larkvi

All facilities are level two except mission control and the astronaut complex, which are level three. Given that I have launched this same booster/bus/probe combo more than ten times now, and spent 300K+ on the test bed for one version, and launched about 10 individual testfires with component parts (two of just the satellite and bus), I would have expected decent reliability, but none of that seems to make any difference. Part failures are immediate and complete. I am also running an entirely unmanned program, so if every probe is going to fail constantly, I have no way to repair them.

I have read all of the documentation, and I am still having trouble understanding what is required of me or what the intent is. I have run tests firings of all the separate parts multiple times, paid 179K funds twice for improvement (it's only a 40K launcher, so this seems extreme), and BARIS makes a launcher that had a 100% success rate before installing it into a launch craft that has a 100% failure rate, generating 28–35 failures every single launch, which is basically every single part on the craft. I am playing with KCT, so integration should not be an issue, but even when I turned integration off, it still happens. I get to about 30K meters and then all at once 20+ parts fail. By the time I reach space, another 8–15 have failed, always including the upper stage motors and tanks, so that the craft is dead when the booster runs out. I thought the intent was to create interesting failures, but what it seems to do is just make every craft a complete failure. Note the 35 messages on the top--every single one was a part failure on this same launch. Fifth straight time this vehicle failed, and another vehicle which shares 90% of the parts failed every time too. https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4iv74s1lax04q1/20170822_larkvi_Player.log?dl=0

If it was easy to fly, how would I know FAR is working? (That is my story, at least. The truth is that, as much as I love FAR, I am terrible at both designing and flying airplanes. I did assemble that one in about five minutes.)

@ferram4 I tried the most recent version on a Mac, without any apparent problems. I do not know what the shader issue looks like, but I did not experience it. The doubled menu button from the previous version is gone. Everything appears to be working properly: my planes are transonically unstable, prone to flat spins, and aerodynamically disintegrate. (Have not tested water.) One thing which I do not know if it is an issue or not (so I have not put it in GitHub): are some voxels supposed to be sticking out a bit from the plane? http://imgur.com/a/OxYrc Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jnehzt4xkb1bydd/Dart.craft?dl=0

I recall an earlier update saying that it supported creating hollow structures and toroids--have any of these shapes been developed anywhere that I could try out?

Is the rescaled Duna atmosphere supposed to be so thick? My lander slows based upon its aeroshell to low enough speeds to deploy a drogue at 30km (versus 10km stock), and with a single parachute can get to 20m/s, which seems a lot for an almost airless planet. The same lander only gets to 10m/s landing on Kerbin. I was assuming that the realistic atmosphere would be more like mars, which is something like 1/200th as dense as Earth.

Do people have good Konstruction crafts that are working well for them that they might share, perhaps with images of them at work?

Moved over from IR thread, because problem does not happen with stock orbit cheat, only KRASH: Here is a logfile and craft where I have reduced the number of base mods to three: Stockalike Station Parts Expansion, KRASH, and Infernal Robotics (with rework parts) and had the game open for no longer than was required to duplicate the issue: Logfile: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jhycq2xdha3ean1/Player_20161104_1223.log?dl=0 Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/atnieuhr2ly3uoe/Duna 6K Lander Concept Cleaner.craft?dl=0 To duplicate. Load craft, launch, confirm that robotics work on the launchpad, deploying shield and airlock. Revert to hanger, use KRASH interface Orbit Selection > Duna > Start Simulation, notice that the central tube is now shifted up the extendatron, which has itself shifted, and the hinge is no longer in the same position.

I did not realize there was now a stock cheat option. I shall try it, and move this issue over to the KRASH thread.

I was really just trying to see if there was a known preliminary issue, not take up your time with that (heavily-modded) craft. Here is a logfile and craft where I have reduced the number of base mods to three: Stockalike Station Parts Expansion, KRASH, (and IR, of course) and had the game open for no longer than was required to duplicate the issue: Logfile: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jhycq2xdha3ean1/Player_20161104_1223.log?dl=0 Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/atnieuhr2ly3uoe/Duna 6K Lander Concept Cleaner.craft?dl=0 To duplicate. Load craft, launch, confirm that robotics work on the launchpad, deploying shield and airlock. Revert to hanger, use KRASH interface Orbit Selection > Duna > Start Simulation, notice that the central tube is now shifted up the extendatron, which has itself shifted, and the hinge is no longer in the same position. I can make a version with no SSPE parts over the weekend, to further reduce the variables, but note that the hinge is not attached to any non-stock parts.

