swjr-swis

If SpaceDock small CDN nodes were to redirect a download they don't (yet) have to a more complete CDN node, would this work for CKAN? I just made that suggestion in the SpaceDock thread following the frequent 404s lately for the node for my area, but then realised I didn't know if that may even work with CKAN. Another thing that comes to mind: can CKAN (be made to) handle multiple download links? As in, if the mod is made available on both SpaceDock and GitHub (and/or Curseforge, don't hit me), that CKAN entry can list all of those and try them in sequence?

Not a bug, or at least it's 'working as intended', even if very annoyingly so. Missing probe cores is the issue. The skippers do light up, but as soon as they detach, since the game deems them 'not controllable', the game automatically zeroes the throttle again - a very annoying and contradictory behaviour since supposedly they cannot be controlled, so how is the throttle being changed. More appropriately, the throttle should simply be left as is, in this case, full out, and the engines should keep firing. Solid boosters do keep firing without a core, because they cannot be throttled once lit up, so they will merrily continue to use up their fuel, core or not.

I was able to do a similar workaround by using my local hosts file. The source of the problem is clearly that one CDN node, at least for us here in north-west Europe (I think the London node?). VITAS mentioned problems with the maximum disk sizes of some nodes a page or two back... SpaceDock is a big repository. Best to do this kind of workaround only temporarily though, when you absolutely need a specific download, because otherwise it undermines the CDN setup and ultimately the viability of SpaceDock. @VITAS, I much appreciate the service, and I understand the reasoning and validity of a CDN setup to spread out downloads/bandwidth geographically, but if a node starts to continuously serve a 404 on the most recent mod updates, SpaceDock might as well not be there at all for the geography the node serves. Your suggestion to manually/automatically prune older mods from the smaller nodes so they have space for the newest updates seems like it would require a lot of babysitting (especially around KSP updates, with two of them upcoming soon) and cause problems on the other end - people that still use/want the older mod versions. Using (and presumably paying for) any <64GB nodes at this point seems counterproductive. Limiting the CDN to only the bigger nodes that do not currently run into that 64GB disk size limit would seem to offer less administration and perhaps even less cost. Or would the bigger nodes then run into a bandwidth issue? Alternatively, maybe some form of auto-redirecting can be implemented, when a download is not available on a smaller node, so it is still served by one of the nodes with a complete repository. That would equally work for newer mod updates or pruned older mods, and would maximize the usefulness of small nodes while avoiding the 404s. CKAN might have an issue with this though, not sure it can currently handle redirection; perhaps something to bring to their attention (I did).

Happy spacing! I hope as part of the 1.1.3 fixes, they disable all wheel/collision stuff on gear and legs when they are fully retracted, when they are no longer supposed to function as 'wheels' anymore. Or at least, switch to a simple collision surface representing just the external surface. It makes sense for actual wheels to always work and collide as wheels, but not for gear and legs. It would solve at least this very common problem.

Yes.

I couldn't figure out what actually causes the problem, so I don't know what to suggest, other than untarget the asteroid as I mentioned in the previous post, and going into the Alt-F12 menu and cheat/mark the mission as complete. Obviously the game is not going to allow it to be completed the normal way anymore, so you're basically just fixing a bug by doing that. Yes, you have it turned off. From the space center, go into your Tracking Station (the radar dishes). Once there and viewing Kerbin, look at the top: you'll notice a row of icons with numbers. The left-most one is the debris (160+ pieces, all over the system). Click it to turn it on and you'll see. To remove debris, just click them in the menu at the left side of the screen, then either the red X to 'terminate' (for debris that's floating in space, no funds returned), or the yellow construction icon for 'recover' (for debris landed/splashed down on Kerbin, some funds returned).

Guys, try to do a 'nslookup cdn.spacedock.info' and post the IP number you get; that way VITAS can check which of the CDN nodes seem to be running into this problem. I can confirm having had the 404 problem downloading updates for mods for several days now, with the same errors as mentioned above. I'm accessing SpaceDock at the moment from NL, and the IP I get for cdn.spacedock.info is 37.139.17.225.

