aimeilian

I was pointed to the Sigma Cartographer utility from the Kopernicus thread. But I can't figure out how to use (or even access) it. Searching the forums hasn't really turned up anything. Nor has plain old Google. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Thanks for the prompt replies! @OhioBob thanks for the tip on pseudo obliquity, I may try that. I did try deleting everything out of .../Kopernicus/Cache--same null result. Color me perplexed. EDIT: Oh, odd. I just noticed that Kopernicus did *not* create new .bins in its Cache folder, after opening and closing KSP again. I take it this is unexpected behavior? Thanks @adstriduum. I got the message re: axial tilt. Disappointing! Also, from the tutorials and stuff I've read, I'm under the impression you don't have to generate a separate ScaledVersion texture--in fact, I could swear I saw recommendations against that? If what you're saying is true, I'm more apt to try just making new textures/height maps/etc. from scratch. I already downgraded KSP to work with Kopernicus, and I'd rather not go further back in Kerbal history.

Greetings, fellow Kerbonauts! I've gotten back into this game after a long hiatus, and discovered Kopernicus just the other day. First off: thanks to @Thomas P., @KillAshley, @the-white-guardian, and everyone else who's poured in so much time and effort into this amazing mod! Being new to Kopernicus, understandably, I have a few questions. And this thread is so long it's difficult to take in all the information here, so apologies if these have been addressed and my search-fu is weak! 1. Is there a way to give celestial bodies obliquity (i.e. axial tilt)? If so, what does the full node structure of this look like? 2. I've so far been tinkering with the example Hodor, and am running into irregularity with how my modded version displays in the map mode. Basically: I tweaked the PSQ parameters to make it look more realistic. It looks OK from orbit. But when I open up the map (or tracker), the ScaledVersion looks like the default Gilly lump of cottage cheese. Hopefully screen shots will illustrate... (Attempting to hide spammy stuff behind a cut...) EDIT: P. S. one thing I tried, to no effect: delete the relevant .bin from Cache, just in case it was a cacheing problem. Nope.

A few other things to note in addition to the comments about radial decouplers: 1) ctrl (or cmd if you're on a Mac) Z will undo any kind of foul-up you make grabbing the wrong part Note that, at least in .22 (I haven't upgraded to .23 yet) it is just a little buggy in that A) it leaves an unattached copy of what you just ripped off (i.e. it doesn't "erase" what you accidentally moved), and occasionally it re-connects struts wrong... but I can't tell you how many times that key command has saved me a lot of fiddly work fixing things that I pulled apart by mistake! 2) Stability issues can be caused by a number of different things -- weight being placed asymmetrically, a rocket being too top- or bottom-heavy, turning too hard or going too fast, etc. There are some parts that can help with stability, all found under the Control tab in the VAB/SPH. Namely in-line stabilisers (reaction wheels) which act as big gyroscopes to help keep a craft going straight. Try experimenting with these to see if they help your rocket fly true. 3) Also note, the stabilisers and any aerodynamic control surfaces won't do you much good unless you turn on SAS. Think of SAS as cruise-control for your craft: it activates stabilisers and control surfaces automatically to keep your vehicle on the same trajectory, but manual control input (WASD) will override it and "set a new course." Turn on SAS by hitting "t" before launch; if your craft is built well it should help keep it going the right way. Hope this helps!

Thanks UbioZur! I've PMd you with links to Pastebin. While looking through the files I noticed a couple things: 1) There were a lot of exceptions posted in KSP.log regarding the parts not linking to a mesh. It looks like possibly there's a syntax problem with building the part links. The references use forward slashes except for the final bit before the mesh name, where it becomes a backslash. E.g. [WRN 12:39:05.793] WARNING [WeldingTool] .!Mesh value does not link to a mesh file /Users/Marion/Library/Application Support/Steam/SteamApps/common/Kerbal Space Program/GameData/Squad/Parts/Aero/standardNoseCone\model.mu Then there are a lot of NullReferenceExceptions in the log. 2) In the part.cfg itself the nodes do not seem to specify a mesh, e.g. MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/Aero/noseConeAdapter/mu position = 0,3.295468,0 scale = 1.25,1.25,1.25 rotation = 0,0,0 } 3) Also, the attachRules seem to have a couple extra points to them, e.g. attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0,0,0 ...but maybe this is something that has changed as KSP has evolved? (In most parts I see attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0 I don't know if any of these observations are relevant, but whether or not they are I hope that they help track down the problem! Thanks again!

