jimmymcgoochie

I have 16GB RAM in my PC and it still manages to fill it up when running a game with JNSQ (and close to 100 other mods) in it, I'm surprised you can run stock KSP with 4GB...

Real Solar System doesn't rescale the Kerbol system to the same size as the Solar system. The only thing I could find was Sigma Dimensions, which says it's only going to work in KSP 1.3.1 or earlier.

Most (all?) planet packs use Kopernicus, and Kopernicus isn't compatible with 1.9 yet- it only got updated to work with 1.8 a short while before 1.9 was released, so it might take a while yet. In the meantime, you can either play 1.9 with just the stock solar system, or use 1.8 with whatever planets you like but without the newest features and graphics updates. There are a few mods that rescale the stock system, but a quick look at them shows many are only compatible with KSP 1.3.1 and earlier, I don't see anything that will work with 1.8 and give you a rescaled Kerbolar system except JNSQ, which does some pretty heavy surgery on all the planets (it's what I'm using right now), you might have more luck with 1.7.3 or earlier.

I don't think any of those mods do anything at all to the Island Airfield, but with Kerbal Konstructs (a dependency for TSC and KSCE) and Omega's structures you could make some changes to it yourself. You need to be 'in flight' at the Island Airfield first, press Alt+K to activate the KK menu then select what you want to add and place it yourself. The Island Airfield itself is one single object so you'll probably have to stick stuff on top of it to get the effect you're after.

@Nertea just downloaded the latest NFLV revamp version and I get module manager warnings about OverlappingParts.cfg: It seems to work, I don't see the MH 5m fuel tanks anywhere, but testing without Restock which may be causing the problem. I can't get any parts to attach to the ER-L2's central pit node as the much larger bottom stack node gets in the way and parts will snap to that instead- the only way to attach to the engine pit node is to stick something on the larger node first. I think that stack node should be a bit further down as putting a decoupler there will cause a lot of clashing with the engines, or maybe it doesn't need that node at all? I can't find a large radial decoupler anywhere, Git says last update was 3 days ago on the revamp branch, did you push it?

@DMagic I seem to have found version 19.3 of SCAN somehow, put it in KSP 1.8.1 and the ROC indicators are just yellow squares rather than little yellow Xes and the new BTDT isn't displaying nearby ROCs like the old one did. Repeated in a clean 1.8.1 install, see screenshot below. It's entirely possible that I have the wrong version and 19.3 is for 1.9.x only, should I be using 19.1? I had previously installed 18.14 through CKAN and that's the most recent version there.

@Well have you thought about doing a 0.625m to 0.3125m adapter/fuel tank? I think that's the only thing this mod still needs (well, that and a red version of the little fin please!), everything else is excellent and it has already become a staple of my space program especially those 'put a satellite here' type contracts.

Yesterday I built a brand new shiny probe with all the newest parts from SCANsat to go and scan some planets like they'd never been scanned before. I put one in orbit ready to do a transfer out to Dres, then realised I had forgotten to put an antenna on it

I built a copy of your lander/rover combo and gave it a test run. The heat shield is definitely not needed as the re-entry used up 2 out of 800 ablator, but it landed on a bit of a slope, bounced and went upside down... After deploying the cheat menu I put it the right way up and it drove backwards (although that might just have been me building it wrong ). A couple of suggestions for you: - Duna's atmosphere is very thin, so you need to set all the parachutes to open at the lowest possible pressure. Ditch the heat shield as it isn't needed, and scrap the Z-1k battery on the lander too as it doesn't have any real purpose. You DO need a reaction wheel though as unless there's one hidden in there somewhere the lander is uncontrollable and not entirely stable if it lands on a slope. - Personally, I would ditch the relay antenna on the lander and replace it with a dedicated orbital relay that would detach from the lander just after entering Duna's SOI and fly to a higher orbit. You would then have to time the landing so that the relay was overhead. A single RA-2 is not enough to reach Kerbin for a significant part of Duna's orbit and will only work if the two are really close, which tends not to be the case by the time you reach it after a transfer, so you should try to put an RA-15 relay dish on the relay instead and make sure you have a level 3 tracking station too. - I would make one small but important change to the rover: swap the battery for a reaction wheel and strap a pair of Z-100 batteries on the sides of the probe core or the underside of the structural plate. The OKTO2 has no reaction wheels in it and all it would take is one bump or overenthusiastic braking to flip the rover over. As a rule I always pack more than one antenna so that there's a spare if one breaks, and you could easily fit several deployable antennae (C16, HG-5 or DTS-M1) into the design without them getting in the way. I also suggest putting the probe core on top of the structural plate with the decoupler on top of that, which greatly reduces the chances of breaking something if you drive over a rock. If you're driving around on Duna, you should probably turn the steering off on the rear wheels as they tend to cause instability at anything above walking speed and can easily cause the rover to flip in low gravity. Front wheel steering only will make your turning circle a bit wider but it's also a lot more stable. If you put a reaction wheel on a rover, that will most likely make your wheel steering useless if SAS is on as the torque can overpower the wheels, so you could end up steering with the yaw controls instead of the wheel steering. Good luck out there!

