Any controlling of a separate craft will have to be done using the Vizzy programming!
…….
However once you get beyond 10 kilometers of another craft no control is possible. Craft beyond that distance actuality despawn and do not exists (only exist as an invisible place holder).
I got this when “validating” system files a few times! Turned out in doing that many of the planets I downloaded (that other players uploaded to this site) had been deleted! I had to re-download this planets to get the custom system to work again.
……….
So somehow you’ve lost files associated with the planetary system you made! Hopefully you made or can find backups of them!
Highest point in the orbit above planet/moon sea level, no?
……..
Pretty sure, for instance, if you place your apogee (or perigee) above Brigo’s giant Crater, it gives the height above “sea level” but you will still have 20-30 km above ground level.
Could be many reasons for this: would help to see the craft in question but….
……….
If you have a gyroscope in the craft, it will of course try to keep the heading locked during a burn. This will use battery power so you need to make sure you have enough battery (and a way to recharge it) so it does not run out. If the batteries were to run out of power in this situation the gyro will cease operating and a spin could ensue.
………..
Also sounds like maybe your center of thrust (CoT) and center of mass (CoM) might not be aligned well enough. When CoT and CoM are not aligned this will cause the craft to point a few degrees off from where it should be pointed during the burn (and lead to less accurate burns). It probibly is possible to have those two so out of line that even a gyro will not be able keep the craft pointed in a steady direction and the craft begins to tumble (or as previously stated if the gyro runs out of power) Agian we’d really need to see this craft to diagnose the issue but there’s a starting point.
Unless someone else chimes in with exact coordinates (might happen but this forum can have a lot of unanswered posts), you’ll prolly need to send a rover to do some exploring near some equatorial spots. You’re unlikely to find a perfectly flat area but there are surly some with very gentle sloping somewhere on the ridge tops (the lighter color areas next to the darker colored ridges on that moon). I’ve found a few areas like this but do not know the exact coordinates.
@Pandariptor doesn’t really matter.
………
1. Because these ideas have already been suggested several times.
…….
2. The suggestions page was closed down some time ago because most of the suggestions (like this one) were just duplicate suggestions.
………..
You can still add a “suggestions” tag apparently, but that seems more for other players who are searching through forum posts then anything.
@SDNS well you’re gonna find a realistic design nearly impossible to duplicate anyhow! The Juno system is scaled differently than Earth’s! So if you try to replicate a real world rocket (same size, same mass, same amount of fuel, same fill in the blank) it’s going to over perform in the scaled back system …… and not be “realistic”. You’re going to have to make some compromises to make it look like it’s real life counterpart and perform similarly.
I don’t believe it has ever been stated what they’re made from! I’m guessing this is just a inquiry from curiosity since it really doesn’t matter, it’s not a property that can be changed.
How hot are the panels getting? They added in a dynamic that if the panels get too hot now they will no longer charge a battery. This can easily happen close to Juno. Try angling the panels so they are not pointing directly at Juno
There’s not really any point to having them in game right now is the problem. Main advantage to them is they are not cryogenic so do not boil off, but since that’s not models in the game …..
………….
If you just want the visual effect of using them I found it relatively least to change the exhaust properties of the engines in the “advanced properties” of the tinker panel. In fact that’s one parameter you can change that will still work in a career game.
@PeriodicAerospace well they planned to land back on the moon by 2025, so those “plans” keep changing. I was mostly curious as to weather or not anyone’s heard any good outline for when they realistically expect to do a lunar test landing of HLS (not general “early/mid/late insert year” projections).
————
I’ll start getting excited at that point (when the thing is actually on its way to the moon to see if it can land). Otherwise I’ve been hearing “return to the moon” date being tossed around since 2006.
@YaMomzBox420 yeah a year or so seems a bit optimistic given they still gotta build HLS and then refuel it in orbit 5-50 times before it can be on its way. As far as I know they don’t even have final design for the HLS yet……
—————
My best hopes are maybe 3-5 years …..
The good news might be: it sure looks like from the videos I’ve seen that SimplePlanes 2 they’re no working on might have mechanics for tank guns! They show bombs and missiles as well as a tank (but not the tank firing).
@PlaneplaneplaneSSSSS sure that seems like a possible solution.