Thanks, but when I say the part doesn't appear in the parts list... I mean it doesn't appear in the parts list No amount of switching part tabs, buildings, tech unlocking, sandboxing, or anything seems to make it appear. I've looked at the .cfgs for the parts I've tried making (as well as checked the ksp.log) and don't see anything immediately obviously wrong with them, but there's a chance I don't know what I should be looking for there. It's like the game forgets having loaded them once you get to one of the assembly buildings. FWIW I'm running KSP under Steam on a Mac.

I have been having the same problem as Whitecold, but the welded part does not appear in any category whether switching category tabs or restarting the game. (Strangely enough I'm trying the mod to help with stability issues in creating FAL/FTL craft...)

Sounds like you're on the right track and getting advice that makes sense to you to help improve -- all wonderful! One tiny little trick that I learned from some random tutorial (sorry I don't remember whose it was): before making your rendez-vous, rotate the craft with which you'll be docking so the port you want to dock with is pointing at exactly 90° to the plane of its orbit (i.e. along its normal or anti-normal). Why, do you ask? Because your target is going to retain its orientation as it orbits Kerbin (or whatever body it's orbiting). That means that, for example, if your target port is pointing prograde at one point of its orbit (say periapsis), it will be pointing RETROGRADE at the opposite point (say apoapsis). Which in turn means that, in the relative frame of your target and the craft you're manœuvering to dock with it, the docking port is spinning around in circles and you have to keep adjusting your vector and orientation to keep up with it. If your target docking port is pointing "straight up or down," then it's going to simply rotate about its axis rather than present a target you're chasing around. Admittedly, the effects of orientation are small, and as you level up your docking skills this step will become superfluous -- but just starting out, if there's a variable you can eliminate, eliminate it! It lets you focus on the basics and get them down first. Good luck and safe flying!

Welcome, Pfeifer! Also note (mainly for future reference when you start making multi-module craft with landers etc.) that symmetry works differently between the spaceplane hangar (SPH) and vertical assembly building (VAB). In the SPH your ONLY symmetry option is bilateral, i.e. two mirrored sides; in the VAB you ONLY have radial symmetry, i.e. parts get rotated around to balance out. Think of how a cat or dog is "built" (bilaterally symmetric) vs. a jellyfish or flower (radially symmetric).

Thanks for all the replies so far! @xoknight - very clever using I-beams to extend the landing struts' reach Now if only there were a way to retract them so the whole landing assembly lies (more or less) flush w/ the lander during transit... As I figured there seem to be as many ways to attach and deploy rovers as there are Kerbonauts But I'm seeing two major and one minor trend so far: 1) Mount rover(s) radially w/ decouplers and pop 'em off upon landing, relying on RCS/mini-engines/gravity to get them on their feet; 2) Mount a rover beneath the lander with one of the small docking ports and just drop it to the surface upon landing; 3) Mount a rover on TOP of the lander (or on an orbiter) w/ thrusters and/or a skycrane and/or a parachute and deploy before landing. Personally I'm inclined toward general approach #2 as the less finicky a deployment, the better, IMHO. Hadn't thought of the small docking port as the attachment mechanism as I'm leery of it bouncing around before I'm ready to drive it... EDIT: Forgot to mention, I'm running w/ FAR (the enhanced aerodynamics mod) and procedural fairings/wings installed, as I like the enhanced realism of the first and functionality of the second. This also influences where I want to place my rovers as having a GIANT payload fairing atop a rocket looks... uhm... wrong. Keep the ideas coming!

I've been playing KSP off and on since about 0.15 and finally got to update to 0.21 -- and of course the first thing I do is start playing around with rovers A couple things I've been struggling with, though, is actually getting rovers 1) onto a rocket for travel to another body, and 2) getting them OFF the rocket to explore where they've landed. e.g. my first attempts revolved around attaching a rover in-line under a lander (au Apollo), but invariably the fairings required end up taller than the landing struts can reach! So I'm scratching that approach and going to start working on a skycrane instead... In any case, so far I've yet to come up with an elegant solution for securing a rover for transport. I usually use the small separator, bolted at the top of a few cubic struts attached to the rover, which of course then remains attached to the rover and looking dorky So I'm curious to see how others approach rover/craft integration. I'm aware of the rover megathread, but this is a sub-question that's hard (for me, perhaps others) to glean information on from such a huge -- if wonderful -- pile of awesome

Funny, I was just running into this last night -- all the way down to Calsey Kerman meeting a dark, damp fate in Kerbal's subterranean ocean. Has anyone filed an actual bug report, or does Squad keep good tabs on threads like this?