Jason_25

I wish I could provide more info on this. On my newer fighter designs the landing gear does not finish the final animation of tilting the "bogey" gears down. This is not just an animation but has a noticable physical effect of lack of stability on the runway.

When giving normal actions to a large vehicle during launch Windows will pop up a dialog asking whether the user wants to wait for the program to respond. At no time should the game strain system resources in a way that causes Windows to detect that it is malfunctioning. Go back to the drawing board on this.

This has been a problem since the beginning where when mounting a vehicle to another one there is a high chance of one or both vehicles failing in some way. This adds yet another element to a long long long build checklist. A beautiful orbit was ruined today by this bug being discovered on a parasite fighter.

I had this happen on my first save loading on patch 2. Reloading an earlier save fixed it. It was an incredibly nasty bug using up memory, disk space, and even preempting the windows task manager!

With the power available to computers today the game needs much better accountability for part damage. I should know when the failure occured, where it occured, and what the stress forces involved were at a minimum. This information should never be unaccounted for or erased from the log in any way. Amen.

At launch natural perturbations in the rocket make the game think it is taking off and landing. This freezes the game up over and over during a critical time contributing to even more physics bugs.

More often that not the result of clicking the pause button is nothing or an immediate pause and unpause. Get somebody that knows what they are doing and run the game UI on another thread entirely.

Every time I have merged a vehicle the game has picked the wrong save name for it. Because the space station now has to be named after some trivial part attached to it?

If the user corrupts the save name in the save dialog it is not refreshed with the current name when the dialog is closed and reopened. It is easy to lose track of ship version numbers with this bug.

I am still seeing this on patch 2 on my star cruiser and the trainer jet for the star cruiser which is a smaller version of it. It can even happen during takeoff contributing to instability. No amount of tweaking can fix this with certain vehicles.

Still seeing all the parts manager bugs with Patch 2. I would like to add that parts manager opens randomly when moving around the vehicle not just with a right click. It should not be opening with the scroll wheel? It should not terminate the mission due to added physics bugs and awesome low fps contributing to what I call punishment protocol?

This is still a problem and may be getting worse with patch 2. I have to use explicit actions instead of toggles for most things now.

This looks to be fixed now but I did not see it in the change logs. Good job.

This looks to be partially fixed with the major bug of not showing kerbals when filled being fixed. Good job.

I am not even sure the people working on the game even know about Apollo 13. It is like when an error pops up on their iphone they just throw it away and buy a new one. No failures allowed. They are telling you what you built is a failure even though these are the people that made the utterly pathetic stock vehicles for the game. These are the people that pat themselves on the back for making a glorifed PS2 game. How about before berating me for what I built you guys actually make a vehicle that an 8 year old would find cool. Maybe actually go to school to learn how to program instead of looking up Youtube videos?

We all know about the thrust redirection that enabled the kraken drive because the redirection itself was being multiplied due to a bug. I noticed that wings interfere with the thrust from jet engines so I set wings intentionally behind an engine and "deployed" them so they would in theory direct engine thrust down. This does allow for slightly better takeoff and slower flight speeds but it is hardly noticeable. Putting a wing entirely vertical deployed or not behind the engine does not have the desired effect of directing thrust completely down. This may be because thrust is "escaping" to the sides and top but there is a cargo bay there which may or may not be able to contain the thrust in the game code. To test if exhaust gasses are escaping the sides and top I built a box of wings around the jet and the thrust continues to be mainly towards the rear. The exhaust plume is always perfectly straight toward the rear also. I would expect to see it deflect somewhat. It also looks like it basically burns a hole through the wing because you can see the light from the exhaust straight through it. The box would not need to be airtight to be effective because the pressure from that engine is going to find the easiest way out which is the large hole in the bottom. It is generally seen as bad engineering to have another engine for VTOL purposes than the main engine. To me it is almost as bad as adding front canards rather than rebuilding a wing. I have been building my lift systems lighter and lighter and transitioning more to STOVL than VTOL because I cannot afford the DV loss from large dedicated lift engines. On the other hand almost everything I build comes with some sort of vertical lift capability. I understand that redirecting lift comes with a power penalty which is what doomed the Rockwell XFV-12. But I have a feeling that we have not been given the correct tools to make something like this a possibility. That or the kraken drive fix was too aggressive in toning down redirection. In my mind there should be something like a 25 percent power loss from making a right angle turn not 90 percent. Either way is disappointing. Am I missing anything and if there really is a reliable way to point thrust please let me know.

