What did you do in KSP1 today?

[Ultimate Steve]

*FACEPALM*

CSM orbit of the moon takes an hour and forty minutes.

Jebediah has an hour and 35 minutes of oxygen left.

I'll walk on the moon for about one minute and then try and chase the CSM in orbit.

Of course the one component I didn't test.

I just lifted off from the moon. I haven't unlocked flags yet, apparently. And I forgot the crew report. At least the RCS is finally working.

EDIT: Of course the game had to crash at the most dramatic moment. Good night, I'll try again tomorrow.

Edited August 13, 2017 by Ultimate Steve

[invision]

KSP now delivering

[JadeOfMaar]

With the official release of GPP finally out of the way, I did some celebratory tinkering with my personal expansion for the GN Drive mod. Mainly, I spent my time configuring and texturing the GN-powered Warp Drives. This one is the Inferior engine, and part of the end-game of my next try at a science play-through.

...That shadow though.  

I gave the engine a WIP repaint to look like OPT, and taped on the Celestial Being logo for giggles.

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by JadeOfMaar

[bobcook]

I designed and tested an Apollo style lander for the Mun, suitable for two Kerbals. Has a descent stage and an ascent stage. Works great as a lander as well as a science platform!

Spoiler

 

[CatastrophicFailure]

4 hours ago, qzgy said:

Psst... your landing gear... seems limp...

[qzgy]

Just now, CatastrophicFailure said:

Psst... your landing gear... seems limp...

The designer I hired forgot to check whether the drills and cargo ramps would reach the ground. This has been rectified for later missions.

[AlamoVampire]

I finished my "kerpollo" mission today. Having used the create a kerbal feature, I placed myself into KSP, and my flag since the passing of my beloved kitty Pumpkin <flag was made by a fellow player I found whilst watching Das Valdez, sadly I forget who made it, but, I do still thank him quietly every time I see the flag> in her honor. My kerbal is facing the flag with helmet lights on to illuminate the flag. Thats Bob standing there mugging it up for the camera! By sheer accident I managed to splash down near the KSC. That burn was meant as a periapsis change only, wound up way way too deep and just went for it. The final picture is after I spotted the island runway and swung the camera back to see the KSC!

 

and landing

First Munar Landing mission in the new save, is in the bag!

original post 02:03:30

[Allocthonous]

I've been building standardized SSTO rockets that can survive Kerbin re-entry and landing. I've been using payload sizes based on the 1.25m fuel tanks. So far I've got a 2.25 ton, a 4.5 ton, and a 6.25 ton finished, although the 2.25 has a tendency to lose aerodynamic stability at the end of its landing sequence. It's a lot of fun trying to design payloads for them that fit within the weight constraints and the size constraints for the 2.5m fairing.

 

2 hours ago, bobcook said:

I designed and tested an Apollo style lander for the Mun, suitable for two Kerbals. Has a descent stage and an ascent stage. Works great as a lander as well as a science platform!

That is a very cool looking lander. I'm curious about your choice of ascent engines, though. It doesn't look like you've got a max accel of more than 4m/s in zero-g, which seems kind of low to me. A couple twitch engines instead would double that for only a tiny bit more weight.

[KerbMav]

8 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

Those are the SpaceX BFR solar panels, right? What mod they from?

Should be Near Future Technology - the Solar package their.

Edited August 13, 2017 by KerbMav

[invision]

messing around i found something that could be useful.

lets say you build  a rocket using any 4 engines on its mainstage, those engines work great in atmosphere but not really any high gains once in space. our goal is to make this rocket  get to full orbit, its just shy of doing this at 2000 m/s so it makes about 3/4 of the orbit or so. we could add another small tank of fuel but with 4 engines its going to eat it up and maybe give us small gain and hit orbit.

but then i thought "what if i decoupled 2 of the engines mid flight?" when gravity and wind resistance its no longer an issue so i did that at 500 m/s and now with the lost weight of the engines and vacuum taking over we exceeded that 2000 m/s from last time and hit 2875m/s just from ditching 2 engines.

 

 

[KerikBalm]

After @Tex posted in a thread about deploying rovers, I wanted to suggest using the mk3 cargobay, but then I pointed out how my stock mk3 deployed rovers were actually terrible rovers: top heavy with a narrow track and very low ground clearange that tipped over easily and couldn't climb steep hills. Example:

They were fine for driving around for a few hundred meters on relatively flat terrain - ie for making surface bases and fueling craft landed near the surface base- but they were terrible for long distance drives or exploring rough terrain that one could't easily land an air'spacecraft.

