CaptainShark

Fixed: the first installation used the (apparently) broken launcher, solution: download a fresh zip version from the website and insert the files.

I recently updated to 1.0.5 via uninstalling (deleted the containing folder and all), and re-downloading via the KSP website. Starting a new career mode, I noticed that there didn't seem to be the added parts in the tech tree. I then started a sandbox mode, and was unable to find the new parts, starting with the cargo ramp, then moving onto looking for the other parts. The version number on the title screen does say 1.0.5, but none of the new parts and at least some of the new effects don't seem to have been applied. This is an un-modded install on Windows 7.

Yeah: the patcher doesn't appear to work either. it simply sits at 0% just as the launcher sits at "checking for updates"

Same issue here: un-modded game, stable connection, but patcher and launcher won't make any progress, despite the launcher showing the correct news entry.

I'm having the same issue: the launcher opens fine shows up to date "news" section and so forth. BUT: it will sit on "checking for updates" forever. As in: I started it, walked off to do something else, came back 10 minutes later and nothing had changed. Before asking: - fully un-modded game - stable internet connection

This is a rather odd issue I've encountered since the last patch: - When using the MK1 command pod, and attempting to leave it, the pod's ladder seems to launch my kerbals - I first encountered it while in orbit (needless to say that didn't end well) - I later found that it did the same thing while in atmosphere as well. - From a horizontal position the force is sufficient to catapult a Kerbal fairly high (high enough to be above one of the long fuel tanks and to dunk them substancially underwater on the return trip downward) - Same goes for horizontal - This seems to happen most often when SAS is on (whether or not there is an SAS module or reaction wheel for me) - It doesn't seem to happen when getting back onto the ladder, only on initial exit - It also doesn't seem to happen right off the launch pad, but rather only after some period of flight

To be fair: that's how a lot of cockpits are, a lot of modern aircraft are flown a great deal by instrumentation, particularly where space is concerned. And some would say that reduced visibility is something you'd have to deal with regardless when going from "3rd person omniscient camera" to IVA view. But I get what you are saying. Personally I'd like to see existing interiors for the Mk3 cockpit and inline cockpit before discussing further tweaks.

This is a fairly minor issue, but one all the same: it's been around for a while, but the tri-coupler can be very finnicky when used, either in the VAB or space plane hanger. I understand why of course: in a program which assumably uses an X-Y-Z co-ordinate system a 3-way balance is probably one of the hardest things to properly express. I know: I've tried. The usual issue at least for me though is that the part is very touchy about whether it will or won't let you place parts on it. For instance: It will take the 3x symitry for SRBs, but not for some fuel tanks, and so on. In the space plane hanger in particular: it simply won't allow you to use the 2x symitry to place the bottom 2 tanks as symmetrical parts. In both, I've had issues with engines clipping into each other with the result being at best overheating, and at worst fiery kerbal death. One fix I could think of would be to very slightly increase the distance between the attachment points on the bottom of the part, but not sure how that would effect the problem of balancing this out. Anyone else experiencing these issues?

My bad; correction made, it's tricky looking at a wiki page to tell sometimes.

