darthgently

I saved Bill! I took the orbit and other info for the SQUAD monolith at KSC in persistent.sfs, nudged the numbers so he wouldn't materialize inside the monolith, put it into Bill's VESSEL record, restarted the game and he was just standing there with an end of movie Dave Bowman look on his face. He had seen things

I'm on 1.10.1 also and if you recall I had grab issues also, and now the SC 62 flight mode mess. How'm I going to save Bill? Y'all need to take this seriously. He is my most experienced engineer dangit.

Ah, ok, I was using the "Insert image URL" button like a good soldier. I'm going to be a bad soldier and do it your way then I had a Kerbal put on one SC 62 now here is what his inventory looks like and he is glitching like crazy https://photos.app.goo.gl/9GdouDdaqpPpzrFT9 In flight view, that white box is the kerb with his backpack repeatedly shooting past the camera view at a zillion mps, but in map view his orbit is fine. I can do a few things with him from hyperedit but none of them stop the visual flybys in flight mode and I'm not sure I'm controlling him at all really. But I was able to open his inventory and r-click->drop all the SC62s, all but one gave null object refs to console (linux) and one didn't and the zooming kerb no longer had a box on his back. But from a ship nearby I could not see the box on map view. I tried taking a ship near him but the game crashes when I do. The sfs file had multiple SC62 entries and I deleted out the ones that didn't have a PART with a matching uid elsewhere in the file but that didn't help. Bill Kerman is lost in space, well, not lost, but not found either He is zooming mostly radial out. I looked hard at the file and couldn't find a vector or quaternion that would seem to explain his visual appearance of movement in flight mode and map mode (and the camera view in flight mode) seem to reflect a normal orbit. I can change his orbit with hyperedit to minmus for example, but the result is the same, just another body orbited. I tried hyperedit landing him with similar results. I tried adjusting all aspects of his orbit separately hoping that something would trigger an overwrite of the bad data but nada-nojoy Apologies for phone vid but its all I got on linux for now https://photos.app.goo.gl/xexHVBRQGxLPfJnm7 I hyperedited him to Kerbin orbit and apparently hyperedit only alters the rails orbit, in the logs, when I had him drop the SC62, it immediately went into a NaN/infinite numbered solar orbit. So I think Bill is also in a similar NaN orbit while flying him from the tracking station just takes me to his rails orbit and him flying past is exactly that, him flying past. It is interesting that no matter where I put him, his infinite orbit still passes through the rails point in the orbit that hyperedit sends him to Here is a scrap of KSP.log ... Drop item (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [Part:kerbalEVAFuture (id=F1256976200)#Module:18] Update config node of the equipped part: [Part:KIS.Container1 (id=F646447281)] (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [FlightGlobals]: ProtoPartSnapShot persistentId changed from 3351607808 to 1702842899. Vessel persistentId 3489096177 (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) WORKAROUND! Temporarily disabling the EVA type of vessel [Vessel:kerbalEVAFuture] (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) Create lone part vessel for [Part:KIS.Container1 (id=F646447281)] (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [TweakScale] WARNING: TweakScale was externally deactivated on module on part [KIS.Container1] SC-62 Portable Container (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) 8/23/2020 8:38:27 PM,kOS-IRWrapper,Attempting to Grab IR Types... (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [FlightIntegrator]: Reloaded drag cube for zeroed cube root part KIS.Container1 on vessel SC-62 Portable Container (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) Part [Part:KIS.Container1 (id=F646447281)] is in state IDLE (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) Packing SC-62 Portable Container for orbit (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) ObT : NaN M : NaN E : NaN V : NaN Radius: NaN vel: [NaN, NaN, NaN] AN: [-2.70480345343493E-08, 1.68703901404221E-08, 0] period: Infinity (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [OrbitDriver Warning!]: SC-62 Portable Container had a NaN Orbit and was removed. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) SC-62 Portable Container Unloaded (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [OrbitDriver]: On-Rails SOI Transition from Kerbin to Sun. Transition UT Range: 65463190.577 - 65463190.597. Transition UT: 65463190.597. Iterations: 24.

