Neilski
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Neilski
-
-
1 hour ago, Mythos said:
That's also the only odd thing I noticed so far. All probe cores have all the SAS modes, even the Stayputnik. Hail the almighty probe!
It isn't happening for me. Weird that it's occurring for some of us but not others. In both a long-standing career and a brand new one, pods seem to have the correct SAS level for me.
It's a super-minor bug in some senses, but also (in my view) worth fixing pretty urgently, before a load of newbies find that their craft which had full SAS suddenly have less or none...
Has it been reported yet on the tracker? -
11 hours ago, vv3k70r said:
Vernier thrusters for side movements.
Yeah, I have them too, though I don't really need 'em cos of the wheels. Very handy for translation while hovering though, indeed.
7 hours ago, InfernoSD said:Looking at this again, you have hinges in both designs, no? Have you tried locking the hinges before the grab? Hinges like to create huge phantom forces. It might make the difference.
You might also try grabbing a free floating object in space just to see if anything weird happens there.
Ahh, good ideas on both fronts there. Must check!
-
On 1/25/2021 at 9:05 AM, vv3k70r said:
Landing legs helps to get elevetion. Rest is on hydraulic actuators similiar way You describe.
Ah, cool! I'm struggling to make sense of your picture but was the Klaw deployed vertically downwards on a piston? And was this in 1.11?
I'm wondering what's fundamentally different between your ship and mine... -
5 hours ago, king of nowhere said:
i have had multiple bugs related to robotic parts being too close to a docking port (and a claw works similarly). so i suggest you try the same without the piston.
Actually the very first craft just had the hinged wheels and no piston, and I couldn't make that one work either.
4 hours ago, InfernoSD said:It's possible that in the moment of contact you're exerting too much downward force and clipping that object into the ground for a brief moment.
Yeah, certainly possible, but the weird thing is that the version of that craft that I used before buying BG was actually successful - it had no wheels and so it was a total bugger to get it to hover and land right on top, but when I got the alignment right, it just worked. No explosions, no "fake" grabs...
2 hours ago, Wobbly Av8r said:you will have a new orientation / control point and that will definitely make the trip more, uh,... "memorable"
Oh yes, this has bitten me several times already
and it'll probably bite me again because I never seem to remember to edit the priority in the VAB!
Thanks for the tip about the image URL - will try again next time. -
12 hours ago, InfernoSD said:
I have used a rover with wheels on hinges and a claw on a hinge. With it I was able to pick objects up and drive around with them pretty smoothly. I haven't tried doing the same thing with a recovery mission, but I don't see why that would be any different.
Your rover looks pretty good. It sounds like your problem is perhaps less to do with the robotic parts and more to do with the claw not working correctly. When is your ship exploding?
OK, wow it's good to know that it's (or at least was) possible to make it work - were these successes in 1.11 or earlier? I'm thinking of trying my craft on an earlier version just to see if something broke in 1.11.
Most of the time it doesn't explode (just acts like it grabbed, but the module doesn't stick to the Klaw despite offering me a release button) but when it does, it happens right at the point of contact. I have formed the impression that if the contact arises from the Klaw being moved into contact by the hinge/piston, it won't work (failure to grab, or bang). If the Klaw comes into contact from the ship itself moving, it's all good
-
Before my recent purchase of BG, I had tackled a few "surface recovery" contracts and had sworn off them. The way I approached them, it was just so damn painful to hover a craft with a Klaw above the module and try to land on it. What I really wanted was a way to lower a craft onto the module and then take off.
Once I bought BG, I took the next surface recovery contract I was offered and had a go. I tried two approaches with BG parts: a wheeled rover, with the wheels on alligator hinges so it could lower its body (+ Klaw) onto the module, and a modified version of the rover with the Klaw on a piston to just lower the Klaw directly onto the module.
Outcome: both approaches failed miserably, because either the whole craft blew up, or the Klaw appeared to engage (and the PAW offered me a "release" button) but the module didn't move with the rover. Very very frustrating. Many attempts, and not a single success. See pic below, if it works, for a flavour of things looked.
Has anyone made these BG parts work for picking stuff up?
(PS: the "Insert image from URL" function won't work for me. This forum is just plain odd :-))
-
On 12/23/2020 at 7:03 PM, Neilski said:
Has anyone else noticed that stuff seems to get kinda stuck to the ground with this patch?
