Claw

Yes, what Taki said. Also, when docking ports have the "decouple" option, it does not apply force when decoupling. These options show up differently because the game tracks the behavior differently. (Which actually comes in handy when fixing docking ports.) Anyway, as a side note, you can mount all kinds of things to docking ports and they provide a clean decouple for the thing that is decoupled. (They don't leave those unsightly spiders hanging off the side of your probes.) Cheers, ~Claw

purpleivan, Your file is a little backwards, but works the same. Look for this section first: PART { name = dockingPort2 uid = [COLOR="#FF8C00"]2476039542[/COLOR] mid = 3364854089 launchID = 13 parent = 15 position = 0,-4.43045043945313,0.912153959274292 rotation = 0.7071068,0,0,0.7071068 mirror = 1,1,1 istg = 0 dstg = 0 sqor = -1 sidx = -1 attm = 0 srfN = None, -1 [COLOR="#FF0000"]attN = top, 31[/COLOR] attN = bottom, 15 Search for the UID and change the attN to mach the red part above. That'll fix the ship with the lander can. To fix the one with the MK1-2 command pod, look for this section: PART { name = dockingPort2 uid = [COLOR="#FF8C00"]1048510628[/COLOR] mid = 3364854089 launchID = 13 parent = 15 position = 0,-4.43045043945313,-0.912153601646423 rotation = 0.7071068,0,0,-0.7071068 mirror = 1,1,1 istg = 0 dstg = 0 sqor = -1 sidx = -1 attm = 0 srfN = None, -1 [COLOR="#FF0000"]attN = top, 106[/COLOR] Again, search for the UID and change the attN line to mach the above. That'll fix the ship with the command pod. Save the file (make sure it finishes saving), then F9 it into KSP. When you separate the ships, you need to right click the regular docking ports (not the shielded ones) and select "Decouple." Enjoy (here's the teaser). ~Claw

It's actually worse than that. In 0.24.2 there was a code change to fix one of the stack decouplers. Something in the way the rocket's velocity is applied to the decouplers was done incorrectly. Basically the decoupler isn't receiving enough velocity when initially separating, even though the rest of the separated part seems to be fine. So while stack decouplers aren't affected to badly, the radial decouplers are more obviously broken. The end result is that a decoupled part appears as if it experiences a sudden "drag" on only the decoupler, causing radially decoupled parts to tip inward upon separation. If NEAR or FAR is installed, this initial tip inward then leads to aerodynamic forces shoving the separated parts back into the core. (This can still happen in stock, but it isn't quite as bad.) Cheers, ~Claw

Hey purpleivan, I loaded up your quicksave and was able to undock the "Eeloo 1" lander from your "Heavy Lift 1" without any problems. So I'm not sure if that's the issue you are having or not. That top docking port won't have an "attN = top" line because there isn't anything attached to the top of it. The other two ports look fine inside the savefile. Can you provide a bit more clarification? Or maybe a picture of what part isn't working the way you expect? Cheers, ~Claw

That's true, so long as you haven't exposed it to KSP already. Since KSP likes to convert save games automatically when you get to the menu screen, there's a bit more work that needs to be done if the save has already reached that point. Fortunately both fixes are fairly easy. Just takes a little copy/pasting from the thread I linked to. ~Cheers, Claw

KSP will automatically use all the ram it wants to, until it hits the end of your RAM supply or the RAM address limit (if you're using 32-bit). You don't have to allocate more RAM to it. Generally, it'll crash if it's trying to grab more RAM than what's available, or the Operating System will start swapping memory to the hard drive (resulting in huge slow down). My guess is that you're actually suffering laggy play (or low frame rates). That's likely because your computer is overloaded trying to simulate the physics and render those huge space stations you're building. Really we need a bit more information, like Motokid600 said. Cheers, ~Claw

Indeed there is a post about how to fix docking ports. It depends on what problems you are having. Also, the fix requires editing the save file. So depending on your level of comfort, it might be easier to do the edits or to launch a new ship. See this thread for details: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78863-FIX-Dock-Undocking-Bug-in-0-23-5 I now also realize that I need to put a few updates in that thread. However, it should still help you reset the port state so that you can dock. Good luck, and let me know if you need help. ~Claw

I think there's a couple parts that don't move heat very well. So when something like that gets pointed at them, they simply overheat instead. ~Claw

Pull up the F3 menu and see what's actually destroying the tank. It's unclear to me if it's the SRBs making contact, if the sepratrons are causing a problem, or if the tank is getting crushed by the acceleration of the main engine. Pulling up the F3 menu will (hopefully) tell you the what's causing damage to the tank. ~Claw

I would actually love to see pictures of an 8mil ton craft. I can't even imagine how big that thing is. Welcome to the forums. ~Claw

