Krazy_Kerbal

Thank you for the fix! Surprised this still hasn't been addressed, but it looks like the devs have moved on to KSP2 (where I personally hope it gets fixed). Cheers!

bump. Why did I not google this before thinking that KSP was going to do something logical. You've been warned, and your lucky if you searched this before assuming. Compatibility. The Inflatable Airlock, when expanded, can dock with Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port Jr. or another Inflatable Airlock. Ok, I looked at the .cfg file and see this was made by Roverdude. Thank you! It's fantastic, I just wished it worked with the Jr. and Normal sized port, so for now, I just edited the .cfg file to change its size to 1, from 0.

Having fun in a simulation-type game is creating a ship that works realistically and accomplishing the same goals that someone else needed 16 SRBs and whatever number of RWs to cheese something. Of course, there is fun is goofing around too, but I am focused on close-to-realistic simulation at the moment.

Thank you so much. I only recently started playing again, and my goal is to play a career game without mods that influenced it (aesthetic mods like EVE are fine). I checked out your link on Kerbalx. This is definitely the way I'm gonna start building things. Feels way more satisfying to me knowing how things work and why. That being said, I also wish the game could add some grid fins like the SpaceX Falcon uses.

One thing I've always valued about KSP is how it opened the door to all these topics and motivated me to learn all about orbital mechanics. It does its best to give an introduction to all these concepts, but either because of its engine limitations or out of fear of scaring away its customers, it can't do everything accurately. Now, I understand that the game is simpler than how real life rocketry works in some ways, and I feel like reaction wheels are no exception to one of the shortcuts they've taken when cheating the laws of physics. After some Googling, there doesn't seem to be much offered in the way of mods that have been updated to the latest version. Is that because the authors have moved on or because the latest version has only been recently released? They don't make sense to me, for the little I understand about reaction wheels, I still paid a little attention in physics class. I know there is a lot of complexity to them that's missing here, like how they become saturated and where the torque gets dumped and how, etc. What I've done in my current vanilla game is just lower the wheel authority to 10% to better simulate how they'd function. Do you have any recommendations on any other quick changes I could make? Should they stay as they are because they function as intended in the Kerbal environment. I tend to forget the scale of things in 1/10th of real life, so maybe they're fine, and I'm just not used to it... thoughts? From a long time KSP fan, thanks for the community input.

I have the answer. Turns out it was a Mechjeb issue with Ascent Guidance. Even though I wasn't using that feature, the mod still thought it was active, so it was shutting the engines down to prevent an overheat.

I appreciate the above reply. What do you make of this issue in the video. I just created it, and it's short. Hopefully to the point. What do I need to examine (logs files?) to understand what is happening here.

Hi, I recently installed Realism Overhaul and all its recommended mods, and I wanted to launch and learn about Skylab (this is how I discovered your mod). Unfortunately, it has been one disaster after the next, apart from the real life disasters of actual Skylab. I put together the below video to better demonstrate the problems. Essentially, the big problem is I can't dock the way the game understands it (creating one craft file from the two) There are also some weird texture and lighting problems on the station, which I don't think are related but just wanted to point out. The docking and crew transfer problem are causing other issues--those crazy physics issues. If I use cheats, that the Apollo command module instantly goes crazy, as shown in this video. Is this due to a bad install? Incorrect docking? Poor game design? I read your first post. Thank you for the help.

This is the mod I've been looking for. It was suggested by RO, and I'm surprised I didn't discover it sooner. The only confusion / question I have is why the rockets' tanks can't use Real Fuels. Also, there are some weird issues I'm having with extra parts (fuel tanks) being attached to the rockets upon loading in the VAB. Would you like a video showing these problems, and what addons I'm using? Again, I installed this in conjunction with Realism Overhaul. Thank you for SpaceX!

Hi, I am loving this mod so much. This is exactly what I've needed since Kerbin lost its appeal (unrealistic). However, I'm stuck on one issue regarding "missing parts" for more than a dozen different files in the VAB. Based on their name, I thought they were part of Kerbal-Konstructs, so I reinstalled it. Unfortunately, that didn't work. they are still missing, so I don't know what to do. Could it be from using 1.2.2 with some sneaky mods updating to 1.3? I've tried linking screenshots via tinypic but it doesn't seem to be cooperating. There are about a dozen different crafts, named such as "RO RN KK Deep Space 1," that are listed as containing parts that are locked or invalid (this is on sandbox). When opening the craft file, I get the list of parts that are missing, such as KK.ULA.D2.PAF3712A, KK.ATK.Star37FM, KK.GEM-40.GL, etc (there are about 14 missing parts). Most of the part names are repeated in the other missing craft files Thank you for your help and information. If you need additional information or logs, I would be happy to provide it.

