[How accurate does my orbit need to be?]

Had the same problem two days ago.

My impression is that around Kerbin and even Mun, the orbit is ok if it's roughly in the ballpark.

But around Minmus, you need to be almost letter-perfect.

Two days ago, my error was a measly 200 metres at periapsi. Nothing that can be seen by eye.

The tip I was given and am now giving you: Set the thrust limiter to the lowest possible setting and try to hit the orbit as perfect as possible.

If you use MechJeb, typ in all those boring decimals.

But, as Colin Campbell (and others) once said: Mind your decimals.

;-)

Yeah, I was within 170m on each apsis and 0.004 degrees on inclination. After I disabled FMRS, Coherent Contracts, and Contract Configurator, it recognized the orbit.

[How accurate does my orbit need to be?]

I wish you guys would stop repeating that nonsense. The contract conditions are independent, and you do not need to build a new craft to satisfy the orbit requirement. This is a technical question about the accuracy of orbits, not an "I didn't read the contract, halp pls" question. All of the contract's orbital parameters as well as my sat's orbit are in the OP. If you don't know how to read them and don't even know how the contract system works, please don't bother answering.

In any case, I tested this in a clean save and the orbit was recognized without issue. This appears to be an issue with either FMRS, Coherent Contracts, or Contract Configurator. When I reloaded my career without those addons, it recognized the orbit as expected.

Here we can see that you can complete the orbit/stability requirements without a valid ship:

[How accurate does my orbit need to be?]

The only parameter I'm missing is matching the orbit and remaining stable for 10 seconds.

The contract requirements and my orbital parameters are both in the OP.

[How accurate does my orbit need to be?]

edit: this appears to be an issue with either FMRS, Contract Configurator, or Coherent Contracts. The game recognizes the orbit without them running.

I got a contract to put a satellite in Minmus orbit. The only parameter I'm missing is matching the orbit and remaining stable for 10 seconds. Here's the target orbit and my orbit from the save file:

PARAM
{
	name = SpecificOrbitParameter
	state = Incomplete
	disableOnStateChange = False
	values = 0,0,0,0,0
	targetBody = 3
	deviationWindow = 3
	difficultyFactor = 0.800000011920929
	orbitType = 6
	inclination = 29.4959648202019
	eccentricity = 0.336474122040093
	sma = 1018486.611352
	lan = 330.015462362215
	argumentOfPeriapsis = 90.9152758315248
	meanAnomalyAtEpoch = 1.00085459935079
	epoch = 0
}

ORBIT
{
	SMA = 1018146.09885518
	ECC = 0.336405005069997
	INC = 29.4995900848707
	LPE = 90.9649353361005
	LAN = 330.016247052645
	MNA = 5.43750381028034
	EPH = 7551762.04827297
	REF = 3
}

It seems like this should be sufficiently close to the target.

[[1.3] Pilot Assistant: Atmospheric piloting aids - 1.13.2 (May 28)]

Do you have any plans on integrating navigation to/from KSP or the science waypoints? Also, it would be awesome to have some kind of ILS hold for landing... maybe integrating with the NavUtilities ILS or something?

[The Comprehensive Kerbal Archive Network (CKAN) Package Manager; v1.18.0 [19 June 2016]]

I installed KAX through CKAN today but it didn't extract the firespitter directory in the KAX archive, which contains a .cfg, and which resulted in no parts being loaded by the game on startup. I checked the file that CKAN downloaded, and it definitely has a firespitter folder in there, but it did not get extracted and does not show up under KAX's Contents in CKAN.

[[1.0][Release-5-0][April 28, 2015] Active Texture Management - Save RAM!]

Amongst other things you're missing a Firespitter resource cfg required by KAX. Missing resources can corrupt the entire game database resulting in parts not loading.

Thanks. I didn't realize I had installed KAX at the same time. This appears to be an issue with CKAN.

[[1.0][Release-5-0][April 28, 2015] Active Texture Management - Save RAM!]

edit: issue with CKAN, not ATM.

[[KSP v1.1.3] Stock Bug Fix Modules (Release v1.1.3b.1 - 10 Jul 16)]

Are there any plans on expanding the crew roster bugfix to include other kinds of invalid data in save files?

For example, if there is a contract in your save file that uses a company name from some part mod, and then you remove the mod, the game will hang on NREs when trying to autosave (like during scene changes) instead of just removing the contract or changing the agent value.

[[0.25] Engine Ignitor (Workaround for some bugs V3.4.1: Aug.31)]

Yeah I think ModuleFuelTanks is a Real Fuels module, that's why it isn't working. And I don't want to use Real Fuels. I guess the easy solution is to just turn off ullage simulation for the "pressurized" ones and don't require the actual RF stuff.

[[0.25] Engine Ignitor (Workaround for some bugs V3.4.1: Aug.31)]

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but pressurized tanks don't seem to exist for me. I've extracted the PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg to the GameData\EngineIgnitor directory, and the small engines say they require pressurized tanks, but no matter what tank I attach to them, they won't ignite and the fuel status on the engine's context menu always says "Unpressurized".

