>land on vulcanus with little in the way of resources
>want to make it my main base
>autistically route dozens of spaghettified belts to create proper inputs and outputs
>takes like 20 hours and I still have yellow and purple science to automate, at 200 spm
>improving throughtput only possible with changing modules

>land on vulcanus with little in the way of resources
>want to make it my main base
>"lol just spam robots"
>takes like 8 hours before a biblical swarm of logi bots is swarming the skies
>improving throughtput is as simple as copy+paste and let bots deal with it
idk man

File: Works on my end.png (564.9 KB)

564.9 KB PNG

>>563690869

>>563715021
skill issue

>>563716838
yes
and a workaround for it

File: 1750303891968506.png (603.1 KB)

603.1 KB PNG

>>563716785
I remember that ship.
I was flying it.

File: Selection_259.png (2.3 MB)

2.3 MB PNG

Bigger rooms, new builds.
Feels like a lot of unused space, but certainly not enough room to eat a whole extra belt of anything. May be useful for moving things between floors later.

Also, red belts, so this eats 30 instead of 15/sec.

Now that it is done, it looks like it should have been so easy to make. It wasn't.

File: Selection_260.png (919 KB)

919 KB PNG

Associated, new upgrade has creates this large hallway which leads to a platform thing, a "mining module". Basically, I can place a hologram of the mining station to the right anywhere I like, and the guns and belts on that station will be functional, and let me move material from that hologram to this actual station. So, in effect, ores get teleported into my base and filtered and/or buffered in this hallway while they wait for their turn in the furnace.

I could have just had a chain of boxes that dump directly into each other, but I didn't want to have to pay the electricity for storing 1 iron ore 40 times in a row, repeatedly.

>>563720564
I enjoyed warptorio a lot
build shit on top of the platform btw, the layers not on the surface are best used for manufacturing and not smelting. ores into plates fits well on the harvester level

positively dreading halting my entire factory to substitute all my old pipes with niobium pipes manually

>>563721596
There's no advantage to them other than longer underground reach

>>563721696
yes, that is a major advantage when building my base because now I can build inbetween my pipes instead of spaghetting them around.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bau4-G59MMw
thoughts on this ksp maneuver?

>>563721696
you forgot another advantage
pipe weaving

im the anon from yesterday who had to do three consecutive rescue missions to save my first mun landing in ksp, i couldnt say at the time because the captchas were tarding out but thanks to the anons who offered advice

ive now successfully recovered everyone (turns out jeb who i thought was stuck in kermin orbit turned out to have more than enough fuel to deorbit - i just thought he didnt for osme reason - so he was stuck up there for 90 days for nothing kek) and am pushing forward. did a successful mun mission of landing + returning with one craft and am looking to make a moon base and/or station in orbit in the near future now ive unlocked some better techs. probably a minmus landing too for a good burst of science. what are the techs i should be looking at for building bases in space?

Just uninstalled KSP for the seventh time. This time Kopernicus was bugged so that the home planet didn't orbit the sun, it was stuck in place. Made for an interesting challenge but the maneuver tool and closest approach/intercept previews couldn't handle it.

>>563731208
good.
may it be the last time.

File: 1771797472335071.png (325.6 KB)

325.6 KB PNG

>>563722167
I think you work for Clipping.

>>563731769
Fucking clippers

im installing ksp mods and the mod installation tool thing ckan seems kinda buggy, the download is going super slowly and the bar is jumping around all over the place. from googling it seems like this is somewhat normal?

>>563733590
I have not encountered any issues with ckan using in intermittently over its 10+ year lifespan
iirc the progress bar works the same as Factorio's mod downloader

>dogshit OP again
when will this tranny fuck off

>>563735343
>best OP again
When will this chad bake another one

>>563733590
>the bar is jumping around all over the place.
Progress for each individual thing, not the whole. You should be able to deduce that from it starting at 0 every time.

>>563738307
i meant the bars for individual mod installs. i did some more googling and it seems like github gimps installs over a certain size so larger mods (namely parallax which was causing the issues) dont work reliably in ckan since it pulls from github

>>563738054
My guess is at page 9 past bump limit.

i just want ksp that is not dogshit bros
will ksa deliver

>>563738789
I would guess they're doing some delivery optimization of dependencies

>>563739083
no.

>>563739083
Pretty much every 3d game that falls for the enginedev meme ends up being incredibly janky and a performance nightmare.

I have no idea why didn't just UE5 for rendering, UI, and game logic, and just write their own physics engine in C++. Building the entire game engine is retarded.

>>563733590
The bar is per download. So if you are installing 15 mods, it will fill up 15 times.