How does one put a link to google photo or drive here? When I try to post the shareable link the popup won't take it.

Ok, the gray hand happened again, but not as severe, it was very brief. Kerb definitely had the drill equipped, but this time I saw a quick flash of the message about "need to have a tool equipped", the I tried again and it worked fine. So there is some slack in KSP or other code about whether the tool is equipped or not. I'm having a more major issue with a corrupted sfs file right now I'm dealing with but if I get more info on the above I'll get it to you. I'm running a user space memory checker also and will run another more extensive one on reboot. I get quite a few memory violations of protected memory, which is not supposed to happen. They don't happen in Blender or Gimp or anything else, only KSP. I've tried every version from 1.8.1 to 1.10.1. Same issue. At this point I'm hoping it is a hardware problem as that is something I can 100% address while the software issues are beyond my reach mostly and in others hands

An incorrect assumption. I'm on Debian buster. Unity uploads a crash report every time, I fail to see a reason why human manual reporting of this stuff is even necessary. The reports go to some server no one ever looks at probably. There are so many different possible combinations of KSP and mods that automating the bug report process and automating a statistical correlational analysis of the combinations of KSP versions and mods in the reports is the way to go. The result would be KSP and mod developers getting very accurate and timely reports if their part of the code is involved in a tangle and players would get to play the game they paid for more. The data is there and being collected. But I don't see the evidence of it being mined effectively. All this technology and all the automated debug data goes to some dark hole apparently, because when it comes time to track down a bug on the user end they are expected to spend an hour or so of their time taking screenshots, videos, gathering and posting logs and filling out issue reports on github etc. Ironic. I financially support quite a few youtube channels, charities, and other people or organizations who I don't have to pay, but I feel that helping them makes a difference. When it comes to corporations basically using unpaid outside "community" mod developers and uncompensated customer time to substitute for innovation and real debugging it annoys me. I'd financially support more community developers if I felt it would make a difference in the outcome with regards to product stability and enjoyment. But I don't think it does in many cases. It is like giving a battered person cab fare to go home to their abusive spouse. Doesn't solve a thing. The model is broken

Not really set up for video and it doesn't happen very predictably. I think it was more of a UI lag issue where the hand icon turning green when placed over an object was just getting very delayed; like to infinity sometimes. I have boatloads of ram but dangling pointers and memory leaks will defeat any amount of ram eventually

A question for the RCS Build Aid community. There is one aspect of RCS balancing that defies my understanding so far. When balancing yaw/pitch attitude on a well balanced craft (wet/dry/avg COM line up), I still (apparently) get a thrust in some translational direction sometimes from equally spaced attitude only thrusters (I separate out my yaw/pitch thrusters on the ends and put another dedicated set for roll/translate at COM). Or maybe I'm not reading RCSBA correctly. What does the "thrust" value and the green vector arrow from COM mean when adjusting for pitch/yaw? Nevermind, I had a hidden thruster that got buried/clipped into a procedural tank when I increased its diameter. <facepalm>

Another question, when an engineer goes to grab something and the "hand" icon over the item is gray instead of green what does it mean? The grab fails but neither to "too far" nor "too heavy" icons or messages show, the hand icon is just gray instead of green. After awhile of trying I was able to grab the item with nothing changing in the situation but time passing. The same item he couldn't grab he suddenly got a green hand instead of gray and could grab it from the same spot the kerb had been standing in with the same item in the same place. On 1.10.1. Not sure if it is a bug, or some context I'm not getting. Thanks for the mod! I love it, and thanks for any clue on this

Looking at it from the outside, it appears like procedural parts are recomputed even during flight to a large degree. I wonder if there is a way to make tmp cfg files for installed parts so once installed they are no different than a stock part other than dimensions and perhaps lessen cpu load. The tmp files would be associated with .sfs and .craft files and when no references remained to them they could be deleted. If I'm way off base about them causing a cpu load more than other parts, well, I'm guessing from some log entries, but forgive me for blackboxing the situation as I see so many log entries related to procedural parts during unpacking of ships and such, but see no such verbosity with regards to normal parts

What a great idea for a mod. I'm deep into a 1.10.1 career game now; is this stable enough for that version?

