schlosrat

While bringing a couple of the boys back from the Mun I took my eyes off the screen and got distracted. By the time I noticed they were just a few hundred feet off the ground and the chutes had not deployed. You're thinking *splat*, right? Well I'd previously turned off crash damage, so no - not quite. I did manage to get them out of warp and get the cutes deployed, but not before they bounced. The chutes caught air on the way back up and I somehow wound up with this... Camera just above ground level. Look closely, those are taught parachute lines around the base of my craft! Camera below ground level He did it...

My point is that the surface (except for scatterers) becomes transparent when you flip the camera to a view from below ground. This actually has nothing to do with your graphics settings or mine. Sorry for the confusion, my point with that (a tangent really) was that the transparent ground from below effect is a boon to those of us who don't have a GPU like yours. Lets set that aside for the moment and take another shot at this. When your camera angle is looking down from above you may not visually notice all the scatterers because of the ground. When you move the camera angle to look up from below the ground then the ground becomes transparent revealing the scatters you may not have notice before. With your settings (as shown in your video) this looks like a lot of stuff that might be below ground. I don't think it is, though. Could some of them be below ground? Sure, but are 95 % of them below ground? Probably not. Maybe some, it's hard to say with the video you've posted. I could do a video with my game settings and you would see that the number of scatterers is fairly consistent whether you're looking up from below or down from above. In my case my game settings makes fewer of them, and those it makes are larger so they're easy to see. Consequently it may actually be easier to tell if this is a real effect with lower settings. You could try those for yourself if you like. Still, my theory aside, this is a good thing to report. What if I'm wrong and you're right? Then either (a) you're getting gipped on scatters your GPU is making or the game is wasting cycles making scatterers that are under ground. Iy may be worth the devs looking into it, but I still think it's an optical elusion.

It's possible that some/most/possibly even all of what you're observing is really scatters on the surface. One of the wonderful serendipitous "bugs" we get in KSP2 is that it will happily let us orient the camera below the surface and look up. For me with my crappy old RX 580, even with all the graphics settings turned all the way down I can get to 2-5 FPS on the surface of Mun - if I'm looking down from above. If I had the terrain details you're using in this video it would be impossible to do an EVA - much less a landing. However with my ultra low settings, putting the camera below the deck and looking up is the best way to get around on EVA. I can get a decent 20+ or so FPS that way.

I've seen this multiple times now, too. Most recently on a couple of mun missions where my craft (different craft each time) got back to Kerbin and I was unable to stage to jettison the transfer stage (I was able to trigger the decoupler form the Parts Manager), and then also I was unable to stage for the last stage - parachutes (again, able to trigger in Parts Manager, but pressing space did nothing). Prior in both flights I staged numerous times using space bar without issue. In the handful of cases where I've seen this, it's been the last two stages in a multistage rocket which started with 6 to 8 stages total. KSP Version 0.1.0.0.20892 On an NVME Operating System and version (Windows 11 Pro on an NVME) CPU i9-9900K @ 3.60Ghz GPU AMD Radeon RX 580 Ram 32GB DDR4 Description of the bug. Staging with space bar stopped working toward end of flight (last two stages) Expected Behavior Press space bar to stage Observed Behavior Does not stage. Was able to effect staging through Parts Manager Steps to Replicate Unclear - both instances I've seen this were long runs with many views and even saves/exits/restarts Fixes / Workarounds: Use Parts Manager to effect staging Mods (None) Other Notes (N/A)

Current game behavior is that having a decoupler and the next motor in the same stage often results in the spent lower stage being still attached while upper stage motor is firing. One solution to this is to have stage decouplers in their own stage so that they can be staged separately from the upper stage motor. The safe practice is to stage the decoupler, wait until the lower stage is clear of the upper stage motor, then stage the upper stage motor. If this process is followed while performing a burn that requires contributions from multiple stages, then the burn time and navigation lines in the map view are screwed up when the user returns to the map view. For example: Set up maneuver node in map view (e.g., setting up a transfer from LKO to Mun) Start burn When lower stage is exhausted stage the decoupler Switch to Flight View to ensure the lower stage is clear of the upper stage before staging that motor Stage the upper stage motor Switch back to Map View to observe the progress of the maneuver When returning to the map view in a case like this the projected trajectory generally shows your vessel headed for a hyperbolic escape from the body you're orbiting. You're left with eyeballing things as your actual trajectory approaches what you had planned for.