The somewhat clipped and retracted landing gear is most likely the issue; probably the nose gear. For some reason, a craft spawned with (sometimes even barely) clipped retracted landing gear causes all kinds of phantom forces/collisions that disassemble and/or explode craft on the pad or the runway. But when it spawns with gear extended and one retracts gear manually, it has no issue. Try saving the craft under a different name, then remove only the landing gear, starting with the nose one, and launch. I'm willing to bet you a like that the gearless craft is then suddenly rock solid.

Hmm, I can reproduce the issue loading up your savefile in a clean 1.1.2 install. Clicking on any object in map mode does not give the usual dialog, so it's not possible to target something else. hovering the blue orbit line of the craft does not show the maneuver 'dot' and does not give the create maneuver dialog when clicking. Strangely enough, a dot does appear when hovering over the yellow orbit line of the asteroid, but it doesn't do anything on clicking. The problem does not seem to be with the craft though, more with the HAY-187 asteroid, or at least only combined with that particular asteroid. I edited the file to deselect the asteroid (in the savefile, search for 'vesselID = abb33873-5558-4ee4-9840-2e8f0afcb605', and delete that and the type line preceding it), and was then able to target anything I wanted and create maneuver nodes as normal, and retarget anything else. But as soon as I target that one asteroid again, the same situation arises. I didn't find anything weird about the asteroid entry itself in the savefile. Not sure what's going on here. Btw... you got some serious space debris issues. Please pay your space janitors...?

What prevents viewing? Format, or are they not accessible somehow? All seems ok here. I tried encoding as animated GIF but they end up being way too big and Imgur truncates them (~20-25MB), or they end up too small/low quality to really see the effect. I don't. Not sure how that would help though, since the video format is the exact same as it would be if uploaded to YT.

Two short videos showing the problem: https://www.dropbox.com/s/kh0xp78mx2qnldk/KSP-ShadowWalking2.mp4?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/12x4r5iakwjfb5e/KSP-ShadowWalking3.mp4?dl=0 This is with all graphics dials turned up to max, including shadows and lights, on a completely immobile scene.

Contracts come around that might give you funds... so all it would take is just timewarp for a contract you can use. Now, if the game were to deduct funds regularly, for example for KSC facility maintenance, and the bill comes in and there's not sufficient funds to pay for it, that'd be an appropriate way of declaring a bankrupt/game over.

The Mun was already claimed for England...

The game forces that EVA fuel on us, we never get to drain it off before launch. It's telling us something with that! We're supposed to push.

About as fair as any other feature request for which we can make up random usage statistics, perhaps? I am sure for every one of the features you feel you represent a majority of users for, there are probably other things you do that you are a small minority in. How many of those would you willingly allow to be crippled (according to your gameplay style) so the 'other 99%' can get their convenience?

I'd rather this would not happen. I do not always build 'in order': it is a quite common thing for me to place things on a craft that are not directly (or even at all) related with the next part I am going to place. Iow, I would be one where placing a Xenon tank can very likely be followed by placing a LF engine, or other such 'illogical' combinations. I would get very frustrated very quickly if the UI started to actively interfere with what I am trying to build by 'intelligently' greying out things I want to use next.

If that is/was your Gamedata folder, you have a problem. Anyway, I guess there's no real question or support request here. Moving along.

Obviously 'unmodded' here does not actually mean without mods, so you'll need to specify more clearly what each of those installs really is. Start with posting a screenshot of the two GameData folders, or an actual list of the mods in either one. People can't simply guess at what you have installed. Also, time to move this to the Tech Support (modded) section of the forum.

No apologies required. You've been busy spinning magic spells to slay the decaying orbit beast, I hear say. By sheer statistics alone, I'm sure there's way more of us waiting eagerly on stable orbits in 1.1.3 than on any EL update, so your priorities are where they should be. Work that magic.