Quick question, if you want a kerbal to simply drop something he has grabbed without hitting escape how does one do it? The top line in the screen popup reads "Drop (bottom)". I tried the down arrow key, I tried dragging it to the bottom of the screen, then ran out of ideas. My kerb is in orbit trying to clear out some parts from a hulk to get to what I need and there is no place within the kerb's reach where he can attach the unneeded part, it is a node attach only part

Quick question, if you want a kerbal to simply drop something he has grabbed without hitting escape how does one do it? The top line in the screen popup reads "Drop (bottom)". I tried the down arrow key, I tried dragging it to the bottom of the screen, then ran out of ideas

When I'm in the editor I get a lot of this in the logs coincident with ksp hanging for a minute or more sometimes. It spams the log the entire time the freeze is occurring [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:9581 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-3618788655 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [edit] I'm I clicked on the VAB with no build in progress, it should be empty. I have no mods that autoload last ship or anything and it just freezes and this is what my log looks like: (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:28643 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:21916 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:21916 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:21738 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:21738 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:9581 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:9581 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:1 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. (Filename: ./Runtime/Export/Debug/Debug.bindings.h Line: 35) [PartSet]: Failed to add Resource -1154601244 to Simulation PartSet:1 as corresponding Part Procedural Liquid Tank-289105523 SimulationResource was not found. .... over and over

Patch works great, I took the liberty of toning down the visuals for my version by adjusting the emissions down 1/2. I might bump them up a little bit as I think I went too far. Thanks for all you do!

I'm attempting to find the right forum for a SpaceY V1 Vernier Thruster issue. I use them all the time, and the performance and visual effects are fantastic. Unfortunately, the visual effect comes from the opposing thruster, not the one that is firing, which looks crazy, and over the top fantastic. Is there a better forum? I couldn't find another SpaceY forum on this site in about a minute of searching. If this is the right place, has anyone else had this issue?

I completely rely on SR. I should probably adjust its generosity down with regards to how much it pays back, but I keep putting that off for some reason, lol. Thanks for all the work! When I wait too long to switch from an upper stage that I manually flip around to burn it retrograde so it gets out of physics range for SR to capture sometimes I delay too long and find myself in atmosphere and can't switch away. Which is fine, I just deploy the grid fins, then eventually the chutes, and manually recover it stock. The grid fins make a *huge* impact on deceleration and am hoping at some point that installed grid fins figure into SR terminal velocity calculations. As it is I have to put way more parachute on than required which really cuts into my DV, but I have to leave the grid fins on just in case I ride it down. Because they are very cool I've used FMRS and liked it overall for simple craft, launches, and missions, but I find myself getting lost in the "parallel realities" when I'm combining contracts, juggling multiple flights, etc. and about 1/3rd of the time click the wrong button and end up in the wrong alternate universe; and Kerbals die. <sniff> Of all the mods out there, SR is, by far, the most straightforward one with such a high impact on game enjoyment, thank you!

First, thanks for maintaining these parts. Often with using the procedural hollow truss adapter below a stage with an engine I end up with a gap at the top of the fairings that I can't get rid of and it seems to affect the stability of the fairings (falling off on the launch pad prior to launch etc). Other times the fairings do fine, unless I make them too long (trying to get rid of the gap) and they hang up on the next stage up. Clearly I am missing something in my understanding on how to use these as others don't appear to have this issue. A clue, a clue, my kingdom for a clue! [edit] as usual, after asking publicly it somehow engages another part of my brain and I'm starting to maybe see through some of this. Is the fact that I'm trying to use this part like an engine shroud (for situations where a normal shroud isn't working) the heart of this? The fairing seems to be stopping roughly at the top of the engine leaving a gap to the tank above. So what *is* the general solution for engines that don't have shrouds or the shrouds that are designed for them are junk?