Are there any good submersible and balloon mods for KSP? I am playing the Sol mod and floating relay balloons on Titan that talk to a submarine in its lakes would be really cool.

>>563739474
because it's a dean hall studio and he's the prototypical Ideas Guy. REAL studios have their own engine so they'll make their own because they're a REAL studio. like Tommy Wiseau using greenscreen.

>>563739942
that dean hall who made dayz?

>>563740123
that dean hall who also comitted stationeers
anything he touches turns to shit

How do relays affect performance in KSP? Its really satisfying watching a big relay network, but doesn't the calculation path calculation scale poorly with the number of relays? Am I eventually going to have to delete a bunch of these sats?

>>563740217
If you can't get somewhere in KSP, you add more rockets.
If you can't run KSP any longer, you add more RAM.

>>563740217
It really should have little to no performance impact whatsoever.
Relay checks should just be a standard node/pathfinding algoritm and simple collision checking against spheres.

>>563740217
I doubt it, unless you're doing something dumb.

>>563740217
I think I put at least 3 satellites on every significant orbital bodies and the game still ran fine even with jraphics mod

>>563740217
Interstellar Extended mod adds beamed power, which uses the same system but also calculates the wavelength, transmitter aperture, receiver angle, atmospheric absorption, etc with no issues.

>>563738054
>chad
Maybe on planet retard

File: KSP_x64_FMLIixDXpf.png (2.7 MB)

2.7 MB PNG

>>563742551
>interstellar extended
>beamed power
feels kinda impractical desu
i can't even figure out how to put a daedalus ICF engine into space
these things are proper gargantuan

>>563739474
Unreal Engine is a dogshit engine
Almost every game made with that garbage runs worse than modded KSP

>>563742824
Most of the big ones are deployable. Or you could build it in orbit with KAS/KIS, one of those shipyard mods or the DLC.

It also gives some crazy efficient lifter engines, ones that can run on plain atmosphere and use a remote beamed power source, like a fusion powerplant you dunked into the ocean for cooling.

>>563743234
>fusion powerplant you dunked into the ocean for cooling
wtf does this actually work

>>563739474
bait

>>563743371
Not as "emergent gameplay" because the mod uses a separate heat system from vanilla. But there is a part made specifically for this, takes "intakeLqd" and uses it for cooling. There's a similar, weaker one that uses a metal pole to transfer heat into the ground (reskinned mining drill, for now)

>Farming Life in Another World with my Excel-lent wife
https://youtu.be/EBvPmQ5N-I4?si=VCPClGsJl0Ue8xyD&t=35

File: file.png (3.5 MB)

3.5 MB PNG

1 antimony oxide/s to fix my various alloy demands and stone wool on caravan for the zipir made out of the overflow gravel.
The deposits are there from the old build, everything is going to be caravan-based.

File: 1594320_155.jpg (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB JPG

I've never needed a dedicated concrete factory outside the base before now, but that's the way this playthrough is going

File: file.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

What. Is my entire station bricked because of this shit.

>>563760893
yeah nigga remove those pointless X junctions

File: file.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

>>563761390
This works. Jank ass shit

I have a deep need to achieve some gravity assists. I found a tool (https://kepeer777.github.io/) but it isn't giving me useful results that I know should exist. No other tool seems helpful. I'm getting the feeling that I'm gonna have to do all the math myself. That might be plausible if it were fairly simple but I just know that it's gonna require an ugly integral or some shit to find the travel time to convert into phase angle. And that'll probably not actually match up to the ejection angle that happens in game. Someone save me.

>>563765472
>useful results that I know should exist
wut

>>563766261
Fuel-saving gravity assists are a thing. It wouldn't give anything that doesn't cost more than a direct transfer.

>>563765472
Just yeet your shit at whatever planet is on your way from the correct side and there's your gravity assist, you're overthinking this

File: example_trajectory_2.png (26.4 KB)

26.4 KB PNG

>>563766638
So if i understand, you want something like picrel but optimal, not just one solution that works?

>>563765472
you can do gravity assists in regular ksp?

File: 1372777775471.png (206.1 KB)

206.1 KB PNG

If I wanna jump into Kerbal Space Program, do I need to watch any tutorials or anything or can I jump straight in and have fun? I remember booting it up many years ago and uninstalled without really giving it a chance for some reason.

>>563767439
Do you... not know what a gravity assist is?

>>563767608
The direction of your velocity is changed within the sphere of influence, so yes. You can add or subtract up to double your speed relative to the body. It's n-body stuff and oberth effect that don't work.

