LordZowy

Damn Dev's always changing the version... @cybutek Keep up the good work. I'm on hold till this gets updated. All other mods I use seem to be working fine.

@sal_vager You Da Man. Support got me fixed up and I'm downloading now!

I personally opened a support case with Squad on this issue. They indicated to me that it was a problem with their relay to my country... I'm a very technical person and didn't buy the response. I've been updating my stand alone download by copying out of Steam. I had bought two copies of the game because I wanted to show my support for the project in the early days. I transferred 1 to steam at around the time they offered that. I left the original purchase with Squad. After about release 1.0 I was unable to download any more from Squads site. This bothers me because I have a purchase that technical, I'm unable to access. I don't want a refund as I feel that would be inappropriate given my statement above. What I would like to see happen is the issue be corrected. Noting that I'm now not the only one having this problem and dosen't seem linked to the Steam transfer, as indicated by @Sezess I have tried this again and again at each release and have encountered the same problems. Normal fixes, like alternative browsers, clearing cache etc didn't change my response from the server. I've tried from other systems. I've since rebuilt my own system and tried again. Nothing has worked. This is a problem on Squads end and it needs to be correct.

Hi Kasper, Nope still not working. I think I've been patient enough. There is something up. I've never had this issue before. Can't even download the old version... I'm accessing the site from Canada, from Order ID: 298207. Could there be something else going on here?

Thanks Red Iron. Wasn't 100% sure where to stick this one.

I recall when the page would just be blank or give you a time out error. They should change the message. I'll wait patiently for my opportunity to come... My career mode has been on hold for a while anyway as I had gotten myself into a bit of a grind and had over a year to wait for Duna to come round again before I could launch my next phase. I figured I'd start over in 1.1 but with the issues that came out of it I decided to hold off. But NOW I WANT MY KSP!!!

Funny thing is I was getting this error on the site for the DL of 1.1 a week after release... I'm going to try from a different location today.

Is anyone else getting this?

Thank you so much for creating this! I was about to start teaching myself how to build a mod! This is exactly what I need for a mult-contact mission I'm planning to Mun.

Standing corrected. My bad and I found my own issue. I'm embarrassed to say this, but I some how unzipped the Texture Replacer inside the Texture Replacer subfolders... so on load it was mounting three versions... RAM Overload. I apologize for my comments. EDIT: And its also the SkyBox... Whats wrong with it? https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By8S9xGHvs1VXzBFYUF6TWhvZW8/view?usp=sharing Or If you have suggestions of an equally good looking SkyBox please let me know.

To be clear... its the 32bit client... never used the 64bit client as its unstable to begin with. [EDIT] If its just me... than fine I'll wait for the next release... maybe it will change something. But if it is a bug than it should be reviewed. But the skybox that I'm using isn't that big... so the comment of running out of memory isn't really valid as the game loads with into about 1.6 GB of ram while running and in space with the skybox running its only using 2.2 GB of RAM. There really isn't that much of an increase. Not to mention that the skybox has been around as long as this MOD and its never caused an issue before. So is it the skybox... no... is the game running out of RAM, even with a 4 GB addressable limit... not a chance... unless there is a leak and in which case its happening faster than I can identify visually while monitoring. As for getting my head bitten off... perhaps we should look at things with a little more open mindedness instead of flaming at someone before knowing the details. (Not that you were, just a general comment on internet flaming.)

With only Three MODs, (Kerbal Alarm clock, Kerbal Engineer, and Texture Replacer) on a 64 bit Windows 7 system running on 16 Gb of RAM... I think you are overlooking the bigger picture. Perhaps the new version has a leak that caused the crash?

Hi Guys, I can confirm that Texture Replacer is the cause of the crashes. I'm not seeing anything out of the ordinary in the log. There isn't a crash log generated, there is a full stop of the game and it shuts down. Also confirmed that removing the MOD folder removes the issue. The last lines in my log as of today prior to the crash and removal of the mod are: [LOG 21:54:28.102] PartLoader: Compiling Internal Space 'Squad/Spaces/mk1CockpitInternal/internal/mk1CockpitInternal' [LOG 21:54:28.107] PartLoader: Compiling Internal Space 'Squad/Spaces/mk1PodCockpit/internal/mk1PodCockpit' [LOG 21:54:28.111] PartLoader: Compiling Internal Space 'Squad/Spaces/MK1_Inline_Int/MK1_Inline_Int/MK1_Inline_Int' [LOG 21:54:28.119] PartLoader: Compiling Internal Space 'Squad/Spaces/mk2CockpitStandardInternal/internal/mk2CockpitStandardInternals' [LOG 21:54:28.143] PartLoader: Compiling Internal Space 'Squad/Spaces/Mk2CrewCabinInternal/internal_MK2_CrewCab/MK2_CrewCab_Int' [LOG 21:54:28.150] InternalSeat: Cannot find seatTransform of name 'Seat_UpLeft' [LOG 21:54:28.150] InternalSeat: Cannot find portraitCamera of name 'Camera_UpLeft' [LOG 21:54:28.152] InternalSeat: Cannot find seatTransform of name 'Seat_UpRight' [LOG 21:54:28.152] InternalSeat: Cannot find portraitCamera of name 'Camera_UpRight' I've added my own skybox that I've been using for years with this MOD so thats not it. I hope this helps... if you need more I'll see what else I can find.

