Fulgora

I can confirm this. My report above was based on 2.1.0.3 (should have written the precise version in my op, sry) I do not have critical temp. gauge installed and saw the same thing. I do have mods installed that add new modules to stock parts so that might be a commonality here. I can't say if critical temp gauge or other mods in @dtoxic's install adds new modules to parts though - this is just an assumption / speculation on my part. Edit: I still have a backup of my save in its broken state that I can use for debugging if that is of any help.

I have encountered a ghost ship myself now. The result was an endless stream of errors in the logs slowing down the game significantly. The fix (other than removing KSTS only) was deleting the ghost ships craft file (it was a simple sub-assembly called 'Micro-Sat v3.0.craft' - pure stock, no mod parts). This Ghost ship was attached to a craft that I deployed to orbit using KSTS - it was connected to the "main" craft through a staged docking port and turned from a real ship to a ghost when i staged the docking port and executed a burn. After it became a ghost to the deployed ship it also started to be floating around any ship that I spawned from the VAB as well as ships that I switched which existed prior to the deployment via KSTS. I have a savefile and the craftfile Technically the savegame requires "a few" mods to load but i might be able to retain the bug while turning it into a stock debug savegame if that helps. I have yet to perform some trials that would lead me to be able to replicate the problem reliably. I am happy right now that I was able to isolate and "fix" the root cause of the issues as a first step. I am using KSP 1.9.1 and the latest greatest versions of all mods and dependencies which have been installed via CKAN and I am not using ModularFuelTanks or USI Life support.

Oh - I have overlooked that. I read 1.9.1 and went to the next section. Apologies for my inability to read properly. Many thanks - it works now!

I do not believe so. I saw this popping up in my install with some 50 mods so I broke it down to a minimal reproducible setup and came up with OhScrap and MM only - neither has any dependencies. The first time I saw all mods were installed through CKAN but for verification I installed "everything" manually. Both my minimal setup and my actual install are fixed by simply removing OhScrap (which I have done for now as quite a few other mods depend on MM).

Hey zer0Kerbal, thanks for providing this mod! I have used DangIt in the past and am now considering to switch to this one. I have noticed that OhScrap has some issues with ModuleManager 4.1.3 (did not test other MM versions): https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/50533-18x-19x-module-manager-413-november-30th-2019-right-to-ludicrous-speed/ I have: KSP 1.9.1 ModuleManager 4.1.3 OhScrap 2.1.1.0 (also tested 2.1.0.0) Windows 8.1 Problem: The game does not finish loading. Depending on whether Squad DLC are installed it stops at "Verifying <expansion>" or "Loading expansions..." It also says in the loading screen: Mod(s) DLL that are not compatible with this version of KSP OhScrap 2.1.1.0 path/to/OhScrap.dll If you cannot reproduce the issue I can also test it on Linux. If you need any help in debugging / testing feel free to hit me up! Many thanks and best regards Fulgo

I do have a history of combining payloads for different STS missions thus my badge numbering is a bit off but I did indeed already complete STS 3 (which can be viewed when clicking on my STS 2 badge) I will sort out my singature badges shortly so its less confusing... Thanks for the Badge - now I just need to finish post production for STS 7+8

I am 99.99% sure that you don't have to do the missions again. A new challenge version = new maintainer/new missions but does not invalidate previous achievements! (0.01% certainty missing because I am not micheal.don) Awesome video btw!

Not-quite-business-as-usual in the shuttle program. Enjoy!

Not-quite-business-as-usual in the shuttle program. Enjoy! Also does this piece of mind-twisting madness qualify for skunkworks badge? https://github.com/Fulgora/sts_launch/blob/master/sts_launch

I have been doing the same (was just too lazy to code the circularization burn so far). The reason why the inclination is off is the rotation of kerbin i believe... so in order to get perfect inclinced orbits we have to factor that in. So far I have only been launching up to 25° which gave me an inaccuracy of about 1.6° (if I remember correctly) and I could not be bothered to fix it yet^^ But if you do the math wizardry hit me up and I will gladly c+p that ;p (Doing continuous correction burns on the way up isn't a viable solution imo... I would either not bother with it at all or do it right from the start...) If you are interested you can find my (horribly formatted / structured) code on my github. Crafts that are working with it are on my kerbal x page. I will test a 60° inclination later with my sts launchscript - genuinely interested in the results I will get... Edit: Does anyone know what generally acceptable error margins on orbit inclinations are in real life? I am not entirely sure whether an accurate solution to this problem exists or not... (without spending much thought on it)

As far as I understand it the game only offers contracts for bodies that have been visited (craft in SOI). That approach should work for planet packs as well because the name of the body is actually the identifier used by the game. Unless there are multiple bodies with the same name things should be fine. A few hypothesis based on that below: a) If you have started the game on stock or a different planet pack and been to a planet that has been moved by your new planet pack (outer planets moves eeloo for example) you should stll get contracts for that planet by this logic... (which might be irritating) b) Also hyperediting crafts around new bodies might potentially mess up your career progress.

What is the level of your tracking station? Do you have any 'regular' antennas on your relay satellites? Mixing relay and non-relay antennas on a relay satellite can make a crucial difference: Source: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/CommNet Whether you are out of range or if there is a different issue is hard to tell, BUT i believe that in many cases the RA-15 is too weak to connect to connect to Kerbin through Duna (not sure though). Either way - pictures of your crafts and orbits would greatly help

My submission for STS 3: Modlist, craft link and kOS soure can be found in the desciption of the video (as usual) cheers

soooo this would be ok then? 3865 kg 33865 I have an even smaller version in the makings but takeoff becomes more and more a problem... Edit: Also a hot contestant for cheapest manned SSTO

No gantries whatsoever? O.o Not even for stabilizing the craft at load and getting a kerbal in?

