Tex_NL

Downloaded and installed into my test set-up. Tomorrow I'll test it under the exact same conditions as I did before. Good to see you've been able to reproduce the issue. I really hope you'll be able to find and fix it. In the mean time I re-installed ModPods into my career game and simply deleted the Mk3to4 service module. It's a part I probably won't use a lot anyway. I guess it must be something along those lines. I can't imagine what else could screw up unrelated parts.

I've ALWAYS preferred ScienceAlert over [x] Science. Very happy to see it brought up to date. Downloading now. Will install tomorrow. Edit: Well. I WANTED to download .... but the provided link points to https://spacedock.info/mod/1015 Which is EngineIgnitor. It should point to https://spacedock.info/mod/1690

And why would that be? Open the .cfg file and simply chance category = Engine to for example category = FuelTank. From then on it should be displayed among the fueltanks instead of the engines.

The Science junior materials bay is already uselessly large. Especially in an early career with small landers. And you're asking for an even larger version??? Much better would be a smaller version similar in size to the goo container.

Please search the forum. I've seen AT LEAST two or three threads mentioning this very same issue.

That's one BadS SSTO plane. The music sounds very familiar. It probably comes from a recent movie or TV series. I know I have heard that music before but I can't place it. Anybody?

And now for the results of my first round of testing. I've tried to be as methodical, scientific, unbiased and reproducible as possible. All flights have been launched from the VAB with the same 100% stock 2-stage rocket (see image below) and have all been controlled by MechJeb2 under the same conditions (also see image below). All flights have been flown three times to average out any inconsistencies in MechJeb. (There weren't any inconsistencies. All dV results were within 0.5 m/s) All flights started with the exact same fuel, weight, dV and TWR. The only mods involved in this test are MechJeb2-2.7.0.0, MechJeb Embedded Universal, ModuleManager.3.0.1 and ModularPods-1.0.9. The only chances between fights have been made to ModPods. The other mods all have stayed identical. Flight #1 started with a full ModPods install. Flight #2 had only the TDProps folder removed. Each consecutively had one more sub-folder removed until none was left. Changes to ModPods Average dV left/short over three flights. 1 Full ModPods -309m/s 2 ModPods -TDProps -309m/s 3 ModPods -TDProps -Decouplers -309m/s 4 ModPods -TDProps -Decouplers -Mk2to3 -309m/s 5 ModPods -TDProps -Decouplers -Mk2to3 -Mk3to4 162m/s 6 ModPods -TDProps -All Parts 162m/s 7 No ModPods 162m/s Flights 1 through 4 failed to circularize their orbit. Each of them had an average of 309m/s left on the manoeuvre node as the fuel ran out. Flights 5 through 7 managed to circularize their orbits and had an average 162m/s dV left according to MechJebs dV readout. The dV results change after ../GameData/ModPods/Parts/Mk3to4 was removed. Edit: As I had more free time as expected I continued my tests. I focussed my attention only on the three parts in the Mk3to4 folder. All tests were done under the same conditions as before except I skipped the triple tests since MechJeb has proven to be extremely consistent. Each test had a full ModPod install with only one part removed. Changes to ModPods dV left/short after flight. 8 Dfuel removed -309m/s 9 ScienceLab removed -309m/s 10 Service removed 162m/s It is indeed the Mk3to4 service module. And I snapped a few screenshot at key stages in the flight: Flight 9: To limit Q MechJeb has throttle back to roughly 50 to 55% while going 281,7m/s at 6370m. After this point MechJeb slowly throttled back up. Flight 9: MechJeb finally throttle back up to 100% immediately followed by stage separation. 751,5m/s at 17311m. Flight 10: MechJeb throttles back to 40 to 45% going 318,6m/s at 7776m. Flight10: Back at full throttle. 865,1m/s at 18466m. Flight10: Stage separation. 1005,7m/s at 20757m. As you can see there is a clear difference in drag where there should not be any.

It is not entirely impossible MechJeb is to blame. But I do think it is highly unlikely as both 'clean' and 'contaminated' flights have been controlled by MechJeb. I too have tried the simple 'SAS on and full throttle' approach with little to no difference in Ap.