>>563768021
Play the tutorials.

I don't remember if it applies to them too or only the scenarios, but you have to delete the save if you want to restart them.

>>563768395
i might be retarded then because i never used it even when i landed a probe on all orbital bodies and their moons

>>563768021
Plenty of people have fun with it by trying shit that fails spectacularly until they start to figure it out. That applies to both making working rockets and planning working maneuvers.

>>563768395
The oberth effect works in ksp afaik

File: GravPoss.gif (198.6 KB)

198.6 KB GIF

>>563769783
You've done it unknowingly

>>563769813
I understood the Oberth effect to be distinct from just changing the parameters of an elliptic orbit. "Burn when going fast" doesn't explain an apoapsis or descending node burn being most efficient.

>>563770315
If he only ever did direct body-to-body transfers without passing through a moon's sphere of influence while ejecting or capturing, he may actually have never gotten an assist.

File: screenshot134.png (2.3 MB)

2.3 MB PNG

>performing an orbital rescue with my space plane
>ready to approach the target
>RCS controls aren't responding
>???
>realize mono tanks are empty
oh...

>>563770712
>realize there are no monoprop tanks

>>563770712
Dock with reaction wheels and main engine. I've done it.

>>563770609
There's a couple of nerds arguing about what it even is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Oberth_effect#Disagreement_over_explantion_of_paradox
The talk page is surprisingly long.

File: screenshot135.png (888.9 KB)

888.9 KB PNG

>>563770782
there are mono tanks inside the plane's science bay but it's never been tested for this...
>>563771118
I managed to manually slow the plane enough with the main engines and had Kerwig EVA over while it drifted at about 0.6 m/s. Fortunately this thing has its solar panels to keep its reaction wheel operating.
Kerwig is now on board the plane and ready for reentry.

Ignore all kerbnigger posts, hide all kerbnigger posts.

File: engineering.webm (3.8 MB)

3.8 MB WEBM

>factorio retard has a conniption
anyway...

>>563771631
Aerospace engineering belongs and that's the prominent game. Don't dumb here. This not dumb area. It's more interesting than logistics optimization anyway.

'Member when KSP had its own general and an eternal schizo got it nuked? I 'member.

File: screenshot145.png (3.4 MB)

3.4 MB PNG

>brought Kerwig ALL the way home
I love this plane, even if its RCS failed me.
This was almost a complete glide after reentry. Used a tiny amount of fuel near the end to make sure I had an appropriate rate of descent for landing.

>>563772876
>almost a complete glide after reentry
I really wish the game had even a basic aerobrake trajectory prediction so you could know approximately where to reenter.

File: screenshot139.png (3.4 MB)

3.4 MB PNG

>>563773183
The path I was given by the map seemed pretty accurate when I made the maneuver plan.
I was aiming for KSC and got there pretty handily, shitty flying by me notwithstanding.
I didn't intend to have any fuel left, that's just how it went.

>>563768021
Best to go in blind

File: mud_wizard6.jpg (155.4 KB)

155.4 KB JPG

>>563772463
You TAKE THAT BACK

>>563765472
It's honestly kind of amazing how awful the community information is for this stuff. I can't even find a reference of what angle each planet is at at time zero.

https://www.captain-of-industry.com/post/update41-is-out
Fresh FFF

File: Selection_261.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

Area up increased, plus now the floor has a unique factor, so it's rebuild time again.

Trying to shove 16 boilers in as few tiles as I can. I found this little skinny build here, which looks quite compact. However, both the default build above and the skinny build below use 6x9 tiles per implementation plus one row for a "bookend", so there's no gain to be had here, other than fitting the boilers into spaces which are 5,6, or 7 wide.

>>563770712
Get out and push

>>563779629
At least once, I built something which, when a kerbal got out and grabbed onto a ladder, provided minor thrust which allowed that kerbal to get back out of deep space.

Kind of glad I don't remember how that worked.

File: 1594320_157.jpg (974.4 KB)

974.4 KB JPG

first delivery of blocks to the bridge to the promised land, this is gonna be lit

I have separate control surfaces for each of pitch roll and yaw. So WHY THE FUCK DOES THE PLANE NOSE DOWN WHEN I ADJUST HEADING?

>>563780061
I have forgotten RCS more times than I can count and used Kerbals to push craft into correct orientation for docking, and docking with the main engine. I have done it countless times.

>>563781627
Because KSP's flight model is basically non-existent.

i want ksp but with space combat
bdarmory isn't cutting it due to the dogshit engine

>>563783887
But I have made planes that don't do that.