If a Kerbal on Kerbin activates their jetpack and attempts to fly (press space to go up), the Kerbal will rise up a few cm slowly, then stop. When you release the space bar and the jetpack stops firing. they stay put as if on an invisible perch. If you move forward, back, or to either side (WASD) then there's an audible and visual stepping down. The game appears to know they're not at surface level so gives you the sound effect as if the Kerbal stepped off a curb and on the pavement or whatever.

There's no way to turn on the suit lights while on EVA. Am I missing something? Because it appears the Kerbal spacesuit is missing something... It's not missing lights - you can see them right there on the suit. It's missing any way to turn them on (or off). The only action in the Vehicle Actions is for the Jetpack, and when you look in the Parts Manager, there are options for Jetpack Status, Jetpack Thrust, and Plant Flag - but nothing for lights. While were at it, there is also no way to remove a the helmet - even on Kerbin where the air is presumably just fine.

@septemberWaves If you'd like an example craft with the "interstage faring" workaround, take a look my Comsat Deployer here. Plenty of pics and you can even download it. Note, I've found that using clamp-o-tron jr's to release the satellites works better than the decouplers, plus it leaves your sat with a docking port should you ever need it!

Oops! I meant "C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps". I believe that's where you'll find it.

I have good news for you! First, you can move the folder out of the Steam folder, and you can launch it directly if you happen to want to do that. Thus, it's possible to buy it on Steam and use it just like it's a direct Download. I moved mine from "C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steam\steamapps" to "C:\Kerbal Space Program 2", then put a shortcut to "KSP2_x64.exe" on my desktop. Works like a charm! More good news! The files you're looking for are not in the Steam folder, they're in your user's AppData folder! Navigate to "C:\Users\<your Windows User Name>\AppData\LocalLow\Intercept Games\Kerbal Space Program 2\Saves\SinglePlayer\<Your Campaign Name>" Under this folder you'll find craft files (they're sets of *.json, *.meta, and *.jpg files now), but you'll need to dive one level lower into the "Workspaces" within your campaign, as KSP2 now treats the things you're creating as whole workspaces and not just one craft. This is part of how they make Merge work I think. Also, and just as a bonus, if you head over to "C:\Users\<your Windows User Name>\AppData\LocalLow\Intercept Games\Kerbal Space Program 2\Global" you'll find a "PhysicsSettings.json" file. Edit this with any text editor (make a back up first, of course!) and you can stiffen up your wobbly rockets a bit by boosting the value for "JOINT_RIGIDITY". The default is 1500. Try 1500000 and see if that helps.

These may be minor, but I thought you should know about them. It seems only letters (upper and lower case) are allowed in the Site Name, so no "Minmus Site 1", etc. And since the title is character limited, spelling out numbers is not a great option. I'd think limiting the flag title to only upper and lower case is a bug - though a minor one and really just a nuisance in terms of impact. Site Name is forced into Title Case. If you hold down shift to get multiple uppercase characters only every other one will be uppercase, unless you add a space. Also it's not possible to have an all lower case Site Name, if that matters. A kerbal seems to be able to only plan one flag. Is this a bug or a design choice? There is utility in placing more than one flag, so I hope this is a bug. Workaround: Reboard vessel, do another EVA, and you can plant one more flag. Using punctuation in the Plaque Text (or attempting to use it the Site Name) can cause timewarp! So if you put something clever like "I got here first..." then you'll be timewarping ahead at 4x speed. Similarly, using a comma will decrease timewarp and so may pause the game. If you pause the game due to a comma, then you may be waiting a long time for Jeb to plant that flag once you close the dialog box. To reproduce this bug take Jeb out for a walk and try planting more than one flag.

Thanks! Yep, I get the same effect. Also, trying to edit more than one craft's name is problematic. You do the first, then attempt to go to the next and instead it edits the first one. All sorts of weirdness here. All the same at least the hooks are in place to edit craft names in the future.

