What did you do in KSP1 today?

[AccidentsHappen]

2 hours ago, capi3101 said:

Try NavUtilities. Gets you close to Mt. Killakerbal without actually smacking it (unless you're being stupid in the first place, that is).

Oh cool, thanks! And, err... It's a bit of a mixture of both... Probably more of the latter. I get too close or I forgot and go eat something and come back to my computer and see I'm going to hit it and I don't want to touch my keyboard because of got toasted sandwich all over my fingers so I try to quicksave with me elbows and it works and I go wash my hands and reload the save but it does that really annoying thing where your craft explodes when it reloads.

This has happened many times 

Hopefully NavUtilities helps.

Edited January 19, 2017 by AccidentsHappen

[Odonian]

3 hours ago, Tyko said:

In the upper picture you added windows to the side of the MKS agriculture module. What mod are those windows from?

Also, the bottom picture looks like a giant gas grill 

 

Those windows are from LLL Continued, maintained by @linuxgurugamer and @LeLeon: 

There are a lot of great parts in that mod.

In fact that base does also serve as a gas grill. I'll fire it up as soon as Jeb manages to harpoon a Minmusian kraken. It really isn't worth the cost of propane to grill NOMs.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Odonian

[Leafbaron]

59 minutes ago, Kamuchi said:

Getting some tourists back to the ship and get a great Gael background scenery

The ship for whoever is curious http://imgur.com/a/uRHfM

Poods infant nebula skybox! i love it!

[Death Engineering]

1 hour ago, eloquentJane said:

The real Gemini spacecraft had ejector seats, but that's not easy to accomplish in KSP so I use a launch escape tower instead.

Try this one.. works like a champ

 

[septemberWaves]

18 minutes ago, Death Engineering said:

Try this one.. works like a champ

Thanks for the suggestion. I quite like launch escape towers, but since I'm designing with your challenge in mind I'll check that mod out.

[Kamuchi]

1 hour ago, Leafbaron said:

Poods infant nebula skybox! i love it!

Yeah I love that skybox and it`s a perfect one for GPP

[Leafbaron]

2 minutes ago, Kamuchi said:

Yeah I love that skybox and it`s a perfect one for GPP

I might have to try GPP, also might have to move back over to that skybox, i forgot how good it looked. Im using his standard milkyway one right now. 

how hard on your system  performance is GPP?

Edited January 19, 2017 by Leafbaron

[Kamuchi]

5 minutes ago, Leafbaron said:

I might have to try GPP, also might have to move back over to that skybox, i forgot how good it looked. Im using his standard milkyway one right now. 

how hard on your system  performance is GPP?

No idea what performance GPP uses, I haven`t played stock since I discoverd mods ages ago and with also using life support and other mods that constantly poll ksp, I wouldn`t even dare to guess
Also on that note, I am running a 6700K at 4.7ghz, so even if I would make a guess, it wouldn`t come close to reality as I`m pushing my pc beyond what most people have.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Kamuchi

[Leafbaron]

2 minutes ago, Kamuchi said:

No idea what performance GPP uses, I haven`t played stock since I discoverd mods ages ago and with also using life support and other mods that constantly poll ksp, I wouldn`t even dare to guess

alright thanks. Im using a pretty beefy system but it is old. Howver with EVE and SVT and outer planets mod as well as ton of parts packs my game crawled at the lower end of yellow time physics, even in orbit. So im guessing my system probably can't handle this mod. I need a new rig haha at least a processor upgrade for current one.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Leafbaron

[Kamuchi]

1 minute ago, Leafbaron said:

alright thanks. Im using a pretty beefy system but it is old. Howver with EVE and SVT and outer planets mod my game crawled at the lower end of yellow time physics, even in orbit. So im guessing my system probably can't handle this mod. I need a new rig haha at least a processor upgrade for current one.

You could always make a copy of your ksp install, remove all planet pack mods and give it a test to see how your pc handles it

[BoPET]

Today I have landed a rover on Moho.

It is based on Buffalo chassis but without an actual crew cabin. Sort of oversized "Spirit".

It was a third attempt to land on Moho, the first probe commenced a nice lithobraking into low mohosynchronous orbit and was recategorised as an impactor.

The second probe did landed (Inflated bags  pathfinder-style) but failed to transmit science due to broken antenna.
The third attempt is so far successful.

 

I have landed her in Western Crater, it looked so cool from above but it turned out to be an unremarkable brown planitia with few old and eroded impact craters. A lot of heavy metals in the surface samples but nothing worth of harvesting.

She looks bulky but a total heaven to drive even in such low-gravity environment.

After I have travelled 50 km from Western Crater I have found a nice place in terms of views and Karbonite prospection.

