JWag

I have been trying to port my GPP game from 1.3.1 and I'm having quite a bit of trouble. After loading the save, I can't go into any of the buildings or exit to menu. The only way to close the game is Alt-F4. I have uploaded a .zip with the save, logs, and a list of installed mods from CKAN. The only part mod I have installed is EVA Transfer. Some of my troubleshooting steps: Verified GPP is current (1.6.3.0) in KSP 1.4.3. Remove all mods except GPP and related. (Even EVA Transfer - several ships lost on load). Start a new career. Everything works OK (seems to indicate problem with save, not GPP installation?) Go back to KSP1.3.1 and re-load save after updating all mods. GPP updated to 1.6.3.0. Runs fine in KSP1.3.1. Copy save over to KSP1.4.3 after this. Problem persists. Added some entries in the Alt-F12 menu prefixed with "JWAG:" so I could figure out where the errors are coming from Googled some of the error messages that appear after loading the save: [SurfaceObject]: Cannot return to original parent, it no longer exists. Material doesn't have a color property '_Color' (repeats 392 times) KSP is 1.4.3 with whatever version of Making History was current. I .zipped a verified install from Steam and copied it to my D: drive so that I could install mods. I'm grateful for any assistance.

I'm not seeing this. I launched a simple capsule on a throttled-down Kickback to ~250km: https://imgur.com/a/f9CJ0 (In the picture I already deployed the fairing, just to show construction; in my tests the fairing stays in place until Kickback burnout.) The retractable panels inside the service bay and the two mounted on the Oscar tanks deployed fine. Images of your craft will surely help. (This really should be in the bug report forum). I have also had no problems with KER on 1.4, but it's a fresh KER installation over a totally clean copy of 1.4. If you upgraded to 1.4 from a previous version, KER will try to use the existing settings in GameData\KerbalEngineer\Settings, which may not work in 1.4. Maybe try deleting the settings after copying them somewhere safe, and see if it works?

I have not had any issues running it on 1.1.3.

In my early career game, I sent a crewed vehicle to Mun to rendezvous with a station. When I got inside Mun's SOI, I found that I not only got my inclination within 2 degrees, but I had an encounter very close to the Pe where I would be making my orbit insertion burn. A handful of puffs from my RCS lined up the Pe, ascending node and encounter markers on roughly the same point. Could I combine a plane change, circularization burn and rendezvous burn? Yep. I was pretty happy about that. I went from a hyperbolic orbit to docked in about 5 minutes.

One spurious NRE with KAC: [WRN 14:26:22.460] [HighLogic]: =========================== Scene Change : From TRACKSTATION to FLIGHT (Async) ===================== [LOG 14:26:22.461] 6/27/2016 2:26:22 PM,KerbalAlarmClock,Scene Change from 'TRACKSTATION' to 'FLIGHT' [LOG 14:26:22.462] 6/27/2016 2:26:22 PM,KerbalAlarmClock,Active Vessel unreadable - resetting inqueue flag [EXC 14:26:22.474] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object KerbalAlarmClock.KerbalAlarmClock.UpdateDetails () KerbalAlarmClock.KerbalAlarmClock.RepeatingWorker () KSPPluginFramework.MonoBehaviourExtended.RepeatingWorkerWrapper () [LOG 14:26:22.480] 6/27/2016 2:26:22 PM,KerbalAlarmClock,Removing DrawGUI from PostRender Queue Win 7 Pro x64, KSP 1.1.3 64-bit (Steam) Logs, persistent file and list of mods here. There are only a couple part mods; the rest are usability.

Seems fine in 1.1.3 on Windows 7 x64. There are a couple of exceptions in my log, but they don't seem related to KJR.

Now that CKAN is effectively dead, how about a passive version? I.e. CKAN continues to do everything it does, except it no longer automatically downloads/installs/removes mods? For example, CKAN maintains its database, checks for dependencies, etc., but instead of downloading mods for me, it links directly to the forum post describing the release notes. I then install the old-fashioned way, using the mod author's own links and instructions. CKAN could even verify that I did it right. We (end users) would still get many of the benefits of CKAN. I would have an easily-exportable backup-able list of mods currently installed, and CKAN would tell me if any of them have updated. Curating my own mod list wasn't as bad on the old version of forum software, because I could define different categories for Subscribed Threads. I had one subscription list for mods that were currently installed, and it provided a link to the first new post in each thread. The new forum subscription model is not as flexible.

Well that's it then. I really don't miss the bad old days of manually curating mods. Unfortunate that it came to this.

I got bitten by this in my old (dating back to 23.5) save. My Eeloo probe should be fine as I used RTGs, but my crewed ship in Dres orbit can't afford to run its science lab for more than half an orbit because it has a pair of dinky arrays.

This was also reported here. It's really annoying. It's in Squad's bug tracker, so here's hoping it gets fixed in 1.1.3.

