jimmymcgoochie

I see an error for 'bluedog.Apollo.Subsatellite.Core', followed by a series of exceptions that seem to indicate that there's a part missing somewhere. Try removing this part from BDB and see if it works; if not, remove BDB entirely and check that it works without it, then redownload and reinstall BDB as you might have a bad download.

Why no MechJeb PVG?

Actually, I do. Quite a bit. Between playing various Sim Cities and the app edition of Transport Tycoon (which also features expanding towns with changing architectural styles as time goes on) and watching videos of others such as Cities Skylines, it’s very common to see large numbers of the same few buildings in the same town or city, with at best minor colour differences between them. You don’t have to look for them because they’re right there in front of you.

Who needs a fake pond when you can spawn a craft directly into the real ocean?

Try the Chatterer mod, it has some Kerbal-y voice clips that can be set to randomly play every now and again along with some beeps and electronic noises that do the same. There are a couple of extensions for it that add more voice clips, or swap to real voice clips from real space missions like Gemini, Soyuz and Apollo missions for those who prefer their KSP realism-flavoured.

A few things to think about- Do towns and cities change and grow over time? Having them stay exactly the same isn’t very interesting or realistic. Maybe these “boom events” for colonies etc. could also trigger a wave of city expansion or new buildings to replace some older ones in towns and cities across Kerbin? And/or different architectural styles as game time passes, old stone and brick buildings giving way to more modern glass and metal and then to ‘futuristic’ designs as time goes on. What about the collisions with buildings? Static features like the KSC and ground scatters/Breaking Ground features have to have collision meshes to make them solid when you hit them, but having that many solid objects inside physics range at once could be bad for performance even with KSP2’s promised improvements in the physics engine and related areas. How many buildings is enough? Just creating a dozen or so models and spamming them out might work if they’re small houses, which are often built in large numbers at the same time so use the same designs, or industrial/commercial buildings which share most of the same features (boxy exteriors, lots of plain brick and corrugated metal on the outside, etc.) but makes a city look obviously fake with rows of cut and paste office blocks and civic buildings. What about airports, roads and train tracks between towns/cities, ports? The other side of that argument is that adding too many models will just add more memory use without any real benefit to the whole “space” thing in the game’s title and that’s the main reason why I see cities on Kerbin as “nice, but nowhere near essential”. Some well-designed city lights to make the night side of Kerbin look like it’s inhabited like Earth would be enough for me; 2D “buildings” on top of the terrain just look bad close up.

Links don’t work? Did you install via Steam? If so, right click KSP in your Steam library, click Properties, click the ‘local files’ tab in the window that opens and then ‘verify integrity of local files’. You might just have a broken installation, it happens sometimes and verifying the files can often fix it.

No. Only moderators and other forum staff can delete posts.

It’s entirely possible but requires either a) a lot of delta-V or b) less delta-V but a lot of game time. Either you just burn normal/anti-normal at your ascending or descending node in solar orbit until you hit 90 degrees or you burn waaaaay out so your apoapsis is beyond Jool’s orbit, then burn normal/anti-normal at your ascending or descending node until you get to 90 degrees; gravity assists from various planets but especially Eve and Jool can make this route cheaper in terms of delta-V but it’ll take a long time to complete.

What you need is drag, lots of drag. Inflatable heat shields are great for that, they’re very big and also very heat resistant; stick a few of those on your asteroid grabber and position them so they’ll inflate into the airflow and add drag. Drogue chutes are another option as they can open earlier than main parachutes and slow you down a bit until the mains can open.

Just dropping a log file with no context isn't helpful. How does the game crash? What mods are you using? I see many in the logs but a mod list would be very helpful. The logs don't indicate that there was a crash, however there are some B9 part switch exceptions relating to OPT tanks so this might be a good place to start- check your versions are up to date and if they are, remove OPT and see if it works then.

We're going to need the logs to get to the bottom of this. Here's how to get them and what to do once you have them: KSP.log is easier to find as it's inside the KSP folder, but Player.log has more information in it. Get both if you can. This looks like a config error of some kind, but it doesn't list the part name on that error message so it's impossible to tell what's causing it without the logs.