Hm didn't think about gantrys qualifying as gatecrasher... Dang - so I guess I will have to find a way to turn this into a monocyle for takeoff... The deorbit was legit though - so all the infinite fuel did was saving me 20 minutes of physics warp buuut anyways, back to the drawing board ;-)

It's dead simple: 1. Get a Mun encounter while you are still in the athmosphere on jet power 2. Achieve orbit by gravity assist 3. Figure out how to deorbit w/o orbital maneuvers I don't buy the Juno jet story either though Edit: This would actually be a fun challenge but it's impossible with stock engines...

The similar colors in the upload bar and forum icon are coincidental - I just removed the color channels from the second one in order to make the 3rd I could of course adjust that it if the difference matters. Personal favorites are #2 and maybe #3, my beef with #3 is that next to the youtube icon it looks a bit insignificant... Here is a final(?) adjustment - 'Forum profile' is about 30% larger now for better readability. The 3rd one has matched colors with the upload bar. Due to the slight gradients it is only a rough match but I doubt many people will use a color picker tool and complain

I don't see much of an issue: Not sure what you use to resize but interpolation isn't strong with your tool I admit the one with the white borders is slightly less readable than the ones without a border but thats a minor detail I'd say...

I did not resize it though, making it smaller is easy, vice versa much less.

I agree to this... its not quite intuitive. Suggestion: Only if that is okay with @SQUAD though of course (If you guys are not okay with that image let me know and I will take it down immediately)

STS 1 & 2 with a fully automated launch {kOS} I combined most parts of the first and second mission into a single one. I hope this still qualifies Mod-List is given in the Video description (totally not fishing for views here :p) For those who can't / don't want to watch the video here are a few screenshots take from it: http://imgur.com/a/xLxwU The screenshots are mostly PR shots without the GUI showing so it wouldn't qualify as an entry but yea... The re-entry burn shown in scene @ ~12:20 in the video resulted in F5/F9 because I overshot the KSC by quite a bit on that run so thats why the runway landing shows more fuel then I had left after the adjustment burn I showed. Noticed that when the upload was 80% complete and I hope that this is still okay. Both the craft file and the script are provided. Additionally I had about 1000m/s more dV then needed so this was over-engineered quite a bit anyways.

Solution: (Credits to @Jackseller) In Scatterer, the sun png files are located in : GameData\scatterer\config\Sunflares\Sun But since the latest version (1.2.x), SVE uses its own pngs in : GameData\StockVisualEnhancements\SVE_Scatterer\Sunflares\Sun They overwrite the Scatterer files. And they use their own settings too. The best way to ignore them is to open the SVE_Settings.cfg located in : GameData\StockVisualEnhancements Then delete the following lines inside the file and save it : @Scatterer_sunflare:AFTER[scatterer] { @Sun { %assetPath = StockVisualEnhancements/SVE_Scatterer/Sunflares/Sun %flareSettings = 0.5,1,0.32 %spikesSettings = 0.7,1,0.32 %sunGlareFadeDistance = 250000 %ghost1SettingsList1 { %Item = 0.1,1,20,0.3 %Item = 0.08,1,8,0.34 %Item = 0.08,1,12,0.49 %Item = 0.16,1,18,-0.3 } %ghost2SettingsList1 { %Item = 0.02,1,4,0.66 %Item = 0.1,1,10,0.44 %Item = 0.15,1,4,0.55 %Item = 0.15,1,18,0.95 } %ghost2SettingsList2 { %Item = 0.1,1,8,0.7 %Item = 0.1,1,6,0.72 %Item = 0.15,1,8,-0.2 } %ghost3SettingsList1 { %Item = 0.1,1,6,0.4 %Item = 0.08,1,11,1.1 %Item = 0.04,1,20,1.2 %Item = 0.03,1,20,1.22 } } } Alternatively: Updating the files in GameData\StockVisualEnhancements\SVE_Scatterer\Sunflares\Sun instead of the (traditional) scatterer folder should solve this as well (untested!)

Hello guys, I hope someone has a clue on why my sun went back to being stock... It used to work but somehow it changed back (mod updates i guess) and now i can not figure out how to get it back the way it was (please don't judge for updating mods) Installed mods: SVE 1.2.2, SVE HighRes Textures, scatterer, Environmental Visual Enhancements 1.2.2, Kopernicus 1.2.2-5, MM and Astroniki Sunflare for scatterer. I have done a fresh install (both, mods and KSP), copied a backup of an older (1.2.2) gamedata folder into my install (with the old mods as well!) and installed older versions of SVE and scatterer. SVE 1.2.1 made the sun about 5x brighter which was a change but not a positive one... >.< Also I have tried to install various different sunflares for scatterer via CKAN and installed mods with and without using CKAN. I am pretty much at the end of my ideas and any hint would be greatly appreciated. Current sun: For comparison: It used to look like this about a month ago:

For the Jool/Laythe mission: Is it allowed to use the deployed mining equipment for refueling or not? Edit: What exactly defines a support package? E.g. fuel delivery? I have serious doubts that I will be able to complete this without refueling in Laythe orbit for the return trip... My launch system is a main booster and 2 side booster - just like the real thing. The main booster has about 1000 m/s more than required for orbit. Is that within the bounds of the challenge? I mean technically I can get a launch it to a suborbital trajectory that is on the edge of kerbin SOI... ;-)