At first, I noticed that Kerbals didn't lift off immediately with EVA thrust, even on Minmus - it would take a good fraction of a second for them to leave the ground (and a waste of EVA propellant). A tiny jump into the air beforehand speeds things up a lot, so I've been doing that for a few days.
Today I noticed that a craft I was testing on the pad at KSC didn't lift off its LT-2 struts in a "normal" (i.e. physical!) fashion when the damping was set to maximum. Instead of what I expected, which was that the feet would leave the ground while the legs were still compressed, the craft slowly lifted with the feet stuck down until the legs looked like they were fully extended, and then suddenly the craft "unstuck" and the acceleration leapt up (on the accelerometer reading) to what it should have been.
The two observations may be unrelated but I've not noticed either behaviour prior to 1.11...For info, I've just tested both of these issues with 1.10.1.
Kerbals don't exhibit the "stuck to the ground" problem in 1.10.1.
However, the LT-2 struts (and perhaps others) do exhibit the issue above. I may download an earlier version and see if it shows up there.However, both of these are pretty minor, as bugs go, so I'm not sure there's any point in reporting them at all given the severe bugs that are still awaiting repair. (Chief on my personal list: the asteroid mass bug which was actually made much worse by the latest fix.)
Speaking of other bugs, the "ship accelerates when Kerbal goes EVA" one bit me last night during a satellite repair mission. I think this was the first time I realised what was happening (on a previous occasion I thought the game just needed a restart). When I played about with it, I spotted that just after EVA, the Kerbal was a long way from the hatch on the Mk1 lander can (about a torso-length - I can't seem to paste an image into this post) and when I moved him up and down with W/S, he got rather closer to the ship; when he got to the "normal distance" (basically touching the ship) the buggy acceleration stopped entirely, having reduced somewhat as he got closer.
-
8 hours ago, camacju said:
I bet I could get under 0.03 funds per science with a very small change to the current missionBut I probably won't unless someone else submits some runs to this challenge
Wow, that's already insanely low. How much dv does the probe have?
-
17 minutes ago, camacju said:
The first expedition has many gravity assists.
What tool do you use to help set these up? (I'm a total noob at gravity assists.)
-
On 1/10/2021 at 8:57 PM, paul_c said:
They look like it but if so, doesn't make sense.
Huh? This is KSP - making sense is optional
Also, HECS2 have great features for the mass - huge battery capacity, decent reaction wheels, great SAS... But I will confess I can't think of a good reason to put two of 'em right under a HECS
-
We've all had this a few times I'm sure, and it's very frustrating when you feel like you've done nothing differently from a successful variant.
I can actually see what looks like a strut from the left booster to the main stack.
That still leaves a few of the issues pointed out above: lack of fins at the base, the timing (and severity) of the turn, and the possibility that the tanks are emptying from the top down.
Definitely adding a few fins should help a lot. Once they are fitted, I would suggest starting the turn very early and then using prograde SAS. If the top tanks are emptying first, invert the priorities. (And yes, the boosters really do look like massive overkill)
-
11 hours ago, vv3k70r said:
If something do not work corectly edit file and/or use alt+F12. I noticed they do not get corect records. Previously they get.
Yeah, I can't find a way to directly grant them experience with Alt-F12 but I can of course cheat them to a solar orbit and weirdly enough, that does the trick in terms of getting them the "orbit around The Sun" experience (once I cheat them back to Kerbin). Perhaps it's something about my transfer orbit to Eve that it doesn't like...
Unless I can find a way of reproducing this issue, I'm not sure there's any value in reporting it as a bug. I have however installed a copy of 1.10.1 now, so I can at least attempt side-by-side tests. -
On 1/2/2021 at 5:44 AM, Superfluous J said:
I spent exactly that on 4 1MB chips in about 1995. They maxxed out my aging 486-DX and allowed me to put off buying a new computer for a fairly critical year where I was very broke. As it was, $200 was way more than I could really afford but I did it anyway because some game needed it
Ah, this reminds me of a painful RAM-related story from many years ago. Must have been the late 90s, and I was pretty cross to learn that a colleague had managed to convince a department manager to spend £10k on a 128 MB memory upgrade, to double the RAM in his favourite IBM RS/6000 workstation. It was annoying for a few reasons, but mainly because I had just spent the previous few months successfully demonstrating that Linux-based PC workstations ran all of our codes faster than the workstation in question, and the total cost of the PCs I was using at the time was around £5k with 512 MB installed. Facepalm time.