————
But since those parts were never designed with that purpose in mind (firing a high speed projectile) I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the kinetic energy doesn’t quite match that of a typical tank gun. (Not to mention the fact parts tinkered too extreme can cause other funky issues). You've essentially attempted mimic a normal gun firing a projectile using gun powder, but it might not work exactly the same!
Yeah the physics of the game isn’t really set up to accommodate guns and such! I’m not even sure how you would propel the projectiles out of the gun barrel, we only have high velocity explosives not slower burning chemicals like guns would use…..
Obviously also make the inlet square by setting all 4 corners to 0.
————
Just be aware there is a limit to how much “slant” you can get. You might not get as much slant as the XB-70 has though, just not sure
So yeah they kinda slant outwards from the centerline and are square! You’ll need to use the slant shape tool to try an emulate that look. That should give em a bottom side that juts out further in front than the top. Then of course you’ll wanna rotate it on its side.
I would think that is just fine. So long as you
Don’t use them to manipulate up votes or spam or planing on doing something to get banned by one account etc.
Well I took a look at the craft on your post (didn’t download) you have a lot of side interstages on that tank really close together it looks like.
——————
What you’re describing sounds like it’s possible all those side interstages are colliding with one another causing it to break apart. Even if they’re not touching visually (or actually) they may be a bit to close for the physics driver.
——————
Try giving the interstage a little more room between them and see if that helps any.
—————
ADD: I don’t actually know what’s causing this, just assessing possibilities based on previous behaviors I’ve seen in the game.
Well hopefully someone will chime in with a usable answer! If not, there are a number of mars landers uploaded to this site: might try downloading a few that use parachutes and checking their settings out (if you haven't already.
…….
I found Cylero a tad boring so I’ve only landed a few probes there, and always just used engines for landing! Just seemed so much easier.
Actually there are decaying orbits! Sort of
……..
Atmospheric effects can occur as far out as at least 600 km from Droo that I know of (never seen any beyond 2000 km of Droo but exactly where that line is I dunno). If you actually stick with a craft in a low orbit (100 to 200 kilometers around Droo) for 3 or 4 orbits (and DO NOT time warp) you will notice your perigee/apogee decrease a kilometer or 2! And it is the atmosphere that causes this phenomena (because it doesn’t happen around Luna or Brigo that don’t have an atmosphere).
……..
However you won’t see atmospheric decay (or any atmospheric effects) if you are not actively with that craft. There’s a very good reason for this: if you have 30 or 40 craft orbiting Droo as I often do, having to “station keep” all them would become a tedious and time consuming task! Especially when you don’t have a staff of 20 people and its just you doing all the work.
Can’t say much about everything else you wrote, more is always more and more is usually better! But of course they were prolly never gonna be able add everything that everyone wanted (and they are no longer taking suggestions/requests since it all has basically been suggested at this point). So it’s very unlikely they will ever read this (they don’t even respond to bugs/glitches in this section of the forums).
……..
But at least the biggest limiting factor you had is no longer a factor anymore!
You’re confusing radius with diameter!
….
They in fact can be made as large as the real life counterparts. Orion has a diameter of 5.03 m (radius of 2.515 m) which is within the sizing limits.
@BuilditProx Show what exactly? That's what I'm saying, there would be nothing to show! It's all SimplePlanes 2 devlopment right now probably.
........
Developers are very unlikely to come out and say: "were not doing anything at this time with (game title)". It's not exactly a statement that would go over very well.
In case you haven't noticed: there are currently a number issues (particularly with career game contracts) that are not even being addressed at this time (bug reports etc going unanswered).
……….
I suspect the team is full into the development of Simple Planes 2 right now and that is why. But if they can’t even address small glitches in career contracts that are causing them to fail for a number of player, I wouldn’t expect any big new updates or development progress for some time!
………..
I won’t go so far as to project they are “done” with Juno or will not have anymore updates in the future, but I really do not see anything big coming for a matter of months while they focus on their new game.
Btw! I would be thrilled if they implemented all those factor into the game! Would make it much more realistic. But not if it’s just “hyperbolic propellant” with no real incentive to use it.
…….
There’s already not much of an incentive to use the varying fuel types currently available.
Engine restarts are unlimited! probability of engine restart isn’t modeled. So again, no point!
…….
Sure if you dive into the advanced properties of the tinker panel you can limit the number of restarts, but it is totally optional (and most players will never even touch that option)
…….