Hi, just want to say how much I enjoy using your models for the SLS. I always prefer realism over the Kerbal stuff (been playing way too long). One problem though - I can't seem to get your rockets to use real fuels. I'm using realism overhaul and all related mods. I very much would love to see these rockets have their realistic dry / wet fuel weights as well as their respective burn times for Earth. I hope that can be done too! Thank you so much for the NASA awesomeness.

I'm having the same issue at the launchpad, but I am also using Real Fuels and SMURF in addition to the recommended mods. Would those mods be the reason why my TWR at liftoff is not correct? Ironic, if I assume that my mods are giving it the realistic weight.

I made a video, and I hope it helps clarify the issue. Additionally, I didn't have time to fully test it again to recreate the issue, but I was running into problems using the SpaceY trunk when it was placed under command pods (seen on the top of the rocket in this video). When I have the time, I will make another video if it happens again. I love this mod because it's the closet thing to SpaceX Falcon 9 love.

Ahh, I forgot to mention I did try that. The part works at 7.5m, but as soon as I scale it down to 3.75m (same issue with 5m), it sticks, regardless of using clamps and elevation from the launch pad. Thank you Edit: As cool as these parts are, I have no modding experience and even wonder if I had permission (assuming I figure out how) to re-adjust the values of these parts to be more in-line with their real life equivalents. For instance, the Ratite engines could use a big thrust boost when scaled to 1.25m. They work well enough alone in a symmetrical pattern on the end of a fuel tank. Never mind. See screenshot below. Seriously, I can't use Google Drive to share images?

I've been having an ongoing long-term issue with one part, the BFR9 "Omega Ratite." Basically, it's sticking to the launch pad area. I went through this thread and feel a little surprised I didn't find any similar issues--I must be the only one? I've tested the other parts, and they seem fine. For instance, to compensate, I will use one of your 3.75m interstage thrust plates and add the Ratite engines separately with better results (and no sticking). Unfortunately, there isn't one available with a 3.75m diameter for 9 Ratites. Would you have any recommendations for a closer approximation to the real Falcon 9? According to the thread, my mods are all compatible. Discovery and tests: Initially, I scaled it down to 3.75m to be more on point with the real thing, but I wasn't getting enough thrust from it and then saw you were going for a more stock feel. However, even at its default 5m, I'm having the same issue. I tested this with just the engine, a fuel tank, and a SY 5m probe. Thank you for any assistance.

In the picture, what is that central glare / reflection being caused by in terms of mods? (obviously it is the sun) I've seen this issue mentioned in other places, without enough information to understand what's causing it. I also have this issue (and it drives me crazy). Game engine limitation with the mods? Any possible workaround? Link to the issue? Thank you for the help. Hopefully not an issue of Scatterer, afaik...

Just to reiterate what my solution was, for the sake of word searches via Google or Bing, to fix the memory leak issue with the latest version of Scatterer while using RSSVE, go back to the previous version of Scatterer, .0256. I don't know how to post a log when I don't have enough time to enable logging before my system locks up. Anyone suggest a way if it would be helpful for diagnostic purposes?

https://spacedock.info/mod/141/scatterer - Version history, it is the previous one (.0256)

i7-6850K, 32GB RAM, NVIDIA 1080 overclocked. With RSSVE and the latest version of Scatterer, I don't last more than 15 seconds due to the memory leak, so I'm confirming what is probably well known. I'll try to get a log posted if that helps. I also can't seem to find the last release either, version 0.2553? Or maybe I just don't know how to look in Github... Anyone have a source? Thank you Found it: https://spacedock.info/mod/141/scatterer

A newb question first, and then a follow up as I continued to experiment and investigate the rotation matter. First, where can I upload my craft file? And then, to update this query, I discovered I attached my wheels incorrectly in radial positions because mirror was not working right. I knew the wheels were going to spin against each other, so I reversed the opposing side, etc. Interestingly, that still didn't work out, so I attached the wheels individually, and reversed the motor control on one of the front wheels, which suddenly made the thing work really well. Except it still tips over forward when braking. The main things I seek clarification on though are traction control and friction control and how (if at all) they influence torque when it is running on SAS. If this has already been discussed, what are better keywords to use since I missed it. Thank you for your interest in this matter.

Seriously, I thought 1.2 was supposed to make wheels work, but it feels like a big step backwards. I figured out how to overcome the torque and SAS issues in previous releases, but now I am having these darn issues again! And with a very simple 4-wheel rover on the Mun! If I can operate a rover on Minmus without flipping it, why the heck can I not get it to work on the Mun before it just spins out of control and flip. My basic design disables steering and power in the rear wheels, and leaves the front two wheels as the control point for that. I again disabled torque and SAS, but that doesn't matter. The rover wheels just spin out and flip the probe. So what am I doing wrong? They're acting like frickin' sleds. Is there a video or tutorial which teaches you how to adjust traction and when to override vs leave on auto? So frustrating. Thank you for any pointers and videos you might know of. I watched a lot of Scott Manley's stuff, so if he covers this specific topic, please point me there.