JEF_300

It does have to be capitalized, but yep, that was it. Simply added ".V" to the filename, and it's working great now. Thanks!

Just wanted to bump this, since I'm having the same problem. I can load the texture onto the default suit, but if I switch to the Vintage suit, it doesn't let me push the arrows.

Thanks @OHara, the collider mod was really helpful. It appears that the fairing collider invisibly extends over the opening when the craft is re-loaded. It's perfectly fine for the whole launch, but when I rendezvous with it, it has to be re-loaded, and so when I try to dock I end up bouncing against the collider. Edit: I have found a solution that seems to be working. On my original design, I attached the fairing as close to the end of the structural tube as I could, for aesthetic reasons. When I edited the hanger to have the fairing attach in the middle of the tube, the fairing stopped closing over the opening on reloads. It seems that when the game redrew the collision vectors, it missed the tube. So I guess this is just a quirk of the game that you have to be aware of if you're building in this specific manner.

Thanks @The Dunatian, that thread does seem to be about the same issue. The conclusion that thread came to was that it was impossible, due to the natural limitations of the stock fairing system, which I would agree with... if I hadn't already successfully tested it. Actually, I've successfully tested it several times over the past day, and with some variations. I've launched a Gemini on the pad and docked it to the test hangar, so being launched as separate craft isn't an issue. I decoupled a nosecone off the front of the hangar, as I did on the version I launched, and I was still able to dock. I was about to test launching the hangar inside another fairing.

So I had an idea awhile ago to create mini-hangers on my station for Gemini capsules. The idea is that you basically have a tube the width of the back of the Gemini service module. When the Gemini docks, back of the tube is "sealed" by the back of the spacecraft itself. Images of Test I tried this once before we had structural tubes using a decoupler to make the mouth of the hangar, but the capsule kept bouncing off an invisible wall in the middle of the decoupler. That's why I tested this version, which uses a 2.5 m structural tube, in hacked gravity on the runway. As you can see, it worked, perfectly in fact. However, once I put the hangar into orbit, the Gemini capsule just bounced off, refusing to go inside. Why did it work in hacked grav on the runway, but not in orbit? I'm including a save file. In the save, there is a hangar and Gemini rendezvoused in orbit, and the testing stand on the runway, so you can try it out yourself. The Save File

Here's the log: [KSPUpgradePipeline]: Neu Glenn S3 (1.3.0) is up to date. (Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42) ADDON BINDER: Cannot resolve assembly: TestFlightCore, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null (Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42) ADDON BINDER: Cannot resolve assembly: TestFlightCore, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null (Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42) Neu Glenn S3 loaded! (Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42) That's the end of the Output log. i Have a whole bunch of mods, I'll put the list at the bottom. The game has been freezing whenever I load certain craft files in the editors. They work fine on the pad and runway. I'm in version 1.3.0, and am quite confident that all my mods are on the correct version. I've been banging my head against a wall her for two days. All help is appreciated. KSP: 1.3 (Win64) - Unity: 5.4.0p4 - OS: Windows 10 (10.0.0) 64bit Toolbar - 1.7.14 AirlockPlus - 0.0.9 Astronomer's Visual Pack - 3.6.1 Community Resource Pack - 0.7.2 Community Trait Icons - 0.1.2 DistantObjectEnhancement - 1.9.1 DMagic Orbital Science - 1.3.0.10 Contract Parser - 1.0.7 Progress Parser - 1.0.8 HGR Community Fixes - 1.5.2 Kerbal Engineer Redux - 1.1.3 <b><color=#CA7B3C>Kopernicus</color></b> - 1.3.0.8 KSP-AVC Plugin - 1.1.6.2 KSPWheel - 0.9.5.20 LoadingScreenManager - 1.2 MagiCore - 1.3 ModularFlightIntegrator - 1.2.4 Procedural Parts - 1.2.12 RealPlume - Stock - 1.0 ReentryParticleEffect - 1.2.0.1 RetractableLiftingSurface - 0.1.4 SSTULabs - 0.6.37.141 StationScienceContinued - 2.3 TAC Fuel Balancer - 2.13 TooManyOrbits - 1.1.1 Kerbal Alarm Clock - 3.8.5 Transfer Window Planner - 1.6.2 Universal Storage - 1.3.0.1 EVAParachutesAndEjectionSeats - 0.1.14 Snacks - 1.8

So, just a quick update, I put the save I was using in a version of the 1.1 prerelease that promptly broke, so I won't have this out until 1.1 proper releases On a brighter note, Jet engine horizontal landing test: http://m.imgur.com/a/gdlUJ

Yeah, you pretty much nailed that one. Whoops

Actually, they built the infrastructure at Vandenburg, as I recall. I mean, they must of, because the first launch from Vandenburg was scheduled for later in 1986 or 1987, but then Challenger

1.1 ? spacedock ?

Ejection Seat Test http://imgur.com/a/N7Fi5

So, the last post here was made 2 years ago... Making a submission anyway! I've got just the thing in mind...