>>563781627
Turn off the cockpit's gyro, check that everyhing's pointing the right way in the builder.

>>563716785
Now post the robocraft one

Gee it would be real fuckin' nice if KSP didn't show the autosaved ship design at the launchpad without the "[Auto-Saved Ship]" attached to it so you can't tell which of the two with the same name that appear is possibly old and missing a change you made. It's like they never even looked at their launchpad dialog after making it.

File: KSS CSA2 Docked.jpg (556.8 KB)

556.8 KB JPG

Planning a new Kerbin space station to replace this old small-part station now that I have far more parts.
Where do you guys put your Kerbin stations?

Maybe I should consider keeping the first station for ships that can barely make it to orbit, and then put the new one in Minmus orbit so I can ship fuel from the Minmus surface?

File: KSP_x64_aj7NDAke8a.png (3.1 MB)

3.1 MB PNG

>>563787335
>Where do you guys put your Kerbin stations?
i don't even when i probably should
though i do have a type of "moonbase" that lags like hell

File: KSP_x64_HdH8wd0DVI.png (3.5 MB)

3.5 MB PNG

>>563787616

>tried train autism game (japan) on a whim
>arcane camera controls turn me off in 5 minutes
shame
Transport Fever 3 when

>>563787952
if i ever get back to ksp i'm probably replacing it with an actual base structure thing so i can launch shit directly, even if i have to move nuclear material production somewhere else

File: screenshot149.png (3.5 MB)

3.5 MB PNG

>unlocked supersonic tech
>never noticed the jet engines with afterburners until now
FAST

File: screenshot153.png (3.4 MB)

3.4 MB PNG

>made a new chubby lander to address a lack of better rocket tech to conduct Mun landings
>excellent Mun intercept
>get all the way there with the main stage right up until the landing attempt begins
>detach the main stage when its fuel is spent during the landing burn
>forgot to put a separator between the fairing module and the lander
>the lander's engine is too weak to burn it off
I am upset.

>>563794684
Your punishment for not having separate service and lander modules with a docking turn.

File: screenshot155.png (3.9 MB)

3.9 MB PNG

>landed with fixed lander
>works great
>have a look around
>notice the lander pod is really, really close to the fuel tank
>there's no separator
>no heat shield
>fucking forgot a reentry system
BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD

>>563760893
>>563761776
because if the fork is too close to the station, the train can't decide which fork to take before stopping so it skips it

File: Untitled.jpg (976 KB)

976 KB JPG

I've been taking it very slow and have gradually moved most my production over to other islands to make use of trains. Besides a few minor things I really like the new train system network. It's easy to understand and doesn't seem to screw you over since they purposefully made it retard proof.
On literally any other map belts are still arguably better because they take 1/20th the amount of time to set up and build and the power cost is negligible.

The new stacker towers are great for rapidly dumping all your rocks when moving mountains. You'll still need to set up 2 or 3 + to keep up with your mega excavators but they save you an absurd amount of travel time for trucks.

File: Selection_262.png (899.7 KB)

899.7 KB PNG

Without productivity, this is what military tier science looks like.

This is the base ingredients for all science that uses only black, red, and green.

Actually, I've got a few more recipes to unlock than in vanilla, but it's still close.

>>563798323
>military provides 2x potions per craft
motherfucker

File: Screenshot_20260417_111636.jpg (233.9 KB)

233.9 KB JPG

>>563777753
>auto balancing within station docks
F to anons who made complex setups just for balancing

>>563788368
>Transport Fever 3 when
Looking forward to that, actually may not take that long

is the RP-1 mod for ksp good

File: Untitled.png (1.1 MB)

1.1 MB PNG

>>563777753
I'm not a UI wizard but why the fuck did they put the add station buttons down at the very bottom of the scrolling lists? You'd thing those would be pinned to the top of the network screen so you could click it instantly and be done in one second.

>>563765472
Bruv, you know nothing. I wanted to do a ballistic capture ever since I've heard about it, but I don't know if it's gonna work in KSP like it works IRL, as in, if it's gonna be more ΔV-efficient.
The lack of even simplified n-body physics is fucking infuriating. So much funky shit that is impossible in KSP physics.

File: 1673885808091534.jpg (90.2 KB)

90.2 KB JPG

>>563799025
>auto-balancing
>Maybe we should do this for the docks too!

