bewing

The LY05 gear in 1.1 are very sensitive about being mounted vertically relative to the ground. Not at an angle backwards. Not at an angle to the side. You need to rotate them until they are vertical. If you want them spread out a bit, then you can use the offset gizmo to spread them. (Yes, in 1.0.5 it worked. It doesn't work anymore.) Your front gear are leaning backwards a bit, because your plane leans backwards. Your middle gear lean to the side. Your rear gear leans forward. (And I think you're going to burn your tailfins off when you light the fleas.)

You might want to read all the comments to this bug report: http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/7499 -- see if trying them changes the behavior. Did you get this as a steam download? -- especially, I think you may want to pay special attention to the very last comment.

Well, the odd thing is that there were some OSX beta testers who had no problems at all with the game. There were several others who had insta-crashes, though. So, as LameLefty says -- I don't think it's universal on OSX. But that leads directly to the question of precisely what is it that makes in non-universal?

No, but this is a known and reported bug. http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/8200

I doubt this is helpful, but it's exactly the same as docking a ship with RCS -- except easier, because a ship can rotate in three dimensions and a kerbal can't. An orbiting kerbal's helmet always points north. So if you get enough practice in at ship docking then EVAs should become easier. One tip is to always point your destination ship north before the EVA and hit SAS. Then the ship and kerbonaut always remain oriented in the same direction. You can also rotate the ship so that the ladder is already pointing at the kerbal. The one major difficulty is that a kebonaut's RCS jetpack is overpowered for the last little bit of the docking. One tiny tap on Shift generally pushes your guy "up" too fast. So you have to tap "ctrl" -- and now your guy is going down too fast. So killing every last bit of your relative speed is hard when you are trying to grab that ladder. But if you mess up, you can always tap S three or four times to back up -- and then you get to try again. Of course, it's also a matter of practice. So just go into sandbox, launch a kerbal into orbit, quicksave, EVA, let go, turn on RCS, and then try ten times just maneuvering and getting back to the ladder. Another tip: once you are within 30 meters, forget the navball. Turn on your suit lights (L) and just do the last bit of the manuever by eye. Other than that, if your kerbal is more than about 5km from the destination ship, use standard orbital methods (modifying your Ap, Pe, An and Dn) to create a close approach before using "rcs" docking techniques. And if your destination ship is below about 73Km altitude, pay attention to what suicidejunkie said -- you will have major camera problems trying to dock. And it's a little easier having your kerbal catch a ship from "behind", I think.

Well, IRL I'm sure you're right. But in KSP I don't think I agree. Any sensible person uses the grass and not the T1 runway, of course. But beyond that, there is a major question of your purpose of getting into the air. Now, if all you are going to do is take some scientific readings in the air and then land at KSC again, then you have a free choice of what to build. But if you are going to be landing in the wilderness, climbing out of the water onto the land, or driving any distance over the land, then there is a huge problem with a taildragger design. That is, terrain changes on Kerbin are very sudden and very steep. You absolutely need a wheel under the nose, or you are going to go nose-first into the first mound you come across. Generally, the main gear in a taildragger design are too far back to get your nose up in time. If you use something like that gull-wing design then you run the risk that any time you go over a sharp peak, the fuselage of your plane is going to hit the ground.

Yes. Sorry that it's driving you mad, but making the shadows pretty is low priority compared to many of the other bugs that the devs are working on. But I am pretty sure a fix for the shadows will be in the hotpatch when it comes.

I highly recommend to actually do all the experiments and try it both ways, but once you do, I think you will find that Norcalplanner is right.

I'll say up to 4 tons. The hotpatch (when it comes) will let us know what Squad intends. In the meantime, it's an incentive to do the LY10 tech upgrade.

You mean like this? (The rear fuel tank is half full. You can replace the girders with an empty fuel tank, or SciJrs.)

