sfjuocekr

If you look at the first example "KSC Landing Screen – 11 FPS", the given time spend rendering was 35.83ms, in an ideal world that would equate to 28 FPS. The logic that runs on the CPU in this situation spend about 55ms instead, so in the given example the GPU was not the problem. The same is true for the other example. This is just plain wrong, because it essentially runs the game at a lower resolution and evidently from the data shown... running the game in a lower resolution does not solve any of these problems.

Thanks, though for some reason... the image does not work for me

I have flown "simple" rockets like this for over a decade, this is not a large rocket at all and I have in-fact flown much more elaborate contraptions that do not suffer from this performance impact. Going from 60 to <5 by just turning engines from zero to >1. So this is why I came here, this type of rocket is what I usually build and could hopefully be used to profile this performance regression. I can also supply a simpler version, but the result is the same. Trust me, I tried with and without.

I uploaded the image to my own server, the "insert image from URL" button to the lower right will not take it. This is not a large ship, I make the same design from smaller parts and the result is the same. It was also mentioned that the performance regression caused by multiple engines on a single source was to be expected, basically all my rockets are of this design.

This is the title of the ship and this is what it claims to achieve as well. I play KSP2 on a 5800X3D, 3080FE and 64Gb of RAM yet this ship manages to crumble KSP2! This is my usual rocket design that -usually- works just fine, you launch it, tilt it just a tad, turn on SAS and make it follow prograde. It -should- more or less launch itself into a 100+ AP from where you can circularize. Is it efficient? Probably not, I just wanted to hand-in a possible less than performant situation for the development team. Download edit: I seem to have no clue how to add the damn image EDIT1001: I gave up, I have no clue how this image adding is supposed to work.

Ive got a weird issue, which sometimes plagued me in 0.15 too but now it comes up more and more. When I have a rocket with lots of stages, mainly SRB\'s, it screws up staging. It just activates all stages and makes the rocket explode. Ill upload an example craft when I get back home. The issue is caused by MechJeb, because it\'s a hit and miss if it works and when I launch the rocket manually it always works as intended. You can identify it going wrong by the fast clicking sound that comes off the rocket at launch.

I found it more or less impossible to do the turn 12 challenge. You would need a rocket that goes 2500m/s at apoapsis 65km on a 90 degrees course. Tried a lot of different designs climbing to 10km first then going north with 45 degrees, but I can\'t reach the speed needed for it to land on the northpole. Got awfully closeish (Canada region), but this was with steering the rocket after 1m30s up until 3m in flight. Ill just submit my 10km climb turn Booster Tech ===== Parachute Command Module ZO 2 Main SRB Decoupler SRB ===== Cost: 8700 ===== Decouple first and fire next booster stage at 23-24s.

Yea I wanted to sent in the last turn but was too late, DonLorenzo is a RL buddy of mine Right now Im babysitting two kids and struggling with the contract challenge, you only pay entry fee and then the parts are free.

The bomb needs to be updated to use 0.6 parts btw

Fried too