>>563799868
I think of a oversight, considering this is just inherited from the previous system where you added a station group from list of sequential stops

Either way, I wouldn't go so far to put everything into a single network without a bit more careful planning first, for example it doesn't make much sense to mix loose and regular cargo networks

>>563801391
>but I don't know if it's gonna work in KSP like it works IRL
Obviously not because the real thing does use n-body. The best you can realistically do is carefully adjust so that multiple successive gravity assists all produce a resonant orbit for the following assist. That's actually easier to do than finding an assist transfer window because only two bodies are involved. Otherwise we'd be talking about something like a full Joolian insertion using multiple bodies for assists instead of just one for capture, which is the exact same kind of problem as the original post's, just with a longer chain of conics.

I will say that the Joolian system is a good enough playground that you can probably work out one maneuver at a time where to find another assist and get all the way down without planning in advance.

>>563802239
There's no downside unless you're using mixed trains which I'd put on their own separate network to prevent issues. All of the trains in this network are also the same length so there's no chance of jams.

File: 1093247568.jpg (87.1 KB)

87.1 KB JPG

>>563803094
>carefully adjust so that multiple successive gravity assists all produce a resonant orbit for the following assist
If I get that correctly, it'd be like this:
>drop from Kerbin to, say, Eve
>bounce off of it at a resonant orbit
>pass by it again, gaining more velocity
>repeat two previous steps until Jool orbit
>use Jool's assist to achieve insertion
>establish a stable orbit around it
Does that sound right?

>>563803587
First not only it would be simpler to manage and diagnose, but there are some things to take into consideration,
at least when I tried it, if you don't have parking spots, the trains would start and go just slightly off the current station and the stop until waiting for the next call, which means it could block some paths depending on how you designed your stations

Then, I don't think there are rules to which waiting stations they take, which means could be rather far from where they should be going next,

And lastly, I think they only go for refueling after dropping off a load, which again may lead to some sub optimal routes

That's not to say its useful, I just think it requires some bit of planning at least
I guess just keep a close look on your network and see if there's any weird behavior

>>563804259
Close. You can resonant assist from Kerbin up to Jool and keep it to two bodies and not deal with windows. If you go up to a 2:1 orbit then it only takes one assist. A bunch of tiny resonances like starting with 11:10 or some shit would probably be low energy for a stupidly long mission.

But it's more relevant for *captures*. As in intercepting Jool and getting a retrograde assist off of Laythe or Vall that puts you resonant with it in a higher orbit, resonant assist your way down to a lower orbit until you're below any possible assists and then finally circularize above Jool.

>>563804898
>if you don't have parking spots
The new network requires those to work properly.
>I don't think there are rules to which waiting stations they take
They'll wait at the closest one after unloading which is why you place your refueling station after your unloading bays.
As far as how they get assigned tasks I'm pretty sure it's the same as truck logic with whoever is closest gets the job first. If your unloading area doesn't have any loading then you obviously don't want waiting bays over there to prevent them from sitting around in the middle of nowhere.
Like I said it's retard proof.

>>563806037
That's what I thought too, but as I said, it requires at least some planning first
just cramming everything rail related that you had from working line system into a single network is just retarded

>>563806319
Only if you're retarded and have mixed freight on trains in the same network as your mono trains. Or mixed length trains all in the same network.
I only have ten trains and none of them even have mixed cargo. Putting them all on one network just makes sense.

You haven't actually said why it doesn't work.

File: 1594320_158.jpg (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB JPG

sure my citizens can't wait to eat this delicious bread that's sat on a train car outside in the rain

>>563798439
are you this new at the game

>>563798439
It provides more if you put productivity enchantments. Later in the game you can even unlock and train the science productivity skill to increase the effect of your potions. Unless then you should cast enhance productivity on your alchemical labs.

>>563796637
There's a good chance you don't need any of those. The vanilla crew pods survive heating from all but the dumbest reentries, I assume whatever that is has similar stats. Your parachute is way oversized, and the fuel tank will either burn off thus becoming irrelevant or will provide extra drag to slow you down.

File: tanker.webm (2.7 MB)

2.7 MB WEBM

>>563787616
>truggs on the mun
Yes! YES!. How are you deploying them?

>>563819681
The guy who complained about off-center thrust has to be going crazy rn

File: lander.webm (2.9 MB)

2.9 MB WEBM

>>563819847
QRD?

>>563819574
Judging by the ground construction mod parts, I'd say he's building them on-site.

File: f790d1a457825d5230a58b836dd5710fa06d2bab.gif (2.1 MB)

2.1 MB GIF

anyone else try minemogul? it's not very deep yet, pardon the pun, but I'd never seen a conveyor game with physics on the belted items

File: screenshot55.png (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB PNG

>>563820340
Oh that's not as interesting nvm.

>>563820098
>>563567797

>>563820370
It looked too much like Hydroneer so I decided to steer clear.