Here I am currently filling a can of Karbonite for fueling generator during long night.

[Jett_Quasar]

Comparison of the Acclamator I & II

Jett

[N_Danger]

 First Jeb discovered a design flaw in the rover test bed.

But then he took a drive after it got fixed

Then came the first fight of a prototype tanker.

 

[HazelPine]

First milestone of The Comical Takeover Of Space (my career) has been achieved!

 

Picking up from the data the MR-1 "Sunbeam" and several scanning and mapping satellites, it was found that there was a very good spot with high Karbonite concentrations, surrounded by high Ore concentrations as well. Mission control quickly marked that spot as the main area for a base, and thus we launched the first lander of the "Mun Invasion".

The lander carries 6 kerbals to the surface and can be used indefinitely, since it is Karbonite powered, but lack the delta-v to return to orbit, so it is used primarily as a mun hopper.

 

Testing the lander was interesting.

 

The little Karbonite engine made a lot of smoke.

Landing was successful, and the 6 brave colonizers set to work on studying the area.

 

Afterwards, the MR-2 was launched. Nicknamed "Boxen", it brought down with it multiple scientific experiments and tools, which the lander crew had foolishly forgotten to bring along beforehand.

 

Once the rover arrived, a scientist and a pilot went out to find a good spot to set up the experiements.

It was decided that the best, most optimal spot would be 5km away, on top of a peak.

67 tumbles and broken antenna accidents later, they arrived.

Only when they had all the experiment packages set down, they noticed that neither of them knew how to operate a screwdriver or a wrench, which was needed to wire the whole thing up. So the pilot drove back and changed spots with an engineer back at the landing spot, and she drove back. This took a while, since I kept crashing the rover.

 

Here we can see a kerbal setting up the science tower.

 

Once that was all complete, they dubbed the whole contraption as a Science Farm, since it seemed fitting. Then they drove back and are now waiting for the first shipping containers to land so that base building can commence.

 

Here we can see the science farm:

 

And finally back at home camp:

[septemberWaves]

6 minutes ago, N_Danger said:

Then came the first fight of a prototype tanker.

Nice design. If you're open to suggestions, I would probably recommend moving those relay antennas. Their current positions mean that your fairing has to be quite wide, which increases the drag on the vehicle and thus increases the amount of fuel spent getting the tanker into space. If you were to perhaps move them to the top/front of the fuel tank by the docking port (and probably rotate them so that they look good and aren't clipped into anything) it would reduce the necessary fairing diameter, which ultimately means that you expend less fuel getting your fuel tanker to orbit because of the lower drag. It might not make a huge difference, but people are often surprised by the losses incurred from an overly draggy design.

Also, I would be a bit worried about your part count. That number of solar panels probably isn't necessary for a tanker vehicle like this one, unless perhaps you plan to operate it beyond the orbit of Eeloo. You could probably get away with just the four deployable solar panels.

[Aragosnat]

From the Mün's pole (little things like thses make playing KSP enjoyable):

And some re-entery fun:

The little targe that is 1.5 km way was not part of the craft before staging.... And it is going the opposite way too.

Edited January 20, 2017 by Aragosnat

[N_Danger]

8 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

Nice design. If you're open to suggestions, I would probably recommend moving those relay antennas. Their current positions mean that your fairing has to be quite wide, which increases the drag on the vehicle and thus increases the amount of fuel spent getting the tanker into space. If you were to perhaps move them to the top/front of the fuel tank by the docking port (and probably rotate them so that they look good and aren't clipped into anything) it would reduce the necessary fairing diameter, which ultimately means that you expend less fuel getting your fuel tanker to orbit because of the lower drag. It might not make a huge difference, but people are often surprised by the losses incurred from an overly draggy design.

Also, I would be a bit worried about your part count. That number of solar panels probably isn't necessary for a tanker vehicle like this one, unless perhaps you plan to operate it beyond the orbit of Eeloo. You could probably get away with just the four deployable solar panels.

 Thanks for the suggestions! 

Yes the faring was large so I'll try something with the antennas.

 I'm playing with the Outer Planets mod and I will be operating beyond Jool's orbit at some point, I play in Science mode so I can ignore economics and efficiency for the most part. I'll probably strip parts off as required for the mission.

 

[Carl]

IMo your probably better off building a dedicated outer planets tankers and restricting that to near kerbin. That said my standard rule of thumb with solar's is as many extendables as i need, (usually in the biggest appropriate size, 4x symmetry so i don't have to worry about roll), and then if it's a design where i'll be pulling the panels in and shoving them back out a lot,l 4 minimum size 4x symmetry surface panels so i will allways have trickle power for extending the extendables. Though for Jool and beyond, i'd go with RTG's myself. Tech allowing.

