jimmymcgoochie

@Leonardoleo46 first forum post and you use it to answer a thread that has been dormant for six years? That's why you always check the dates on forum posts BEFORE you answer them.

That link for the log doesn't work for me, I get a 403 error. Does removing either KK or Kerbinside from the total list of mods cause R&D to reappear? They might not actually be involved at all. This may require a lot of spreadsheet wrangling... Start by removing all of one type of mod e.g. all your planet packs. If the problem persists, those mods aren't causing the problem and can be removed from the list of suspects (don't reinstall them!); if the problem stops, those mods should be put on a new list because you know at least one of them is causing the problem. Keep trying for each different category e.g. parts packs, flight tools, contract packs etc. and you should end up with a noticeably shorter list to work with. By this point you should have a shorter list of mods which are still causing the missing R&D building. Find every mod that's auto-installed as a dependency and try it with just those (plus KK and/or kerbinside if they're definitely involved) so you know either way if they're involved. Split your list of suspect mods in half (it doesn't really matter how- alphabetically, every second one, whatever), add the first half and see if the R&D building is there: if the building is still there try the other half; if it isn't then you've eliminated half the list in one go, now split the remaining list in half again and repeat the process until you find the mods responsible. If neither half makes it disappear, it's a problem with mod interactions. Add all the suspects back in and work backwards by removing smaller numbers of mods until you find what's causing the problem. With so many mods the load times could be horrendous, but I reckon if you're using that many mods to begin with then you've got a pretty potent PC and it can handle it. It will be a time-consuming process to go through methodically and track down the problem, but in the end you'll know exactly what mod(s) are causing the issue and can decide if you want to remove it/them and you'll also know which mod thread(s) to post in about the issue so someone can try to fix it.

^ Ignore me, do this instead ^

Re. the above, I had a rummage through the settings and found this- UNSUPPORTED_LEGACY_SHADER_TERRAIN = False. Turning that to True made the game use what looks like the pre-1.8 terrain (and possibly the pre-1.8 stock Duna terrain as it looks much darker than the JNSQ version), but it doesn't seem to be crashing at all. If anyone else has been having issues with terrain causing crashes, this might fix it for you too.

With 16gb of RAM I'd be surprised if you managed to fill it all up, but KSP can be a RAM hog so try closing everything else down while it's running. What KSP version are you using and what mods? Removing some mods might help bring your memory use down, be ruthless and cull anything you aren't using; you can go into the mod folders and delete parts you aren't using but keep those you are, but just remember that if the mod updates then those deleted parts might be re-added in the update. To use the openGL trick: In CKAN, click 'File' then 'Open KSP directory'. Find KSP_x64, the executable that actually runs the game. Right-click and select 'create shortcut' or 'send to -> desktop' to create a shortcut. Right the shortcut, click 'Properties'. Where it says target, with the file location of KSP_x64, add -force-openGL (with a space before the -force). Instead of running the game by clicking the Launch button in CKAN, use the shortcut instead. It might help reduce the memory load and That log isn't actually very useful (at least to me). You might find more useful information in the following files including what errors you're getting: C/Users/you/appdata/locallow/squad/ksp/player.txt C/Users/you/appdata/locallow/squad/ksp/output_log.txt KSP root directory/KSP.txt And a word of advice: if you're going to dump a log file in a forum post, do it in a spoiler- at the top of the text box there should be some formatting tools, and spoiler is the one that looks like an eye. It means that the gigantic wall of log text is hidden inside a drop-down box which helps a lot for people who look at the forums on mobiles/tablets.

If you want a quick and only moderately hacky fix: Go into your KSP directory/saves and open persistent.sfs, then search through it until you find the 'landed' vessel. Change the following: sit = LANDED landed = True ... some more lines... alt = [a number] to: sit = ORBITING landed = False ... some more lines... alt = [a number + 5] And that should make the game think it's orbiting; it will also move the vessel 5 metres higher so it will actually be above the ground, but should float gently down and land properly.

CKAN is easier to do and has the benefits of being far easier to track, updates are found automatically and you can even copy the entire game to have several instances all with different mods installed. But, not all mods are on CKAN and it doesn't always get versions right (it can sometimes suggest a mod version will work for you when it won't, or vice versa).