Exactly. I'd like to call a polar scanning satellite something other than a "relay". And just because I like some station parts on a larger ship doesn't make it a "station" (the word deriving from static, as in staying in one area). Then, to make things worse, and ship that docks with that "station" ship gets its root part reassigned to the part that docked. Because "stations" have that kind of awesome power

Your words not mine. Flying ships and stablishing bases is the point of KSP to me. Different strokes for different folks, have fun

I get that, but I've drawn the line at KAS/KIS and some mining related stuff. The mods really bog a system down after awhile. Games are about working within limitations, ELP deflates the fun a bit for me by taking away a key limitation that makes KSP fun for me. ELP solves problems that are the point of the game for the player to solve. For me it crosses the line just enough to start sucking the fun out of the game. I have no doubt the creator(s) of it took great joy creating it and had some fun in between the sweat and tears, but I feel it comes at the expense of having solved issues that many others want to solve themselves

I think I figured out why I think this is a good idea and others can't figure it. I use Kerbal Attachment System so engineers can fix/build a lot of stuff outside the VAB, but I don't run Extraplanetary Launchpads so I can't just build rockets anywhere. I have, however, had kerbals replace parts on stuff in orbit that were scavenged (usually from a nearby working ship that had extras). A good example is moving parachutes from a zero fuel upper stage (that normally deorbits so Stage Recovery can handle it; I used all the fuel circularizing and forgot to leave any to deorbit the upper stage and just left it up there). Anyway, when I ended up with less room on my ship during a contract rescue (because the VAB put extra castaway kerbs on that I didn't notice before launching) the solution was to put parachutes from the debris onto the rescue contract Command Capsule and nudge it into a deorbit. Everyone survived. But the rescuee rode back in the rescue ship and one of the engineers rode the debris and chutes down because it seemed like the thing to do. Got paid for the Command Capsule too. So it was 2 rendezvous instead of one, the first to go get the chutes

Yes, currently I rename stuff that might come in handy in orbit somewhere so I don't accidentally delete it as debris. But the filters in the map view, not just the TC, filter by specific categories. I would like a category just like "ships", "debris", probes", "bases", but for stuff that KSP calls debris, but I don't want to mistake for debris. Why does this seem so complicated? A lot of off the wall push back here on a fairly straightforward UI suggestion. How about the general ability to add custom categories? It is a matter of being in map view and wanting to find something in the noise and being able to click a button to filter out the irrelevant, not looking at the name I gave everything after going to the TC etc

No, that is not the idea. The player would tag it as salvage worthy. You can change the categorization by selecting the object in the list in Tracking Center, the clicking on the "i" panel down in the menus, then doubleclicking on the name of the object. You can edit the name and you can re-categorize it to one of the stock categories. I'm merely suggesting adding another category the player could choose. No automation. More clear? Sorry if I wasn't The player decides, not the game. Currently I change the name of the object in TC, but I want to be able to filter it in and out like the other categories. Jeez guys, think I wouldn't want automated anything. I just want to be able to assign it as salvage myself and filter it in and out as needed. I launched a rocket to replace some solar panels that Jeb flew through on a sat, then later when going through debris there was a piece of failed rocket with panels on it. Could have save some time to just rendezvous a ship that was already up there and grab it. I hadn't deleted it because long ago I thought, that might be useful sometime, then forgot about it. I want to tag it and see it when I filter by 'salvage'

Just as we can tag tracked objects as ships, debris, probes, etc., how about adding "Salvage Target" or just "Salvageable"? That way we can still filter out debris from the map without passing up that full fuel tank the kraken had mercy upon