>>563822764
That's not thrust.

>>563822916
Thrust not perfectly aligned with the center of mass, but that's a mouthful and you know what I meant.

>>563823216
Not center of mass either.

>>563821225
What's your poison then? Vertical or a plane-like lander for the spess truck delivery?
Also, hangar or no hangar? Talking about a mod, by the way. Keeps things unloaded, but takes on their mass, sorta.

Personally, I only ever did vertical, though horizontal should be doable, especially with rotating engines, retro thrusters, or the good ol' flip'n'burn.
Thing is, you need a sizeable flat landing strip for this… then again, why in the fuck would you even build a base somewhere that isn't flat? Crater walls be a problem, though.
And hangar mod lets you store stuff in a way that removes potential for things clipping into each other and subsequently CLANGing the whole thing out of existence.
Applies to stowing rovers inside said hangars too — things can and sometimes do wobble on loading. Pretty sure there's a mod that adds parts that attach to ground, might be the hangars mod itself, hopefully that can help here.

Also, why not use procedural tanks? Multiple tanks in a quad formation like that are bound to be less stable than a single massive tank, especially since part mass has an effect on part connection strength iirc.

File: KSP_x64_cROIzZTShJ.png (1.6 MB)

1.6 MB PNG

>>563819574
>>563820340
i sent one truck by rocket but it was more of a meme more than anything

>>563821931
>TERRAIN
>TERRAIN
>PULL UP
>PULL UP

>>563823272
He thinks it's phantom drag, but it's really just the part being off-center.

>>563824114
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FwwBYzU2gE

>>563824114
>KURWA!
Gotta appreciate how it got past the mountain, a bee's dick away from crashing, though.

>>563824145
>>as it gains speed

>>563824362
ah, alright
point is your cargo is a whole mess of parts that should be seeing the same effect but isn't

>>563824480
That post was complaining about the combination of retarded drag together with no SAS. Anyone delivering a rover or similar asymmetrical payloads has no control problems, only possibly a loss of efficiency from thrust vectoring. You just made a stupid comparison.

>>563824702
oh well

>>563820370
>>563822842
yeah, it looks like hydroneer AKA automatic pass

File: ksp.png (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB PNG

>>563823428
I wasn't aware of the hangar mod it doesn't sound like my style. I've done a bunch of launches with these kinds of payloads and they generally don't clang, not even on that multiplayer game we did.
I try to solve problems without using mods I think the only mod I'm running is for longer 0.6m tanks.
The shuttle has vtol engines for landing but iirc it's extremely sketchy which led to the development of the swivel rocket.

File: KSP_x64_whykeubcEc.png (3.6 MB)

3.6 MB PNG

>>563824030
also, because it doesn't use any fairings, it tumbles in atmosphere, requiring: a lot of reaction wheels, a lot of rcs, and a first stage that is rotated so it forces the rocket to spin, giving it a fully vertical ascent profile

File: ksp2.png (2.5 MB)

2.5 MB PNG

>>563824867
Looking at my old save apparently there's a revised swivel rocket with a little ramp so the trucks can drive back onto the rocket and the unsightly gap between the rocket and the cargo bay has been eliminated.
This was the best way to deploy vehicles I could find. vertical landing but with horizontal loading/unloading.

>left the game open for 10h as I went to work+work dinner
NOOOO MY MILESTONES

>>563820370
>let's game it out played it
it's worthless slop then

File: ksp3.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

There are 2 tanker/miner trucks linked up but only one spacecraft how did the 2nd tanker get here?

File: ksp4.png (1.2 MB)

1.2 MB PNG

>>563826962
Must have flown one of the tanker trucks here with this attached to the back. dodgy as fuck.

>>563824030
Yeah maybe something like that

File: Selection_264.png (2.4 MB)

2.4 MB PNG

immaculate belting

File: Selection_263.png (1.6 MB)

1.6 MB PNG

>>563828092
can't see shit from up here, or down there
but together, we can not see shit together.

Anyway, that's 1 science/second. Game's gonna give me a space upgrade soon I think, but I still wanted to shove the production in the small space because my brain is broken I guess

File: ksp6.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

These must be for contracts they're kinda weird.