Are you really using 381 mods!? That's going to make it difficult to narrow it down. It would help to have some screenshots to see what's actually happening- is the R&D department of KSC missing? What KSP version are you using (I'm guessing 1.8.1 based on some mod versions) and are all your mods up to date (I'm guessing you use CKAN otherwise that list would have taken hours to create )? Are there any error messages in the logs, either in the KSP.txt log file inside your KSP directory or (for windows) C/Users/you/appdata/locallow/squad/ksp/player.txt (or output_log.txt in the same folder)? It might be hard to find the relevant errors with so many mods in there and since it isn't crashing the game they won't be at the end either, so try searching for ERR or EXC to find error messages. Try cloning your KSP through CKAN (or better, a completely stock version as it'll be substantially quicker without ~400 mods to go through), clear all mods, then load KSP with ONLY kerbinside and kerbal konstructs and their dependencies installed to see if that causes the same issue. If not add in anything else that also uses kerbal konstructs until you can reproduce it; if that still doesn't work try loading your save game and if the bug happens then, your save game is corrupted somehow.

I prefer unlocking all the science kit first, because that way I can do one single mission and gather all the data from each biome instead of repeatedly going back each time I unlock something else. Spending hours flying around Kerbin in a plane just to get a seismic reading from the Badlands, after doing the same yesterday to get pressure and temperature readings, is tedious and boring and sloooooooow. Besides which, the rather nifty Kerbal Environmental Institute mod makes gathering all the data from KSC itself a one-click task and saves having to clamber on top of each and every building to get results from it (fun fact: most buildings in the KSC are their own little microbiome and give science in addition to just driving through the areas e.g. the fuel tanks beside the VAB, the individual buildings in R&D and even the water tower on the launch pad), so an individual science unlock can get you a lot of extra science without too much effort. Now if only there was a way to pay for someone to go out to the Badlands for you and get the readings... Although having said that, I also try to unlock batteries and solar panels pretty quickly too and lob probes at the Mun or Minmus for some quick gains and the bonuses for reaching/orbiting/landing (crashing). But mostly MOAR SCIENCE!

Vector- RS-25 engine from the Space Shuttle (and more recently re-used on the SLS). The vector is even called the KS-25 after it. Juno jet engine- named after the Jumo engine that powered the Me-262 and other WW2 German jet aircraft. (Ironically, the Kerbal version is actually less explodey than the real one; the Jumo was notoriously unreliable and prone to self-destructing!)

You could install one manually? Alternatively: 1- Install one mod (e.g. DMagic) 2- Copy the DMagic folder from GameData and stick it somewhere else, you'll need it later 3- Uninstall DMagic 4- Install For Science! 5- Copy the DMagic folder back into GameData- it won't be controlled by CKAN which means no conflicts, but no updates either. Keep that in mind.

This isn't much information to go on. Are you seeing a graphics glitch, did your lander fall through the terrain, what actually happened? Screenshots or video make it vastly easier to understand what's happening. What version of KSP are you using? Are you using any other mods besides those two (and what version of EVE?), any DLCs installed? What terrain detail settings are you using- this changes the shape of the terrain and often results in things ending up under the ground if changed.

If you enable 'advanced tweakables' in the settings, you'll get the option to add autostruts which will create invisible but fully functional struts between that part and either a) the heaviest part on the rocket, b) the root part or c) the grandparent part- each part is attached to another part, which is its parent, so in the rocket StrandedOnEarth posted, the twin boar engines on the sides are attached to the radial decouplers (parent) which are attached to the central orange fuel tank (their parent, and the parent of a parent is a grandparent). When you're building rockets with radially attached boosters, it's a good idea to fix the booster part (I usually use SRBs like the Thumper) to the heaviest part for maximum stability, with any fuel tanks on top of that fixed to their grandparent which greatly improves rigidity and the nosecone on the top fixed to the root, which in total makes the boosters stay pretty much exactly where they are in flight instead of wobbling around and occasionally ending up pointing backwards. The same applies in a stack- strut some of the higher parts in later stages to the heaviest part and some of the lower stage parts to either root or grandparent parts, and this works with docking ports in the stack too. That original rocket of yours looks really strange to me- why are you using a solid rocket as the main stage and twin boars as radial boosters? It's better to do it the other way round and set the booster decouplers to 'enable crossfeed' so that the fuel tanks on top of the boosters can feed the core stage and drain first before being discarded.

