Jod

I was just about to create a topic about this. I have a 114 ton craft with 12 LT-2 landing struts. When I tried launching it with the struts starting off deployed - the LaunchPad blew up It seems fine when I launch it with the landing struts retracted though. I mean come on, it's not really even that heavy! Good thing I test all the expensive craft in sandbox before launching them in career mode, or I would be sunk. These retrievable turbojet engines and intakes cost a fortune! After playing around with it a bit more - I've devised an Ultimate LaunchPad Demolition Tool. It completely obliterates the LaunchPad and gleefully continues bouncing above the rubble, unscathed by the carnage.

I've ran into a very pesky memory problem on 32bit winXP. Which is odd since I have 4GB of RAM installed, the game usually runs perfectly on high settings and uses less than 1GB of RAM(no mods installed). After every couple of launches when I return to the space center it crashes with an OutOfMemoryException: Out of memory. The crash logs are spammed with "can't allocate memory to textures" errors: DynamicHeapAllocator out of memory - Could not get memory for large allocationCould not allocate memory: System out of memory! Trying to allocate: 5592408B with 32 alignment. MemoryLabel: Texture Lots of them. And textures really glitch out eventually, especially in the mission control interface. So far I got different stack traces in every crash, here's two of them: ========== OUTPUTING STACK TRACE ================== (0x007960C8) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@V?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@AnimationEvent@@QAEXAAV?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@Z + 0x512a8 (0x0079778D) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@V?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@AnimationEvent@@QAEXAAV?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@Z + 0x5296d (0x0058225B) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x94d6b (0x00581ED2) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x949e2 (0x0058268B) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x9519b (0x005EA0FD) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0xfcc0d (0x7C80B713) (kernel32): (filename not available): GetModuleFileNameA + 0x1b4 ========== END OF STACKTRACE =========== ========== OUTPUTING STACK TRACE ================== (0x10118F0A) (mono): (filename not available): (function-name not available) + 0x0 (0x10106B71) (mono): (filename not available): mono_jit_info_get_code_start + 0xaea5 (0x10106BC5) (mono): (filename not available): mono_jit_info_get_code_start + 0xaef9 (0x10106EAC) (mono): (filename not available): mono_unity_liveness_has_parent_class + 0xb1 (0x101070C6) (mono): (filename not available): mono_unity_liveness_has_parent_class + 0x2cb (0x10107217) (mono): (filename not available): mono_unity_liveness_has_parent_class + 0x41c (0x1010724E) (mono): (filename not available): mono_unity_liveness_has_parent_class + 0x453 (0x101074D0) (mono): (filename not available): mono_unity_liveness_calculation_from_root + 0x1e (0x0057D0FB) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x8fc0b (0x0057D1B6) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x8fcc6 (0x0058F9C7) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0xa24d7 (0x00581399) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x93ea9 (0x00581854) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x94364 (0x005829D9) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x954e9 (0x00582B84) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x95694 (0x005F3E4B) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x10695b (0x005F566B) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@VSafeBinaryRead@@@Behaviour@@QAEXAAVSafeBinaryRead@@@Z + 0x10817b (0x0085E948) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@V?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@AnimationEvent@@QAEXAAV?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@Z + 0x119b28 (0x00893830) (KSP): (filename not available): ??$Transfer@V?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@AnimationEvent@@QAEXAAV?$StreamedBinaryRead@$00@@@Z + 0x14ea10 (0x7C817067) (kernel32): (filename not available): RegisterWaitForInputIdle + 0x49 ========== END OF STACKTRACE =========== Here is the most recent output log: http://m.uploadedit.com/b041/1412975681617.txt After some thought - it could be my video card. GT520 only has 1GB video RAM... I will try to reduce texture quality and see if it helps. Edit: Yep, after turning off some of the landscape settings and lowering texture quality the crashes stopped happening.

That's... a bit too glitchy for me. I was thinking along the lines of a seat for 1 kerbal, lots of infiniglide flaps since we don't have propellers yet, and some ions for when I'm halfway out of the gravity well.

Wow I can't believe this thread is still kicking. So essentially it can be done with exploits, huh... I guess I'll be trying to make a semi-infiniglider with ion engines then.

Fixed the first post. I meant electricity from PB-NUKs and/or solar panels. Will try to make a wider and longer rover. The one I have is great for landing and taking off without a skycrane but not for driving around at high speeds. Upd: Made one that does 15 m/s relatively stable. Can possibly make an even faster one but meh. Flagged 2 arches, got over 30km land distance.

Aerospikes must always be ahead of CoM or the Drag resistance will screw you over at high speeds, literally. The rest of the engines - behind.

Battery power as in - electricity. I am currently trying to get the land nav ribbon for the moon, but it takes ridiculously long. At 10 m/s 30km is almost an hour long trip, so I was trying to get at least 20 m/s which usually ended up in the rover toppling and parts exploding due to terrain not being level.

Has anyone done this? 10 m/s as I can tell is a safe speed at which even if you crash your pilot in a seat will most likely survive. Is there a way to build a rover that can travel at 20 m/s or higher on electricity alone? And not crash and kill anyone riding it? I'm guessing seats are out of the question since kerbals tend to fall out of them a lot.

-your aircraft goes out of control at high speeds? -changing CoL and CoT positions does nothing? -you've tried everything and nothing works? My boy, you have Center of Drag issues. Move the air intakes as far back as possible. Also - if you use aerospikes they need to be in front of CoM. It solves this problem for me anyway. Every time my craft goes nuts at high altitudes I find that it's because I placed aerospikes in the back or air intakes in the front. No exceptions so far.

Ok... 30 000m then. What is the altitude from which you can see munar arches btw?

So... I'm planning to send hive ships full of probes to Eve. If I understood correctly - I should assemble my fleet at just above Mun orbit(12 000 000m)?

I am placing my Mun station at 13 000 m right now. Maybe I too should reconsider... I was initially thinking of 150 000 m but suddenly realized I will be sending landers and probes back and forth and it would take a while.

I don't know what the FTL engine will be, but it will probably not work with liquid fuel and not be efficient within kerbol SOI to avoid huge balancing issues. Hence - making fuel depots now is shooting blind. Depending on the stats of FTL drive there are several plausible locations(including Eeloo orbit in case FTL has ungodly weight that I have to drag with me across kerbol system), but I would probably go for Duna orbit. It is at the same inclination as Kerbin, allows aerobraking to save a bit of liquid fuel, has low escape velocity and can easily be resupplied. Even if FTL works only outside kerbol SOI, it is easy to calculate how much you need to slow down before entering the system to end up in Duna orbit. I don't think using a gravity slingshot effect to slow down will be useful, but if it will then Kerbin orbit is the way to go, maybe even Eve. Jool is a gamble, currently it has too low gravity for a gas giant but if it gets increased(or there will be a larger gas giant in another system) then it will be the planet to go to slingshot some speed down and then aerobrake the rest. It will heavily rely on resources too. If mining will be implemented then outer rim planets like Eeloo and Jool are the more likely targets. The decision whether to make the station in Kerbol orbit or near the planets should be based on craft fuel reserves, remember that you need to transport fuel to the refueling station too so making a fuel depot that can easily refuel ships but can't be easily refueled itself is still inefficient.

Sounds like a shader that does not account for surface normal direction.

Ok, so essentially - I will need to split my air intake and jet engine action groups. Close 3/4 the intakes at lower altitudes, then open them and turn off 3/4 of the jet engines at higher altitudes... Will give it a try.