Here's a simple rocket that demonstrates one way to solve the lack of interstage nodes in the KSP 2 EA faring capability. This rocket will easily make it to the Mun or Minmus with fuel to spare, and can deliver three communications satellites into a nice network. CommSat Deployer Here's what the beast looks like. Note I used control surfaces instead of stabilizers. Although the center of pressure is well behind the CM even with empty tanks, this beast gets a bit jumpy when you're going through Max Q, and stabilizers just didn't seem to be able to prevent it tipping over. Probably my piloting skillz just aren't as good as they need to, but if you keep SAS on Prograde after you've started your gravity turn and keep the angle above 45 until after max Q you should be able to get to orbit every time! In fact, you should be able to do most of your low orbit circularization burn with the first stage! If you prefer to ditch the fairing before circularizing, then you can move Stage 4 to be down between stages 1 and 2, then stage the fairing once you're clear of atmo and proceed. If you want to play it safe you can leave it where it is and ditch it after circularization. This view shows the satellites stacked inside the fairing This view shows a closer view of the full stack of three communications satellites with engine mounts used to stack them inside the fairing This view show the Clamp-O-Tron Jr's used to attach the satellites and the engine mounts. Be sure your solar panels are retracted when you decouple or things can get stuck! This image shows the decoupler used to toss away the engine mount once you're done with it. These are found on stages 5 and 6, with the top one (first you'll toss) in stage 5. Be sure to point the host vessel away from it's intended line of travel or the recently deployed sat! In this view I've deployed the second sat in the Normal direction then turned to the Anti-normal to jettison the engine mount clearing the path to deploy Sat 3 next. If you look closely, you'll see I goofed and deployed Sat 2 *before* circularizing (oops!). No worries, each sat has more than enough RCS to boost its own orbit back to circular, make tweaks to inclination, etc. Even this low in Kerbin's well it was no trouble at all! Here we can see the deployer vessel lined up for it's next maneuver with both Comm Sat 2 and the engine mount that held it clear of the path and each other.

I believe it's primarily about the game being in Early Access. There are definitely a lot of missing features that we'd expect in the 1.0 release. This is more like a pre-Alpha. Fun to mess around with and get the hang of it, but definitely more buggy and feature poor than what we should expect in the actual 1.0 release.

I'm not sure how else to describe this, but I'm consistently getting some really weird effects with comm sats I deploy. I jettison them Normal to the plane of the orbit, then modify the orbit of my deployment vessel for a 2:3 resonance orbit. When I warp back to apo it's like the main vessel passing by the deployed vessel has some bizarre gravitational effect that drags the deployed sat into a weird highly elliptical orbit. The little deployed sat had been in a nearly perfectly circular orbit ever so slightly inclined from the parent craft due to the deployment force, has no motors other than RCS, and RCS was turned off for it - so it shouldn't be under much force ata ll. In this most recent case I was in a high orbit above Minmus (around 1K km), so it's not like Minmus would have much effect. I saw the same thing while deploying sats around the Mun. Sometimes all goes well, sometimes I slingshot the poor little com sat right out of the SOI.

Ahh, then it might be possible that they are simply pre-compiled unity assets files. There are readers for such things, but I'm not sure what good a reader would do for you. You can google unity unity asset file and find things. I suspect editing one of these files would be a quick way to break the game (assuming there are editing tools as well as readers).

I've seen this happen a number of times. The workaround I've found is to NOT have the decoupler and the next engine in the same stage. It's annoying, but if you give the decoupler a little time then the spent stage clears the next stage and you can fire your engine. I've not seen this kludgy method fail yet, but I've seen several instances where, if the engine and decoupler are in the same stage group, then I end up towing a spent stage behind me with the engine firing.

Is there any way to transfer or copy a craft save file from one campaign to another?

Are you using an appropriately sized engine mount? If so, then it should project an interstage node below your engines and you can have a normal fairing around the cluster of engines. Just attach the next decoupler to the interstage node and the straight fairing should appear.

