martinborgen

Yes, I have been thinking of placing flags, however, upon switching to my spaceplane, the loading bugged and all parts separated. Strange, but happened three times. However, do you find one flag at each end suffice? Some more during the final approach might be handy, no?

Hello all. I currently have some troubles landing my spaceplane. I either come in too hard or too fast (not having enough runway to break on). I've played quite a bit of flight sims, so this shouldn't be too hard, but I don't have my joystick anymore, so I might be hampered by needing to use keyboard. HOwever, when I come from orbit, I find it hard to line up with the runway. The cockpit view is not that good, and the externals are not much better. As I don't have the luxury of landing legs, or circle the airfield, I find a lot of error in descent speed is made trying to align. A way would be to place probes, giving markers similar to a real runway approach. But how to place these so that they're correctly aligned?

Laptop plugged in. However, I just found one power setting, masked by bad wording, (perhaps bad translation to Swedish OS), Power saving scheme selection worded as "power schemes visible on the battery meter" or something similar. I tried ticking "power4gear maximum performance", instead of "power4gear power saving". Voila, the FPS is back! Loads on 49%, FPS on 40! Ah, the smoothness! Too many places to choose the same thing, Nvidia control panel, GeForce experience, etc. were all set to maximum performance, no power save. But this one, under control panel, energy options, was the key! Well, still it won't work harder on re-entry when FPS is at 20, load is at 40-50%, but it's so much better, still feels smooth.

No, nothing I can notice. By speed, you mean the load or processor clocking? From memory, the clock is at 2,2+ GHz, but I will check it up for you. All the cores show similar load, all around 20%. I have turned every slides to performance, but I might have missed some obscure one.

I have not investigated NaNs, I think I tried once, and the game diddn't like it. It happens a lot though (though negligible number of crashes/bugs). Anyone has a clue why? I have not found any correlation between their occurrence (through debug menu) and the low FPS. (As low FPS is constant, although worsened the more things going on at the same time). Further, I've checked on GPU-Z what my GPU's up to - and it's chillin' at 10-20% load. In fact, it seems the low FPS is parallel to lowered GPU load - basically, the GPU doesn't try hard enough, and less as more things happen. Disc usage is low, memory has a margin, CPU is 10-20%. I simply cannot find the bottleneck, and it's only KSP. Recently got new nVidia drivers, no difference. Debug menu also showed, on performance, there seems to be an FPS diagram. Mine is two lines, one at 1, the other straight at 25. The menu proclaims 25.0 FPS, both as minimum and maximum. Is this normal? I see the FPS diagram wobble/small spikes (upwards) sometimes when I unpause the game, or switch nVidia settings in the background, then back to 25.0 (while my actual FPS, measured through steam and my eyes is below 10).

Nice one, it works!

Hello all! I got the game bugged, presumably after disembarking a turned over rover, where the kerbonaut got stuck, ragdolled and clipped into the runway. Everything disappeared, (only empty space remained) - I revert to SPH. Upon relaunching a redesigned rover, the game still won't render Kerbin, leaving a spooky empty space. IVA is available, but only interior. NavBall had all vectors on one place. So I quit the game, tried to reload the save. Still the same thing, even when looking at the KSC. I tried to load an earlier save, still the same thing. I quit the game, re-started the game, and now it loads just fine - But its a VERY OLD save. It doesn't matter if I try to load the latest quicksave, or something - still the same old save is loaded. I'm perfectly fine if I can load any other save than the persistent, an old quicksave would do it, i'm not fine starting almost from scratch again. (my ships are still there though!). But it's not possible to load a save without a persistent in the folder? I suspect the persistent is corrupted, because it's the only thing that has changed since the bug appeared.

Well, to be fair, they did not get the resources to test the thing in a test stand first. I suspect it would have helped.

The soviet N1 was supposed to work in a kind of similar way. The same small engines would power all stages - though tuned for the altitude they were supposed to work in.

Bern there, done that. I think the reason this wouldn't work IRL is because the engines are cooled by the cryogenic rocket fuel. A running engine however!

There are no huge landing legs.

By all means, but shouldnt I see one core working its behind off when FPS is below 10? As it is, all corrs run at 20-25%.

I'm glad (in a relative way) that you guys with good computers also experience this. I bought this laptop (i5, 8GB RAM, GTX850) with the intention of playing kerbal and a few other games from time to time. in .90 I was not dissapointed, my frame rates were so high (for small craft) compared to my old computer that I kept crashing landers because timewarp worked so much faster. Even big stuff were playable, allthough with lof FPS. Nowdays, I rarely get above 9 FPS, even with small craft, and big ones are out of the question (2-4 FPS). A question to you other guys: my computer shows a CPU load of 20-25% on all cores, RAM is not an issue (I play with no mods), disk usage is low and allthough I haven't checked the GPU with a program, the fan doesen't suggest it's working very hard. Do you have the same issue?

Slightly better on a new save, which led me to clean up the debree and old probes I have. While in tracking station, I found that if I stopped tracking things, frame rates increased. All the flags lowers the FPS by quite some. However, still I have very low frame rates without much computer load. I haven't tried the mouse thing - I have a USB Intellimouse. What does the NaN errors imply?

Use an extendable ladder that extends over the fairing. =)

I found this is a bug where if the Navball is hidden, you cannot use that widget. Pull out the navball and you can use it. EDIT: just made a report

What's the point of playing if you can be sure you'll have enough fuel to get there?

I found the rendevous system terribly borked - it always told me abot 60km, when I saw it passing it some 15km away...

Yes, I've noticed this as well.

Logs, (from a previous bug report): but I guess it's the same info. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-rO2rdIDe4cMGxpQzhiS21YNUU/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-rO2rdIDe4cUTJLNkF3ZDhOaDg/view?usp=sharing I do have set in the Nvidia control panel and such to use the GTX850m card for KSP, but of course, it might explain it if it's using the HDgraphics.

Once again; Logs: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-rO2rdIDe4cRlNpMzRIZ3hZRDA/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-rO2rdIDe4cMlRoTDRGWElXcGM/view?usp=sharing

Hmm. Also my GPU doesen't seem to be the issue - judging by the fan... I would really appreciate some help or fix for this, as it makes the game hard to enjoy. I mean, if the computer was working, I could understand, since it's by no means a supercomputer, but now it's just above idling.

I might be wrong, but I think the problem of re-entry too flat is the G-forces destroying the craft. No Idea about the heat levels involved though.

If you right click the intake in flight, you can see generated drag. It does decrease when closed.

My eve lander, I don't know the deltaV of the thing because I don't use mods. But it was huge -850 tons of mammoths, with two asparagus stages on top of each other, angled so that all engines except the centre ones would fire simultaneously. The would disassemble itself AFTER touchdown. Tried a touch and go when it became apparent that the fuel lines were bugged... I spent something like 1 500 000 on the lander and 2 500 000 on the 20k+ LF+OX eve orbit refueling craft. Yes, career mode.