File: file.png (648.2 KB)

648.2 KB PNG

>>563828092
you are like a little baby watch this

File: file.png (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB PNG

landed the first stage of my munar base bros :D
the solar panels are a little jank because i didnt realise how theyd work but its fine. i also did no maths for if i had enough batteries to make it through munar night but if i dont i can bring more up with the next ship. theres no one living in it yet so it doesnt have to be perfect

>>563828519
Why the actual fuck do you need that much to handle vrauks

I'm just gonna assume that this is like advanced vuks with food and 6 extra inputs or something

or maybe this is the end of 4 really really long columns of vaurk buildings. That might make some sense of it.

t. same anon

>>563829183
nah bro's belting sap for some godforsaken reason despite it being a direct insertion 2sap into repcenter like a fucking lunatic

I am annoyedly considering one of those scripting mods for KSP. Constantly restarting my launches because the gravity turn is a little too shallow or steep is really frustrating when trying not to waste a couple hundred m/s.

File: ksp7.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

>parking solar powered vehicle in the shadow of the lander.
>>563829024
is this a meme or legit gameplay?

>>563829472
>is this a meme or legit gameplay?
its legit, i never said i was good kek. i only started playing the other day, im just fucking around building shit that seems cool. i know its likely not optimal. really i just wanted to try making a rocket to haul and land a large/awkward payload and a base module was an excuse to do that

File: ksp8.png (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB PNG

>>563829565
Are you planning to dock things together on the surface?

>>563830231
i dont think so; the port is really just there to act as a door. the base is just going to be a few separate modules that the kerbals will eva between, is my plan atm

File: ksp9.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

Idk whether to love or hate the contract system. I assume it's why this ore lander has seating for 9 kerbals and a cupola

File: ksp10.png (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB PNG

Maybe this was supposed to combine a contract for a space station with an interplanetary drive stage but never used because it's only got a mini docking port on the front?

File: ksp11.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

Now this is interesting. Like the last ship it has large crew capacity and lots of liquid fuel, probably to fulfill a space station contract but nerva engines were added to 2 of the docking ports after launch.

>>563823428
>Multiple tanks in a quad formation like that are bound to be less stable than a single massive tank
I didn't have an answer for that but after looking at more of my old vehicles I think they don't use big tanks because KSP didn't have big tanks that only store liquid fuel for some fucking reason. The contracts are always for liquid fuel, not oxidizer iirc and maybe using the liquid-only tanks allowed a smaller vehicle.

>>563824867
Am I seeing things, or do you use the larger docking ports to reduce the inevitable wobbling?
Also, why swivel design? Wouldn't it be better to use a plane-like landing for long rover delivery?
Or, maybe, make a multi-part rover by docking smaller modules together?

>>563832892
Even if you're a mod purist, I consider configurable tanks and procedural tanks mods a necessity, simply to bypass the limitations of available parts, also to reduce the part count and, subsequently, how much shit the game has to simulate physics for.

File: KSP_x64_udl04dxvny.png (3 MB)

3 MB PNG

i should try to figure out why my jet engine lacks the flamey burney effects at the back

File: ksp12.png (2 MB)

2 MB PNG

I like the "get me the fuck out of here pod" cluster but I've no idea what's going on with those 4 orange tanks.
>>563833393
>inevitable wobbling?
the tanker is held in by a mini docking port at the front of the bay and a couple of struts at the other end so there's no wobble really.
>Wouldn't it be better to use a plane-like landing for long rover delivery?
You mean landing a rocket sideways with a second set of VTOL engines? I haven't tried it though it makes most sense when you're landing a nearly empty vehicle with a nearly empty lander so the sideways vtol engines only need to be small. Once the lander is fully fueled and maybe carrying a fully fueled tanker or some other heavy cargo the vtol engines would need to be much larger and packaging those could get interesting.
>multi-part rover by docking smaller modules together?
Sure. What would that look like?
>I consider configurable tanks and procedural tanks mods a necessity,
Yeah Idk. The lack of 0.6m tanks apparently bothered me enough to mod them in but not large liquid tanks for some reason.

File: Screenshot_20260417_142107.jpg (2.1 MB)

2.1 MB JPG

Is it me being really shit at this game. Or building in DSP is shit?

File: ksp13.png (1.8 MB)

1.8 MB PNG

Found another get me the fuck out of here pod cluster orbiting the mun. Maybe these exist so the landers don't need to return to kerbin or have any re-entry equipment.

I turn off almost all of the KSP contracts and pretty much just have science collection contracts. I am playing the frontier space exploration agency, damnit. No retarded craft that have been put up by companies for me to deal with. In fact, no space trash at all. I deorbit anything that isn't a permanent installation.

File: Screenshot_20260417_145020.jpg (1.3 MB)

1.3 MB JPG

>>563835594
Also, now for my real questions. The tutorial tells me that I have to go to other planets for titanium and more. But how do I transport them back?

