softweir

I doubt it will be fixed, at least not without some considerable work. As it is, the truss uses physics-less animations; so if parts could be attached to it then they would stay still while it rotated! *IF* the truss was rejigged to use a robotics motor to drive it then it could also be rejigged to accept attachments. There would be downsides, as there are problems with robotics parts accumulating errors in position that have not yet been 100% fixed.

Unfortunately, most users don't look for, see or read Readme files, and in response most mod authors have given up on updating them. Therefore, the place to look for information is in the OP of a mod thread and any associated FAQs. This is what @darthgentlywas trying to steer you towards. (It would be easier looking for such data if all mod authors stuck to the same, consistent format for mod release posts so we could more easily scan them for critical information. Alas, there is no consistency whatsoever.)

Really neat models! *thumbs up*

Alas. no. Ground effect is far from simple to simulate and hasn't been attempted yet.

The preferred way to share logs is to use a file-sharing service such as Dropbox. You upload the file, and the service will give you a link which you paste into a comment on the forum. I use Dropbox, it is free for such low-level usage.

Do you have Firespitter installed?@The Brazilian Luigireported this exact problem about six posts higher. He resolved the issue by updating his installation of the Firespitter mod.

There are no IVAs, alas. However, the IVAs for a previous incarnation of HabTech can be used: Go to the message linked below Copy the code Open your fave text editor and paste the text in Save it (as text! in the filetype setting) in the KSP/GameData as HabTechIVSpatch.cfg (Or some other name that you will recognize later.) This won't fix things for all HabTech2 parts, as it has parts not included in HabTech, but it's better than nothing. Good luck and have fun!

Click onto: ... and scroll down to the heading "The Logs", and from there down to "KSP versions 1.8.0 and above". Good luck!

If the strings are parsed as HTML then &35; or even # might, possibly work.

"that's an exercise left up to the reader" is a common sentence in academic works meaning "there are many ways to solve this, and you will learn more by doing it yourself than if I told you just one way to do it". This topic isn't really the right place for a tutorial on assembling spacestations; there are discussions in Gameplay Questions and Tutorials on that topic, and you can see a few ways people have done that by reading through Missions Reports. Good luck! P.S. Try benjee10's mod that he linked to, it has a nifty utility vehicle which looks good for grabbing station parts and shoving them in position.

Ah! I see! OK, weird thought: add a probe core to the craft, oriented upwards. Control from the prove core, and then you can use the SAS Radial Hold option. This will determinedly keep the probe core pointed away from the ground, which would achieve what you want. Also, check that your command pod doesn't have a switchable Control Point that can be set to Up. If so, setting that to Up and using SAS Radial Hold would also work. I hope this is useful!

Hello! Can I recommend you look at Mechjeb's Aircraft Autopilot feature, which allows you to do exactly this: use Roll Hold to control your roll, and set Vertical Speed Hold to zero. (Most aircraft require a degree of pitch up to fly a level course, so Vertical Speed Hold would operate this for you. I believe there are other Autopilot mods you could look at if MechJeb's doesn't quite suit you. Have fun!

It's not my mod, but hypothetically speaking I would want the entire log; the crucial details aren't always the most obvious except to the creator of the code, and editing down a log might leave them out. In a previous time of my life I had to argue most sternly with a user to get a full log, and when I did I immediately saw the important detail he had thought irrelevant!

The best way to post logs is to save them to a freebie fileserver, and then post the link. I prefer Dropbox. It gets around that appalling mass of text that can destroy the format of a forum page! OK, you need to sign up for an account, but Dropbox are a pretty responsible company and I have had no issues. The service is free for small-scale users, and as such it's ideal for those of us who occasionally need to send log files!

I believe this may be due to the bug introduced with KSP v 1.12. Mod authors have to make sure all .dll files have version metadata attached - if there are duplicates and they don't have the version info then KSP gets stuck. So make sure you have the latest version of all mods. If that doesn't fix it then you need to hunt for duplicate .dll files and remove all but one. Good luck!

Try removing all the control surfaces from one of your craft (I suggest choosing the simplest!), saving the craft, reloading it, and then replacing the the control surfaces. I know that's a nuisance, but I believe it will fix the problem. (You may find that craft you haven't touched since installing FAR will still be OK.) (You may be able to edit the craft files using a text editor, but I'd have to look up the changes needed, and I am short on time. Perhaps somebody else could advise?) Q: Why? A: FAR replaces the stock control-surface modules normally attached to parts in a craft, and replaces them with its own; uninstalling FAR doesn't remove the FAR control-surface modules in existing craft, nor replace them with the stock modules - hence the game can no longer recognize the parts as control surfaces, and the need to replace them with shiny new parts from the parts catologue.

OK, yeah, I was uncharitable. In my defense, too many "any progress yet" can have the same effect as "HEY WHY ISN'T IT FIXED YET", and seeing just one makes me itchy. Sorry.

The important word here is "able". Modders are amateur enthusiasts, unpaid, and have lives. What is remarkable is how very many mods are maintained for year on end; many fall by the wayside due to LifeTM. Nertea has been active of late but has a lot of high-quality mods to care for, and sometimes difficult problems must be put on the back burner so easier problems can be resolved quickly.

Props to @xytovland @linuxgurugamerfor creating and maintaining this mod! I am glad I have finally (belatedly) found it!

@king of nowhere: Ah, yes... That may well do the job. I hadn't thought of that! Now to remake my Action-groups and action-group crib sheet - because like F can I remember everything! Thanks!

Ah! That looks like something that might fit the bill! Thanks! P.S. Just in case anybody else needs to know, the mod to look for is "Action Groups ReExtended" by LinuxGuruGamer.

WaterfallRestock is working fine for me. Try uninstalling both mods, redownloading, and reinstalling. Make sure you put everything in the right place!

RCS thrusters can be toggled between Enabled and Disabled using Action Groups. Cool. A lot can be done with that! I am also aware that one can use "R" to turn RCS control On and Off. However, there are times when this is not quite adequate. For instance: I am creating an ISS analogue. I will have several Soyuz equivalents docking at various times. When the first Soyuz docks it is easy as pie to disable its RCS thrusters using an action group disabling the ISS's thrusters. However, when the second Soyuz docks it must use a different action group to disable its RCS thrusters, or else the action group will enable the corresponding thrusters on the first Soyuz at the same time! And, of course, one may not want to disable the ISS's RCS by hitting "R". When one has numerous Soyuz and other craft visiting, managing separate action groups before launch (or editing action groups to remove the toggle RCS from already docked Soyuz craft) becomes onerous. So: is there any way to force RCS thrusters to go Disabled without using Toggle RCS? (Stock mechanisms and mods are equally valid solutions so far as I am concerned.)

We've all done it!