Fraktal

Raged three times in the past two days while in the process of upgrading my space station's docking ports in EVA for increased stability. The reason for my raging? Since all my station modules are subassemblies, the game kept making the docking ports root parts whenever I undocked so that the engineer could get to them. I also managed to reproduce this bug by accident while working, making my engineer stuck inside his pod unable to get back out due to Insert Name Here Kerman blocking the ladder until I spun up the cargo ship to a high enough RPM that INH.Kerman got flung off the ladder by the centrifugal forces. Bugfixing in KSP style, ladies and gentlemen.

Clipping is not cheating as long as it's aesthetically pleasing. I always clip my parachutes and OX-STATs halfway in for that reason. Which is why you should play with 10% science income. You'll love Minmus a whole LOT more than the Mun because it changes the game completely by raising the level of challenge. You can and will softlock yourself from even reaching the Mun if you pick the wrong tech nodes in the early game and you can just plain forget about using NERVs for your first Duna mission if you aren't using a science lab (and if you are, you'll likely miss the first transfer window if you wait for enough science points to come in).

...why not just change the craft type to debris so that it can be filtered out from display?

Compared to the rest of your ship, it's a drop in the ocean. I'm more concerned with running a converter on the mining rig slowing down the rate at which the ore tanks fill up.

Why not do both, then? As in, put a converter on both the mothership and the lander. Lander lands, fuels up, loads up ore, takes off, docks with mothership, offloads ore. Mothership processes ore while the lander is now free to go about its own business in the meantime.

This appeared a couple versions ago, yes, and is caused by float rounding errors in the engine as far as I'm aware. Only workaround I know of is to engage 5x time warp before you warp to the maneuver node. Kicking to high warp right away is what triggers this.

Holy hell, this actually updated?! I recently pulled it down from the repo to maybe fix @flart's issue, but couldn't figure out how to set Visual Studio up for it properly.

I'm all for having a tether, it's just not in the game yet. Hence why I didn't count it.

How it might work better in my opinion: Going EVA when flying low above Kerbin should be Astronaut Complex level 1, not level 2. In other words, the kerbals are basically wearing a regular flight suit that isn't vacuum-rated. Going EVA when flying high above Kerbin or orbiting in space still requires Astronaut Complex level 2. In other words, this is the point where the kerbals get their hands on Gemini/Voskhod vacuum-rated EVA suits. Optionally, going EVA when landed/splashed anywhere other than Kerbin could require Astronaut Complex level 3. If this is actually the case, remove the requirement of a level 2 R&D for collecting surface samples. In other words, this is the point where the kerbals get their hands on Apollo A7L suits. Parachutes stay unlocked right from the beginning, since you can now actually use them right off the bat. EMU is... a different beast. I'd say it could be unlocked at the same node as craft RCS but then you run the risk of losing a kerbal if they let go or slide off of the command module's ladder. It'd be safer if the EMU is unlocked at Astronaut Complex level 2 (since that's the point where you can actually use the EMU), but I don't know whether it's possible to tie a part's availability to facility level rather than a tech node.

I personally find it a bit poorly thought-out that the game auto-equips parachutes right from the start - but won't actually let you bail out so that you can actually use the parachute until the Astronaut Complex is updated. I know it's just an oversight arising from the fact that the career facility limitations were implemented literally years before personal parachutes were a thing but still, am I really the only one who noticed this?

It doesn't show the EVA experiments added a few version ago, nor does it show remaining science below 0.1, but otherwise there are no complaints with it.

