling about helps MJ keep the rocket flying straight. What I've been having problems with is it not properly finishing orbit maneuvers like periapsis changes and circularizations after the ascent one. It likes to put the throttle down to very low and just keep burning, overshooting the node. Was testing my 16,000 unit Kethane rover in Mun orbit last night and I had to keep manually stopping it because it would not establish a circular 15KM orbit. I've made some changes to it and will test it again tonight to see if that makes a difference. Various versions of MJ have done this idling burning, the fix typically seems to be... moar boosters.

Could be they're like Discworld dwarfs*. Only Kerbals can tell their genders apart, and they aren't divulging the knowledge. *Yes, dwarfs. That's the plural of dwarf on Discworld.

I wonder if it's possible to edit the legs' cfg to add an extend and lock function which can be added to an action group? What would be a useful addition is a trigger for self leveling so that when landed on an uneven surface the uphill legs retract and the downhill ones extend to point the vehicle as straight upwards as possible. Legs that can't hold a ship upright on the perfectly level launchpad are a bit less than useful!

Grabbed this shot from my second tryout with .22. Alas, this roster is gone after loading my .21 save file. Check out the last name on the list. Does he get the ladies' attention or drive them away?

I thought a Kerbal's jetpack didn't have enough fuel to reach orbit from the surface of the Mun?

MechJeb2 2.0.9.0-83 has some amazing landing accuracy, a bit too accurate at times. Things wiggled just as I clicked and the target got set to the exact location of Kleveland 3M and MJ nailed it spot on. I was able to drive it off but it tipped onto its side. I quickly retracted the panels. I figured it'd flip completely over but it just stopped. I backed 3M up a bit then used RCS to flip 2M onto its wheels. No damage done to anything! Whew! Here's a daylight shot of 3M and 2M side by side. I leave the small tank on top of 3M empty for landings, fill it up for takeoff. Odd thing is, that tank is drained only after the side tanks empty. Haven't had to tap it yet in "real" use but did during "simulation" flights with Hyperedit. If fuel gets that low by the time orbit is achieved, it's not going to make rendezvous with the refinery. The fuel in that tank gets transferred to the refinery's tanks. 3M has six cylindrified RCS tanks. For the trip after next I may leave two of them empty. Less weight should save a little fuel. Even with having RCS on for the full landing, ascent and docking it doesn't come near to running out. Still crazy that the same two engines used by 2M can lift 3M just as easy with everything full. Kleveland 2 is just grossly overpowered with its 10 little engines. I should fill its Kethane tank and see if it can still lift on Kerbin. Next step? Perhaps a rover capable of lifting 16,000 units of Kethane? Going to have to figure out a way to do it with the tanks laying down or some way to make it no taller than Kleveland 3M. Will be such a drastic change it'll have to start a new development series name.

I loaded my .21 save into .22 last night, with texture quality set to half (looks pretty horrid but it runs, turning anti-aliasing off did more for it) and had no issues at all with the -83 update of MechJeb doing ascents to orbit, docking, a transfer to Mun and other maneuvers. Landing guidance is extremely accurate. I wanted to land one rover next to another on Mun but things wiggled just as I clicked and it put the target right on the landed rover. MechJeb landed one right on the other. Fortunately I was able to drive it off but it flipped up on its side. I quickly retracted the solar panels to save them. Backed the first rover out of the way then used RCS to flip the second one upright. No damage to either one. What it can't handle is a spaceplane. I tried some of the stock ones and attempts to use ascent guidance had them flipping up sideways and doing a 90 degree right turn. Managed to slam straight into the VAB once. Also can't land for crap on the island runway, never lines up on it, just crashes into the island from random angles. Once I got it onto the right path but it came in too low and crashed like it was flown by those Asiana pilots. I didn't try going out a long ways then circling around to give it half a chance at attempting a KSC runway landing. Aircraft control is a completely different ball of yarn from rocket control. So is rover control. Both are very underdeveloped in MechJeb.

This is MechJeb, short for Mechanical Jebediah, a reference to the 18th century fake chess playing automaton known as the Mechanical Turk. A person would be stuffed into the base of the cabinet and control it via levers to play chess vs another person. Mecha-Jeb is the 20 foot tall anime robot version of Jebediah Kerman, quite popular on some of the eastern islands of Kerbin.

Match planes with the target first, then setup the Hohmann transfer. That step isn't automatically done like it is in Rendezvous autopilot. What if you get out of Kerbin SOI, then match planes with the target plant, then do the Hohmann transfer? The latest development release MechJeb2-2.0.9.0-83.zip of MechJeb does not play nice with KSP .21 I tried it to launch the rovers I have on Minmus and it would not light the engines for the circularization burn. Tried a launch from KSP and despite incliniation set to 0 it'd take off with an immediate slight turn *east* then at the gravity turn start it'd just keep going over and head for the ground. It seems to work in .22, at least for the one launch I did in a vanilla setup with no mods other than MechJeb. Launched, turned and circularized just fine. The -83 release has an automatic turn height adjuster which changes according to the altitude set in Ascent Guidance. Doesn't matter if that's on or off, Ascent Guidance just doesn't work right in .21 with that release. This one MechJeb2-2.0.9.0-82.zip works properly in .21 Get 'em here. http://jenkins.mumech.com/job/MechJeb2/ Edit: WTH? I was sure I had the -82 release working in .21 last night. Just tried rolling back to it and same problems, it's completely out to lunch on ascent guidance. I'll have to try older releases until I find the newest one that works - or see if .22 will go with all the mods at half texture resolution setting.

I have 2 gig RAM. If you're running a 64bit OS with enough RAM to enable a single 32bit program to have a full 4 gig, then that should remove any issues KSP may have when it can't have 4 gigs. Whether or not KSP properly requests the RAM, or any other glitches that make it crash, that's up to KSP.

What if you set some random Kerbal's mode to other than 0 or whatever the number is for dead?

Something to note is that the build in the VAB gets rotated 90 degrees when placed onto the pad. For example, if you build a rover oriented so it should be able to roll out the door and up the ramp, it gets plopped sideways onto the pad when you click launch. Why does it break with the visuals that way? Is what's seen out the VAB door the same virtual environment as the outdoor launchpad area or is it a separate "set" where for some reason it's always daylight? I never noticed the rotation until I built a rover.