This is sort of up to you. If you feel like you're not understanding how, then you can download MechJeb and give it a try. You can decide if you want to either let it do it for you all the time, or you can use it to learn some techniques on how to get to orbit efficiently with the Stock game. Another alternative is to browse through some youtube videos and learn from those. The nice thing about MJ is that it will fly YOUR rocket, rather than you watching someone else fly their rocket. After MJ does a few launches, you can try it again manually. I would venture a guess that it's not only your ascent technique that's causing you problems, but perhaps how your rockets are built. Often times when people feel they need giant rockets just to get to orbit, it turns out they are trying to carry too much fuel, which needs bigger engines, which requires more fuel. And it becomes a vicious cycle. If you truly want help, my advice would be to post a few pictures (or even craft files) to the Gameplay Questions forum. You'll likely find a lot of help there. And that still lets you decide if you want to MJ or not. Cheers, ~Claw

One extremely narrow example to consider as people banter about how automation is cheaty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland Airbus is all about automation. Many airliners have crew selections for throttle settings (takeoff, cruise, land) and the computer decides how fast the engines need to run based on a variety of conditions. Airbus even forces their airplanes to pitch down during landing, so as to force the pilots to actually interact during the landing phase. Something like a Beechcraft 1900 can fly an instrument approach but can't land itself. Something like a T-38 can't fly itself during any phase of flight and requires a pilot on the controls at all times. Each aircraft has it's own challenges and kinds of people who fly them. Seriously, it's a video game. Go enjoy your free time. Cheers, ~Claw

Moved to gameplay questions and retitled. Cheers, ~Claw

This is exactly the kind of thing that I will not tolerate. It can be your opinion, but you don't need to come onto the forums to tell people they have the skills of a dead monkey. It is unacceptable. Your first post has already started to derail the thread. WWEdeadman is not the only one sliding down this path. Stay on track of discussion of what you do or don't do with MechJeb, why you don't like it or do, and whatever else you may or may not use it for. I see no need to tell people that they cheat because they do or don't use it, or to try to veil insults about their skills. Up until this page the discussions have remained on a track that is leaps better than in the past. Keep it that way or this thread will end up like the others. ~Claw

Yep, there's been a rash of these lately. While a necro itself isn't bad, it sometimes confuses people. So in this particular case, I think this one is played out. Cheers, ~Claw

Yeah, craft built only with control surfaces nearly always end up experiencing infiniglide. ~Claw

Stache K, Yes, as a matter of fact you can convert your old saves into "Science Only." Follow the link below, and it will be one of the fixes listed in that thread. I think it's near the bottom of the list, titled "[0.24] Converting a 0.23.5 career save into a "Science Career" (no contract) save – [FIX]" http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92235-Cross-Platform-Issues-Thread I HIGHLY recommend you copy your saves before editing them. Welcome to the forums! ~Claw

For stock aero, my personal rules of thumb for air/space planes are: - 1 TurboJet per 12 tons (no more than 15 tons) - 3 intakes per TurboJet - 100 to 150 units of liquid fuel per TurboJet (less as you get more comfortable with the design) - 0.5 lift rating per ton (no more than 1.0 lift rating per ton) These rules of thumb are sort of a sliding scale. If you increase in one area, you can decrease in another. So if you have less weight per TurboJet, you can get away with less lift rating, fuel, or intakes. So you can make some trade offs that work for your design. Also, this assumes an ascent profile that relatively mirrors flying at terminal velocity all the way up. If you want to know what these Rules of Thumb are based on, let me know. They were developed after much testing and trial/error. Cheers, ~Claw

Yeah, I would ask the same question as Taki. Especially if there is any clipping near your docking ports. Docking ports really do not like clipping at all. That being said, I've seen other similar disassembles with similar, X-shaped fuel tankers. While I couldn't figure out what was causing the shake/explosion, it was controllable by toggling off the torque modules immediately upon switching to the craft. That allowed enough time to move fuel around. For some reason, moving fuel around caused enough of a change in the mass distribution that the shaking didn't happen after that. Good luck, ~Claw

It's not going to be carried as a bug because it's not something that would be fixed with a new release. Likely, the next release will also cause some unwanted side effect to save games. The best thing we have to combat this right now is to note it and figure out fixes so people can update their saves if required. Some people start fresh, some people carry over. But it's not something that will be fixed in a future version, because it's likely that the future version will break something else anyway. Sometimes I like to be wordy. Hopefully that makes some sense. Cheers, ~Claw

Hmm, up front I would say that most of your instability is actually caused by a bug with the flight control surfaces. There's something called "infinigliding" that happens with control surfaces (because they are currently broken). That would likely explain your instability. I'm not sure what's causing the camera problems though, unless the craft is destroying itself and that's where the camera is left behind. ~Claw

Moved this report about a mission into mission reports. ~Claw

And that's okay. Some people overwhelm easier than others.

You are quite welcome, and we hope it works out better for everyone. ~Claw

Hey TheGrandSophia, What would be really awesome is if you could supply us with some more information. You did a good job of describing what happened, but if you can help us figure out why it's happening that would be even better. You are right, this is fairly rare in the stock game. Please check out this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92230-Stock-Support-Bug-Reporting-Guide It will tell you where and how to collect information that will help us figure out what's going on. Pictures and craft files would be awesome, as well as what KSP you are using (mac, windows, linux) and maybe the log files. Thanks, and welcome to the forums! ~Claw