bewing

Welcome to the forums. Your EVA kerbal just wasn't floating close enough to the correct pod. An EVA kerbal can always get data out of any pod that has data in it. However, the data is in the pod of the rescue ship where the scientist boarded the ship -- not where he ended up sitting for the return trip. So my guess is that's not the crew cabin. So the reason why the crew cabin didn't have a "take data" button is that the data is not in the crew cabin. It's in a different pod. When a kerbal enters a ship, all the experiments they are carrying get immediately stripped from them and stored in the pod that they just entered.

The old explosion textures were incompatible with the upgraded version of Unity that was used in KSP 1.4.x.

The funny thing is, this sort of happened to me once in sandbox too. I loaded a quicksave with the kerbal already in the air. There was no parachute option in the menu, and P didn't work. But I was never able to get it to happen again. In order to report it to the devs, I need to be able to make it happen repeatedly.

Basically nobody knows because Unity is distributed as closed-source, obfuscated binary blobs AFAIK.

One of the main reasons (in the olden days) used to be part clipping. But that shouldn't be a problem anymore ... "shouldn't". However, when I see parts vibrating, 95% of my brain says "autostruts" ... but 5% still says "maybe it's some kind of clipping thing that still happens".

Welcome to the forums. When the tutorial says "remove the engine" -- what it means is that you need to delete the engine completely. You know how to delete parts by putting them back over into the parts bin? That's what you need to do to the engine. Once you've done that, you should be able to continue.

Once you split it, if the CoM of either of the two new halves is outside the physics bubble, that half will vanish. So that doesn't avoid the problem. Just splits it in two, as it were.

Correctamundo. And I doubt you can play enough games with fuel shifting to move the CoM more than a third of the way from the geometric center of your station.

Mr. Cheesecake basically said it, but I want to emphasize: holding down your Mod key (Left Alt on windows) activates "force node attachment".

I'm not sure if that ^ mod allows you to just write your own. To do that, look for the ScienceDefs.cfg file in Gamedata/Squad/Resources. The text for each science report is technically in there, except that they have been replaced with autolocs for localization. However, you can replace each autoloc with your own real text, and then it will appear in the game (after a restart). (Also note that the science reports for planets you have not explored yet are rather spoilery.)

My bet is that you won't be able to dock with it -- because no matter how you approach it, it will get packed and disappear before you get to the end docking port.

I think Geonovast is right. Almost all engines need clearance to function. If you grabbed something in a klaw and the something is now right in front of an engine -- then all the thrust from that engine is now blocked. There is a minimum distance required for clearance so that the engine's thrust is not blocked.

It depends on the status of your mothership. If it's on the ground or the water, then the physics bubble is only 300 meters.

For things like "thrust" to be modeled, the engine has to be within the "physics bubble" range from the currently selected vessel. The size of the physics bubble is set at the bottom of your Physics.cfg file, in the section called "VesselRanges". The reason those settings are there is so that you can change them. So basically the answer is yes, you can increase the distance. And no, you can't disable it, because the physics bubble is vital to the functioning of the game.

I don't think it has, but I've spent a week trying to figure out how to do it, and I've failed. I need clearer instructions, or a very very simple test craft that shows the bug.

Agreed wtih AeroGav that the "Shielded: No" is (almost?) never reliable. It seems that the reliable number is to turn on "Aero data in Action Menus" in the Debug Menu. Then open the context menus for those parts while in flight and look at the Drag value. Are you running a modded game? What version? I just tried in 1.4.5 and it's working correctly. I can post a pic to prove it.

If you have ever used KJR, then "Grandparent" is basically the same as what KJR does automatically. It is the safest kind of autostrut -- the least likely to make your ship destroy itself through stress buildup. If you want to stiffen up an entire section of your craft, then you (obviously) need to use it on at least every other part in your subassembly, so you typically need a lot of grandparent autostruts when you use them. Root and Heaviest work for quickly making long-distance struts. Such as from the tip of a wing back to your fuselage. This can add a lot of strength and stiffness using very few autostruts. If you think you may end up in a situation where you have to turn off all the autostruts on your craft, then having very few of them is extremely helpful. If one section of a space station is going all wobbly, then putting a Root or Heaviest autostrut from that section back to some more sturdy part of your station can stop the wobblies. However, Root and Heaviest autostruts are also very dangerous -- especially for stations and bases. When you dock two vessels together, the root part and/or heaviest part of the combined craft may suddenly change. This will cause all existing Root and Heaviest autostruts to forcibly disconnect and then reconnect to the new correct part, one by one. This process can involve large forces, and can easily be violent enough to destroy a craft. So it may be necessary to manually disable a bunch of autostruts before doing a docking. (Note that landing legs and wheels automatically use "Heaviest" autostruts, always.) As 5th Horseman said -- especially for Root and Heaviest autostruts, be careful not to overuse them because they can easily store stress in a craft that will destroy the craft. My rule of thumb is that 5 is usually safe enough.