So I decided to go about trying to make a rover that could actually drive fairly well, that can deploy easily from my "standard" cargobay (1 long mk3 bay with a node mounted 1.25m docking port, and a mk3 cargoramp on the end, no part offset or surface attachment used)

I started making what is a fairly decent, not too big rover, and then adding 0.625m docking ports to the sides and a duplicate of it. That way it can link to a copy of itself and have a wide track and relatively short wheelbase. The ground clearance is also much better than the large 2.5m base module "rovers" I previously made:

It can be easily deployed on stock Mun using something like this:

Spoiler

But I play on a 3x resize now, so something a bit bigger and beefier is needed:

 

 

Then I modified it to have internal crew space, and since i use TAC-LS, life support supplies, so it can go on long distance drives in rough terrain:

It still linked just fine despite the different weight distribution of the two rover sections:

I could not flip it on the flats around kerbin by just trying a hard turn - I hadn't modified the traction settings, but it would just skid/drift rather than flip.

Spoiler

^ Jeb wanted to ride outside

Bob practices the science, then goes back inside:

Jeb follows:

They do some more testing - the ladders don't seem to work, but they can climp up the wheels it seems. Jeb tried climbing up the science junior from the external command seat, then walking across to the enclosed cabin, he broke things along the way:

The rover sections, unlinked:

Test completed, all sections returned, jeb will be advised not to climb on the science junior or around breakable antennas and solar panels:

I figure this flatbed design can also accommodate 1.25 convert-o-trons and mini drills, and can link nearly indefinitely to make mini-surface bases. If life support is used, 1.25m carbon extractors and water purifiers are easily added, as are 1.25m food containers. I can also fit "container greenhouses" and "algae farms" from the KPBS mod, to produce food, on the flatbeds - but I don't see the point, the docking port height will necessarily be compatible with the docking ports of the 2.5m designs, since they all dock in the same cargobay.

Next transfer window I'll send this science collecting rover to Rald... I still haven't sent anything into the volcanoes or "Noctis Labyrinthus"(at least that's what its called on mars, and I used a mars heightmap) because of the steep terrains there

Of course, now I'm doing everything in 3x rescale, but with terrain height only 50%higher, so things aren't as steep, but still...

 

[Julien Kerman]

Today Pioneer 11 flew through the Saturn System.

Titan Encounter, Periapsis: 612km

Bye Saturn!

I also placed the first station in orbit around the Moon:

Spoiler

 

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

Messed with really tall things.

Tried to go 30% taller, with hilarious results.

 

[Xemina]

Today I used KWRocktrey for the first time! Made a rocket called "Kirbea IB"#

Spoiler

 

[Goddess Bhavani]

Make cute little planes!

https://kerbalx.com/pandoraskitten/P-101b-Personal-Flying-Wing

[bobcook]

8 hours ago, Allocthonous said:

That is a very cool looking lander. I'm curious about your choice of ascent engines, though. It doesn't look like you've got a max accel of more than 4m/s in zero-g, which seems kind of low to me. A couple twitch engines instead would double that for only a tiny bit more weight.

Can't really disagree with your logic, the Twitch is a better performance choice in every way, but I liked the look of the lower profile of the Spider engine when mounted to the side of the lander. Also loved the visual effect from the plume of eight Spiders firing up at the same time. Sometimes its just about how it looks. 

[Jul_Le]

 

I had no idea trees have colliders... The more you know!

But that still counts as a good landing, right?

[TheRagingIrishman]

1 hour ago, Jul_Le said:

I had no idea trees have colliders... The more you know!

But that still counts as a good landing, right?

FYI, in stock they don't but mods that change the terrain (like SVT) or planet mods have the ability to enable colliders.

[Spaceman17]

20 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

This is where you're going to have problems, bruh. It's going to be very difficult to find support and get mods to work when your install is half a dozen versions out of date. You're pretty limited in what you can do with modding planets in stock, and no mod author is likely to provide support with a .90 compatible version of anything, if such can even be found. You're not being criticized, we're just telling it like it is. You'll make life much easier on yourself if you upgrade to KSP 1.3, Kopernicus planet editor is pretty easy to learn, and if you've no existing save you're trying to preserve (which modding planets would destroy anyway), there's really no reason not to upgrade. 

i cannot upgrade to more than 1.0, because even in 1.0 some textures aren't showed and eats much ram

20 hours ago, eloquentJane said:

It's not criticism as such. The issue with you as a mod maker using 0.90 is that if your mod is good people will want to play it, but very few people still play version 0.90.

I would advise doing any modmaking for the current latest release (in this case, 1.3) because firstly you will have a vastly greater audience for your mod than if you continue to use 0.90 (in fact, I suspect that if you continue to develop a mod for such an outdated version you might be the only person to ever use it), and secondly it will mean that you won't get anyone complaining at you for your mod not being up to date. Of course, none of this matters if your mod is only intended for personal use, but even then I don't see why you'd be using 0.90 due to the enormous improvements made to the game in more recent versions (not least the major improvements in performance).