Hey all. Many thanks for continuing to support this mod. I wish it was part of the core game but i'll keep coming back. I'm having an issue with it in 1.0.2. I'm using the latest 1.0.16.6 but its not showing up in the VAB. Worked fine in 1.0. Is it just me?

We need an update for 0.24.1 on this one... let me know when its up! Thanks, Never mind...

I've discovered an interesting "bug". When you have "manned" Pod's that are unmanned, the Enhanced Navball indicators do not work. But when you man the unmanned pods the indicators start working. I'm not sure if this is by design or not, but it would help it wasn't. I normally run unmanned pods attached to ships that are probe controlled, or in the case of a "rover" that contains a pod attached to the ship, it doesn't work. Thoughts?

Thanks, this was the first redesign and I liked it so much that I just started using it.

For those of you who wish to know where I went with all this I present: LZSSI-MunRover-MkV Mountain range on the South Pole (In search for likely locations for the Monolith) Profile: Front: Rear: Top Down: After traveling 12+ KM from touch down, I've investigated two possible locations. Still unable to locate the Monolith... without exact locating data, I'm hunting a needle in the hay stack. But I have faith that this rover will be able to complete the mission. I've climbed mountains with this rover and its survived falls intact, just had to fix the wheels. As with most rovers, driving it takes some time to get use to. You may have to disable and enable some motors as needed. Climbing can be a grueling challenge for this thing. Don't forget to disable the torque before you head out, it will not make contact in the rear unless you do... leading to all kinds of interesting behavior. Oh and be sure to set the breaks before you detach the landing engines, they have a lot of kick... and it can send the rover for a spin. The action groups are simple: 1 = enables and disables the Command modules' (Lander Can) torque (Helpful if it starts to tumble, just keep it pointing straight up and you'll always land on the wheels, you may have to repair a couple) 2 = Deploys the communications antenna 3 = sets the breaks, deploys the landing gear, switch the rear lights on and extends the ladders. I'm planning a MkVI which will include detachable/rechargeable RCS chairs to support greater range. Enjoy

For the record the I have changed the design and thrown out the old files. I will upload the full completed design for all to see once I've finished testing. I think that Master Tao got the nail on the head... its not part clipping here, its truss linking multiple times to the same part... I can't say if this is a bug or not... but its messed up all the same. Also I'm sorry that I have bugged and crashed so many Kerbal installs. But I have never built anything that has ever done this. As for recursive symmetry I'm familiar with the problem and usually pick up on it visually(Shimmering parts, multiple ghost's etc.) and correct the issue. As you can see this doesn't show as the same issue. I have taken your advice on creating the new craft by not using symmetry to place the Rovers on the vehicle.

I can't recall correctly but I think it was as follows: Coming out from the ship in the original build it would have been (In order) TT-38K Radial Decoupler Modular Girder Segment Modular Girder Segment Modular Girder Segment (Rotated to 90°) Modular Girder Adapter Tr-sV Stack Decoupler Modular Girder Adapter Z-1K Rechargeable Battery Bank Modular Girder Segment (Front facing) RoverMax Model M1 (Left side) RoverMax Model M1 (Right side) Then I clicked the Modular Girder Segment (Front facing w/ Wheels attached) Enabled symmetry Reattached the front, which than duplicated in the rear. Disabled symmetry I continued to add the parts, Lights and so on. Once I was happy with it, I detached Tr-sV Stack Decoupler (Grabbing the whole Rover) Created a subassembly with it. Reattached the subassembly with symmetry... proceeded to basic testing on the launch pad. Decoupled boarded drove... etcetera. Then went onto launch test... 6 KM Boom Boom! Any additional struts were added in post to ensure that stability was maintained to rule out stress on parts as being the cause for the Big Bada Boom.

Good advice!

So here are the subassembly parts for the: new rover and the old I've done a compare on them using Notepad++ and I can't see a lot of differences. The order of build is different on the old... so I'm not sure if that is having anything to do with it. I've continued to build on the new rover design find that here: Mun Rover MkII

Parts clipping was one of the first things I checked for. I don't use part clipping. If you were able to download the craft file and see for yourself you'd note these things..... I will admit, it is a truly unique issue. Its one I've never come across before, which is why I shared the file. I was hoping that someone out there would have the ablitity to review the craft file on a text level and see what happened. I can read it but my brain starts to go mussy after about the 1000's line...

Hence my new Signature â–¼

I have, as an attempt to confirm Epthelyn's theory of horrible symmetry, removed and rebuilt the rovers in basic form Here: LZSSI-MunRoverDeliverer-MkII And yes it launches past the 6KM mark without issue. What is the difference? In MkI I created one rover, as a single entity. Starting at the front of the rover, and building on the parts that I wanted to duplicate on the rear. Then I removed that structure piece and added it back with symmetry. This seemed ok. I continued to finalize my single rover design. Adding the "single" item parts without symmetry. Once I was happy with its design, I detached it, including the decoupler, and stored it as a new subassembly. Then I added this new assembly back to the main craft with symmetry. In MkII I created both rovers in complete symmetry and ran a flight test... I held my breath as it reach 6KM and immediately yelled 'W00T!' upon surpassing that altitude without incident. But please by all means continue to investigate what actually went wrong here. I would also indicate that this may actually be a bug. I'm not sure given the steps I took that something of that nature would be considered in testing of the symmetry. But I do know that there have been issues with the system for some time now and not much has been done to directly address those items.