I am not using KJR, but I am having a problem where my lander with deployable airlock works fine on the pad, but on changing scenes, the part attached to the extendatron loads in a different position than it was in the editor. Is there some setting related to the discussion above that people would recommend? Is there a known incompatibility with CRASH? I am using the latest version from Ziw with the rework parts. https://www.dropbox.com/s/k0yw2uo1oetoflc/duna_lander_airlock locked.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/erttk294yf68b5k/duna_lander_airlock_extended.png?dl=0 If someone has a workaround for the immediate period, that would be great. Else, I will try to isolate the error. (The log has a lot of other stuff going on from what I believe is an unrelated problem, but is here if it would somehow be useful: https://www.dropbox.com/s/o8ymrm8jk3eyara/Player_2016_11_02.log?dl=0)

To add to what Ferram said, if you go to the Ven's Stock Revamp thread, you'll note many people have been having trouble with the recent version. In my experience (my current game uses tons of VSR Skippers), 1.9.2 works fine with FAR, so use that until Ven has a chance to figure out what is going wrong.

You can just put the science in a command pod--would that not work?

Golf scorecard is from equipping and using the surface gravity experiment (the golf club) from Surface Experiments.

Just wanted to say I have been enjoying this contract pack, and it has inspired me to make a series of one-launch (+extras) SkyLab-inspired "SpaceLabs" which I have been sending around the Kerbin system to mine for science and rich contract rewards:

Just wanted to sat how much I love this mod. Really gives something interesting to do on missions, and makes engineers critical to accompany my scientists. I had a terrible time with explosions on Mun, but recently set up on Minmus with no issues: http://imgur.com/vf5JGbv

I believe it is in an unreleased future version.

What are people's current best-case dV expended to LKO for rockets using FAR? I am trying to automate some repetitive launches with MechJeb and tune my ascent profile, and I cannot seem to get much below 3300 dV expended to 80x80km. I know some stock players are expending as little as 2900 dV, and I wonder if the 300-400 dV are something I am dropping in my design or just what FAR takes. If you have a craft that makes it with significantly less, would you mind sharing it with me so I can see where my design is falling down?

Can MFT handle a module with a scaling value that is equal to a resource? I would like to have procedural KIS tanks, but tank definitions are a resource and KIS is a module, even though the capacity should be easy to scale. I assume this is not possible with MM?

It would be wonderful it they lined up. It is a great little part--with some hacking of 'up,' I made a ridiculously-tiny Minmus lander with it, and look forward to more tiny parts that will fit on missions, especially if I can use them with other parts.

Will the Akita rover bits fit with the squarish AES pod? It would make a nice alternate cab.

Can I make a procedural KIS container, or do procedural parts only contain resources?

I can't seem to get this to work in either my modded or un-modded install. I start a new career, choose "Medium", upgrade the tracking station, launch the telescope in a 253x263km polar orbit, and then target Eve, point it towards the target marker, and click "Research Bodies", then the tracking button, but it always gives an error message about needing to be in space or "Oups, (sic) there is nothing new here." or "Result: VOID", despite them showing up as unknown in the zoomed-out and tracking station view. The button in the main SpaceCentre view also gives no clickable options. Only other mod is module manager 2.6.24 (same happens in my other save with 2.6.25). Duna seems to work, despite being further away. Eve, Moho, Dres, and Jool do not. Logfile: https://www.dropbox.com/s/t3kbcx8gq7o4wrv/UnresearchableBodies.log?dl=0 Definitely agree that the research of bodies needs to be more than clicking. Perhaps research programs from the ground to discover the body that take time to finish, and the telescope is used for more-detailed, higher levels of information about the body? Can you dynamically construct the information revealed about a body, like its name, orbit, moons, and reveal them one at a time as a research program, or even update information in one of the encyclopaedia pages, as more research is done (possibly including probes?). Edit: I watched the video on the first page, and realized that it is a matter of clicking like mad to find the bodies. Not sure why this gameplay choice was made, but maybe I have not clicked enough times. Definitely a gameplay feature that is non-obvious and should be part of your overhaul.

Does one of the numbers in the data view specifically record this? I am prone to creating planes which enter flat spins, and if there is one number I need to pay more attention to, I would be interested. (I suspect the answer, as so often here, is a bigger tail, but I was trying to avoid adding more than I need to.)

I have been using FAR exclusively in KSP almost since I started, and can make stable planes and SSTOs regularly, but I have never really learned how to make flaps work for me--I have read the example design process, but are there more detailed guidelines for how much flaps to use and how / when to use them in flight? I am a generally terrible (keyboard) lander, so I am investigating ways to make things land at lower speeds and with fewer parts lost. And, since we can never say it enough, many thanks to Ferram for maintaining this over so many iterations and conflicting mods.