File: ksp14.png (2.4 MB)

2.4 MB PNG

So that's how the mysterious second tanker got to duna. Some kinda big re-usable booster.

>>563835457
Still, would using larger docking ports help make the connection more stable?
>You mean landing a rocket sideways with a second set of VTOL engines?
Not quite. I'm talking landing it like a plane — horizontally.
Use engines to kill most of the velocity, then landing gear brakes to bring it to a complete stop.
Using either retro-thrusters, rotating engine pods, or turning the whole craft around and going in ass-first Lexx-style.
…may need a large landing strut to lift the nose up for easier takeoff after landing, though.
>it makes most sense when you're landing a nearly empty vehicle with a nearly empty lander
Why'd you have a loaded vehicle for in the first place? Start with an ISRU module or two, then fuel stuff off of those, no?
You could bring construction parts, but you don't like on-site building, so I don't see the point in fueled vehicles, to be honest.

>What would that look like?
Picture the Hitchhiker cabin or a fuel tank on it's side, with wheels attached, then slap a docking port on both of it's ends.
Add a few more modules like that, then dock them together. Lots of parts, but you can deliver the modules separately.
With a remote control part you don't even need crew for rearranging the modules.
Might be able to build it on-site too with part attachment, but I haven't tried that myself, so don't know if that works for sure.

>I've no idea what's going on with those 4 orange tanks
They look like dockable fuel tank modules to me. Doing a lot of refueling in orbit?
>ion thrusters on landing capsule
Clever, but won't they run out of electricity? I don't think an RTG can satisfy their power hunger, not without some heavy batteries.
RCS/monoprop engines seem like a safer bet, shouldn't be too heavy either, methinks. Gives you some wiggle room maneuvering-wise too.

>>563835594
it kinda is, and last I tried it the blueprints still sucked ass. but DSP, unlike most any other game, has to deal with blueprinting on top of an approximate spheroid coordinate system, so I cut them some slack when it comes to imperfect blueprint borders.

>>563837763
manually.

I am using Kerbalism for science. The SENTINAL asteroid finder thing has a science experiment. But when I run it, it says it will take 600 years to complete. It has enough power. Any idea why that is?

File: file.png (946.9 KB)

946.9 KB PNG

at this point should I just install loaders

>>563838869
I'm surprised pY doesn't come with loaders in some fashion, I'd even eat the piped lube cost just to have them

>>563838431
Thx, guess Ill produce yellow hash on another planet and ship it manually until I can get Interstellar logistics

>>563835594
Why not both?

>>563837763
iirc your first trip has to be in person. Beeline for Interstellar Logistics Station tech and you'll only have to do it once.

>>563838869
Are those slow, huge and expensive to run assemblers really better than adding a fuel input?

>>563840097
they are if you can put productivity on them

File: yKZsnGtrtm.png (39.5 KB)

39.5 KB PNG

>>563777753
>4.1 before 2.1

File: ksp15.png (1.7 MB)

1.7 MB PNG

Not entirely sure what the use case is for this one. It has a lot of power generation and storage with ISRU but almost zero fuel storage. It's got a hinged docking port on the back so maybe it's supposed to connect to the normal tanker/miner.
>>563838353
>Why'd you have a loaded vehicle for in the first place?
I wouldn't. I meant to say a rocket that lands sideways makes sense if you're only going to land it, but lifting off again at maximum weight could be a challenge. I did see lexx when it was on tv but don't get what you mean.
>I'm talking landing it like a plane — horizontally.
Maybe I'm missing something here but wouldn't landing a rocket like a plane be extremely difficult or borderline impossible?
>ions
I don't think those are ion thrusters. just the smallest fuel tanks with the smallest engines.

>>563840229
4.05, the other 0.05 is a dlc

File: KSP_x64_zuiQaIHsY9.png (3.3 MB)

3.3 MB PNG

i wish ground vehicles were not shit in ksp

>>563840603
>Maybe I'm missing something here but wouldn't landing a rocket like a plane be extremely difficult or borderline impossible?
That's why I'm suggesting making it more plane-like for horizontal landing and dropping off long vehicles.
>don't get what you mean
Off the top of my head there are three approaches to tackling horizontal landing: retro-thrusters, rotating engine pods, and turning the whole craft around to land backwards.
"Lexx-style" is turning the craft around and firing the thrusters retrograde to land "backwards".

I just think that landing larger and longer vehicles might be easier done with a horizontally-landing craft, rather than using a swiveling section… however cool it may look.

>>563841424
There is nothing to do on the ground anything. Its not like Kerbal actually has cool surface features or really anything on the surface at all.