Jump to content

You Will Not Go To Space Today - Post your fails here!


Recommended Posts

Alright, so because I 1) Am me, 2) Have a computer the equivalent of a brick, and 3) decided to open TeamViewer to let my friend watch my shenanigans, I had one heck of a day yesterday. It all started off normal (Me begging for help because I couldn't install the Airplane Plus update), and then the fun really started. First I made an awesome jet with some terrifying engine sounds. then an F-22 knockoff that was awful. As I was flying Mach 2 over the ocean, I decided to do a straight pull-up to loop back to base. Then, as @Servo said, "Half of the plane agreed with me." (No screenies, sorry.) The cockpit, RADAR, and 1 adapter went with me. The others just went off and did their own thing. Destruction FX made it all pretty though. Then I showed off my Mach 4+ SuperJet. My flight plan was to go to that continent across the ocean, and then fly through its mountain ranges before landing in one of its many lakes.

Attempt 1: Upon a water landing due to a lack of sunlight, the plane landed perfectly. Except that the Mk. 1 to Mk. 0 adapter broke, exposing the front of the craft and turning it into an un-aerodynamic brick. *Revert flight*

Attempt 2: I attempted to timewarp forward to get a good time. I skipped through 2 days (Inadvertently), and finally took off. I was going at cruise speed of about 1/4 throttle (And about 1km/s), when all of a sudden, RUD. *sigh*

Attempt 3: It had to work now. Surely! No chance of failure! Halfway there! 1/4 of the way there! I CAN SEE THE MOUNTAINS!!! *Makes a tiny maneuver* *Pilots KO'd* Oh god no. NO! PULL UP!!! *Splashdown at Mach 3* *Goes off into corner and cries*

*Lunch Break*

Alright, back. So I decided to open up my old War save. I come to a crappy F-14 knockoff, a 475-part Battleship, and a 295-part Destroyer. So I decide to test the plane.

Hint: Mach 1 + 770 parts + Bombs + Explosions + BDArmory + TeamViewer window open + A couple other apps running + Music playing via YouTube + My PC = Game Crash. 2 times. *sigh*

So then I decided to try to do boat V boat. Guess what happened when I loaded my Battleship in? Battleship: "I MUST GO! MY PEOPLE NEED ME!" Yeah, the thing decided to jump around, and then Game Crash #3 happened. So I just scrapped the idea of a battle, and decided to let Val test out my new race car and allow Bill and Jeb to test the E-720 "Angel" Med-evac helicopter.

The car went great; sticking to the ground like a boss and hitting insanely high speeds (For a rover that is). Then, it happened. Coming out of Turn 13, the right-rear tire smacked into a dip, sending the car into a roll straight into the VAB. The entire right-side wheel housing was ripped off, and Val was "hurt". I rushed the "Angel" out there immediately, and then I realized: I created a zombie. I mean Val was alive (but probably now well), but her character model was all slumped around.

THEN! Due to my incredible luck, another game crash. I think I'll just stick to Minecraft from now on...

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I had just planted some waypoints on the Mun (at various anomalies), and decided to visit them with a simple lander. Upon a slightly faster landing than was anticipated, a slight structural error with the lander occurred. Nothing terrible, just a slight difference in location between the capsule and the rest of the lander.

EmWozwP.jpg

GGkGUQ8.jpg

So, I decided to send a rescue lander, complete with rovers to explore the anomalies that had been marked.

It landed after a couple tries (as it turns out, heavy rovers on the sides make for an unstable platform)

Lander (without rovers):

ayijowp.jpg

One of the rovers tipped over, but I had two, so I didn't flip it back.

E8ASi47.jpg

The other landed upright, although I noticed something strange.

nE6mvYI.jpg

The strange thing was, none of my control inputs for the wheels worked, They spun, but the rover did not move. After fiddling with the controls, I found that the reason they were not moving the rover was that they simply did not exist, and that my Kerbal could walk straight through them.

giphy.gif

At the KSC, I found that the wheels apparently did not exist on any model of that rover:

dKPQnjQ.jpg

Another rover is in the works, but it will have to go to space another day.

Edited by spacebrick3
Gifs are hard...
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, spacebrick3 said:

Kerbal could walk straight through them.

This is a feature. Kerbals do not collide with wheels and landing gear to avoid violent Kraken breakouts like those present in ver. 1.1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, spacebrick3 said:

The strange thing was, none of my control inputs for the wheels worked, They spun, but the rover did not move. After fiddling with the controls, I found that the reason they were not moving the rover was that they simply did not exist, and that my Kerbal could walk straight through them.

It's possible the rover has a wrong control point; it might be worth trying "control from here" on the cockpit. That sometimes fixes non-responsive rover controls for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AccidentsHappen said:

Flying a helicopter, when suddenly...

screenshot244.png

"Jeb--"

screenshot264.png

"--Jeb plea--"

screenshot223.png

"--JEB--"

screenshot196.png

"JEB JUST LISTEN--"

screenshot256.png

 

And that kids, is why when I use VTOLs, I make an F-35. If I ever make a VTOL at all... I've only made 1 Helicopter and that's only for med-evac. Jeb? Jeeeeeeeb? When did that gun get put on the "Angel"? Jeb? ANSWER ME JEB! *SPH explodes* Okay that's coming out of your paycheck

