bakanando

Proktologue 1

Oh god, this is bad. I can't complain about anything. Thanks for the summary. I haven't played in a long time now, but I like to keep up with development.

Have you made any named saves? Loading one of those could save your game.

Is he the pointy-haired boss of squad? I'd think it is because of him that we don't get any orbital information or any useful info. A dev that doesn't know how to play their own game is scary.

The flea is still overpowered, underfueled, and overweight. It's sad to see a new part with a good idea being so broken in implementation. The squad spent time designing a part that you'll only use once per science/career play.

Just think about it like you do with RCS, that also drains from everywhere.

Considering the direction development has been going for a while, rockets wont be the only things crashing and burning if they keep the same course.

The rockomax 2.5 decoupler is also a very wobbly part, after switching to separators of the same size I've had little to no wobbly rockets in past versions. I reduce the use of the decoupler as much as I can for that reason.

I haven't had memory related crashes, but I play on linux and things are more stable here memory wise. I did had #3 happen to me in a 0.90 save, I had to revert to an older save as I was having many different glitches occurring after the inital borking.

This would work if it was interstellar space, in interplanetary space there are no stars in-between.

Will there be a squadcast this week?

I would have payed $30 for 0.24. I wouldn't pay $20 for 1.0

The real one weights just a bit more than 5.5 T and at 4m diameter is a bit less that twice the size. The kerbal one is extremely heavy for a thing that should be as light as possible. In my case, I'm using the hitchhikers for transporting more than two kerbals at a time.

OpenGL will make the game run more stable in either platform, your problem might be somewhere graphics related though. Try reading the Linux Thread and post more information about your pc's specs or you won't get much help.

Don't forget about the EVA reports on mun orbit differ between different geological regions/biomes, you can get about 300 just from milking those. I've finished the 90 science mark without even landing on mun, which is the next project you should aim for. Contracts won't give you enough science to advance much.

The mission says from orbit of Mun though, so it seems ok.

He mentioned it in last week's squadcast. You can check the transcript by ObsessedwithKSP here in the forums. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/121535-Squadcast-Summary-%282015-05-16%29-Max-Forgets-About-Re-entry-Heating-Edition%21

This is one of those things that should have been cleansed before release.

Although I don't know what could have affected the fuel this way, there's a way to fix the fuel levels. You will need to upgrade your R&D building for fuel transfer capabilities though. You seem to have just enough fuel for two full tanks plus a bit in another, thus: 1. Fill both tanks below the pods. 2. Transfer the remaining fuel to the center tank. 3. From both full tanks, transfer fuel to one of the empty radial tanks until it fills completely. You'll now have two tanks half full, one full, and one empty. Plus the central one. 4. From the full one, transfer half the fuel to the empty radial one. This might not be perfect, but at least you'll have just a slight fuel unbalance in one direction. 5. Transfer fuel from all the radial ones into the central one until all are level or the central has as much fuel as you want. You can even fill it if you want. There are better ways, but this was the easiest I found that could be made quickly. And for you problem, try disabling any and all mods that you are using before lifting off again. One of them might be causing the problem. For further troubleshooting a craft file or more pictures can help.

I really haven't heard of this problem before, but I think there is two ways that may fix it. The first is that you might have some residual archives from earlier versions, check your steam install (right click on KSP->options) or make a clean install and move your save data there. Is your savegame a new 1.0+ game? The second option is that you might be able to work around it by putting all your tourists inside a pod, launch, and recover to see if the contract check is fixed this time.

@Necrobones: Your design had little problems because the small fins have almost no lift compared to other fins I ran in the test, they indeed perform pretty well but still show the tendency to pull/push your rocket towards an arbitrary direction. Indeed, fins+gimballing work very well to hide this problem. But that is not a fix, it is a workaround to an inherent problem in the game. I don't have SAS modules yet, so I can't really tell how much torque do you need to control your rocket and counteract the fins exagerated torque. -Edit- @KerbMav: That is hilarious, sorry. You might have moved the camera down with your mouse (middle button hold), and changed the camera to new chase mode. This would cause something similar to what you had. As for the tumbling, try holding closer to prograde at all times.

I had a similar problem. Loading an earlier quicksave fixed the problem. I hope it works for you too.

You are going too fast, even after the previously mentioned 20km if you tilt too much away from prograde your rocket will flip. The smaller rocket fins will help (fins are currently bugged though), but you will need a gimballed engines or your rocket will still be unstable. Try not to veer too far from prograde. Even with a gimballed engine the ship will flip if your ship gets out of the prograde circle while below 15km and above 400m/s. Finally, if you are going faster than 400m/s by 10km, you are definitely going too fast.

That's the next thing I wanted to do, I played minecraft all day so haven't tested it yet.

It's a problem that fins are not working as they should, as finless rockets tumble if they are ever so slightly misaligned with prograde, but turn too quickly when fins are included. As of now, I have noticed the problem with three and four way symmetry. I'll try alshain's suggestion of putting each fin individually (bad workaround), and test other symmetry modes (namely, 6 and 8 way simmetry).