Also I get this in the ksp.log:

[LOG 17:45:59.847] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTankSmallFlat/part/fuelTankSmallFlat'

[ERR 17:45:59.851] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

[LOG 17:45:59.866] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/miniFuelTank/part/miniFuelTank'

[ERR 17:45:59.871] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

[[0.22] ISA MapSat 4.0 Dev Build]

Not sure if it's intended usage, but if you use 'polar' and a size argument, you get weird results, like this:

[[1.3.0] Kerbal Engineer Redux 1.1.3.0 (2017-05-28)]

One bug: I added a second engineer to a rocket (it had 2 sats on it), and the Engineer VAB window half-disappeared, leaving only a glitchy grey bar. When I went to launch, I couldn't click anything, even though the "clear debris from launchpad" and "abort launch" buttons lit up when moused over. I will try to replicate this when I get home.

Feature requests:

- orbital period

- longitude of/time to ascending/descending nodes

- longitude of periapsis and true anomaly (and by extension, the spacecraft's longitude relative to the planet it is orbiting, for adjusting phases)

[How do I get this to the north pole without exploding?]

togfox: The trusses are from the Deep Space and Kosmos packs.

Add wheels, jet engines and a lot of fuel and drive it to the north pole.

This seems very Kerbal. I might try it, although I think keeping it upright when driving over hills might actually be harder than keeping it together during ascent/landing.

Holy Poop?!What are you doing on the north pole? Digging to the core of Kerbal?

Making a interplanetary slingshot? Jeez this thing is Huge..

It's an antenna, intended for connecting all my RemoteTech keosynchronous satellites. Hence the north pole.

Update: MOAR TRUSSES.

[How do I get this to the north pole without exploding?]

[[v0.19] Damned Robotics Version 1.3]

Is it possible to include a scaled-down version of the DR parts in the next release, so that when we use them on satellites (like the tiny probodobodynes, for example), they are appropriately sized, instead of giant?

[[0.22] ISA MapSat 4.0 Dev Build]

I got bored and made a GUI for ISA_MapGen.exe:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xpuu7bd8cgj58zq/IfU4X7DXbg

Windows only, put it in the same directory as ISA_MapGen.exe.

[Space Agency Tycoonâ„¢?]

I just found out about this thing. Not sure how I didn't know about it sooner. So far I've only played the "demo". I hear there's munwalking and landing struts in the paid version? That would be nice, considering my first mun result:

But ultimately it's not so important, so I think I'll stick to free for a while. Apart from new parts and fancy features the main thing I'm looking forward to is the tycoon aspect of the game that is basically non-existent right now. It really needs economy management, space port building and all that. I think that more than anything will provide replay value. Like some sort of evil genius in spess.

I also know they are working on more planets? I think first they should make the existing ones more interesting. It's great to (fail at) landing on the mun, but once you're there there's nothing to do. And the main planet is basically just green grass and water. Nothing very interesting at all.

Between the available mods and plugins, and the persistence that you get with the paid version, you can already do an evil-genius-in-space sort of thing. There are lots of us that have whole satellite networks and moon mining operations and space refueling dumps set up.

You sound like you're already planning on buying the game eventually. Why not buy now, and enjoy all the community building (and game building) that happens between now and full release?

[Pan-Kerbal Super Sonic Transportation Challenge!!!]

I call BS. I put 5 engines and 6 400L LFTs in drop tanks on my plane. It took only 19:45 for me to burn through all 2400L of fuel in those. How exactly are you lasting 48 minutes on 6 Mk1 tanks?

Edit: My attempt is currently burning about 0.2L/s/engine with 4 engines running at cruise (14k, 510m/s). In a best case scenario, you went for 48 minutes on the 6 tanks of gas you took in drop tanks, therefore burning 48 minutes * 60 seconds/minute * 4 engines * 0.2L/s/engine = 2304L of fuel. I don't think the Mk1 tanks you're using can hold 384L each.

[Do It Like Jebediah: Orbit and land safely using only boosters]

Too much SAS, not enough boosters!

[Aerobraking mechanics]

Did you have winglets on it?

[ULTIMATE AVIATION CHALLENGE: Fly an aircraft around the world]

Well, I managed to get about 450km on half my fuel the other day, at 300m/s and 13.5-14.5km. I figure it's possible to make it the whole way; the plane would just have to be scaled up 4-5x. The big hurdle with these is that as fuel burns in LFTs, the cg shifts aft and you end up with a plane that just wants to do flips by the time you're on the last tank.

[ULTIMATE AVIATION CHALLENGE: Fly an aircraft around the world]

I think the point of this challenge is to make an actual spaceplane that actually flies (under power) around the world, not to see who knows how to bug out the winglets and float around at 10m/s.

[In-Atmosphere Speed Challenge]

837.2 m/s straight up. I could do better if I was able to get more than 1 fps.

[In-Atmosphere Speed Challenge]

Are you going to set an altitude limit? I'm pretty sure I can get close to orbital velocity at 34.4k with stock parts.