Yakuzi

Good to hear! I figured since you explicitly asked us to communicate the urgency/internet popularity of the bugs in your game, you'd be anxious to give us some feedback... you know, to give your playerbase the slightest of inklings that the free time they devoted to fix your product isn't completely wasted. Thanks! Who knew spending hours at an end of my free time meticulously going through bugs and design flaws, lodging files and writing detailed reports whilst being told that stuff's "working as designed" would be something people pay money for??? I'll make sure to provide my bank details... will get cracking on those '50 bugs marked as Ready to Test' as soon as I receive my coffee coins. Jest aside, I'm happy you're working on the plethora of bugs @SQUAD... looking forward to see which ones you've attempted to squash in 1.7.

Cool Now what about addressing the bugs you so enthusiastically asked the community to prioritise for you? There's quite a few bugs which have been upvoted, however, I haven't seen any marked as "Ready to Test" for 1.7...

Great work @SQUAD! Alongside the delta-v readout, I really appreciate the initiative, time and effort the team is putting in providing us with these much needed and requested metrics. I'll echo the comments about the UI optimisations posted above, including adding an ap/pe readout. In the meantime, keep up the good work! PS: Great timing as well, no one seems to be mentioning the moonbase anymore

How are you guys n gals going with the bug squashing? Despite a slew of upvote amassing issues, I haven't seen any marked as "Ready to Test" for the upcoming version... I had similar issues on my end, appears to have something to do with the size of the table... moving the "votes up" option up in the "Selected Columns" list seems to fix it.

Today, worked on this unit: Not today, not Korolev, not cross:

Thanks mate, very much appreciated! Happy you like them Bla Bla, I loosely based the Slingshot on the MiG 4.12 and the Slingshot Pro on the MiG 1.44 (both were demonstrator designs), they indeed have some similarities with the Rafale. The door on the front end is from an upside-down Mk1 cockpit (on top of an upside-down Mk2 cockpit with the Slingshot Pro). I frequently use some degree of clipping for aesthetic purposes (and because KSP cheats with drag/aerodynamics a), but not to physics defying extremes if I can help it. Here's a list of visual mods I use:

No worries mate, welcome to the forums, quite the entrance with an SSTA! I checked it out on KerbalX and it looks good! I did notice however that it's not marked as "stock" due to FAR... Since many peeps look for stock craft on KerbalX, you might want to consider (if you can be bothered) saving your craft in stock KSP and reuploading. On my end, I finished a series of stock SSTO spaceplanes for LKO after being away from KSP and the forums for quite a bit. I'd forgotten how much fun it is to tinker around in the SPH and optimise craft you'd never thought would reach orbit. Anyhow, below a couple of pics of the fruit of my labor, the "Slingshot" and "Slingshot Pro" class spaceplanes, full albums here and here, respectively. If you want to take them for a spin around Kerbin grab them from my KerbalX page here (they're a breeze to fly, flight instructions in the craft descriptions, aviation lights not included ). Left: Slingshot Pro Right: Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot Pro Slingshot Pro Slingshot Pro

Just checked and there was indeed a flag at the end of the runway Issue upvoted on the bugtracker, thanks for letting me know OHara!

Thanks heaps mate! Did a bit more testing on the z-fighting issues I've been experiencing in 1.6.0, check out the gifs of 1.5.1 vs 1.6.0: KSP 1.5.1 KSP 1.6.0 Both are completely stock installs*, identical settings, same craft file (loaded and launched from the SPH, accelerated to ~120m/s then stopped). As you can see there is some minor z-fighting on the ruddervators in KSP 1.5.1, however, in 1.6.0 all wing parts and most other parts are having epilepsy level z-fighting issues. The z-fighting problems seems to be fixed upon reloading the scene. Can anyone confirm before I submit this to the bugtracker? The craft above can be downloaded here. * Apart from some Mk2 config file changes in 1.5.1

Thanks @TriggerAu I was referring to this, I'm obviously oblivious to what was discussed internally: Anyhow, thanks again for looking into this!