Dynamic. Yes, it will switch.

Flaps that are at the CoM have no control authority. The automatic control systems know this, and only use each flap according to how much control authority they have. That looks to me like the source of your flaps problem. And no, I think most craft default to saying "debris" for their craft type for some reason. So I don't think that's anything to do with the problem.

A nicely overpowered and engineered hydrofoil can cruise at 400m/s without doing anything destructive -- just so long as all you do is go straight. But boy does it suck down the fuel.

FleshJeb is right, but I'm a practical guy and don't go in for all this theoretical stuff. Look, the deal is that the devs are trying to make your life hard, all right? They build these parts so that they always have limitations that you have to deal with, and engineer around. The first basic point about "air" is that engines and intakes are always throttled at all points in their airspeed/thrust curves. The maximum amount of air that an engine needs is based on its maximum thrust -- which can never actually be achieved, because the engine is always limited by its thrust curves (so it's a worthless number). Additionally, you always have to keep in mind that at most one air intake can ever be assigned to a single engine at any one time. At zero speed, an engine/intake combo is almost always throttled by the intake air requirement. So the important number at a standstill is the effective intake speed -- which corresponds to "how good is the turbofan at sucking in air from the surroundings when standing still". If you plan to do a lot of low-speed taxiing, pay attention to this number. If you have an intake that's got a bad intake speed, then you need to keep your throttle low while taxiing, or you will flame out. This can be problematic if you are driving around the countryside, and trying to go up hills with jet power. In flight at low altitude, you have so much air getting crammed into your intake that it will always provide more air than any engine will need (because the engines are always limited by their thrust curves). So you don't have to sweat it in this case. At high altitudes you have to fly fast. At high speeds the various air intakes choke, and the engines also choke because of their respective airspeed/thrust curves. Each of them chokes in different ways and at different speeds -- except for the shock cone intake, which never chokes. In some rare intake/engine combos the intake will choke first. But usually it's the engine that flames out while the intake can still provide enough. All you need to do at high speed is open the context menu of the engine and see if the "Prop. Requirement" is 100% or not. If it's not, then the engine is being limited by the intake. Then you have to decide if you are already flying fast enough to suit your tastes, and whether you actually care about going a few m/s faster. None of the numbers that you see in the part menu in the SPH tell you what the performance curves of the intakes/engines look like. You either have to look them up here online, or you have to learn by doing. Goliath engines are thrust-limited so they can't go faster than mach 1. Rapiers go really fast. And each of the engines has a sort-of-matching air intake that can provide enough air through that engine's flight envelope. So when it comes to "air" and the stats you see on the air intakes, the "effective base speed"/"effective air speed" is the only number that gives you any immediate useful feedback. On the engine, look at the Prop Requirement. If you want to know about high speed intake performance, do a search here for some of the graphs that other players have created.

Well, if you are intending to do an Elcano on Kerbin then I've got a zillion quibbles with your design. I assume you are intending this craft to be amphibious? That is, it should rove over land, and hydroplane over the water? To rove properly, you need the medium landing gear -- because it's steerable. Those goliath engines are extremely heavy -- I'd recommend a single panther instead. You can turn on the panther's afterburner to get up to speed, and then switch back to dry mode for efficiency. (But to do that you're going to need to reduce the weight a lot.) You're going to need to refuel several times, so have you thought about docking and fuel transfer? MK2 parts have very high drag, so they waste a lot of fuel. I would strongly recommend rebuilding with MK1 parts instead. Do you really need to carry 6 kerbals? Cockpits are very heavy things to drag around. Using deployed ailerons as hydrofoils can work very well. They produce relatively low drag, and can be undeployed when you are not in the water to reduce roving drag even further. But my fundamental question is: are you determined to stick with this basic design?

Hmmm. Glad your operation was a success. But as Gargamel said -- definitely something fishy. I've never seen such an error before, though.

Are you running mods?

It's a bug, and the devs know about it, and they have been looking at it, and version 1.5.0 comes out this month, and beyond that is NDA territory.