Claw

What is it that you are trying to do with the stationary orbits?

64-bit is due out in the next update. Please be prepared for bugginess. As has been mentioned, memory is probably not your problem unless you are running a lot of mods. Many people suggest visiting Minimus first, because it requires the same skills as Mun, but is a lot easier and more forgiving. If you need it, do it! KSP is still single threaded. Which means it really only uses one core at a time. However, the operating system will push the KSP process around on the cores so the task manager makes it appear as if the coreas are all being used at a lower rate. It's just disguising the single thread.

Yes, quicksave/quickload does indeed work for ports that are in working order, but haven't reset after a recent docking. (No need to exit to the space center.) Roscoe's docking fix thread is a great help, but I find that it can be difficult for people without a lot of save editing experience. Also, it doesn't seem to always fix the docking problems in 0.23.5. If you try the quicksave/quickload and have confirmed that ports are installed correctly, try this thread. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78863-FIX-Dock-Undocking-Bug-in-0-23-5 Aaaaaaand, after I posted this, I realized it's a necro...

I have never seen this before. And I don't recall it being posted on here either. I see you have some mod parts. Can you get it to also do this with stock (just removing any mod parts)? I could imagine that KAS might be doing something also. You might want to check the KAS threads.

Cantab just pointed out that you can rename vessels and change their type via the tracking center. Handy for those parts that don't have a controlling probe core or capsule. In the tracking station, select the vessel to change and click on the "i" icon to the right.

I believe they are intentionally adding features first, so as to flush out all the bugs together. The alternative is slower releases which will still contain bugs (either new or waking up old ones). In any case, make sure if you are trying the "previous orbit" bit that the node is far enough ahead. If it's not, the game will think that the previous orbit is in the past (and therefore not valid).

You might get a bit more help asking in here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/forums/37-Add-on-Development At least, it sounds like you are modeling a new ship, rather than piecing together one from various KSP parts. I'm not sure if there's a specific size limit on a singular part, but generally things are limited to 2.5 km because of KSP's physics range.

Yes, it seems fairly common. I'm usually able to get around it by clicking further down the blue orbit line (sometimes changing view angle) and dragging the node back to where I want it. With the addition of the "forward/backward one orbit" option on the nodes, I find that can be handy too.

Not only does it depend highly on the airplane (as others have said), It also depends on how much AoA is on the airplane. Generally speaking, more AoA means the rudder is more effective at turning, while the ailerons are less effective. Which one works better at any given time will depend on the airplane. The thing is for most typical flight though, it generally isn't the rudder that does the turning. It's because you are in bank. You might need to add rudder to overcome the sideslip and/or induced yaw from establishing and holding the roll angle. That's actually what you're doing to coordinate a turn. That's all great and all, but KSP isn't exactly real life. However, stock KSP actually does a half way descent job replicating these things. (Which is part of why I think stock aero isn't totally horrible.) So, for example, if you have a plane with a lot of wing (like a sail plane) then it will require a descent amount of rudder WHILE you have roll in to get it to turn faster. Even in KSP. And if you add some pitch up (while rolled into turn) it will turn faster. Some pitch up is required if you want to maintain level flight. Some designs will require pitch up to turn at all when in roll.

Well, it depends exactly on what you mean by renaming it. KSP classifies object types separately from the name. So if, by saying "renaming it to something other than debris..." you only mean the name of the vessel, then no, it won't do anything. You have to change the TYPE of the vessel. Changing the type is also done via the renaming menu. I have no idea what the renaming thing looks like that Cantab describes, but if it's the same as the "in-flight" name changing menu, then it should work the same.

AFAIK, once you stage an engine you can't move the icon and stage again. Unless there is some loophole in that where you can trick it. Then yes, this would be really easy. Besides, someone did this exact thing (staging only) with a Mun landing and return. So it's definitely possible even without reshuffling the staging order.

As has been noted, if you don't have 0.23.5.464 update to that. If you still have EVA problems, try this thread. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/75586-Master-Thread-Unresponsive-Kerbals-in-EVA

I can't try this at the moment, but it's crazy how many little features are buried in this game.

You do need to have a probe core onboard (or some other controller) to rename it. However, if you're not opposed, you can open up the save game and redesignate it by hand. Switch out the vessel label type, and if the setup happens to have a type number. I think the number is usually associated with docking. Whatever label type you pick needs to be spelled and capitalized correctly or it won't be recognized.

Bsalis was trying to answer your OP. You asked if there was a better way to do this edit, and Hyperedit is a mod that will do that. While typically saying "there is a mod for that" isn't the greatest answer, in this case it's probably a better option. If you simply want to zap something into a random orbit around another body, Hyperedit is more reliable. The parameters in the save file require some detailed orbital mechanic knowledge to set up by hand. If you don't want a mod, another option is to send up a very simple "positioning" craft into the orbit you want (perhaps even cheating it there with infinite fuel). Then you can copy and paste the simple position craft's orbit info into your new craft's orbit parameters.

It looks brilliant! And unfortunately I have to spread around more love before giving it to GusTurbo again.

Thanks for the clarifications. And sorry for missing that rule. (There's so many circumnav threads that sometimes my poor brain goes crosseyed. )

The jettison option can only be set up in the VAB/SPH as an action group. I'm not sure if there's any "normal" reason to use it, but it might help in this instance. Once you launch though, it's too late to change it (in stock anyway).

Try reading this. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64362-Fuel-Flow-Rules-%280-23-5%29 When you bring several fuel lines together then try to split it back off it often doesn't work. It has to do with the way the game searches the parts tree for fuel. One tank will drain correctly while the other paths stop short. Kasuha is our resident fuel expert, and his thread is pretty in-depth.

Unfortunately the shroud is there because of the decoupler. I can't try it now, but I'm curious to see if the engine's jettison action group would be able to fix this.

As a side note, Squad plans to get the skeletons of all of the features into the game first, then go back and adjust all of the content. Plus they have already acknowledged that the VAB/SPH is due for an overhaul, and that it might happen soon. Just realize that they are indeed focusing on new features first, then fixing bugs and content. As for the OP, they have also acknowledged the click through popups are a problem. Apparently it's a thing with how Unity does some of the windows, so I don't know when that will get fixed. I don't know of any mods that fix this.

Haha, welcome to the forums!!

I like playing all stock but I did add MechJeb (and Kerbal Alarm). MechJeb is mighty and powerful, but also remember that nobody forces you to use it in any way. I've only ever let it land and dock once just to see how it did. (Don't ask what happened to my space station...) Anyway, I do use it when I've already launched 10 rockets in a row. Sometimes that part gets a bit tedious. (Although it also isn't perfect when circularizing orbits...) In any case, what I do absolutely use it for is all the information. I'm in information junkie, and it's made the difference for me to move from a wandering gamer to someone who can actually design a thing to do what I want. Incidentally, I only chose MJ over KER because of looks. (I found out later it has an autopilot.) Anyway, all that being said, don't let anyone tell you that you MUST have it, or any mod for that matter. (And MJ is one of those mods that a lot of people have an opinion on...) I always recommend to folks to play vanilla for a while till you decide what's important to you. Then go look for mods that scratch that itch. For me, it's MJ and Alarm. I'm pretty happy with those for now. They provide a lot of empowerment without changing the basic gameplay. Oh, and by the way: Welcome to the forums!!

Woohoo! Welcome to the forums! There are plenty of places to crash...err, I mean browse around here.

And I think it's actually "Welcome...to the world of tomorrow!"