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread reminded me of what happened on my first (and only) Jool "landing". It was a long time ago when I had first started playing KSP. The whole mission went flawlessly and my lander was on a sub-orbital trajectory towards Jool. Everything appeared normal until suddenly everything around the lander turned green and my camera only allowed me to look down on my craft. I surmised that this was a bug and continued the landing. My excitement was up 100 points as the altimeter slowly ticked down to zero. It was then I realized something was wrong. After reaching zero, the altimeter began to climb again. It reached 256 meters before the mission ended in a fiery explosion. I had no idea of what had happened. Later I discovered that spacecraft cannot land on Jool because its a gas giant and the pressure will crush the space craft. This just goes to show you the importance of researching your destination before actually launching. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Dunatian said:

This thread reminded me of what happened on my first (and only) Jool "landing". It was a long time ago when I had first started playing KSP. The whole mission went flawlessly and my lander was on a sub-orbital trajectory towards Jool. Everything appeared normal until suddenly everything around the lander turned green and my camera only allowed me to look down on my craft. I surmised that this was a bug and continued the landing. My excitement was up 100 points as the altimeter slowly ticked down to zero. It was then I realized something was wrong. After reaching zero, the altimeter began to climb again. It reached 256 meters before the mission ended in a fiery explosion. I had no idea of what had happened. Later I discovered that spacecraft cannot land on Jool because its a gas giant and the pressure will crush the space craft. This just goes to show you the importance of researching your destination before actually launching. :) 

If that was as long ago as I think it was then it would be before the crush depth was a thing in KSP. People had... mixed results 'landing' on Jool, to the point where some people's ships more or less survived the journey, while others instantly went out in a blaze of glory. People have even planted flags on Jool! This inconsistency is the main clue that the Kraken was to blame, not the new pressure limits. :P

I say that because, well, sometimes the explanation for KSP shenanigans is even more bizarre than you think. :wink: 

Edited by wadusher1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hypercosmic said:

To @wadusher1: That was an older version of the game.

I am well aware of that. In fact, it's the reason I bring up crush depth and pressure, as those are presumably the reason you now explode consistently on Jool's surface in 1.2 onwards. I assume said older version is when @The Dunatian's 'landing' took place. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes my Kerbodyne Kickback boosters come off my rocket wrong, and they hit the main engine, destroying it. The rocket then is left on a sub-orbital trajectory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, UranianBlue said:

Sometimes my Kerbodyne Kickback boosters come off my rocket wrong, and they hit the main engine, destroying it. The rocket then is left on a sub-orbital trajectory.

Separatrons are your friends, they kick the kickbacks back where they belong (as in out of the way when spent).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Curveball Anders said:

Separatrons are your friends, they kick the kickbacks back where they belong (as in out of the way when spent).

Not when you are rolling your rocket wrong. I always use sepertrons for that seperation, but sometimes if your rocket is doing the gravity roll, the kickbacks will crash into, and destroy, your engine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UranianBlue said:

Not when you are rolling your rocket wrong. I always use sepertrons for that seperation, but sometimes if your rocket is doing the gravity roll, the kickbacks will crash into, and destroy, your engine.

Depends on the pivot point (as in where the decouplers are mounted) and the angle of the separatrons.

I prefer using std nosecones with the separatrons on the 'inside' or 'shipside' and since then my kickbacks  always leave the main rocket alone, regardless of roll (or how many, I've used it with everything from 2 to 8).

And it actually looks quite spiffy as well (Korolev Cross style) :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Curveball Anders said:

Depends on the pivot point (as in where the decouplers are mounted) and the angle of the separatrons.

I prefer using std nosecones with the separatrons on the 'inside' or 'shipside' and since then my kickbacks  always leave the main rocket alone, regardless of roll (or how many, I've used it with everything from 2 to 8).

And it actually looks quite spiffy as well (Korolev Cross style) :wink:

But the rocket is rolling. With a Kerbodyne size lower stage, I use 8. If your rocket is rolling, there is a chance that the kickbacks come back and hit your main engine. Happens very rarely, but it is annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hypercosmic said:

Where can I find those engines and boosters? :)

To @wadusher1: The successful Jool landing attempts were performed in an older version of the game.

SSTU + RealismOverhaul configs which are bundled with RO.

Edit : I haven't tried SSTU in stock thus mentioning RO configs

Edited by Alpha_Mike_741
Link to post
Share on other sites

I built what I thought was a pretty good autopilot system in kOS.  I set my rover, Bogie McBogeface on the next 100km leg of it's latest trek for a surface rescue contract on the other side of the Mun, and went off to diner.

Came back to this.  Looks like it tumbled down a slope, broke the differential bar, which let the rocker and bogies flip 180°.  As I understand it, wheels, much like rocket engines, are suppose to point towards the ground.  Welp, time to send a rescue / repair mission!  Technically, I'd already gotten it to space...
44D68XY.png

Edited by Soda Popinski
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, wadusher1 said:

I am well aware of that. In fact, it's the reason I bring up crush depth and pressure, as those are presumably the reason you now explode consistently on Jool's surface in 1.2 onwards. I assume said older version is when @The Dunatian's 'landing' took place

If I remember correctly the version the "landing" occurred in was 0.80

Link to post
Share on other sites

I took a vid of a jool 5 work in progress. Skip to 1:20 for fail.

After this was fixed, I found out LV-N shrouds apparently cause surrounding ones to explode. yay....

Edited by qzgy
Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...