Looks like I lied about 24 hours, and now it's the Monday so... I SHOULD have something in "a few days", whatever that ends up meaning There, a more honest answer

This thread has been running since 2012? And I didn't know it existed? Huh. Ill have an entry here within 24 hours

There's a link to images which display CoM and CoL

This save is technically modded, however none of these mods are being used/should affect the aerodynamics I'm building a new shuttle, the Large Unmanned Cargo Kraft, or LUCK. Its gone well for the most part, for instance it looks fantastic, however there is a problem with the aerodynamics. I cant quite tell if its just (somehow) more stable in reverse, if its something to do with the Cargo Ramp up front, or if maybe the control surfaces are acting wired. I've been testing in Hack Grav for the "Glide Tests". It flys normally, until I turn a bit too far in any direction, at which point it flips so that the rear is facing forward. When i attempt to correct, it just ends up spinning. Here's are some reference images: http://imgur.com/a/Bq1GK Any and all help will be appreciated, so thanks in advance

That's not at all what we're talking about, did you post in the wrong thread?

I mentioned this in another thread I started, but I really wanted to push this idea, since it has grown on me a lot Has it ever seemed weird to anyone else that if I want to send 1 Kerbal to Moho and back (depending on your specific mission architecture) the love-able breadbox with a paint job that doesn't match anything else in the game and a window smaller than -insert your own jokes here- known as the Mk1 Command Pod is the best option? I love the thing, but let's be honest: it's not pretty, it's not got a cool IVA, and it breaks my immersion (hoorah buzz words!) So I have come to request the creation of a new- no, RE-creation of the Mk1 Command Pod. As a mod, we can surely rebuild it, better, stronger, faster. Or at least prettier, which is of course what actually matters. My idea was fairly simple: Leave the general dimensions the same, give the pod an even white paint job like the Mk1-2 and Mk1 Cockpit, and replace the window with one in the Gemini style (aka, inset and forward facing). Then add a matching IVA that's actually full like every IVA EXCEPT the Mk1 Command Pod's, add it as a new part called the Mk1A (for Advanced), and Viola! Now I say that like it's simple, however I am wholly incapable of doing any of that, and don't have the time to learn. That's why I'm making the request If ANYONE with the skill to make a model/texture/IVA/drag-all-that-together-in-code has an interest in the idea, please do give it a try, because I'd love to use one of these. Can you imagine flying a little cargo tug up to a station with your one Kerbal staring out at it in that IVA? Would be way more immersive and aesthetic (ooh, more buzz words!)

Maybe it's just me, but the K2 doesn't look stockalike at all to me, so I don't use it.

I know, but that pod was 1.875m, which means I would've needed other mods to really use it. I'll check those out, thanks.

I really do like it, but I need to limit myself when it comes to mods (it gets bad when I don't), so I'd prefer not download any others parts mods, and to really take advantage of that pod I'd need 1.875m parts. I suppose I could take the pod and shrink it down and make it 1 Kerbal in the .cfg, but then the IVA wouldn't fit. Thanks anyway; It really is a nice pod.

I want to spend a moment talking about command pods. There are currently two in the game... and that's it. The most popular and reliable method of getting into and leaving space for the past 50 years and the forseeable future, and it's represented in KSP by a mere 2 parts. There are 3 cockpits for crying out loud, and this is Kerbal SPACE Program. This needs to change (at least on my install) So I thought,"Ok, no problem. I'll just go over to the forums and find the mod pack of only Command Pods that surely exists!" ...and now I'm here. My request is simple: More Command Pods! Preferably stockalike with IVAs at some point. I'm not looking for suggestion for currently existing mods as I've seen "most" of them already, though I won't turn any down. Some Ideas Bellow: "Advanced" mk1 pod. It always seemed odd to me that when I building a vessel destined for Eeloo, the breadbox with the tiny window and mis-matched paint job is still one of the better options. This pod would be essentially a mk1 pod with a white paint job and better (more Gemini?) window. Simple mk 1-2 redesign. Put the door in a nice place, clean up the textures, etc. Long 2 crew pod. This would be a 1.25 meter capsule that's extra long so it can seat 2 kerbals in a row, F-4/F-14 style. Wide 2 crew pod. This would be a 2.5 meter part with 2 kerbals sitting in it side by side, like in the top seats of the mk 1-2. There's already a mod that does this well, so that's not really a priority. 4 crew Pod 5 crew Pod Many crew pod Round pods Uniquely shaped pods etc.

After much burning (and quick saving) in the Jool system on the resupply rescue probe, I realized I'd entered the system in a retrograde orbit... Take 2

Well I can add some new ribbons: Jool and Pol Orbits! Equatorial at that! Of course we ran 100% out of fuel getting into that pol orbit. Pollo IV pictures and rescue mission tomorrow. Planning on sending out a probe with a closed off fuel tank and claw to refuel it enough to go down to the surface and mine it's own fuel. Might bring a scanner along with it.

I'm a bit late, but want to chime in to. I've owned KSP since 0.16, but only just recently started playing a lot myself. I made my Mün landing in 0.18 I believe (after stranding Jeb on Minmus in nothing but a capsule in another save), and landed and returned from Minmus only a few days ago. I also within the past few days have sent a unmanned rover to Duna's South Pole (not the ideal landing site for a SOLAR powered rover), Dropped a landing probe into Eve, and missed Gilly in an Ion lander. With all this experience now under my belt, I have decided to land a Kerbal on a body outside Kerbin's SOI. But where? Duna is the traditional choice, but tradition never particularly mattered to me. Gilly, Ike or Dres would be the reasonable choices, but are all kinda bland. Then of course, there's the most important factor: My favorite color is Yellow. Welcome to the Pol Or Nothing Program (shortened to Pollo)