Even if the mod you plan to make is simply for personal use, you're unlikely to find anyone willing to help you for a far outdated version of the game (as CatastrophicFailure said) simply because everyone else has moved on. People who are capable of answering questions like yours are almost guaranteed to prioritize helping everyone who is making mods for the current game version before helping someone who is still using the game as it was 2 years ago.

In short, if you want to make a mod for public use you'll be wasting your time by making it for version 0.90, and if you're making it for personal use you'd be better off upgrading to version 1.3 anyway.

someone will be able to make a version for 1.3 (i think)

12 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

I finished my "kerpollo" mission today. Having used the create a kerbal feature, I placed myself into KSP, and my flag since the passing of my beloved kitty Pumpkin <flag was made by a fellow player I found whilst watching Das Valdez, sadly I forget who made it, but, I do still thank him quietly every time I see the flag> in her honor. My kerbal is facing the flag with helmet lights on to illuminate the flag. Thats Bob standing there mugging it up for the camera! By sheer accident I managed to splash down near the KSC. That burn was meant as a periapsis change only, wound up way way too deep and just went for it. The final picture is after I spotted the island runway and swung the camera back to see the KSC!

 

and landing

First Munar Landing mission in the new save, is in the bag!

original post 02:03:30

i'm about to make my first mun landing, it consist of 10 missions until a landing:

1- make a flyby around mun in a free return trajectory(FRT); preparing

2-achieve an orbit around the mun, orbit sometimes and return to kerbin; preparing

3-make a orbit around kerbin, for testing the lander; preparing

4-flyby mun in FRT with the lander to test; preparing

5-use the lander engines for orbit mun, then undock and back to kerbin; preparing

6-orbit mun and make a unmanned landing on mun, no return; preparing

7-orbit mun and make an unmanned landing on mun, returning to the ship; preparing

8-send a rover to mun and make an unmanned landing near it; preparing

9-orbit mun for find a good landing site; preparing

10-land in mun and plant a flag; preparing

11-land in mun near the rover, and plant a flag; preparing

12-land in mun, and drive the rover for find a site for building a base; preparing

facts: all missions are being made with orion and SLS

more missions will be announced

Edited August 13, 2017 by Spaceman17

[Bornholio]

Never ending dev testing ( I should make a Haiku)

Upon discovering that others did not know that RSS had a release in the works with Uranus' Moons included I worked on testing that a bit with Principia because "We Cannot Afford a Principia Gap!"

https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealSolarSystem/commit/87837e69b4f8f21634872422cfae09aab16edb0d

New Biomes and textures maps, added moons and planets (Vesta, Ceres..)

KCT version shows already picked tech nodes but yet to finish researching as orange in green and fixes the old stuck purchase bug from hovering over a purchase node that is too expensive.

So far Principia (Cayley) is working fine.

 

 

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by Bornholio

[qzgy]

40 minutes ago, Spaceman17 said:

i cannot upgrade to more than 1.0, because even in 1.0 some textures aren't showed and eats much ram

Try out 1.3 or 1.2. And check that everything is up to date.

51 minutes ago, Spaceman17 said:

someone will be able to make a version for 1.3 (i think)

But then its not yours, is it? And, sorry, I don't think anyone besides Linuxgurugamer, really wants to update mods that aren't theirs.

[Spaceman17]

2 minutes ago, qzgy said:

Try out 1.3 or 1.2. And check that everything is up to date.

i'll try 1.1 and 1.2, to see the thing of the textures

[invision]

the ultimate kerblin 3 challenge

mission control must have been impressed with my recent work and have trusted me with it, i must deliver them a space craft only worthy of such a mission. all the best engineers were contacted, all the dumpsters were searched, and we designed and built a craft mission control would indeed be proud of.

The Kerbal SP-1............S for space.....P for plane.....and since it only has room for 1 the kerbals felt this name was perfect.

 

and away we go

fuel tank de-coupled and our 4 mini nuclear engines pollute space but give us great gas milage

first stop minus

2nd stop the mun

will we make it?

the parachutes go out just before the launch pad

and we land right back where we started \o/

[Corscaria]

Normally I tend to make really BIG things in KSP, but every once in a while I get the urge to make something small. And this is one of those times. One of my mods, I'm not sure which, includes an RCS which is fueled only by Air Intake, and Electric Charge. So I decided to make a nearly stock plane using those new RCS as the engines. And this very tiny microplane with an RTS as the primary structural linkage is the result. After installing a radio control module Jeb gave it to Val as an anniversary present in remembrance of her first flight.

Kerbal added for scale...

Edited August 14, 2017 by Corscaria
Added another picture

[AR3S_TGL]

Today I theorized about the Reputation to Post ratio on the forums. It is just essentially the KDR of Kerbals. But wait! TWR comes into play! Oh god! So I thought of a way to see how good someone is at KSP. I call it the RTPTWR!