@Johnny Wishbone: during beta, another tester was having a problem with SciJrs on reentry, and claiming it was impossible even from suborbital. I asked for a list of specs, and he gave me some. So I made him a ship that can easily reenter from a 200km Ap. I put the .craft file online. It is an encouragement to think outside the box -- don't just slap a heatshield on things. Here is the thread and the craft and the launch instructions. Think about it. We did a lot of testing during beta pre-release of the inflatable heatshield and aerocapture. It works great. Lots of fun! At Jool, At Eve. You just need to be careful about decoupling the silly thing -- don't run into it and don't use "jettison".

Which inline cockpit? MK1 or MK2?

It's not quite the same issue, actually. If you were to put two SciJrs on your RV, you would see that something different happens, which is a bug.

Rocking your RV with adsw helps a lot too. You need to increase the aerodynamic drag, especially in the upper atmosphere. Did you bring your RV in sideways? It's not the heating that changed. The MK1 pod has less drag now, so you come in faster.

Actually, I just tried to create a little bug report on a different issue -- and the bugtracker is broken right now anyway. Can't create issues with text in them. (The "Pre-release" tracker has been disabled, but the main bugtracker has not been re-enabled yet. Oops!)

Yeah, I'm afraid that redmine itself is not bug-free.

Heh. At the risk of blowing your landing gear the hell up. I am sure your fix for my jitterbugging problem will work in the short term -- but it still seems to me like the proper programming solution in the long term would be to add some dampening to the flexing of the joints, rather than just playing with wheel settings.

I find that changing the "friction control" to override (and sometimes reducing the friction from 1 to .6) can help a lot with spinning problems -- especially on the rear wheels.

Yes, this is a known bug. Discussed during beta testing here: It's also on the bugtracker somewhere.

On Kerbin, I always place a flag at the end of the runway, saying "End of Runway". It can be used for targeting my landing from half a planet away. When I'm screaming down from orbit, it's handy to check the distance to that flag. Elsewhere on Kerbin, I place flags at biome intersections where I may want to return. Those flags give a heading and altitude for landing a jet. Elsewhere, the flags that I post for useful purposes have the biome, altitude, and the flatness of the surrounding terrain.

Well, it's really best to confirm bugs somehow, rather than just to post them willy-nilly. And you need to get an account in the bugtracker before you can do it anyway. @OP: a form of the bug you are describing has been seen before, but it was always linked with retracting the vehicle's landing legs. Did you do that?

I can't imagine that you really need all of that. A crew module + decoupler + your ultralight, perhaps?

Precisely what do you mean by "fixed gear"? The LY10s that jitterbug intensely for me are steerable (see that panther.craft). sgt_flyer faked up an MK3 design with the heavy landing gear out on the tips of the wings, and that jitterbugged, too.

Is your reentering craft built with MK1 parts? During beta-testing we did a lot of testing on this issue, because many people are finding aerobraking to be harder. Lots of arguing back and forth. Eventual conclusion: the atmosphere model is identical to 1.0.5 -- as the Squad devs were insisting. However, it seems that many parts have had their drag coefficients reduced (quite a bit!). And some other parts are still the same as they were in 1.0.5. So some designs have exactly identical performance to 1.0.5 during atmospheric flight and reentry, and some other designs slip through the air a heck of a lot faster (and get a lot hotter). The MK1 parts seem especially slippery now, and hard to aerobrake without being extra clever.

Sorry slashy, but I don't think your theory is right. @Renegrade and @sgt_flyer have an alternate theory that a bounce in the wheels gets transmitted as a force into the craft's joints. The joints flex (with no damping) and then return all that force to the wheels, which then bounce again. I have a plane that jitterbugs severely -- see the panther.craft file on this bug report: http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/9288 -- It supports their theory, because if the wheels are mounted on the wings, the plane jitterbugs. If the wheels are mounted to the fuselage instead, there is no jitterbugging. I just made your suggested mod (.9 suspensionDistance, .1 targetPostion) to the LY1. I removed all the fuel from panther (the ly1 can't handle the full weight), and replaced the rear LY10s with LY1s. After reloading KSP and launching that plane, it jitterbugs for a bit, and then starts spinning in a medium-speed circle.