Let me just check, hmm, thought so, it's called KERBAL Space Program, not Human Space Program. It has already been said pretty clearly that KSP2 will use the same Kerbol system as KSP1 and at the same scale. I tried RSS once and ditched it pretty quickly as it's far more difficult to get into orbit, the RO/RP stuff was bewilderingly complicated and Earth looked abysmal compared to the real thing. Basing anything on a real place is risky because people will see all the ways it doesn't look like the real thing, whereas the Kerbol system is based on the real solar system closely enough that it's obvious what the analogies are (Duna = Mars etc.) but at the same time it's different enough that you can have a Jovian water-world and a Martian moon that's geosynchronous and tidally locked. The stock scale Kerbol system is more than big enough considering how few people who start playing the game a) make it to orbit, b) get to the Mun and c) land on the Mun (I'm basing that on what I read when there was a KSP2 stand at a games expo a few months ago). Anything that makes it harder to do those three fairly simple things will drastically reduce player retention, and people who try a game and give up because it's too complicated aren't exactly a ringing endorsement. Another important point is that we haven't visited most of the real solar system to any great extent- a few rovers on Mars, some landers on Venus and a handful of probes to the asteroid belt and the outer planets; we've only ever set foot on the Moon, which in astronomical terms is like going to the bottom of your garden, and that's not likely to change particularly soon. There's hardly any data out there for a great many of the bodies in the solar system, so basing it off a fictional one means you can make things up without being bound by realism and instead are free to make something far more interesting like the binary planets we've already seen in the KSP2 trailers. I'm currently playing through with JNSQ as the stock planets aren't all that difficult to get around especially with all the mods out there; but then again I've been playing for a while now and chose to try something more challenging. It was either that or waiting the 60 years or so of game time for a probe mission to fly to Neidon- I tried a few stock-scale planet packs too including OPM and XPC, but simply adding more planets doesn't always improve the game. I have no intention of ever installing RSS or any of the realism-related mods at any point in the future, and by the time I'm done with this JNSQ game KSP2 should be out and I'll be unreachable for a few weeks months. There might be a group of KSP players who like doing everything at real scale and with all the real challenges of doing a real space mission- fine, if you like that then go right ahead, but for the rest of us (and I'm pretty sure it's a significant majority) all the added complications of things like ullage, ignition limits and hypergolic vs cryogenic fuels are completely uninteresting; we don't want or need any of it. Likewise for procedural parts- if it works for you, fine, but don't try and force it on the rest of us. I'd far rather get KSP2 sooner and without any of that stuff than later with a load of features I turn off on day one and leave off forever. KSP's moddability makes it possible to do all the realistic things or none at all and KSP2 will have its own versions of them; don't try and force a rather niche set of requirements on the game because long-term players want it, when it will make things worse for most of the other players and new players in particular.

Went to do it and someone's beaten me to it

Is there any way to get just the spark effects and not the plasma trail? I think the sparks look great but the trail is overkill and I don't like it.

I've just landed my first rover on Duna in a JNSQ game and every time I switch to it, the game crashes after a minute or so. Strangely enough all the sound effects still play , the cursor looks like it's still working and I'm fairly sure I've managed to do quick saves with F5, but the game is completely frozen and has to be closed down and restarted. I suspect this may be the same error that was previously causing the game to crash a lot in KSP 1.8/1.8.1, but that was resolved by turning the terrain texture settings down to minimum. I've been using minimum terrain texture settings since but this is now happening all the time. I checked the player.log files and found a lot of errors like this: With w and h values gradually decreasing to 1, always the same 887a0005 error message. A quick check online suggests something is causing my graphics card to crash in some way resulting in the game freezing on screen, but still running in the background. Mod list from CKAN: Update- just tried a test: KSP 1.8.1 base game with terrain textures at low worked fine, added JNSQ with exactly the same settings and it froze on Duna every time and sometimes so quickly that my rover's wheels didn't even touch the ground after it loaded in. The terrain on Duna is like one of those strange fractal gifs, the pattern repeats as you zoom in or out. Definitely something in the JNSQ planet textures that is causing the crash to happen more often than the stock versions.

The more automation is added, the more humans are free to take on the more creative aspects, like deciding where to go, what to do, building rockets and so on. I for one don't want to have to fly every launch, transfer, approach, docking, landing etc. when the computer systems can do it better and more accurately than I ever could and I can use that time for something else like making food, phoning/video calling relatives, eating food, doing household chores, bathroom breaks, eating food etc. I've done those all manually (the launching/docking etc. that is!) and while I could do them manually again, I'll take the same approach I use in my day job as a software tester- do it manually first, then once you understand it, automate it. Modern passenger jets are almost entirely automated and the pilots are only really there to tell the computers what to do and make sure nothing goes wrong. Why should spacecraft, which go many times faster and orders of magnitude further, be any different? And of course, if you REALLY wanted to do things fully manually you'd do it all without SAS of any kind, without using maneuver nodes or even the map view- just point in what you think is the right direction, fire the engines for a while and then wait and see where you end up...