Currently, you don't make an interstage faring. There is, however a workaround! While the KSP2 faring's don't have interstage nodes, the simple engine mount has something that will work! It's a kludge, but it can get you there. I just did something like this to carry three comm sats to the Mun and deploy them. I got the idea from another post that I can't find right now or I'd credit that clever person, but basically you can do this. Build the internal structure of what you want to enclose with your faring using appropriately sized engine mounts from the structures group. They're all 0.7 tons so you whichever size makes sense, but flip them over to orient with the small side up. This will put the interstage node where you need it. On the engine plate I stick an XS truss and a XS stack separate or stack decoupler. You can use decouplers to let go of your payload, but be careful they're oriented the right way. If you use separators they weight a bit more but you do't have to worry about their orientation. Oh, do set their decouple force to something small! So my stack up looks like this (from bottom up) Engine mount (flipped over) XS truss (if needed) XS stack separator (or decoupler with arrow facing payload) Payload XS stack separator/decoupler attached at the interstage node from the engine mount Engine mount (flipped over) XS truss (if needed) XS stack separator (or decoupler with arrow facing payload) Payload etc. Omit the last stack separator, then attack a faring to the under side of the first one and build your fairing! Be careful that the stack separators/decouplers are in the last stage group. You don't want those buggers staging prematurely!

Suppose you're crazy, and you'd like to deploy a network of, oh... let's say 3 communications satellites. Not that this would be anything a normal person would want to do, but work with me here and just suppose... Here's how you can do it given the extraordinarily limited amount of orbital info you can get in KSP 2 right now. You're probably going to want to use a tool like Excel or whatever you like for some simple math (maths if you're English). Get the mass of the body you're orbiting (I assume the old KSP 1 Wiki is at least close). For the Mun this would be 9.7599066×1020 kg In your math tool of choice get ready with the following G = 6.67e-11 M = 9.7599066e20 mu = G*M NOTE: You can also get this from the wiki - it's the Standard Gravitational Parameter Get in a nice high circular orbit around the body you want to deploy your network about. Record your AP and PE from the ORBITAL.INFO block below the nav ball. You need these numbers in meters! If your orbit is showing them in km then convert. AP = whatever it is in meters PE = whatever it is in meters Compute your orbital eccentricity e = (AP - PE)/AP + PE) Compute your semi major axis a = (AP + PE)/2 Compute your semi minor axis b = SQRT(a^2*(1-e^2)) Compute your orbital period TP1 = 2*PI()*a^(3/2)/SQRT(mu) Compute the orbital period of the transfer orbit you need. If you want a network of 3 satellites you'll want a 2:3 orbital resonance, which you get by multiplying the period of your circular orbit by (2/3) TP2 = TP1*2/3 Compute the semi major axis of your transfer orbit a2 = (TP2*SQRT(mu)/(2*PI()))^(2/3) Compute the periapsis for your transfer orbit PE2 = 2*a2-AP Release your first satellite! If you've stacked them vertically, then point your vessel in any direction other than prograde or retrograde (I like to use Normal direction, but Anti-Normal works well too if you're feeling a bit deviant) Once your first satellite has cleared away from you then point retrograde and burn until you've got a PE equal to PE2 computed above Complete one full orbit in this transfer orbit and circularize once you're back at the apoapsis Release your next satellite Rinse and Repeat as needed. So, basically you need to do a little math with the tiny amount of info you've got, plus one assumption for the mass of the body you're orbiting, and you can get the PE you need for a resonant orbit. The rest is really up to you and your piloting skilz.

Can you elaborate please? I went to the tracking station but apparently didn't look hard enough as I didn't see a way to do it even temporarily. I ask since they may fix that bug and so I may need to use that.

There is also a bug where if you perform a stage separation to release something with a probe core, that new vessel will not have comms even though it's got EC, a probe core, and an antenna. One workaround in this case is to do a quicksave/quickload (F5/F9) and then all appears to be well. This may be analogous to the problem/solution you've found.

This worked great! Anyone know how to change the name of a separated vessel? I liked what KSP1 did where it was automatically named <primary vessel> probe or some such, but instead I've got a comm sat called "Default Name-7". I've tried with the part interface and looking at the probe core, but no luck there. Also tried at the tracking station, and no joy there either. In fact, I found it didn't seem to work when selecting debris and destroy it, although I was able to accomplish that from the flight view by right clicking on a debris object to delete it that way.

Any clues where the equivalent of a KSP 1 parts cfg file would be? I got the game on Steam (which I've never done before), so I don't know if that changes anything, but poking around in the game folder I can't find anything even remotely like a GameData folder or parts or CFG files. If such things exist somewhere then maybe we can play around with them.