[53miner53]

I'm trying to make an ion-powered spaceplane with jets for in-atmosphere flight. I'm also trying to send it to space Dream Chaser style. All flights so far have been probe controlled because I didn't want to lose any Kerbals. I know I will lose some eventually but it had the probe core as part of the design anyway, because I always try to include a probe core and an RTG

This is the launch stack: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=846003080

I first tested its atmospheric flight capabilities with horizontal take off flights. It did those quite well, probably because it is a modified version of a plane.

The first vertical flight ended with the jet on the runway missing one elevator off the tail and the ion engine. This being after I lost control of the stack at less than 1000m and realized I might need more thrust and winglets during initial takeoff.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=845996285

This is how the second launch ended. It still went better than I expected after the booster came off before I started the engine. 

Edited January 20, 2017 by 53miner53
another picture

[Firemetal]

So recently, I have been getting kind of bored with KSP to spite the fact that I have been building a Duna surface base and a LKO space station. I have visited and returned from all the planets in KSP and gone to Minimus, the Mun and Duna with SSTOs. So I decided to do something I have been against for a long time. (No offense to the 60% of the KSP community that does this )

Download a heck ton of mods and make the game a HECK of a lot harder. So I downloaded Ckan, downloaded RSS, a bunch of part mods, a bunch of the mods I used to use before I went stock such as RCS build aid and KAC. (However I am still calculating my Delta V and TWR. The only difference is I can see my TWR during launch which doesn't really matter a whole lot)

So I got to Low Earth Orbit for the first time ever today!

Spoiler

(Sorry it was at night!)

But that's it for now.

Fire

Edited January 20, 2017 by Firemetal
I am still "downloading" my Delta V and TWR. Man am I great at mental typos!

[AccidentsHappen]

Worked on some UAV's:

And also tried some--

GOSH DARN IT! WHO LET JEB FLY!? YOU KNOW HE CAN ONLY FLY REAL PLANES!

The Valkyrie had another run at flying a rover over to the airbase:

...I then found out that the rover couldn't clear the bottom of the drop bay. *sigh* I'll be back, I unfortunately have some employees to fire...

And I almost forgot, I have my new contender for Dakar 2017:

Edited January 20, 2017 by AccidentsHappen

[Kyrt Malthorn]

 

I was planning a mission to Duna, consisting of an interplanetary transfer vehicle, a hab with greenhouses (USI-LS w/ permadeath) for a crew of six, and a lightweight lander intended to put lucky kerbal on Duna and get him back to orbit after.

 

Then I had an epiphany. The transfer to Duna or back home is only about 65 days. I have to plan for over 300 due to waiting for launch windows.

 

So, what I'm going to try to do tomorrow is plan the greenhouses (and if I can get away with it, much of the heavy habitation stuff) into a module I can detach and leave in Duna orbit. Future missions would only need to take supplies for the transfer itself, and fertilizer to run the greenhouses that are already there. This would free up weight, I could use the same interplanetary vessel to bring other payloads, like reusable landers and ISRU equipment.

 

Oh the possibilities...

[Leafbaron]

2 hours ago, Kamuchi said:

You could always make a copy of your ksp install, remove all planet pack mods and give it a test to see how your pc handles it

good thinking!

[Ty Tan Tu]

16 minutes ago, Kyrt Malthorn said:

 

I was planning a mission to Duna, consisting of an interplanetary transfer vehicle, a hab with greenhouses (USI-LS w/ permadeath) for a crew of six, and a lightweight lander intended to put lucky kerbal on Duna and get him back to orbit after.

 

Then I had an epiphany. The transfer to Duna or back home is only about 65 days. I have to plan for over 300 due to waiting for launch windows.

 

So, what I'm going to try to do tomorrow is plan the greenhouses (and if I can get away with it, much of the heavy habitation stuff) into a module I can detach and leave in Duna orbit. Future missions would only need to take supplies for the transfer itself, and fertilizer to run the greenhouses that are already there. This would free up weight, I could use the same interplanetary vessel to bring other payloads, like reusable landers and ISRU equipment.

 

Oh the possibilities...

Somehow this reminds me of that old movie Silent Running that ends with the garden being the last thing to survive... 

[Galileo]

3 hours ago, Leafbaron said:

I might have to try GPP, also might have to move back over to that skybox, i forgot how good it looked. Im using his standard milkyway one right now. 

how hard on your system  performance is GPP?

I have asked for players on slower computers to try the mod and report performance on the GPP thread.  So far,  I only have one person testing and reporting. without SVE and scatterer I know it's no more performance hungry than stock.  It's the visual packs that slow things down.  I would say,  just try it.  You might be surprised