I have seen this also. Most noticeably when coming back to Kerbin from Mun. Pe at Kerbin was rising about 10meters/Second. I went around my ship and disabled RCS and engines, but still the Pe increased. This seems to happen for me only with the active vessel, and only when not in standard warp. Mods are: [x] Science! (xScience 4.16) Environmental Visual Enhancements (EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements 2:EVE-1.1-1) Environmental Visual Enhancements - Config files (EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements-HR 2:EVE-1.1-1) EVA Struts (EVAStruts 1.0) Kerbal Alarm Clock (KerbalAlarmClock v3.6.1.0) Kerbal Engineer Redux (KerbalEngineerRedux 1.1.1.0) Kerbal Joint Reinforcement (KerbalJointReinforcement v3.1.6) Kerbal Stock Part eXpansion - maintainted (KSPX v0.2.10.1) Module Manager (ModuleManager 2.6.23) Precise Node (PreciseNode 1.2.2) Procedural Fairings (ProceduralFairings v3.16) SCANsat (SCANsat v16.0) Toolbar (Toolbar 1.7.11) Though the ship in question was built entirely of stock parts, and KER was in partless mode.

The CKAN metadata maintainers say they're getting the thread URL from the Spacedock page for KSPX, which does have the old-style forum thread URL listed.

Here is the KSPX (Kerbal Stock Part eXpansion) thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/96464-11x-kspx-kerbal-stock-part-expansion-mod-reposted-v02101-20416/

You can right-click on it and it will stay up. Mostly. It has been a little fiddly for me, and it's pretty much impossible if the marker is near another marker (i.e. a Target's periapsis or apoapsis).

I'd like a mod that will back up a maneuver node, and restore it on demand. Many times when I'm setting up a node, I'll end up with a "good enough" result. It gets me what I need, but I'd like to shave off some dV or fine-tune it so my rendezvous is perfect. And many times those tweaks actually make it worse, but now I've lost the node that worked. It'd be great if I could back up that "good enough" node so that I can reset it if my tweaks are counter-productive. In a perfect world, this would be integrated into Precise Node.

I love your mockup picture. As much as I love PreciseNode, it's tedious to make large changes with it. The stock node editor is nice and intuitive, but as you say, it's too easy to grab the wrong widget, and it becomes really hard to use when there's lots of clutter.

Very grateful for your efforts keeping this mod going.

The 909 and Poodle are fine landing engines on worlds without atmospheres.

Another excellent point, and another advantage we have in KSP. In KSP I've recovered some missions where I got aggressive and flipped, especially if I keep it to a 360 degree flip and don't lose too much velocity. A real rocket would be thousands of rocket fragments in a fireball. Even when KSP is hard, it's much more forgiving than the real thing.

I'm no rocket historian, but I've never heard of a rocket that drains from the top first. You'd need to segment your tanks and put pumps in each one and the weight penalties would be enormous. In real rockets, fuel and oxidizer are in separate tanks, which each drain from their bottoms. You get a nice advantage with this; you can pick which propellant tank is close to the engines, and which is closer to the nose. The Space Shuttle put the LOX tank at the top of the external tank and the LH2 tank at the bottom. LOX is many times more massive than LH2 at the same volume, so the ET's CG was always nearer the nose. In KSP your tank just drains top to bottom as if the fuel and oxidizer were pre-mixed.

I don't think the LV-T30 has ever had a gimbal. If you use one of those on a 1.25m rocket, you're only steering with the (wackily OP) reaction wheels. We have another disadvantage when playing with a keyboard: It's very hard to make tiny adjustments to your trajectory in KSP. Unfortunately, when you're at max-Q the last thing you want to do is slew your control device to full lock.

Real launch vehicles don't have fins because they have very good control algorithms that monitor angle of attack more precisely than you or I can. They are also flying ascent profiles that were exhaustively studied, modeled and simmed long before the rocket was ever assembled. Real launch vehicles are also flown in the same configuration over and over, building up a huge database of performance that feeds back into the algorithms. When you and I throw something together in the VAB and toss a Kerbal on top and put it on the pad 15 minutes later, we haven't done any of that. I spend a couple of minutes doing "trade studies" in KER sometimes, but often I just fly the darn thing. We don't have a fancy guidance computer, or carefully calculated thrust profiles or anything. If SpaceX or ULA or Roscosmos or Arianespace did that, they'd be just as flip-happy. EtherDragon's advice to keep initial velocity low is good. We have the luxury of extremely deep-throttling engines (an advantage none of the real rockets have). I'm happy to see the new tiny fins. I've really been wishing for something like that.

It appears the tail connector part is excessively sensitive to heat.

If heatshields are massless and have drag, would that explain the wonky orientation?

Sure thing! Here it is. I believe the only mod parts present on those two craft are Procedural Fairings bases. Other craft in the save have ScanSat or KER parts, but the two manned craft I'm talking about shouldn't need anything other than Procedural Fairings. Thanks!