sal_vager

Okay, here's how I SSTO spaceplane in 1.0.5. I keep an angle of around 30 to 40 degrees, the jets can get you higher now before flaming out, you want to get high and fast and nose up before you activate the rockets, because they are thirsty you don't want to be on rocket power too long I aim to be over 1000m/s at above 25km, [I]at least[/I], before I lose the jets. I personally prefer turboramjets and aerospikes in combination btw, rather then rapiers. Burn till you AP exits atmo then coast with your nose prograde, you lose the least speed that way, though I will actually have the throttle open a crack just to avoid losing altitude. As far as design goes, start small and light, the goal should just be to make orbit and return in one stage, don't think about payload until you have that down. Once you have the flight profile sorted, you can then work on making a plane with some payload, work your way up to larger craft, you won't loft a jumbo 64 on your first go. Good luck.

[quote name='WildBill']Not to be too picky, but to be a Single-Stage-To-Orbit (SSTO), don't you need a single stage?[/QUOTE] Yeah, which is why I just popped of the boosters, added two more tanks and flew it up there now :) 100km x 80km

I made an SSTO rocket for my new 1.0.5 career [s]yesterday[/s] today. 12 fuel tanks, no SRB's on this one, fuel to spare to deorbit. [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/MZunPJv.png[/IMG]

Sorry oneru but the Steam plugin is not finished, there's not really any support we can offer you at this point, but If you can get it to work then great! It'd be useful to know exactly what is needed to set it up, assuming it can be, and you can help test it out [U][URL="http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/projects/ksp/issues"]and put your findings here[/URL][/U], but keep in mind the implementation at the moment is very much a work in progress, so people should expect it to not work at all.

I don't think this is something we can change to be honest. Maybe try [URL="http://portableapps.com/"][U]a portable version[/U][/URL] of a decent browser instead?

Hi Jebby2. Please see these two threads. [U][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92228-Known-Issues-Self-Help"]known issues and self help.[/URL][/U] [U][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92230-%21%21%21-PLEASE-READ-BEFORE-POSTING-%21%21%21-Stock-Support-Bug-Reporting-Guide"]!!! PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING !!! - Stock Support & Bug Reporting Guide[/URL][/U] We will need more information from you to determine what is causing this, as crashes and white screens are not normal behavior.

Thanks for reminding me, it's actually no longer required. Updated post to show it is only for 1.0.4, in 1.0.5 KSP will replace the file correctly.

Or just the structuralPylon and smallHardpoint folders in GameData/Squad/Parts/Structural...

It's probably a new stock bug DasGoat, but if you remove MechJeb the craft won't load. [U][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92229-How-To-Get-Support-%28READ-FIRST%29"]Please see here for how to post your logs and save here though.[/URL][/U]

Unfortunately KSP on OSX does this with some graphics card and driver combinations, especially with mobile graphics in laptops, this is at the graphics driver level and is not something Squad is able to fix. All I can suggest is you experiment with your graphics card settings and between windowed and fullscreen mode in KSP to try to find a setting where this doesn't occur. Updating OSX to get the latest graphics driver may also help. The tracking station issue is known, [U][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/138802-Kerbal-Space-Program-1-0-5-New-Issues-Repository#trackingcenter_corruption"]you can find more info on it here.[/URL][/U]

Hi Djsnowboy267, please ensure your graphics driver is up to date and is on high performance mode, that you have no unnecessary programs running in the background, that you are not on a powersave setting and that your delta time slider in the Settings screen is low (slider to the right).

I'm not sure I'd even call this a bug to be honest, it's definitely a change from 1.0.4, but not unrealistic. [quote name='sal_vager']Reality may have to be sacrificed for gameplay to "fix" this, as the pod with heatshield seems to be working correctly compared to a pod without. The greater mass means there's more inertia for the aerodynamic drag to overcome. Reducing the pod and heatshield mass will have negative effects in other areas unfortunately, such as moving the rockets center of mass downward, reducing stability. And accounting for occlusion from parts in collision would eliminate the double drag, causing you to fall faster, and that may end up being a bad thing depending on your angle. Plus the occlusion checks are computationally expensive, additional checks for collided parts are better avoided. Artificially increasing the size of the heatshield drag cubes might work, drag cubes can already be overridden and this is done for the cargobays and fairings (cue bug reports that heatshields are unrealistically draggy). I don't mind the extra decoupler to drop the heatshield on a Mk1 pod, the separator on the Mk1-2 doesn't look bad either and I can use the next size down and the offset tool to hide them later in career. So there is a workaround, and we can adapt, we can't expect nothing to change with each update to KSP. Maybe heatshields do need built-in decouplers though as that'd encourage players to drop them, and the double drag may actually come in handy to save your Kerbals on occasion if you're lucky enough to have your heatshield stay pressed against your pod by aero forces during descent.[/QUOTE] I think people need to adapt, a lot of info on playing KSP is out of date anyway. [U][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/138802-Kerbal-Space-Program-1-0-5-New-Issues-Repository#heatshield_drag"]I'll add this to the known issues thread[/URL][/U] with your heatshield onna decoupler workaround.