Eve es casi naturalmente el paso siguiente - el otro planeta vecindante, con otra luna que visitar. Una visita para orbitar y tocar suelo en Gilly y en Eve mismo, aunque volver a órbita quizás debería ser un paso aparte: remontar desde la superficie de Eve es uno de los retos más dificiles que el juego tiene, requiere bastante optimización para superar. Pero tanto Ike como Gilly ofrecen una oportunidad de plantar una base de operaciones hacia más adentro o afuera del sistema... vale la pena considerar un ISRU en ambos lugares. Siguiente sería una visita al sistema de Jool, ofreciendo posibilidades de jugar con asistencias gravitatorias y con aluzinajes de diversos tipos. Y si ya sabes llegar a Eve, puedes usar la gigante púrpura para darte un buen empujón hacia Jool y ahorrar combustible y peso total.

Thanks for the update. Deal with real life as necessary, I hope it's not too ugly. Thank you for your work so far on granting us control over the potatoroids.

If we're talking long term anyway, then I see no reason why any of those 4 things you mention should be left out, let alone any single one of them have the sole focus. In fact, I think that that is the only fitting 'general direction' for KSP: "Moar." More scope, more depth, more stability and refinement, more realism, more options... more of everything. More. KSP is a universe unto itself, and as a proper universe, it needs to expand, in all directions at once. More. (*: yes, I wrote 'more realism'. As long as it's optional and not at the cost of the game elements, I have no problem with extra dials and sliders to crank up the realism when we so choose. I will even enjoy it once in a while. Choice is good.)

Buenas. Yo por lo general hago las cosas al revés, que en realidad es como se deben hacer: empiezo diseñando y simulando de los últimos pasos hacia los primeros. Dicho de otro modo: Primero diseño la etapa o vehiculo que quiero que vueva a Kerbin, asegurándome que los Kerbals y/o instrumentos requeridos estén en este, y que todo sea capaz de reentrar y aterrizar sin desintegrarse. Cuando estoy contento con eso, lo convierto en un assemblaje, y empiezo una segunda nave con la capacidad de traer ese asemblaje de vuelta a Kerbin desde donde tenga en mente llevarlo. Este conjunto entonces forma otro assemblaje, y ahora tengo que pensar en la parte que dejo atrás si la misión lo requiere etc. Añado la etapa de transferencia que lleva todo esto de orbitando Kerbin al lugar que quiero visitar. Y finalmente, un vehículo que levante todo el conjunto hasta ahora de la superficie de Kerbin a órbita. Lo bueno de hacerlo en ese orden es que sea que lo hagas 'stock' (peso total de cada asemblaje para calcular) o con mods (dV en directo), a cada momento tienes la información a tu disposición para asegurarte de que añades suficiente dV para cada etapa. Y si no te molesta usar mods, HyperEdit permite poner la sección de nave que ya tienes completada en el momento/sitio exacto para comprobar si el diseño y los cálculos dan en el clavo. Todo este tiempo lo considero simulaciones y no me molesta volver a revertir a antes del lanzamiento, para sequir perfeccionando el diseño. Aunque los mapas dV son buenas indicaciones, yo aconsejaría no colgarse demasiado de un valor total para la nave completa, especialmente si hay varias etapas. Es mejor fijarse en lo que cada etapa necesita individualmente, y diseñar con eso en mente. Una vez el diseño a gusto y comprobado, es tiempo de lanzar la nave 'de verdad', y de ahí ya si algo sale mal hay que asumirlo y actuar según las circumstancias. Los fallos son parte del asunto, y ofrecen la posibilidad de ver cómo salvamos lo que podemos.

I think the problem there is that if it's too close to the center of mass, the game code can make the default deploy direction flip, even mid-flight, since it appears to use the position of control surfaces relative to the CoM to decide this. Also, that close and any slight difference in mass distribution (fuel, cargo?) causing the CoM to shift can have the same effect.

For the general promotion of Kerbal culture and science, I present you, the Kraken Encyclopaedia: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Deep_Space_Kraken Feast and sate thy hunger for the ancient and arcane knowledge.