smunisto

Sometimes I wonder if people even read other posts before they quote a chosen one. It has been already mentioned multiple times in the past 40 posts that this is a known KSP issue and it happens only when the shrinking tank is the root part of your craft. Either don't use such parts as root or wait for a fix, as Winston and Kick already mentioned.

A Kerbal is roughly 1/3 the size of a human, if you are basing your calculations on that Kobymaru.

Interestingly enough when I launched the game after I posted - it worked normally... I wonder if this queer behaviour has something to do with the random game crashes I am experiencing too. They don't seem to be related to a mod, but then again, if ARP is playing up... I'm at work, and can't present you with a craft file, unfortunately.

Same thing here. x64. Output log here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vznkrb3qyosuke7/output_log%20%284%29.txt

KW Rocketry crashes my game too. At first after the update - the craft I had in orbit got terribly bugged - I lost all staging and engines control and between quicksave reloads I would get the engine to actually appear with a fairing on it or with its animation active - like it's firing. I decided this save is as good as dead and since it's not very far ahead I deleted it and started a new one. Now it doesn't get past the scene switching from VAB to Launchpad. Space center to VAB and SPH works fine, but the moment I click Launch it crashes. Here's an output log.

Decouplers in KSP x64 have no decoupling force. If this is your issue, you may try Sarbian's Fixed Decoupler for x64

I really don't understand people's problem with this little button. OK, it is not integrated in some toolbar. Big deal. How much time do you spend on the space center screen? 1 min for every hour and a half playtime? I don't mind it and to be honest I prefer if Stupid_Chris has more time to debug, rather than be forced to respond to pointless discussions about his own mod's design choices. In the end the bold part in my previous sentence implies that the author has the final say on the design choices he makes. If you don't like something about a mod and you were able to install it - you should be just as able to uninstall it and stop using it. I don't see the point in wasting 2 pages for a discussion about a 12x12 px button, which by no means interrupts your gameplay, even though the mod author responded firmly to the first post regarding it. Sorry for the rant, but pointless stuff like this made the mods lock the B9 thread. Please stick to discussing bugs with Chris, I am sure he has more than enough work on those.

Thanks for the reply. However if by your last sentence you mean the new COM bug was introduced with 1.2.1, I will stick with stock chutes for now

If he is running x64 there is no longer such thing as memory limit. Not a sensibly reachable one by KSP anyways.

So how do you go about uninstalling the mod? I have noticed duplicate entries in the engine tweakables, wondered if HotRockets has to do something with it. I wish to uninstall it until it's fixed, but your posts about it saving and messing craft even after being uninstalled worries me. Does it apply only to launched and saved craft? Or do I need to restart my whole savegame, no matter that I have no craft in flight?

I believe this is the same bug as mine. As Stupid_Chris mentioned in his reply - if you updated RealChutes to 1.2.1 mid-career(i.e. you did not update to 1.2.1 and after this you started a new career), you will need to start over a new save for this to be fixed.

Thanks Chris, I don't remember if I made the whole program using 1.2.1, probably not. Is it ok if I install it AFTER I have started and already have craft with stock chutes(I use the MM cfgs for them too)? I am afraid to do it now, maybe it will break with the same bug again?

Nope. For everything you do with chutes - you need to put enough of them to correspond to the part mass. The author of the mod is using a formula, to calculate the mass of the part versus the parachutes. If you have a sensible suggestion for rebalancing this ratio - then bring it forward. 1 chute for an empty orange tank + engine is not enough and will never be a reasonable option. Try putting 1 MK16 on your 2m ship and let it land. I guarantee you will not get any funds back

Stupid_Chris, something seems to happen with the latest version of RealChute. I thought it's EVE, because it almost always happened when I passed the cloud layers, but after looking at the log I am not sure. Liftoff, and at the moment I pass the cloud layer the camera loses focus and the Debug window is spammed with NRE's. This is the log itself: https://www.dropbox.com/s/udd3umug744jtik/output_log%20%282%29.txt

I am having the same DRE exceptions like the users a few posts up. Difference is my KSP x64 outright crashes on these errors. I know Nathan is already dealing with the issue. Any news on an update? It's nighttime in the US, I know, just thought I'd ask.

Taranis, I am getting the same UI bug as Liowen. Here's my log file(by the way the game acts weirdly from time to time, so if you notice anything else that's strange - please do give me a poke ): https://www.dropbox.com/s/g78bn2vshyixs6t/output_log.txt

Hahaa! Amazing! Great job Athlonic!

'MURICA!!! Good job!

Problem is - is this true 64-bit, or they just updated the game, without changing the unity version? Will we be able to use more than 3 Gb RAM?

Additionally, having spoken about releasing different packs and being suggested the "Realistic" and "Sci-Fi" pack names, I would also like to suggest a balancing and realism pass on the part cfgs in the end of the development period. Let them be fun now, while people are testing them, but running 70m/s on an alien world is as stupid, as it is unrealistic. I understand that for each person the "Realism" boundaries are different. Some want 1:1 Kerbin:Earth, some want additional planets, some want wheels that can go over an obstacle at 50m/s and not budge. So maybe it is a good idea to have 2 different packs as out-of-the box default solutions. Then if people still don't like those they can fine tune the cfgs themselves. Fine tuning is better than doing it from scratch though. So a "Realistic" pack, where wheels behave more "naturally" when subjected to stress - less strength, less springs. And then a sci-fi cfg pack for all those who love to have racers on the Mun.

I hope when you are done with the modelling, you will look at the cfgs and balancing for these parts. The wheels seem way too strong for the things you put them through in the clips. You can't go 25m/s over obstacles and not break anything.

The Tu-144 always looked like a sad puppy when landed.

Problem with the texture reduction packs and ATM is that something gets a bit messed up with the shadowing of the parts. Some stuff(like the probe-sized orange-y-gold-y toroidal tank) loses all of its color properties and becomes matte, and also has messed up shadowing. I think for my new install I need to fix that .bat to include only the internals fixes by the texture reduction packs.

The mods work perfectly fine, on top of that they work perfectly fine. You are probably not doing something right. You need Blizzy's Toolbar to see Fuel Balancer. You also need it for LS, but it should show up with a warning the first time you fire up the game after installation too. You are not installing them correctly. Give us screenshots.

Gah, I've been expecting the truss inline sections for ages Seems like people's interest is making you develop more robotic arms parts though(in a space program game). It would be amazing if those inline sections could get some love too.