Others have posted that the stuff from the main menu is appearing during their launch but I have only seen one other report than this one that it was actually crashing into stuff. I can add to that now because a day or two ago I noticed the creepy kerbal hanging out around my rocket at launch and then respawning near it again and again and it appears he did crash into my ship and destroy stuff. The mystery parts destruction of vehicles is partly due to the "ghost kerbals" actually crashing into your ship as you fly. *More X-files Music*.

Planes are faster at high altitude when launching vertically than when taking off from the runway. This happens when launching with launch clamps from the runway. I have not tested whether launch clamps themselves or the vertical nature of the "flight mode" as far as the game is concerned is to blame. I also have not tested if this happens when just launching vertically from the runway or also when launching vertically from a launch pad. What is clear is that the lift to drag ratio is noticeably different in both flight regimes. My test vehicle was seeing about .600 lift to drag and at high speed high altitude after vertical launch compared to about .450 at high speed high altitude after runway launch. I also noticed that aerodynamic changes are meaningless when launched from the runway. The same 950mps brick wall was being hit regardless of aero changes like the addition of nosecones. When launched vertically these changes are quite noticeable. The combination of aero modifications and the vertical launch caused the vehicle to hit about 1100mps instead of 950mps. I have tested with a totally different high speed vehicle with a different wing with similar results. I have ruled out any changes like speed or extra fuel from the vertical boost rockets and in fact this happens even with a vehicle that does not require boosters to lift off vertically. If this is confusing and inconsistent it is because I have scrambled myself with so much testing and retesting. This along with other design issues was driving me crazy for the past 2 days before I figured it out.

I think the engineer's report should get smarter and have more features. It would be nice if you have built a horizontal craft and it detects that you do not have international standard lighting placed such as red and green lighting on the wings. Perhaps your entire operation could be shut down if you launch too many unprofessional flights like this. It would be nice if it detects that the rear landing gear are too far back and there is insufficient force for rotation under 150 mps. It would be nice if it detects if the vehicle will suffer an immediate structural failure at launch. Get some NASA scientists on this if you have to but this feature alone would make the game 1000% better. I have thought of and forgotten many more additions to this report but these are the ones off the top of my head. edit: High altitude flip warning - detect when control needed is beyond authority at high altitude at estimated max speed. This is greatly needed for new players. VTOL warnings - 3 warnings needed. VTOL thrust imbalance side to side or front to back could be shown as a percentage and a red warning triggered over a certain amount. VTOL TWR being below 1 triggering a yellow warning. STOVL brake status showing whether vehicle will front flip with a brakes-on takeoff as main and VTOL are engaged at full thrust triggering a red warning. If so then a longer brakes-off takeoff must be executed. These warnings combined would reduce build times by around 90%.

For my drone bomber I added a "taxi" area for ferrying crew around. Unfortunately this does not show kerbals when filled and it seems to have no interior like the cockpits do.

For my drone bomber I noticed I needed to individually enable crossfeed for each small hardpoint in the VAB. There are other bugs related to crossfeed but I wanted to post this distinct bug as well.

I have a built a drone bomber with small hardpoints with fuel tanks attached and have enabled crossfeed in VAB. This still does not allow fuel to be used by the jet engine. I know this conflicts with the other bugs I have made on jet engines but that is just what I see with this creation. However choosing crossfeed on for any of the hardpoints immediately enables crossfeed for all.

If I attach a ship to another ship with the small hardpoint it seems to work fine at first. However upon loading into the game this attached ship will have partially disappeared. Also when loading back into the VAB these removed pieces are gone forever. The workaround is to make the probe core of the attached vehicle the assembly anchor for the entire structure. This may mean that "control from here" is needed to get control back to the main cockpit also.

When I use a vehicle that has no crew but only probe cores this vehicle is treated more like a rocket. Tapping g to actuate the gear has no effect. Also action groups are not working. The only workaround is to set a built in action group like lights to what you need and click that instead. This means no AI "Taxis" for crew unfortunately.

I noticed that jets will pull from the droptanks of my fighter no matter whether the crossfeed setting is on or off. Using a rocket causes the rocket to not pull from the droptanks unless the crossfeed setting is turned on. I have found no workaround.