Meanwhile, my PC now has 16 GB of RAM, and even though it has some left over when KSP hits 8 GB or so, I still need to restart the game at or before that point cos it just crawls (not thrashing, just damn slow). I only have KAC installed, along with BG and MH, so I guess this is just how it is.
-
How far away do you have to be to trigger the issue? I've just been doing EVA construction on what I consider to be a large ship - almost 47 metres long - with the root part up at the front, and I'm able to glide along it and tweak parts right to the other end.
-
9 hours ago, Steven Mading said:
The only way the new repair/edit vessel contracts for distant destinations like Jool or Duna are do-able is if you saw the contract get offered while you coincidentally were already there for some other reason with a crew vessel that can do the contract.
Yeah, I have found that the OrbitalConstructionContract has similar issues - was offered an Eve "add a part" contract with 1y218d until expiry. (I took it anyway, but needed a LOT of dv to get there in time!) This is pretty freaky and players could be forgiven for being caught out by it, because even the "rescue a Kerbal from LKO" contracts tend to have 5 year deadlines
Meanwhile, I've noticed another bug today and am not sure how new it is: I sent some Kerbals to Eve with a research lab on the ship and after arrival I levelled them up, only to find that they didn't reach the expected level. I had intended for them to reach 4 stars: Kerbin orbit, orbit around The Sun, flight at Eve (dipped into upper atmosphere) and a flag on Gilly. However, they were only listed as "fly-by" of The Sun. This wasn't (as I first suspected) a bug in the research lab - I cheated them back to Kerbin and recovered them and they still had just the fly-by listed for the sun.
I reckon this bug wasn't present in the past because a few of my older Kerbals already have "orbit" around the sun in their achievements. I even double-checked what the situation indicator was while they were still in deep space on the way to Eve and it showed them as "ORBITING" in The Sun's SOI.
Does anyone have a clue if there's a workaround for this, or know if it's a fresh issue in 1.11? I plan to report if it isn't a known thing (googling for it has turned up nothing so far).
-
23 hours ago, JPLRepo said:
That's because when I replied there were no links. The original post was edited to add links to some of the issues that were in the post after my post and the subsequent follow on comments in the thread.
But (a) the edit timestamp is before your post and (b) the links are literally in the text you quoted in your post
Unless the forum software is behaving really weirdly, your post would not be modified by someone updating their own post.
21 hours ago, Vanamonde said:The devs do not have the time to scan all the posts on the forum in search of people announcing that they've encountered bugs. Fair or not, if you expect bugs to be fixed you have to see to it that they're reported properly. Grousing at the devs about that won't change the reality of it. But that is not the subject of this thread, so let's please get back to talking about the update itself.
I absolutely agree that there's only one right way to report bugs - on the tracker - and I wasn't seeing much grousing.
Back on topic: can anyone confirm that the "stuck to the ground" thing (for Kerbals and sort-of for ships too) is new behaviour as of 1.11.0? I don't (yet) have an old version installed so I can't double-check; I'm all but certain it's new for the Kerbals but not so sure about the ships. (Is it "the done thing" to have an old version on standby?)
I have spotted a couple of other minor niggles which may be new bugs and I will get around to reporting them shortly (I guess I'll hunt through the tracker first to see if they are long-standing issues). -
On 12/28/2020 at 10:14 PM, JPLRepo said:
This thread is not a bug reporting thread. Please raise bugs on the bug tracker so they can be triaged by QA team.
https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/
This request confuses me. The text you quoted from @Rakete actually contains links to 4 already-reported bugs on the tracker - perhaps you were in an hurry and didn't notice the links?
-
On 1/8/2018 at 2:44 PM, bewing said:
Actually, there seems to be a new bug involved here. I'll look into it further. A no-engineer conversion process should be running at about a 10% load, max (5% per channel). Which means 40kW core heat, max. Which two or three small TCS's shouldn't have any difficulty with.
I've just observed precisely this behaviour while testing conversion rates with 1/2/3 recipes running (i.e. a no-engineer 2-recipe conversion is causing overheating when it seems like it shouldn't).
Did you manage to look into the bug? -
10 hours ago, Boyster said:
I haven't played this patch yet but this seem like a bad side effect of the more aggressive fix this patch had to reduce/stop sliding,
Is it very immersive breaking?
Well, I'm still seeing sliding too
I wouldn't call either part of what I've observed particularly immersion-breaking but I'd be a bit concerned that whatever's going on under the hood (if they are linked) may have uglier consequences somewhere else.