I find it strange you are unable to reproduce it. But for now I am just glad you're taking this serious. The dV at launch in my test rocket has not changed for all my tests (21 in total. 3 flights for 7 different tests) so it can't be anything related to weight, thrust or ISP. I get the idea it has something to do with drag and is too subtle to notice without automation. During the flight MechJeb will throttle back to limit max Q. I still need to confirm it but I thought I noticed MechJeb throttling back more without Mk3to4 and therefore save fuel. Will keep you informed.

@TiktaalikDreaming I am currently still in preliminary testing but as things look right now I can confirm it is something in the ../GameData/ModPods/Parts/Mk3to4 folder. I started with a full install and consecutively removed sub-folders until I started noticing a difference. That difference came after removing Mk3to4. After this round of testing RL has to take priority. I'll post my findings and detailed reproduction steps later.

As far as I know this is correct. The older models could be fooled in recording a lower road speed with a few well place magnets. Quite possibly even stop them from recording at all. But if you get caught doing this the fines you'll face are not just through the roof. You could loose your license and perhaps even face jail time. In other words: DON'T!

Yep. That's how you recognize a true KSP addict.

THIS is why!

Not a mod. If your crew cabin is hot and your Kerbal goes on EVA he inherits that temperature. The cabin has a much higher tolerance than your Kerbal. The temperature gauge indicates your Kerbal (or part) is in danger of overheating. And an overheated Kerbal goes POOF.

I'm not sure when exactly but I'll look into it over the weekend.

First of all, as a trucker I can guarantee you it has NOTHING to do with the tachograph. Tachograph sensors are always mounted on the gearbox. Never on the wheels. Pretty sure I've identified your gizmo. It's called a 'central inflation system'. Check out this google search for more images. Trucks that go off-road sometimes partially deflate their tires to improve traction. Deflating and re-inflating your tires manually multiple times a day is not just a cumbersome job, it would simply take up too much time. With this installed all it takes is a simple flip of a switch.

Only reasonable assumption would be that shattering the asteroid first would make it more pliable so it fits better in the net. Blowing it up won't change the mass although you would loose some small chunks that will slip through your net.

Of course this forum can parse images/video to for example a mere link. The old UBB forum did it and since they claim this is better it surely can too. It's just a matter of installing the proper plugins and/or settings. It has nothing to do with "can't" but rather "won't" or "can't be bothered"

I'd prefer more a Mindrover style of coding. MUCH more intuitive.

Has 'The Cloverfield Paradox' been mentioned yet? First of all: Minor spoilers ahead! You have been warned! For a SciFi thriller/horror it's pretty decent. But the science ... not so much. Most of the story takes place on an earth orbiting space station. The station consists of a large upper ring, a spine supporting three radially mounted rings and at the bottom an array of most likely radiators. The entire station rotates around it's axis presumably to generate artificial gravity. The three smaller rings counter rotate at nearly the same rpm. (They rotate inside their own mounts, they do not move in relation to the spine or upper ring.) Centrifugal and inertial forces would therefore fluctuate wildly inside those rings. But the worst thing is: gravitational forces you actually witness inside the station is not radial as it should be but orientated along the stations axis as if the large ring was the top and the radiators the bottom. And I won't even go into what they are actually trying to do on the station and what happens when they succeed. (Or would that be fail?) That's completely bonkers. But the story does explain a good deal of it. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And the pinnacle of bad science in blockbuster movies: EVERYTHING from the Marvel/DC universe!

Because that was not asked for.

Have you read my post BEFORE the one you quoted? Clearly you did NOT! Please do that first. THEN we can talk! In the first test I DID provide those MMconfigs. In the second test there were NO OTHER MODS that could cause this. ModPods was THE ONLY variable that changed.

Same goes for refuelling on a low gravity planet/moon.

@TiktaalikDreaming Yet another test: Brand new, 100% stock install. Installed ModuleManager, MechJeb (and MechJeb embedded) to make flights as reproducible as possible. Did NOT install ModPods yet! Build a simple 100% stock 2 stage rocket. MechJeb launched it to a 100*100 orbit with 160m/s left. Now WITH ModPods installed. Loaded up the exact same 2 stage rocket. MechJeb launched it under the exact same conditions to the same 100*100 orbit. It fell 310m/s short of making orbit. I am very sorry but I can come to no other conclusion than blaming ModPods as it was the only variable.

I've had it happen with contracts (although not recently) and as you say manoeuvre nodes. A craft sometimes becomes unresponsive for no apparent reason. Save, quit and re-start can than be a solution but is not guaranteed.