We're going to need a bit more information than that- log files, game and mod versions and maybe some screenshots would all help. Here's how to get logs and what to do with them: Before I go any further- did you install KSP via Steam, and are you adding mods to that Steam-controlled copy of KSP? This is a big no-no and a common cause of weird bugs as Steam can sometimes interfere and cause files to get corrupted. Clear your mods, back up your save games then uninstall and reinstall KSP through Steam, then verify the file integrity to make sure everything is working; once you've done that, copy KSP out of steam/steamapps/common and put it somewhere else that Steam can't get to, then put your mods in that instead.

It's almost certainly not Kopernicus causing this. The first thing I saw when I opened your log file could be the key- you've added mods to the KSP instance that Steam controls. Don't do this, ever! Steam is notorious for meddling with stuff especially with mods in the mix. If it broke something inside Kopernicus then that could be the cause. Create a modpack in CKAN for easy mod reinstallation and back up your save games somewhere outside of Steam's folders (desktop will do), then completely uninstall KSP through Steam, reinstall it, disable cloud syncing then verify the game files- this will check all the files to make sure nothing has been corrupted and fix anything that has. Once that's done, copy KSP out of steam/steamapps/common and put that somewhere else, then add that instance to CKAN and reinstall your mods using the modpack. Add save game, boot up KSP and see if the problem persists. I see many, many exceptions in the log file but a few things stand out- Kopernicus Expansion causes a few early exceptions, double check you don't have that; and MiniAVC causes some errors too so try adding ZeroMiniAVC to disable that. You could also try uninstalling and reinstalling Kopernicus.

The hardest landing and ascent of the lot- Eve. Almost a hundred parts and a hundred tons is included in this mission just to get to Eve's surface and back. This is why I go to Eve first, to get rid of that big, heavy, high part count lump of stuff that hangs off the front of the ship. The design here is nearly identical to that used by Intrepidity, so unsurprisingly it worked perfectly even when I tried some more aggressive aerobraking to avoid the oceans. The one thing I didn't change, though, was the ladder positioning; spoiler alert, I should have changed that. The landing and flag planting took place in the dark. As is right and proper. It took a few attempts to get a landing that wasn't in the water or at really low altitude; this one was at about 2km ASL in the peaks. It was only after I sent Phoebe out to plant the flag and do some science that I realised the problem with the ladders- the lowest ladder is slightly too high for a Kerbal on the surface to jump up and grab. EVA construction solved that problem in a way that fortunately didn't cause any explosions and only one fall from a considerable height due to a misaligned ladder. That didn't stop Phoebe from climbing half of the ladders upside down, but I think that's just a minor bug with the way those ladders work. With no way for the lander's upper stage to get all the way back to Indefatigability on its own, I sent one of the nuclear-powered Ion Space Tugs down into a 100km circular orbit of Eve to catch the lander and tow it back to Indefatigability, or Gilly if the opportunity arose. Sadly I completely forgot to add a docking adapter so they can't actually dock to each other, meaning I'll have to send that one back and deploy another; the good news is that the Ion Space Tug worked well, its four Hall effect thrusters hustling it along with a comparatively huge 32kN in total. Had I done the Eve ascent first and then sent the IST down I would just roll back to the last save and do it again with the adapter attached, but I sent IST down and then did the ascent so that's not an option- I'm not doing that Eve ascent again any time soon! A few failed Eve ascents later and at last it all came together: There's enough fuel to do a bit of rendezvousing and docking, or quite possibly to do a landing on Gilly as the docking adapters now contain a small quantity of LF/Ox (a patch from Missing History turns the FL-A10 adapter into a fuel tank which I use regularly in other saves and have added here too) and the orbital velocity out there is ridiculously low- I could probably land the lander using RCS alone. Full album: https://imgur.com/a/RAU7Okc Flag count so far: 3.

It’s back!

@Wisemanyou say “proof of concept”, I say “new workhorse of my lunar fleet” . I fully intend to use that lander as soon as it’s built.

@king of nowhereI haven't gone all the way down yet, just ~400m/s of braking so far. My last attempt to land on Eve needed a lower orbit or the lander would cook itself, but I might be able to do something with one of my various Space Tugs to brake the lander down a bit more without wasting all that time bringing Indefatigability down with it. The problem that then arises is getting back out of Eve's gravity well with a very elliptical orbit, if the destination is in another direction. I had to deal with that to some extent with Intrepidity but with the much lower TWR I have now it would be a lot worse.