Could also work

So I've seen a couple suggestions about, picking base locations, secondary launch locations, or portable VAB/hangers, all of which are cool concepts but a bit tricky to implement. Don't get me wrong: personally I'd love to eventually have some sort of "orbital dry dock" in which to build large interplanetary vehicles. But that's beside the point. Apart from convenience: these don't serve a great deal of purpose in KSP's current state. But it did spawn an idea which since the implimentation of destructable buildings did seem like something with merit: a secondary launch site for smaller vehicles. Let's face it: if you've played career mode currently, you've realized that you will inevitably end up with a good number of one-shot, semi-expendable rockets designed to test one or two parts and collect the contract rewards. It isn't really practical to go for a half dozen of these or so at once simply from the altitude and speed requirements being occasionally radically different. SO my idea was: what if you could conduct these flights with nno risk of breaking stuff at the KSC, and the answer I thought up was: a launch ship. now before you say that this is inpractical, this is a real thing that companies use: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Launch The basic idea here is thus: - Spend X amount of funding to build/purchase the secondary site (ie: ship) - It can then be accessed from the menu, same as the VAB or hanger - its interface would basically be identical to the VAB, but with some additional rules - Those rules: the ship you build, unlike at the KSC, will have an upper cap on its launch mass and footprint, thus making these factors for the first time (besides cost obviously) - the advantages: 1) that the ship could be placed at an "optimal" equatorial site by default, 2) there is no risk to your KSC buildings on take off, and 3) in the event that you do total the launch ship (somehow) you could buy another, possibly for a cheaper price than repairing one or more KSC structures. - This also lends itself naturally to the "upgradable" thing that I've seen being kicked around, ie: a larger ship with higher caps on tonnage and footprint Thoughts? It's kind of a halfway-house between the current single-site, and the more open "let us build anywhere" concept I've seen posted. Personally I think it'd make for an interesting game play element: first with the limitations on the size of your rockets launched from it, and the principal that instead of starting with it, you would have to "invest" in the sea launch site.

Agreed: here are some potential name suggestions: (insert "Kerman" as you will) - Valentina - First woman in space (USSR) - Sally - First American woman in space - Mae - First African American woman in space - Chiaki - First Japanese woman in space - Claudie - First French woman in space - Liu Yang - First Chinese woman in space - Roberta - First Canadian female astronaut Citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_astronauts

Yeah: that was the initial idea: integrate the idea of screenshots into gameplay as it were. And that had crossed my mind: special bonuses for discovering the various "anomolies" (easter eggs) about the solar system.

Well: glad someone else likes the idea. As to telescopes: I touched on those on afore mentioned "more science parts ideas" post which I'll link: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78161-Some-ideas-for-additional-science-parts

Some time ago I made a thread about adding some more variety/real-world science parts to KSP, (which is now buried a ways back i imagine), but one of the ideas touched on there-in came back up with the integration of "reputation" as a currency in career mode. The idea in summary: - Add "camera" parts, ie: parts through which we can see ala: IVAs, but then take photographs (basically) screenshots through. - These photos could then be given a "value" in rep points (or science, but rep would make a bit more sense) based on the objects in frame and the setting (ie: from space, flying or on the surface, etc) - These could then be placed in a "gallery" of sorts in the admin building maybe for further management. Anyone who played the old N64 game pokemon snap could recognize the idea of scoring photos. For KSP it could be fairly simple, since the code to recognize when objects are in frame, even very distant ones like moons or Kerbol is already in the game. Another possibility: Maybe each of the Kerbal admins wants photos for different reasons or will give you something different for them (not the recovery guy obviously) Finances = sell them for some extra cash PR = Use them to gain extra rep Science = use them to get a small amount of science Or: maybe contracts could have "take photo of x body" or "Take a photo of a kerbal on the surface of x body", etc. Some objects/factors which could factor into a photo's value: - the planets, moons or stars in frame (der) - Flags - Kerbals - Vehicles - the setting (in space or "under a different sky") Cameras as a part: - Probably placed radially or as a "tiny" part - Would have a very minor pan/zoom ability, meaning you would actually have to point a ship in order to take a desired photo - Consume power on activation/taking a picture - Maybe they can only store so many frames before needing to transmit them to the KSC (film or digital storage space) Some benefits I see to the system: - Adding some game play/objective variety - A record of achievements for players - A means of making back or padding the rep system (for when that becomes important) - Integrating into game play the idea of screenshots - Adds a new reason to have transmitters - Means that a bit of value could still be salvaged from say: a rover who's wheels busted on landing and thus can't travel Thoughts/Suggestions?