Reality may have to be sacrificed for gameplay to "fix" this, as the pod with heatshield seems to be working correctly compared to a pod without. The greater mass means there's more inertia for the aerodynamic drag to overcome. Reducing the pod and heatshield mass will have negative effects in other areas unfortunately, such as moving the rockets center of mass downward, reducing stability. And accounting for occlusion from parts in collision would eliminate the double drag, causing you to fall faster, and that may end up being a bad thing depending on your angle. Plus the occlusion checks are computationally expensive, additional checks for collided parts are better avoided. Artificially increasing the size of the heatshield drag cubes might work, drag cubes can already be overridden and this is done for the cargobays and fairings (cue bug reports that heatshields are unrealistically draggy). I don't mind the extra decoupler to drop the heatshield on a Mk1 pod, the separator on the Mk1-2 doesn't look bad either and I can use the next size down and the offset tool to hide them later in career. So there is a workaround, and we can adapt, we can't expect nothing to change with each update to KSP. Maybe heatshields do need built-in decouplers though as that'd encourage players to drop them, and the double drag may actually come in handy to save your Kerbals on occasion if you're lucky enough to have your heatshield stay pressed against your pod by aero forces during descent.

This is also a [U][URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/138802-Kerbal-Space-Program-1-0-5-New-Issues-Repository#fairing_lift"]known issue[/URL][/U], reported here and on the bug tracker.

Almost every factor, when you're on rails your ship is just a part of the rail, the position of the rail, ie: its direction, magnitude (distance from the center) and facing, are relative to the parent planet, moon etc, the ships position is a product of elapsed time on the rail, there's no physics taking place, there's no interaction. When you're off rails your ships direction, magnitude and facing are relative to the center, the rail orbit is gone, and the orbit you're on has to be determined from your speed, direction etc, and the lines drawn accordingly. Two very different ways to handle orbits, but you have to have the second to handle the player controlling the vessel, and you need the second (you need to run the physics engine to know where you are going) to make the first. Not going to post for a bit, sleep has to occur sooner or later...

Hey kananesgi, welcome to the forum, if you're stuck on stuff there's tons of people here who are willing to help :)

I'd say it's because of the jump when coming off rails, though 5x is the minimum we can use on our active vessel in KSP, I have an orbit here that varies by a few hundred meters while "active", stops wobbling completely at 5x warp then leaps by 0 to 20 kilometers when I come off warp. 1x warp doesn't look to be any better (tested by switching to a distant vessel and back, comparing periapsis before and after), the jumps are much larger than the wobble on an active orbit, that'd happen every time you touched WASD (or your joystick sent a signal because of too small a deadzone).

I'd like to see the trajectories of debris in the atmosphere precalculated, it's just debris so the value could be lerped between other values on a table, I don't like that debris ignores drag when out of physics range.

I just pick stuff up from here and there, the forums, IRC, experimentals. Plus figuring out peoples issues in here over the years. Also NASA used patched conic approximations as well, there was a little thing called the Apollo Moon landings... Course they were not limited by current consumer desktop PC's, they had sliderules :D Currently NASA uses better computers, but the crucial difference from what I understand is that NASA can precalculate all this, they don't need to keep doing it in real time.

You have a better PC then me then, I see yellow quite often. Wish I could have been able to offer real help on this :/

It's best to find a value that works for you, the value goes from 0.12 on the left to 0.03 on the right, and it sets the maximum time in milliseconds between every physics step. 0.12 [I]should[/I] reduce the frequency of the wobble, and while the simulation will run faster (mostly green MET timer), the framerate will make it look slow. 0.03 will make KSP slow down the simulation instead of drop frames, it's smoother but you're more likely to have a yellow, or even a red, MET timer, and the physics steps are closer together so the wobble should be more rapid. It's just the maximum though, so if your PC is better than mine you may not see much difference, as KSP will try to run with as short a step as it can. It still won't really be [I]more[/I] accurate, I used the wrong term above, but should wobble less energetically. I leave mine on the default of 0.04 because my PC struggles enough, I'd rather take the slowdown over the framerate drop. [SIZE=1]Lol, ninja'd you Glaran![/SIZE]

[quote name='sal_vager']And the further the orbit is from the world origin the worse it gets.[/QUOTE] The effect will vary with how far you are from the absolute center of the game universe, when you're on the pad you are at the center of the universe, but when you hit certain speeds (750m/s during ascent is the first) and distances your speed/location is reset and [I]the universe is moved around you.[/I] At the center this wobble is at its lowest, though it's still there, the further you are and the faster you are the worse the wobble becomes. The resetting is deliberate, it was necessary to fix the space kraken bug, before this if you went too far and too fast your craft would come apart due to the very same issues that wobble the orbits. That'd be why you don't notice this all the time. As for mitigation, I am sure others have their own methods, but I don't treat the orbits as absolutes, and I correct my trajectories as necessary with later burns, if I'm nearer the center of the game universe at that time then the wobble is manageable. You can briefly warp as well to put the orbit on rails, and this will top the wobble, though it'll be wobbly again and may shift quite a bit when you come off warp. Also there's the delta time slider in the settings screen, you can raise it to trade frame rate for accuracy, it might help but it will kill your FPS, it will make KSP do more calculations in the same time frame but caps the frame rate to the delta time, the default is 0.04, too high and you start dropping frames.

Unfortunately not, it's already pushing the x86 and x86_64's ability for accuracy as much as it can, it's no better on Linux 64bit either. And the further the orbit is from the world origin the worse it gets.

This is the way it is, it's a known issue, the devs do try to improve it but there's nothing we can do here except wait for the next attempt. There's no fix or workaround I can offer you, and little possibility of either in the future, this is how the game is. That you do not consider a 40km deviation per minute nominal is noted, but this is the reality of the situation with orbits in KSP for any craft that is not on rails.

Probably Windows removed your graphics driver, it's been doing that a lot lately. I'll move this to Support, please locate your output_log.txt in the KSP_Data folder, put it on dropbox and post the share link here, thanks.