I encountered this problem last night. Couple months ago, I left a deployable goo canister on the Mun's Kerbin-facing side, powered and connected. Problem is, due to initially not having the entire DSN up, only the KSP, the Mun only had intermittent contact with Kerbin. The canister had gotten to the point where it displayed 100% collected but only 40-something% transmitted and it was off as well. So I launched a service mission that landed at the camp and flicked it back on. Went back home, checked in the Tracking Station... ...and it was off again. So I reloaded the quicksave I made prior to returning to debug the issue. Flicked the goo canister on again, engaged timewarp - it turned off by itself after a while. Seems like as deployed science does its work in "ticks", if it detects during an update that it's already at 100% science collected, it automatically powers itself off... and since it's off, it probably won't transmit the last bit of collected data either despite having a real-time direct connection to the KSC at all times (I got the DSN up in the meantime), nor is there a way to manually transmit the data either unless I have a kerbal pick it up and put it back down, which transfers the data into the kerbal's inventory (and also resets science collected/sent to 0%). End result is that once the canister hits 100% collected, it will never transmit anything ever again. Is this a bug?

I really hope we won't get to that point. I live in the general area too.

There's no getting around researching fuel ducts, I'm afraid. You need to research Fuel Systems (ie. the tech tree node that gives you the fuel duct part) before you can crossfeed decouplers.

I think that's a deliberate performance shortcut. Years-old posts in the KSP subreddit claim that KER's suicide burn calculations always assume a perfectly vertical descent, which is obviously going to be wrong if you descend at an angle. This is because to get the actual downwards thrust, KER would have to poll the craft's current attitude, get the engines' thrust vectors' angle away from pointing perfectly downwards, calculate the cosine of that angle and multiply the engine thrust with that. All of which would have to recalculated every single time your craft rotated even a microscopic fraction of a degree in any direction, including from engine torque caused by your craft's weight distribution not being 100% symmetric. I'm sure you can imagine the performance impact of doing all that every couple of milliseconds in a game that's already one of the most brutal CPU hogs I know of. End of line, you must kill your horizontal velocity before you begin the suicide burn. That is how the suicide burn countdown will be accurate - but even so, I always seem to end up killing my descent speed before reaching the surface if I start high enough, so I think the countdown might not calculate weight loss from fuel expenditure either.

What if the engines are large enough relative to the engine plate that they clip into each other? Can their thrust vectors overheat and destroy each other at high gimbal?

...I just discovered that you can stow non-retractable solar panels in EVA construction mode. This is BIG. I finally have a use for non-retractable panels on space stations meant to be upgraded later on!

You don't have to launch a separate craft for every piece. Their orbital inclinations and eccentricities are close enough to each other that fuel usage should be comparatively minimal, even if you factor in changing your orbit after each piece to catch up with the next without waiting for weeks/months.

Actually, you can probably do the job like this. Bring an engineer and plenty of fuel. Intercept trash. Have the engineer exit and hang off of a ladder. You won't be able to warp like this, so do this only at the very end of each interception. Once close enough, kill relative velocity. Turn/translate until the engineer can reach the trash in EVA construction mode without letting go of the ladder. If it's a small component, stuff it into a storage unit; if big, surface-attach it somewhere on the craft where it'll harmlessly burn off during reentry. If you have spare fuel left, go after the next piece.

Save the subassembly again with the same name. Game will ask if you want to overwrite, click yes. I found a few years ago that the game has trouble recognizing whether the root part is surface-attachable. Effects range from refusing to save if all of the root part's attachment points are in use, to saving the subassembly just fine but throwing nullref errors when you pick up the subassembly and try to put it back down, forcing you to kill the game executable.

Was trying to launch a rover to Gilly, but the left-side wheels kept breaking when I popped the fairing in LKO, even if the rocket hadn't even left the ground yet. Widened the fairing a bit eventually, that seemed to do the trick.

Oh, right. Now that you mentioned it, I remembered using that design choice too. Was wondering because to this very day, I still don't understand why Squad made the choice of not allowing crossfeed through KV pods even though every single other command pod in the game allows it.

Food for thought: do SRBs allow liquid fuel to crossfeed through them...?

Stratzenblitz75 already beat you guys to it two and a half years ago. Albeit his take was an aerial spinlaunch.

Then here's a counter-argument: Don't use the MPL. Set science reward multiplier to 0.1. THAT is how you grind. The issue with stock career is that it's too easy to get your hands on money? This is sure to make money way tighter in the early game due to the large number of missions you need to launch just to get ahead in the tech tree.