I like Soundtrack Editor and the ability to add more music to the game as the stock music can get a bit samey after a while (and even the music that comes with Soundtrack Editor got a bit samey for me so I added even more). The ability to add your own music as a stock feature of KSP2 would be great, but I don't think Soundtrack Editor is going to be updated to allow music for an individual planet. The ability to choose music for each individual planet would be nice and I've already started working on matching each planet to one of Holst's Planets as there are seven Planets and seven planets in the Kerbol system plus most/all of those planets have obvious Solar system analogies. My current list looks a bit like this: Moho- Mercury, obviously; Eve- Uranus- NOT Venus; Uranus is big and brash and loud which suits Eve much better, plus- Kerbin- Venus, because it's calm and tranquil (and also because there's no Earth in the Planets so I had to improvise a bit); Duna- Mars; Dres- Saturn (the 'Bringer of Old Age' for the planet forever waiting for a visitor ); Jool- Jupiter for obvious reasons; Eeloo- Neptune, because they're both the furthest planet (no Pluto in the Planets either as it hadn't been discovered at the time!) I'm still working on what to add for the various moons, so far all I have are Clair de Lune, the Moonlight Sonata and 'Ticket to the Moon'...

If the error is with mechjeb then the mechjeb forum thread is probably the best place to post this. You should probably put your mod list in a ‘spoiler’ too.

Are all the mods you’re using compatible with the version of KSP you’re using and which version is that? Since you’re running KSP directly in your steam folder it’s possible that the game has been updated to v1.9.1 from v1.8.1 or earlier, and a number of mods aren’t yet compatible with that version yet. If you’re using CKAN it should flag incompatible mods, if not check each mod page and make sure your version is compatible with the version of KSP that you have. It’s a good idea to copy KSP out of the steam folder and keep it somewhere else, especially if you aren’t using the most recent version of the game. You can also have multiple copies of the game and on different versions. I’m not sure that’s the right log file as that one says the game loaded and you went to the space centre, editor and tracking station at least. Is there a player.txt log in the same folder you got that output_log.txt from?

Try uninstalling and reinstalling the problem mod, and if that doesn’t fix it check you have a compatible mod version for your version of KSP (Which version are you using anyway? And what other mods do you have?)

Try making an identical rover but with the rovemate the right way round and launching that, then copy all the parts references for that new rover in the save file and paste them over the broken one. Note- backup your save file first!

KSP 1.8 and up uses a different version of Unity to run the game, it’s possible that your PC can’t run it or you have an outdated driver somewhere. If you’re on windows, look inside the KSP folder for a file called KSP.txt, open that up and scroll/search up from the bottom looking for either EXC, ERR or crash. You should also try to find C:/users/your_username/appdata/locallow/squad/kerbal space program/player.log and look for exceptions, errors and the point at which it crashes. If you find any, upload the files to a file sharing website and link to them in a reply, do NOT paste the logs directly into the reply as it is really hard to read and can cause problems for people visiting the page on a mobile or tablet. Can you also tell me where you got KSP from e.g. steam, and if you are using any mods what they are. What’s the last thing that gets shown on the screen before it crashes?

Apparently there were plans to create the 'Black Prince' rocket by using the 'Blue Streak' as a first stage and sticking an entire Black Arrow on top: Blue Streak was used as the first stage of the ill-fated Europa rocket and Black Arrow's first stage was deliberately designed to be the same size as the Europa's second stage for this very reason, and it would have given the combined rocket substantially greater payload capacity and range. It didn't happen in reality, but here's my KSP version of the Black Prince. The Blue Streak was about 3 metres wide and 18 metres high; that wasn't possible to replicate in KSP so I went with 2.5m diameter and around 15 metres high, with two Vector engines with a 75% thrust limiter to match the real thing's first stage thrust of ~1500kN. Since this isn't actually a real rocket, merely hypothetical, and since it has a lot of extra oomph than Black Arrow (which can do Mun and return), I decided to test this one out by going a bit further afield. Gilly, to be precise, and it made it all the way there and all the way back using a fairly simple little lander as a reference payload (HECS2, FL200, FL100, terrier, 3x landing legs, 3x solar panels, 3x parachutes(!)). I could have done it properly and used the ~900m/s of fuel I had left to deorbit and re-enter Kerbin the right way, but instead I turned on ignore max temperatures and bombed into the atmosphere because it was already 11pm and I had no heat shield (and it's not a career game so it doesn't matter if I cheat a bit ) https://imgur.com/a/rfZ4TL2 for all the images. Blue Streak first stage adds about 2600m/s of Delta-V in the VAB to the Black Arrow above.