Hey Kerbonaughts I just updated my game to 0.25 (no mods as of yet), and ran into a bit of an odd bug/glitch/issue: - When i entered the VAB or hanger I found that all the parts in the menu had been "duplicated", by that I mean they were showing up twice. Two MK1 command pods, two SRBs of each size etc. - This happens in both career and sandbox mode - unlocking parts in the tech tree does this as well I searched for help on this issue, but only found suggestions to delete some files in the game folder and then use Steam to replace them when it comes up with an error message upon starting KSP. Unfortunately for me: I don't use steam, I use the stand-alone install of KSP and haven't been able to find a solution for the duplication given that factor. Thanks in advance - Captain Shark

Oh now that's an interesting idea: I like the idea of having to discover the smaller/farther away bodies and or mapping surface topography somehow, naming features without the use of flags could be interesting in that respect, or just having your scientists name things to provide a navigation aid (I know I've gotten lost on planets a lot)

Alternatively if "just take 100 percent power production" is too generous: - average the power generated over time, ie: assuming a panel generates X amount while fully illuminated, and it falls behind a body 50 percent of the time just do X/2 as its generation - or, ignore generation all together and just figure out if the vehicle while idle has a net drop in stored energy over a given space of time, if it does, the vehicle will eventually run dry and operation would have to stop, if not, it would continue indefinitely, theoretically anyway

I've been playing with the career mode a bit as of late, having bought KSP quite a few patches ago, back when re-entry effects were big news and the sun was no longer a point of light. Anyway: I noticed something which seemed a bit odd to me in terms of balance/immersion and the like: following the removal of "science spam" as a viable option (a good thing), it seems that there isn't really any incentive to have permanent structures like bases or stations save for refueling platforms and "because I can", which i still good, but doesn't have much pay-off in terms of the currency of career mode. So I got to brain storming on a few ideas which could fix that, and here's what I came up with: - Telescopes: Possibly in a couple varieties, for instance: a small one one could place on a satellite, a larger in-line one for use in larger space ships, or a giant 3.5m one the size of the entire lab module or a large fuel tank, something akin to the real world Hubble telescope in appearance. The idea of these would be that they would remain in orbit and generate science based on their view of the sky, for instance: getting more science for (obviously) being outside atmosphere, but still more for being farther away from the sun (reducing glare). Maybe even have a few flavors of them, like radio telescopes, infra red, and so on. - Research labs: Essentially simmilar to the telescope idea, but a "micro-gravity research lab" of some kind which would slowly generate science over time. Of course requiring constant flow of electricity and the presence of Kerbals to make it work. Could have plenty of potential for funny quotes as well given we've all seen footage of astronaughts having fun with microgravity. - External experiments rack Something for the Kerbals to visit while on EVA, this would be something simmilar to the materials observation bay but instead of yielding science upon recovery, would yield results and be refreshed via direct intervention of a kerbal on EVA. - Soil sampler Effectively: a robotic arm or the like which would allow an automated probe to perform the same action as a kerbal on EVA, ie: collecting samples from the surface of a body. Obviously this would require return, so this doesn't exactly address my initial inspiration, but I thought it was neat. - Cameras: This is probably the oddest of these ideas: basically the idea would be to be able to take photos from your probe, rover, station etc, and these would be transmitted back to the KSC and put in a "gallery' of some form. Basically integrating into game the idea of taking screenshots. These could then net a small amount of science based on what you got in-frame, maybe even have special bonuses for finding easter eggs like the monoliths. These could even be integrated into career mode some time down the line when costs and public interest are factors to be considered. - Core sampler The idea behind this one is basically "soil sample on steroids": basically a large component which requires a kerbal, constant flow of power and time to extract a sample from the surface of an object. This, like most of the others i've listed are the sort of things you'd have to "set and leave for a bit", in order to get a return out of them, thus incentivising longer duration structures and missions. A note on balance: These are NOT in my mind a replacement for having big sample and crew return missions, rather something which would generate a "slow but steady" flow of science points as opposed to the big jumps you get from acomplishing a major mission. of course with time acceleration there would be room for abuse there, but since when is that not the case with time acceleration.