-
Has anyone else noticed that stuff seems to get kinda stuck to the ground with this patch?
At first, I noticed that Kerbals didn't lift off immediately with EVA thrust, even on Minmus - it would take a good fraction of a second for them to leave the ground (and a waste of EVA propellant). A tiny jump into the air beforehand speeds things up a lot, so I've been doing that for a few days.
Today I noticed that a craft I was testing on the pad at KSC didn't lift off its LT-2 struts in a "normal" (i.e. physical!) fashion when the damping was set to maximum. Instead of what I expected, which was that the feet would leave the ground while the legs were still compressed, the craft slowly lifted with the feet stuck down until the legs looked like they were fully extended, and then suddenly the craft "unstuck" and the acceleration leapt up (on the accelerometer reading) to what it should have been.
The two observations may be unrelated but I've not noticed either behaviour prior to 1.11... -
On 12/21/2020 at 5:06 PM, Star-Eagle said:
Hi everyone.
I have a few questions about the new EVA construction system that I don't think I've seen mentioned elsewhere of the forum that I hope someone can answer for me.
1) Can Kerbals use the new system while in an external command seat? I have an idea of either making something like NASA's MMU with built in inventory storage or something like the space shuttle robotic arm attached to a space station for orbital construction without the Kerbals floating off.
2) Can the system be used to join two or more separate craft together? I have another idea about building a refueling depot from the fuel tanks of a large rocket, and if craft can be joined together it would simplify things.
3) Is it possible to use the new system to set action groups outside of the VAP or spaceplane hanger? I don't think I need to elaborate on the possibilities this would allow.
Q2: as @dok_377 already said, no. But, if I'm understanding what you want to do, a way to make it rather closer to a "yes" would be to bring along a couple of docking ports (or a Klaw) and stick them onto both (or one) craft and then stick 'em together after exiting the construction mode.
On 12/21/2020 at 3:30 PM, Richard Deckard said:I'm a purist, no mods just all the expansions and a long complex career mode. With flights on the way to pretty much every body, I just rendezvoused with a comet, sent my scientist to collect a sample and he's now floating away with no jet pack. Why didn't you provide default equipment to existing flights? Any way to roll back to an older version on steam?
A few people have been saying this and I'm really confused about what might be different for them. My existing (long-standing) flights haven't been bitten by this issue - all of them still have their chutes and jetpacks.
-
I'm seeing some slightly funky game mechanics right now, which may be "normal" but it's new and odd to me so I'll ask if it's the expected behaviour...
I bought Breaking Ground (and MH) a couple of weeks ago. However, I hadn't managed to get around to trying surface-deployed science experiments until after 1.11 came out...
When I started to try it in the last day or so, the weird thing that I have come across is that my Kerbals can't pick up the experiments if I have the chute and jetpack equipped; removing just the jetpack allows some things to be picked up but even the chute has to be taken off to fit some of the other pieces of kit into inventory. I've been literally having to walk my Kerbals up to the base of the rocket, take off and store their chute and backpack, and then pick up the base station, solar panels, experiments etc., deploy them from the Kerbal's inventory, and then pick up the jetpack again to fly back to the cabin (I don't normally bother with ladders)
Is this really how it's meant to be (and I guess has been ever since BG landed), or did 1.11 introduce some accidental side-effects that mean you can't pick up and deploy experiments with chute+jetpack equipped?
-
Nope, it's infinite, albeit slower to extract than on an asteroid.
-
On 8/4/2020 at 6:17 PM, Laie said:
The mining bug hasn't been fixed yet, so the comets won't lose mass -- it's still totally possible to do it with the dV you get from mining, but acceleration won't ever pick up.
Is there a thread about the mining bug? I've searched and can't find one.
After hitting the bug, I found it listed on the bugtracker and after some mucking about I have found a workaround that appears to work for asteroids (perhaps it will also work for comets). I'm looking for a good thread in which to post it, but if there isn't one I'll make one I guess.
Recover a module from the surface... BG parts haven't helped me - can they be made to work?
in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
Posted · Edited by Neilski
added bugtracker link
Update: I've now tried a similar craft in 1.9.1, 1.10.1 and 1.11.1.
Outcome: things work perfectly in 1.9.1 and 1.10.1; they don't work AT ALL in 1.11.1.
I suspect that all surface recovery missions are currently impossible until this is fixed.
I will report it as a bug on the tracker shortly (and add a link here).
Thanks for the assistance, folks!
Edit: bug is now on the tracker here