Are you asking for the real scale solar system in KSP2, or just souped-up graphics for the existing one? Adding the real solar system would be a disastrous mistake- it takes a ludicrous amount of delta-V to get into Earth orbit, enough to do a whole land and return expedition to Duna with fuel to spare in the stock solar system. A large percentage of people who first start playing KSP either never make it to orbiting Kerbin or get there and no further, so anything that raises the barrier of entry beyond that is a definite no. Besides which, it has been clearly stated that KSP2 has the same base Kerbol system as KSP does but with better graphics. You also have to realise that while super-shiny graphics packs like AVP or SVE might look spectacular on a high-spec gaming PC, they require much better hardware than the stock game does and so can't be used by a lot of people with lower-spec computers or consoles. KSP is an old game that has evolved greatly since its creation, which means that it can't use the most modern tools for graphics etc. as either the code isn't compatible, or the resulting game wouldn't be compatible with a lot of players' hardware. KSP2 is brand new from the ground up, so the minimum requirements can be set much higher and the graphics and performance can be far greater too. What I've seen so far in the KSP2 sneak peeks/dev blog videos looks promising in this respect. (Hopefully KSP2 can also use multiple processor cores instead of throwing all the physics calculations at a single core and leaving the rest twiddling their thumbs as the frame rate goes to 3FPS and game time runs at 1/3 speed; wouldn't that be nice...)

1) Is the space bar set for staging in the controls? It may have been reset, check your settings and make sure. 2) Where are you staging from? Space bar staging only works in flight mode and not map mode as far as I know, unless that got changed in v1.9(.1) 3) What game version are you using? Any mods installed? Does the space bar work sometimes, rarely or not at all? 4) Does your space bar work outside of KSP? If not it could be the key itself that's broken and not the game. Does it work for other things in KSP, like typing names for rockets?

I never got that far, the ground usually swallowed my rovers before they got close

I'm getting the following two error messages spammed in my KSP logs and the NRE seems to be causing the game to run chronically slowly- 1/3 speed, 3FPS even on a relatively small rocket. There isn't any obvious pattern to it and it's impossible to reproduce except by accident. I'm using KSP 1.8.1 with close to 100 mods installed, list below. I've tried searching for the hex code in the NRE within the game folders but had no luck. If anyone knows which mods use KSP.UI.Screens.Flight.TelemetryUpdate or QuickHullConvexHullLib that would help to narrow it down a bit.

Step 1- download and install MechJeb Step 2- select the ports you want to dock Step 3- activate docking autopilot Step 4- never manually dock anything ever again... Getting two ships to point at each other isn't so easy if you're docking a small craft to a huge space station as the station can't move nearly so easily. I've found that the target indicator can sometimes be in the wrong place leading to some strange directional changes at close range when both ships are set to point at each other, especially if the target port is not aligned with the target's centre of mass/root part- this is particularly bad for large stations.

(ssshhhh, don't tell anyone I said this) You could turn on infinite propellant in the cheats menu (alt+f12 on PC) and fly back up that way... You probably have some monopropellant left for the RCS thrusters, you can use that for a bit of extra thrust. Shut down some engines if you can, leaving the most efficient ones running- unless all 8 are the same type- because you don't need a huge amount of thrust to take off from Duna and that could save you some fuel. Duna's atmosphere is very thin so you want to turn and head east at fairly low altitude to maximise your orbital velocity without losing speed to air drag. Shed any unnecessary weight you can, retract the landing legs the moment you're airborne and if you have an orbiting ship time your launch to end up as close as possible to it, then EVA all 3 Kerbals and fly them all towards it at once- this will require a lot of frantic switching between them but should be feasible, and those EVA jetpacks have A LOT of delta-V in them. If one of your Kerbals is a scientist, stash all the science data in the command pod if possible and then grab it with the scientist when EVA-ing to bring it back with you.

I've had plenty of issues with rovers ending up underground after using Bon Voyage to drive them somewhere. The solution seems to be turning the terrain detail settings (not the graphics!) to the highest setting, which actually changes the shape of the terrain. Bon Voyage apparently only uses the high detail terrain maps so if your setting is lower, you can end up at a point where it's above ground on high detail, but below it on lower settings to the explosive detriment of your rovers.