I have resubmitted the issue to the bug tracker here: https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/20423. Any up-votes or comments are immensely appreciated! ??? Neither are the fuel tanks... AFAIK, the "fix" was introduced sometime between KSP 1.0.5 and 1.1.3 to make attaching Mk2 parts easier for new KSP players (originally you had to press "w" and "d" before the Mk2 parts were lined up correctly when attaching radially, check out the Mk2 crew cabin as the "fix" isn't applied to that part for obvious reasons). The texture flipping buggy behavior was an undesired side-effect of the "fix", but Squad decided to implemented it anyway (@Porkjet and @sal_vager weren't happy about this**). Comparing the current state to the original non-buggy, expected, intuitive, symmetrical Mk2 attachment rules: Current Mk2 fuel parts: Radial attaching parts: Easy Rotation behavior: Unexpected, counter intuitive, inconsistent, buggy Asymmetric craft: Yes In-game workaround: No Bug persistent*: Yes Original Mk2 fuel parts: Radial attaching parts: Medium Rotation behavior: As expected (like any other part in the game) Asymmetric craft: No In-game workaround: Yes Bug persistent*: n/a *Persistent: if you fix the .cfg files and share a craft with correctly oriented Mk2 textures, anyone who loads it in a stock KSP version will have the textures flipped again. The current Mk2 attachment rules are clearly more undesirable than the original ones. @SQUAD knows this otherwise they would've applied the "fix" to every part (like the Mk2 crew cabin for instance). @UomoCapra could you please look into either providing a proper fix that doesn't result in this buggy texture flipping behavior or reverting to the original Mk2 attachment rules, cause what we have now is a very sloppy "fix" with some very undesirable side-effects. ** The original 2016 post where @Porkjet and @sal_vager expressed their discontent concerning the "fix" was deleted somehow, in 2017 sal_vager mentions again he's unhappy about the "fix" here, and said he asked "to get it revoked again".

The "funny orientation" thing was the reason Squad introduced the fix IIRC. Here's my main issue though; you can easily work around this by pressing "w" and "d" once... whereas you cant work around the flipping textures flipping, even when you save a craft with the correct textures they will get flipped again when you load them in a different stock KSP game. So the pros and cons of each situation: Current Mk2 fuel parts: Radial attaching parts: Easy Rotation behavior: Unexpected, counter intuitive, inconsistent, buggy Asymmetric craft: Yes In-game workaround: No Bug persistent*: Yes Original Mk2 fuel parts: Radial attaching parts: Medium Rotation behavior: As expected (like any other part in the game) Asymmetric craft: No In-game workaround: Yes Bug persistent*: n/a *Persistent: if you fix the .cfg files and share a craft with correct Mk2 textures, anyone who loads it in a stock KSP version will have the textures flipped again. I fully understand the reasoning for making life easier for newbies trying to make cool looking Mk2 craft. However, this shouldn't overrule expected part behavior and unfortunately the current "fix" does exactly that. @SQUAD clearly knows this, otherwise they would have implemented these attachment rules to all parts, including the Mk2 crew cabin @OHara mentioned above. Ideally, we would have Mk2 parts that attach easily and behave correctly. Until this solution is available, however, please fix the Mk2 parts so they behave like every other part in the game, as the current "fix" is a very sloppy, buggy attempt to accommodate the new player while resulting in unexpected, inconsistent behavior and asymmetric craft for everyone else...

Then can we have this six legged "feature" on all parts please*: * /s

This bug still exists in KSP 1.6.0.2395(x64). Link to the bug report here. Solution to the issue: Change the following lines in the Mk2 fuel tank .cfg files in the GameData/Squad/Parts/Mk2FuselageLong and Short: Remove line: mirrorRefAxis = 0, 0, -1 Change node_attach line to: node_attach = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 Please fix this @SQUAD, thanks!

Ow man, a stock delta-V readout, Xmas came early (but late )!!! I'm having some serious z-fighting issues with wings in 1.6.0 vs 1.5.1 though, anyone else experiencing this? Very disappointed to see the Mk2 texture flipping bug still hasn't been addressed in 1.6.0, @SQUAD @UomoCapra @JPLRepo or whoever is in charge, could you pretty please have a look at this, it's been well over 2 years since this bug was introduced. The fix (proposed by @Porkjet at the time) is extremely straightforward: You'll have my eternal gratitude!

That's incorrect unfortunately. When you bought KSP you payed for a software license not a product, by playing any version of KSP (whether it's 1.3.x or 0.7.3 or anything in between) you accept the new EULA: For more info, have a look at the Updated Terms and Service thread here, or read the new EULA.

