Chris_The_Crafter

So I've just noticed that sometimes one axis, usually pitch, will be reversed. Currently, we can only invert all inputs in the parts manager, which won't do if only 1 or 2 deflections are reversed. I've had to resort to splitting elevons into 2 wing pieces, one that only does roll, and an inverted one that only does pitch, for example. This results in weaker output, higher part count. wings that are even more fragile than they normally are, and an increase in weight since our procedural wings do not have procedural mass. There's a lot in need of fixing here.

I agree, this kind of stuff would be useful. In particular, in the VAB, we should see the control surfaces deploy when we deploy them in the parts manager, that way, we could ensure they were deploying in the correct direction, it worked exactly like this in KSP1. As for the RCS, something with similar information to the KSP1 mod "RCS build aid" would be quite useful, especially if complete with wet/dry mass indicators.

This is after the first patch: I've been having the same problem, though it has been happening when I launch something. If they spawn, these home screen crafts will keep spawning even next to a craft in motion, and will eventually collide with it. Here are some pics of one spawning until it collides with a freshly launched rocket, ripping off an engine: https://imgur.com/gallery/Yd84JFz My pc: OS: Windows 10 Home, version 22H2 CPU: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400F 2.50 GHz GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6600 RAM: 16GB KSP Version: I have the first patch Mods: none

I have been having similar bugs with decouplers. Here's one in which I have a lander with a coupling plate/decoulder/heatshield and my landing legs are inside the shroud made by the coupling plate/decoupler. Ignore the parachutes, that's a different bug. When I fire the decoupler to drop the heat shield and shroud to expose the landing legs, the camera breaks and seems to be following the center of mass between the vessel and the parts I just decoupled. I also seem to lose all control, followed by the sudden destruction of my vehicle. Here are the pics: https://imgur.com/gallery/AthSmU5 My pc: OS: Windows 10 Home, version 22H2 CPU: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400F 2.50 GHz GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6600 RAM: 16GB KSP Version: I have the first patch Mods: none

In KSP1, the game automatically switched to the correct symmetry if you tried to place parts with symmetry onto other parts that were already in a symmetry pattern. In KSP2, the game does not currently "force you" into the same symmetry pattern as the existing part when you try to place a new part on it, resulting in what you have in the 3rd picture. There are 2 easy workarounds: build a collection of parts with symmetry by first building just one, building on that, and then copying its root and re-placing it in a symmetry pattern where you actually want it, or: place the first symmetrical parts, then when you want to add to them, you do the extra step of of switching to the same pattern as the first symmetrical part, meaning that if you want to put mirrored landing gear on a set of mirrored wings, you have to switch to mirror symmetry yourself, the game currently doesn't do it for you automatically. As for the bicoupler, the devs know about that and say they plan to fix it, but it's a convenience feature, not an actual problem, so for now, put 1 engine on, copy it to the other node to simulate the craft properly, set up your action groups and part settings for just one of the engines, delete the other, then copy the original engine to the other node again. That's also how you deal with the tediousness of the parts manager and action group manger right now, set up just one part in the managers, then copy and symmetry it to the craft.

I've noticed that the mk2 fuel tanks seem extremely under capacity. Assuming the relative sizes between parts has carried over from KSP1, which looks to be the case, then a mk2 tank has slightly more than double the internal volume of a 1.25m tank of the same length. However, the current mk2 fuselage tanks have the same fuel capacity (and dry mass) as the same length 1.25m tank. And the mk2 to 1.25m adapters have 3/4 the capacity of the same length 1.25m tank despite having much more volume, comfortably above 50% more volume than the 1.25m tank. For comparison, the 1.25m tank has 2T of fuel, the .625m to 1.25m adapter has 1.2T of fuel (which is spot-on according to my math), but the1.25 to mk2 adapter has only 1.5T of fuel, barely more than the next size down in adapters. Then there's the mk2 to 2.5m adapter, which is a bit harder to calculate, but clipping 1.25m tanks into it suggests it may also be at half capacity. I'm not quite sure what to make of the mk2 to mk3 adapter yet, since it is even trickier to measure and that might belong in a discussion on how underfilled the mk3 tanks are, but the mk2 to mk3 adapter definitely seems more underfilled than the rest of the mk3 tanks. This is why this looks like a bug to me, because it looks like being at half capacity afflicts the whole mk2 parts family. This has the effect of making mk2 stuff behave really draggy because they have more surface area and volume, but less fuel and mass than the same length of 1.25m tanks, and more drag, less fuel, and less mass are a perfect combo for a poorly performing plane that must be built larger than it has any right to be. This was a problem in KSP1, but players lived with it because the adapters wasn't quite as bad as in KSP2 is at the moment, mk2 stuff looks cool, 1.25m tanks could be added to make up the bulk of the functionality of the craft, and because mk2 parts had no competition in KSP1. But in KSP2, the drag and fuel capacity of the mk2 parts is a big deal, since mk2 stuff now has to compete with 2.5m planes due to the new 2.5m cargo bays. I could understand if the devs decided that the mk2 parts shouldn't be filled to their full geometric volume because they are a more complicated shape for a fuel tank, will have higher heat tolerance, and have some body lift, luckily 1.8x or 1.6x the current values for dry mass and fuel would result in nice round numbers. I'd like to see at least 1.8x, but the parts will still be semi-usable with 1.6x their current values. Side note: mk2 parts were really draggy in ksp1 yet had less than 1/3 the body lift that their horizontal area suggested when measured, seems like it had something to do with both the large but lightweight mk2 fuel tanks creating lots of drag and generating extra drag from the lifting surface they had to simulate body lift, I'm not sure if that's been changed for KSP2, but in the end, the aerodynamics will need to be fair for these parts to compete against planes made from cylindrical tanks and cargo bays. Anyway, devs, please fix the mk2 part fuel levels (and dry mass), I think it's important this be done soon, before players get too used to building with the bugged fuel tanks.