Now if they ever implement factors such as: does the engine have an ignitor, how many restarts can the gas supply accommodate (for gas generator and staged engine), engine failure probabilities and cryogenic boil off rate, then maybe they’ll add in more fuel options. But until then, adding in hyperbolic would simply be a cosmetic add.
Prolly when there’s a point to them
…….
The main purpose for them is that they don’t suffer from the issue of boil off like cryogenic fuels do. But since boil off isn’t modeled in the game …….
When you click on the part, it should be in the very top drop down tab that activation groups are assigned. By default it will be set to “none” but should be a couple of selector arrows (one in either side) too cycle through which activation group you want it assigned!
Well I just searched “change craft using vizzy”
…….
There are a few results out there so you might wanna try doing that…. Cause you could be waiting a while for answer here (there are several recent posts on here that still remain unanswered).
……..
If I used vizzy and knew, I would tell you. But I don’t.
Yeah B**!
.....
One of my biggest frustrations with the game is that we have a very nice Military style cockpit but trying to make a commercial/general aviation cockpit is a hell of a pain! I never even flew aircraft in this game until a few months ago when starting up a career game nut now I find the lack of easy to construct aircraft parts a real hamper!
AHHHH yes! I'm an old Microsoft Flight Simulator player (dating back to MS flight sim 4.0 in 1993!). Unfortunately, this game is no "Flight simulator" nor do I think it was ever intended to be!
.......
Not that those aren't good ideas, but I think you might be lucky to get them in the upcoming SimplePlanes 2 but most likely not here (planes seem to have come as an after thought in SimpleRockets 2/Juno, and only recently been taken very seriously with the recent updates). But as frequently tell others: I play this game for the Rocketry/space exploration, If I wanna fly an airplane, I start up MS Flight Sim!
........
As far as flaps go: You actually can put those onto wing surfaces in Juno! Just add a second control surface, Set them to a "Slider" of your choice, then click the "Invert on Mirror" option so they will rotate in the same direction (instead of opposing directions like ailerons do) and whala! you have some flaps!
If you’re not the type to set your own goals for motivation to play this likely isn’t the best game! Even with that it can get a bit old after a while but also does in career mode I’ve found (after sending up the 20th SmallSat it’s really only for money at that point nothing real different then what you’ve done before). So then it can just become about finding diffrent ways to accomplish the same stuff.
They are not identified as a particular type found in real world rocketry.
…….
There are a couple different types like “amateur” and (forgot what the other is called) as well as a few diffrent grain types like ramp up, ramp down, steady and basic.
Sometimes it’s helpful to color the “up” RCS thrusters a different color so when docking you can identify visually the orientation of your craft. In the designer, the “up” side of your craft (when in rocket configuration) will be the side pointing away from the blue arrow on the grid at the bottom.
The Luna Mare (dark ocean parts of Luna) are the flattest parts! They get flatter twords the center then around the edges from what I’ve seen. If you want an absolute 0° slant surface you prolly have land a rover there first and do some scouting. Or by using pistons in conjunction with landing legs, you can level the structures more that way.
If you mean to hold different kinds of fuel types?
……
Really you can just as easily add two “tanks” together with different fuel types and they’ll look like the same tank!
Well you can’t! You could sort of reproduce the effect using pistons. The idea being you have fuel tanks the size of the inflated object and hid them (or reduce their size by having them clip together) then use pistons to “expand” them out.
Any controlling of a separate craft will have to be done using the Vizzy programming!
10 hours ago…….
However once you get beyond 10 kilometers of another craft no control is possible. Craft beyond that distance actuality despawn and do not exists (only exist as an invisible place holder).
I got this when “validating” system files a few times! Turned out in doing that many of the planets I downloaded (that other players uploaded to this site) had been deleted! I had to re-download this planets to get the custom system to work again.
+1 3 days ago……….
So somehow you’ve lost files associated with the planetary system you made! Hopefully you made or can find backups of them!
@Pedro is it not calculated as: highest point of a craft's orbit above a planet's/moon's sea level?
13 days agoHighest point in the orbit above planet/moon sea level, no?
14 days ago……..
Pretty sure, for instance, if you place your apogee (or perigee) above Brigo’s giant Crater, it gives the height above “sea level” but you will still have 20-30 km above ground level.