The first paid KSP DLC is coming out in just over a week if all goes to plan. Are you planning on buying it? If you choose "other", please post below to let us know what/why!

Unfortunately, according to the EULA, KSP is licensed not sold, so by playing any version of KSP (whether it's 1.3.x or 0.7.3 or anything in between) you accept the new EULA: And here's the statement from Daniele Peloggio (= @UomoCapra?) on the KSP steam website: If you don't accept the new EULA, it means you're terminating the license provided by Take Two, and, as described by the EULA, you are required to destroy and/or delete any and all copies of KSP Software in your possession, custody, or control. NB: IANAL

Any news on a response by any chance @JPLRepo? Since the new EULA will go into effect in 4 days, it'd be great if we would get more info soon. Particularly if we want to communicate through these forums, which will require accepting the new EULA from the 6th of March if I'm not mistaken.

Thanks for the feedback saxyomega, I'm curious to hear how you go with the Katateochi! Concerning figuring out the ascent profiles, in the end it really comes down to trial and error. However, there are some strategies that you can apply to speed up the process. I found in KSP 1.3.x, starting off with a 10 degree ascent profile works quite well. Then adjust the initial attitude based on your craft performance. Ideally, you'll want to go as shallow as possible so you can build up as much horizontal speed in airbreathing mode, but you don't want to go so shallow that your craft starts burning up. Other people say building up speed at sea level and then pitching up somewhat more aggressively works really well, for my creations it's not the best solution however. Mark Thrimm made a pretty good tutorial about designing SSTO spaceplanes in KSP 1.3.x, please note however that he doesn't take drag into account in his calculations. In my experience drag is a vital factor in making your designs achieve orbit effectively and efficiently. One of the bottlenecks for SSTO spaceplanes is punching through the sound barrier: if your craft has trouble gaining speed between the 340 to 400 m/s range, you either have to 1. make your ascent profile more shallow, 2. reduce drag, 3. add more TWR in that speed range (ideally with air-breathing engines), 4. a combination of the above. As a general rule: Mk2 parts are a lot more draggy than any other parts for their size/mass, the Whiplash or Panther engines are very effective for punching through the sound barrier if your craft struggles. Empty attachment nodes create a lot of drag, so put nosecones/air intakes on empty nodes. Also, you don't want to stray too much from the prograde vector whenever you are in the atmosphere while trying to build up speed. Finally some really handy tools that make building SSTOs easier (and more rewarding): KER - doesn't really need an introduction; flight info is good info! CorrectCOL - sweeps the center of lift across speed and angle of attack for pitch and yaw, both when your craft is fueled and empty RCSBuildAid - not as essential as CorrectCOL, but very handy for evaluating the center of mass shift during operation of your craft (without having to drain and refill your craft's fuel tanks all the time). Good luck with designing your first SSTO spaceplane @saxyomega90125, personally, there's nothing quite as rewarding as getting a fully reusable craft to orbit and back! Let me know how you go, if your run into any problems, feel free to send me a PM or ask the many other helpful and knowledgeable people that are part of this amazing community!

Any news on this @SQUAD @Darth Badie? The fix is pretty straightforward, as only the attachment rules of the Mk2 parts need to be changed back to their original settings... There's also an entry on the bugtracker here, but it got marked as "not a bug". While I can understand it is not a "bug" per se, it is very unintuitive/inconsistent/buggy behavior and there's currently no in-game workaround. My gratitude would be eternal if you could fix this!

Get twice the amount of junk in space with the Gemini Class cargo transport! This unmanned stock SSTO spaceplane has twin cargo bays and can deliver a 2x5.6 t payload to a 100x100 km orbit. Been sitting on this one for a while, but after some recent tweaking I think it's good to go. The Gemini is a bit more tricky to handle than my other craft, but if you think you're up for it, grab the craft file at KerbalX here. Edit: Post 500! That's a personal record as far as forum posts go

I would certainly hope so. However, since this issue was the main reason for "enhancing" the console port, it's kinda important for Squad to state this explicitely... unless of course we're all supposed to forget the squad/fte console port love-up ever happened

All good and dandy, but does this fix the save game corruption issues?