I agree, this is something we badly need. Something like the m0d "rcs build aid" from KSP1 would be a great feature, but For now, I'd settle for adding a dry center of mass indicator to stock KSP2.

Part of the problem is that mk2 craft are really draggy in general, because mk2 tanks have the same fuel capacity or less than 1.25m tanks of the same length, but have much more surface area and volume and therefore behave very draggy themselves. In ksp1, they also generated drag from both their size/shape and their lifting surface, I don't know if the devs have changed that for ksp2 yet, but bottom line, mk2 stuff severely underperforms in ksp2 at the time I'm writing this. And with the new cylindrical cargo bays in all sizes, mk2 stuff now has direct competition from 2.5m planes, which have about 4x the fuel relative to their length and can be made much simpler. Mk2 planes are just for the cool factor at the moment, and best avoided for functionality right now, but now that they have something to compete with, hopefully the devs will give the mk2 parts the fixes they never got in KSP1, (mainly doubling the dry mass, fuel, and lifting surface and fixing the drag). and if it's a mk1 spacecraft you want to launch, you could try stuffing it into a mk2 cargo bay if you really want to keep the mk2 launch vehicle.

theJesuit, it's not just in your head, those are the actual designations (somewhere) for those part diameter sizes in ksp1. I am also not a fan of the change and think the devs should have kept the existing system and that they should quickly change the size wording in ksp2 to match. This has also made some players nervous because it suggests that there will be no size 1.5/1.875m/medium parts released later, which is a turn-off for a lot of players. I liked the 1.875m size for a lot of reasons. Also, we have some 1.875m parts now just like ksp1 did, things like the mk1 lander can and one of the probe cores, the hex2 I think, they are clearly too big to put in-line with 1.25m parts, but fit much better with 1.875m parts, the heat shield in particular, though I can understand the devs not wanting us to have a 1.875m heat shield for the time being to prevent us from abusing the mk1 lander can.

I've also had problems with action groups after the first patch. So far "toggle deploy" and "toggle roll/pitch/yaw" on control surfaces don't work and "toggle motor" and "toggle steering" don't work for wheels. These were all on some kind of symmetry. I tried reverting and loading and checked that the action groups were set up right. No luck. Other action groups which had been set up at the same time still worked. My pc: OS: Windows 10 Home, version 22H2 CPU: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400F 2.50 GHz GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6600 RAM: 16GB Mods: none

So I planned a maneuver to lower my orbit from minmus to mun, and the trajectory it had me take to escape minmus seemed fishy, but it showed I would get a mun intercept for it, so i gave it a try. instead, I got sent on a kerbin escape trajectory that didn't lower my orbit anywhere, but only showed this after I left minmus' SOI. I went back to replicate the problem and got basicly the same result. This is all after the first patch. https://imgur.com/gallery/fvvYX7U My pc: OS: Windows 10 Home, version 22H2 CPU: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400F 2.50 GHz GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6600 RAM: 16GB Mods: none

Although I think this is a common problem, I can't find an existing thread for it so here goes: My missions are frequently ruined by parts falling off my craft for seemingly no reason. It seems to happen more often with spaceplanes, and mainly when they are in space, just coasting along. Loading a save, even a previous save, often doesn't get the parts back. The crafts behave normally in space after losing these parts, aside from losing the functionality of these parts, but after losing some canards to this bug, the craft became less aerodynamically stable instead of more stable/too stable, even with all the remaining fuels pumped forward. my pc specs: OS: Windows 10 Home, version 22H2 CPU: 12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-12400F 2.50 GHz GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6600 RAM: 16GB Some pics of the problems: https://imgur.com/gallery/M8aMNeO https://imgur.com/gallery/6AUk85o