Could be many reasons for this: would help to see the craft in question but….
15 days ago……….
If you have a gyroscope in the craft, it will of course try to keep the heading locked during a burn. This will use battery power so you need to make sure you have enough battery (and a way to recharge it) so it does not run out. If the batteries were to run out of power in this situation the gyro will cease operating and a spin could ensue.
………..
Also sounds like maybe your center of thrust (CoT) and center of mass (CoM) might not be aligned well enough. When CoT and CoM are not aligned this will cause the craft to point a few degrees off from where it should be pointed during the burn (and lead to less accurate burns). It probibly is possible to have those two so out of line that even a gyro will not be able keep the craft pointed in a steady direction and the craft begins to tumble (or as previously stated if the gyro runs out of power) Agian we’d really need to see this craft to diagnose the issue but there’s a starting point.
Unless someone else chimes in with exact coordinates (might happen but this forum can have a lot of unanswered posts), you’ll prolly need to send a rover to do some exploring near some equatorial spots. You’re unlikely to find a perfectly flat area but there are surly some with very gentle sloping somewhere on the ridge tops (the lighter color areas next to the darker colored ridges on that moon). I’ve found a few areas like this but do not know the exact coordinates.
+2 19 days ago@Pandariptor doesn’t really matter.
20 days ago………
1. Because these ideas have already been suggested several times.
…….
2. The suggestions page was closed down some time ago because most of the suggestions (like this one) were just duplicate suggestions.
………..
You can still add a “suggestions” tag apparently, but that seems more for other players who are searching through forum posts then anything.
@SDNS well you’re gonna find a realistic design nearly impossible to duplicate anyhow! The Juno system is scaled differently than Earth’s! So if you try to replicate a real world rocket (same size, same mass, same amount of fuel, same fill in the blank) it’s going to over perform in the scaled back system …… and not be “realistic”. You’re going to have to make some compromises to make it look like it’s real life counterpart and perform similarly.
20 days agoI don’t believe it has ever been stated what they’re made from! I’m guessing this is just a inquiry from curiosity since it really doesn’t matter, it’s not a property that can be changed.
21 days agoHow hot are the panels getting? They added in a dynamic that if the panels get too hot now they will no longer charge a battery. This can easily happen close to Juno. Try angling the panels so they are not pointing directly at Juno
+1 21 days agoThere’s not really any point to having them in game right now is the problem. Main advantage to them is they are not cryogenic so do not boil off, but since that’s not models in the game …..
21 days ago………….
If you just want the visual effect of using them I found it relatively least to change the exhaust properties of the engines in the “advanced properties” of the tinker panel. In fact that’s one parameter you can change that will still work in a career game.
@PeriodicAerospace well they planned to land back on the moon by 2025, so those “plans” keep changing. I was mostly curious as to weather or not anyone’s heard any good outline for when they realistically expect to do a lunar test landing of HLS (not general “early/mid/late insert year” projections).
one month ago————
I’ll start getting excited at that point (when the thing is actually on its way to the moon to see if it can land). Otherwise I’ve been hearing “return to the moon” date being tossed around since 2006.
@YaMomzBox420 yeah a year or so seems a bit optimistic given they still gotta build HLS and then refuel it in orbit 5-50 times before it can be on its way. As far as I know they don’t even have final design for the HLS yet……
one month ago—————
My best hopes are maybe 3-5 years …..
I dunno man! Coulda sworn I saw a bird flying backwards in that video!
+1 one month agoSo how long till we get an HLS fueled up, en route to the moon and ready for a landing?
+1 one month agoThe good news might be: it sure looks like from the videos I’ve seen that SimplePlanes 2 they’re no working on might have mechanics for tank guns! They show bombs and missiles as well as a tank (but not the tank firing).
one month ago@PlaneplaneplaneSSSSS sure that seems like a possible solution.
one month ago————
But since those parts were never designed with that purpose in mind (firing a high speed projectile) I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the kinetic energy doesn’t quite match that of a typical tank gun. (Not to mention the fact parts tinkered too extreme can cause other funky issues). You've essentially attempted mimic a normal gun firing a projectile using gun powder, but it might not work exactly the same!