They were useful for the Black Arrow due to the single-axis gimbal which matches the BA's first stage engine setup, but I don't really use them much on my 'proper' rockets as they're not particularly powerful or efficient and they make a tremendous amount of noise when you're using a lot of them. The pod-less Restock version is good for its tiny size. I think there was an idea to combine Black Arrow with another rocket called Blue Streak, I might have a go at making that as I already have half of it Edit: I went and made it see above link

After a long time spent tolerating some really dreadful game performance in my heavily modded 1.8.1 game, I have found that CNC is a real performance drain and makes the game run considerably slower and with worse FPS, regularly dropping to 3-5FPS and running at 1/2 or even 1/3 speed for me. I thought it was due to some combination of other mods I was using like EVE or scatterer, or JNSQ, but removing EVE/scatterer didn't fix the problem and a totally fresh save game in the same KSP instance ran quite happily at normal speed and 60FPS. I also saw a lot of inexplicable occasions where the game would suddenly speed up to near-normal speed and 20-odd FPS and couldn't work out why. My career save has nearly a hundred vessels in flight and that's obviously having some effect, but when I removed CNC the average frame rate doubled and the only time the game runs slower than real speed is when flying really large vessels and/or in atmosphere. I do like this mod, but the performance penalty I get with it is just too high to keep using it. I haven't gone as far as trying to recreate this problem in a clean KSP install, but from my observations I have to conclude that this is the cause.

Jool has a huge gravity well so you'll pick up a lot of speed on the way 'down' towards it. You can try aerobraking through the atmosphere of Jool itself, but you'll need to bring heat shields as that speed results in very high heating even though the atmosphere is so thin a barometer can't actually detect it. You can also try braking in Laythe's atmosphere, but that's a smaller, moving target and the atmosphere isn't as thick either. Aiming is critical- too low and you burn up or have to expend more fuel to regain the lost speed, too high and you'll overshoot and if you miss the atmosphere entirely you'll just end up with a huge gravity assist that will hurl you out of Jool and the entire solar system. With some very careful planning it's possible to use the gravity of the moons combined with some well-timed burns to slow yourself down without using too much fuel, although I haven't ever done it myself and trying to judge the timing by eye is all but impossible.

You could try naming them after moons in the Solar system- there are over 200 to choose from, from the more famous like Ganymede and Titan to the more interesting and/or obscure like Kallichore, Jarnsaxa and Bebhionn. Best moon in the Solar system for KSP purposes has to be Kerberos (although that also sounds like the name for adult-themed KSP fan fictions ) You could also try planets from Star Trek, Star Wars etc., mythological animals, or just try and name them using words starting with the first two letters of the planet/moon they're orbiting or pick any letter and run with it. There's also the option of raiding a thesaurus for inspiring words, that's how I named my interplanetary ships Endeavour, Intrepid, Tenacity and the as-yet unbuilt Audacity which will have heat shields to aerobrake into Jool. If it's good enough for NASA...

Not sure if this qualifies, but I made a near-real scale, all stock (well, stock plus Making History) Black Arrow a couple of weeks ago, also using Cubs as the main engines which had the added bonus of ending up with surprisingly similar thrust and delta-V to the real thing on the first two stages. Black Arrow is surprisingly small (<14m tall including fairing, maximum 2m wide) compared to other rockets, but then again its payload capacity was pretty small too (a few hundred kilos to LEO) so it actually fits KSP scale quite well. Sadly, it doesn't have the original rocket's paint scheme or orange fairing, but there's only so much you can do when using pure stock parts.

Wow.

@Nertea E-series structural tube, the 'black' and 'white' variants are the wrong way round (black one is white and vice versa), non-textured flat versions are correct. 5m N-series one is fine. The 7.5m guidance unit, stack separator and decoupler seem to be about 10 degrees out of alignment with the other parts and are slightly asymmetrical no matter how I rotate them with snap angles on, see the screenshot below if that explanation made no sense. Holding Alt makes it so much easier to put engines on those engine mounts, but due to the sheer size of some of the parts it can be a bit hard to actually see underneath to attach the engines The attachment nodes are also now in the right place for the mounts with 'pits' in them. E and N service bays have a localisation failure in the 'partial' floor variant. The mesh floors also create some pretty awful shimmering effects when the camera is moved when those parts are highlighted. A few questions: Are there any plans for paint variants of the 7.5m fuel tanks e.g. orange, black or black and white? As there is a significant parts overlap with Making History, are the 5m parts going to be hidden if MH is installed like the overlapping 1.875m parts in Restock+? I like the switchable textures that the stock parts don't have, would it be possible to hide the MH 5m parts instead? The NR-AD-6400 conical tank has what looks suspiciously like podded separator motors on the sides, but only in the black and white version, and they aren't actually separator motors: is this something you're thinking of adding in future, or are they just to make it look nice?

You're probably missing a dependency, try installing 'Firespitter Core' and see if it works then. On an unrelated note- the fairings around the gargantuan dish/relay don't seem to work right for me, they never change colour and they don't jettison when the relevant buttons are pressed. In addition, all the deployable parts (engines, solar panels, science bits etc.) will change colour but the parts that actually move will almost always stay the default gold colour, which often looks really out of place.

I'm guessing you're looking for this? In which case, it's listed as compatible with 1.9.x which means 1.9 or 1.9.1