Indefatigability lives! Goodbye buggy Persistent Thrust, hello Better Time Warp to crank the physics warp speed up well beyond stock. This obviously has detrimental effects on ship integrity (read: bending in half, bits snapping off and general wobbliness) but a few tactical autostruts will hold the shakiest components in place and prevent the ship from flexing too much. Long burns are guaranteed, but running at 8x physics warp and full engine thrust it's a lot more manageable than Persistent Thrust ever was. It's goodbye to Kerbin... And hello Eve! It'll take 140m/s to capture into Eve's SOI, but 1400m/s to get to a low circular orbit due to the high gravity and correspondingly large SOI. A course correction between Kerbin and Eve fixed the poor accuracy of the final transfer burn and also provided an equatorial orbit around Eve, which is good for rendezvousing with the lander after landing but means I'll have to dodge the oceans again like with Intrepidity. A few burns to drop the apoapsis and some of the first ring of xenon tanks are nearly empty. I've shuffled fuel between them to dump six empty tanks, but when I tried to do so I accidentally removed one of the tanks with fuel still in it; when I reattached it, many explosions ensued. Note to self- don't reattach those Kerbalism gas canisters, EVER! Full album: https://imgur.com/a/68qcFU5 Flag count so far: 2

I've been using this little mod for a while now, it's always interesting to see what appears. Today I got a strange, slightly crinkly looking yellow planet and spent a good while trying to figure out what it was, before I realised- it was the sun (Kerbol)! That would explain the strange lighting effects on its surface too.

Unless you absolutely need them, try deleting the interior views for modded parts. A complex and detailed IVA can use up a decent chunk of memory when loaded and more when in flight so deleting them might help; it’s not entirely risk free of course but for mods with many crew parts and/or detailed IVAs (e.g. station parts expansion redux) the difference can be significant.

I’ve had that bug too, occasionally the EVA construction move/rotate widgets would appear in the sky for no reason and clip through the camera plane if I zoomed in or out. No harm done as far as I can tell.

I created a reusable Moon lander which is theoretically capable of making many trips from low Lunar orbit to the surface and back; precision not guaranteed due to a fairly low acceleration rate, but I already have a rover on the surface which can ferry crew from their lander(s) to the surface base and back. My current Moon lander, which the new one is based on, uses the Apollo-style two stage system with the descent stage staying behind on the surface (often as not because I used up every last drop of fuel for the landing), but this means I need a new lander each time which is very cost inefficient. A reusable lander and a fuel tanker probe to shuttle the propellants out to the orbiting space station around the Moon will make things much more sustainable (and cheaper!) for keeping this base occupied and doing science while the rover embarks on some medium-range expeditions to new biomes hunting for science. And yes, I did say Moon lander, not Mun- this is the real Moon we're talking about.

@ngdemusdid you try updating the driver for the integrated graphics card as for the OP? Huh, now that I've been looking through this thread I just realised that I'm having very similar symptoms to the OP- dedicated graphics VRAM is nearing the limit but shared VRAM is barely registering. Maybe I have the same issue and never realised? Edit- I've done a bit of internet sleuthing and it turns out you're supposed to get high dedicated GPU use- that's the big powerful GPU doing its thing; shared GPU memory is vastly slower so you don't want to be using that. 1.8 and later also added new higher definition terrain options so maybe turning that down will help reduce the VRAM use?

Yes, you can pick them up- just right click them then click "pick up". You can only do this if the Kerbal you are controlling has the room in their inventory- they need a space for it to go and the volume/mass for it to fit. If you pick it up when it's half way through an experiment, for example because you've levelled up a scientist and can get a faster data collection rate, it doesn't mean you'll get more than the maximum science cap- if the experiment produces 100 science in total and you've transmitted 40%, picking up and re-deploying will probably generate another 100% data but you'll only get another 60 science points for it. The data needs to be transmitted back to be received, so packing a deployed dish can be useful for more distant targets; it's fairly powerful, but if you're going further than Duna you'll probably need relays to boost the signal back to Kerbin. There's nothing to stop you from landing a probe beside the deployed science setup with a big relay dish though, just bear in mind that you still need an unblocked line of sight to Kerbin so there'll be times when you can't send data back- relays will fix that as they do for any other mission.