Yeah the physics of the game isn’t really set up to accommodate guns and such! I’m not even sure how you would propel the projectiles out of the gun barrel, we only have high velocity explosives not slower burning chemicals like guns would use…..
+1 one month agoObviously also make the inlet square by setting all 4 corners to 0.
one month ago————
Just be aware there is a limit to how much “slant” you can get. You might not get as much slant as the XB-70 has though, just not sure
So yeah they kinda slant outwards from the centerline and are square! You’ll need to use the slant shape tool to try an emulate that look. That should give em a bottom side that juts out further in front than the top. Then of course you’ll wanna rotate it on its side.
+1 one month agoI would think that is just fine. So long as you
+1 one month agoDon’t use them to manipulate up votes or spam or planing on doing something to get banned by one account etc.
@Edithiddenproperties31415 no you don’t have too. Only if you want too
+1 one month agoWell I took a look at the craft on your post (didn’t download) you have a lot of side interstages on that tank really close together it looks like.
+1 one month ago——————
What you’re describing sounds like it’s possible all those side interstages are colliding with one another causing it to break apart. Even if they’re not touching visually (or actually) they may be a bit to close for the physics driver.
——————
Try giving the interstage a little more room between them and see if that helps any.
—————
ADD: I don’t actually know what’s causing this, just assessing possibilities based on previous behaviors I’ve seen in the game.
Well hopefully someone will chime in with a usable answer! If not, there are a number of mars landers uploaded to this site: might try downloading a few that use parachutes and checking their settings out (if you haven't already.
one month ago…….
I found Cylero a tad boring so I’ve only landed a few probes there, and always just used engines for landing! Just seemed so much easier.
Actually there are decaying orbits! Sort of
+1 one month ago……..
Atmospheric effects can occur as far out as at least 600 km from Droo that I know of (never seen any beyond 2000 km of Droo but exactly where that line is I dunno). If you actually stick with a craft in a low orbit (100 to 200 kilometers around Droo) for 3 or 4 orbits (and DO NOT time warp) you will notice your perigee/apogee decrease a kilometer or 2! And it is the atmosphere that causes this phenomena (because it doesn’t happen around Luna or Brigo that don’t have an atmosphere).
……..
However you won’t see atmospheric decay (or any atmospheric effects) if you are not actively with that craft. There’s a very good reason for this: if you have 30 or 40 craft orbiting Droo as I often do, having to “station keep” all them would become a tedious and time consuming task! Especially when you don’t have a staff of 20 people and its just you doing all the work.
Can’t say much about everything else you wrote, more is always more and more is usually better! But of course they were prolly never gonna be able add everything that everyone wanted (and they are no longer taking suggestions/requests since it all has basically been suggested at this point). So it’s very unlikely they will ever read this (they don’t even respond to bugs/glitches in this section of the forums).
one month ago……..
But at least the biggest limiting factor you had is no longer a factor anymore!
You’re confusing radius with diameter!
one month ago….
They in fact can be made as large as the real life counterparts. Orion has a diameter of 5.03 m (radius of 2.515 m) which is within the sizing limits.
@BuilditProx Show what exactly? That's what I'm saying, there would be nothing to show! It's all SimplePlanes 2 devlopment right now probably.
+1 one month ago........
Developers are very unlikely to come out and say: "were not doing anything at this time with (game title)". It's not exactly a statement that would go over very well.
In case you haven't noticed: there are currently a number issues (particularly with career game contracts) that are not even being addressed at this time (bug reports etc going unanswered).
+2 one month ago……….
I suspect the team is full into the development of Simple Planes 2 right now and that is why. But if they can’t even address small glitches in career contracts that are causing them to fail for a number of player, I wouldn’t expect any big new updates or development progress for some time!
………..
I won’t go so far as to project they are “done” with Juno or will not have anymore updates in the future, but I really do not see anything big coming for a matter of months while they focus on their new game.
Btw! I would be thrilled if they implemented all those factor into the game! Would make it much more realistic. But not if it’s just “hyperbolic propellant” with no real incentive to use it.
2 months ago…….
There’s already not much of an incentive to use the varying fuel types currently available.
Engine restarts are unlimited! probability of engine restart isn’t modeled. So again, no point!
2 months ago…….
Sure if you dive into the advanced properties of the tinker panel you can limit the number of restarts, but it is totally optional (and most players will never even touch that option)
…….
Now if they ever implement factors such as: does the engine have an ignitor, how many restarts can the gas supply accommodate (for gas generator and staged engine), engine failure probabilities and cryogenic boil off rate, then maybe they’ll add in more fuel options. But until then, adding in hyperbolic would simply be a cosmetic add.
Prolly when there’s a point to them
2 months ago…….
The main purpose for them is that they don’t suffer from the issue of boil off like cryogenic fuels do. But since boil off isn’t modeled in the game …….
No
2 months agoWhen you click on the part, it should be in the very top drop down tab that activation groups are assigned. By default it will be set to “none” but should be a couple of selector arrows (one in either side) too cycle through which activation group you want it assigned!
2 months agoWell I just searched “change craft using vizzy”
3 months ago…….
There are a few results out there so you might wanna try doing that…. Cause you could be waiting a while for answer here (there are several recent posts on here that still remain unanswered).
……..
If I used vizzy and knew, I would tell you. But I don’t.
https://www.simplerockets.com/Forums/View/82589/How-to-switch-crafts-using-vizzy
Does that not work?
3 months agoHmmmm that’s odd, I’ve never had adding flap control surfaces behave like that. There’s prolly a reason and solution for it though.
3 months agoYeah B**!
3 months ago.....
One of my biggest frustrations with the game is that we have a very nice Military style cockpit but trying to make a commercial/general aviation cockpit is a hell of a pain! I never even flew aircraft in this game until a few months ago when starting up a career game nut now I find the lack of easy to construct aircraft parts a real hamper!
Fail
3 months agoAHHHH yes! I'm an old Microsoft Flight Simulator player (dating back to MS flight sim 4.0 in 1993!). Unfortunately, this game is no "Flight simulator" nor do I think it was ever intended to be!
3 months ago.......
Not that those aren't good ideas, but I think you might be lucky to get them in the upcoming SimplePlanes 2 but most likely not here (planes seem to have come as an after thought in SimpleRockets 2/Juno, and only recently been taken very seriously with the recent updates). But as frequently tell others: I play this game for the Rocketry/space exploration, If I wanna fly an airplane, I start up MS Flight Sim!
........
As far as flaps go: You actually can put those onto wing surfaces in Juno! Just add a second control surface, Set them to a "Slider" of your choice, then click the "Invert on Mirror" option so they will rotate in the same direction (instead of opposing directions like ailerons do) and whala! you have some flaps!
As previously stated: it is simply identified as “solid” fuel (not by any chemical makeup).
3 months agoIf you’re not the type to set your own goals for motivation to play this likely isn’t the best game! Even with that it can get a bit old after a while but also does in career mode I’ve found (after sending up the 20th SmallSat it’s really only for money at that point nothing real different then what you’ve done before). So then it can just become about finding diffrent ways to accomplish the same stuff.
3 months agoThey are not identified as a particular type found in real world rocketry.
3 months ago…….
There are a couple different types like “amateur” and (forgot what the other is called) as well as a few diffrent grain types like ramp up, ramp down, steady and basic.
Sometimes it’s helpful to color the “up” RCS thrusters a different color so when docking you can identify visually the orientation of your craft. In the designer, the “up” side of your craft (when in rocket configuration) will be the side pointing away from the blue arrow on the grid at the bottom.
3 months agoThe Luna Mare (dark ocean parts of Luna) are the flattest parts! They get flatter twords the center then around the edges from what I’ve seen. If you want an absolute 0° slant surface you prolly have land a rover there first and do some scouting. Or by using pistons in conjunction with landing legs, you can level the structures more that way.
4 months agoIf you mean to hold different kinds of fuel types?
4 months ago……
Really you can just as easily add two “tanks” together with different fuel types and they’ll look like the same tank!
Start a career game, you’ll see some “landmarks” marked with white flags and names.
4 months agoWell you can’t! You could sort of reproduce the effect using pistons. The idea being you have fuel tanks the size of the inflated object and hid them (or reduce their size by having them clip together) then use pistons to “expand” them out.
4 months agoYeah the suspensions are weird in this game sometimes! They can bounces around and jitter like they’re on crack or something!
4 months agoThe largest mountain (prolly a volcano) is:
5 months agoVeegxangus Mons
……
The large valley is:
Valles Lusiades
……
Both are labeled as landmarks in career