sojourner

This IS the second generation of Mechjeb, hence the Mechjeb2. But, yeah, If mechjeb ever stops working, I too will be stuck on whatever the last compatible version of the game is. I just am not interested in all that manual flying.

The Valley Forge on it's way to Jool.

Get the latest Mechjeb here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/47317-MechJeb-2-Patch-test-bed-release-%28August-31-Ter%29 uninstall whatever version you have first. Also, it sound like you're issue may be more than mechjeb. Are you running KSP from \program files or a folder on your desktop? if so these can both lead to strange errors in games due to rights issues with the files. Try moving the game to something like c:\games

I'd like to second the motion for Smart A.S.S to default to "off" on ships that have undocked from each other.

Yep, I knew all that. Regardless, if you need to justify how the current game works you can just picture the current LV-N's as LANTR.

Not as wrong as you think. Looks like Squad just did a little research and found an NTR that uses both hydrogen and oxygen:http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#lantr

That will just result in the decoupler stuck to your engine instead of to the docking clamp. Besides, there are 2 good answers already in this thread. 1. after using the decoupler, rightclick on the docking node it's attached to and click "decouple node" to release the docking clamp. 2. use a stack seperator next time, it has blue markings and detaches from both ships when activated. It functions in all other ways as a decoupler as far as ENG and Mechjeb are concerned. oh, and third option just omit the decoupler and drop the upper ship right on the docking node and then "decouple node" as above.

Yes. It's a well known KSP issue. It's a problem with how the fuel flow logic is coded from what I have heard. After some testing I need to amend my statement about fuel line heights. The height does not make a difference in overall drainage of fuel in a stack of tanks. It does, however, affect which tanks in that stack get drained first. if your asparagus stage has 3 tanks and you attach the fuel line to the middle tank, it will drain the upper first while also pulling fuel from the lower tank at a reduced rate. Once the upper tank is empty fuel will be pulled from the middle tank while fuel continues to be pulled from the lower tank. Both of these tanks deplete at the same time. If you attach the fuel line to the lower tank fuel drains from the top down. upper tank empties then middle, then lower. Here's the weird part. If you attach it to the upper tank it behaves much like connecting to the middle tank did above. The only difference is the amount of fuel drained from the lower tank while the upper tank is draining is much more reduced. once the upper tank is empty, the middle and lower tanks both finish at the same time. In conclusion, it would appear that for best COM during flight, to attach your fuel line to the lowest tank in an asparagus stage for draining purposes. Oh and of course, use symmetry. If you have a pair of asparagus stages draining from different tanks, well, you won't be going to space today.

^Classic fuel loop problem. Don't go from one tank to two tanks to one again. The height of the connection makes absolutely no difference on the fuel feed of the rocket. Unless of course you've accidentally put the connection above/below a decoupler when you didn't mean to. Also, who is having problems with fuel lines when going back to the VAB? I have never encountered such an issue. Now, subassemblor will mess up fuel lines when loading a saved assembly if your not careful, but that's the closest I've seen to that phenomena.

I see people on this forum using "SSTO" in place of "spaceplane" all too often without realizing there is a difference. A spaceplane can be an SSTO and an SSTO can be a spaceplane, but neither of those is always true.

If you don't plan on reusing the engine.

To be honest? no, not really. I don't like mods relying on other mods. It's bad enough to watch a mod stop working when an author loses interest. It just makes it worse when a mod stops working because a different mod's author loses interest. How about we just leave the functionality as is. And the people that want to EVA to connect struts can go ahead and EVA before they do it. How hard is that? How is it in any way different? No extra coding required by the author. No extra effort for those that don't want to do it that way. And wow, if you want to EVA to do it, it's effectively exactly the same!

yep, I use this setup all the time. no problems. tank,dockingport,dockingport,engine. make sure you have the docking ports facing the right direction and as noted, SR docking ports are stronger.

Either way it's still pretend. So why limit MY game play by how YOU want to pretend? If it's an option, fine, just don't make it a mandatory way to use the mod.

I've seen some behavior where a ship will decide to take the "long way around" to get to the target on the navball. For example, it might be pointing about 90 degrees from target to start, but instead of just changing by 90 degrees, it will go a full 270 around the axis of change. This hasn't happened during ascent, mostly with the docking autopilot and a couple times with autorendezvous. Anyone got any ideas why?

The periodic chart. the atomic makeup of elements are universal.

Damn, how did I miss this update??? I check the addons forums every freakin day!! Excellent work! I have to go! <runs off to build atomic rocket ships>

No thanks. I prefer it the way it is. There's nothing stopping people from EVAing Kerbals if they want to pretend that it has to be done by EVA.

First step, get the latest build from this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/47317-MechJeb-2-Patch-test-bed-release-%28August-31-Ter%29

Most of mine have already been mentioned by others, but here is one I haven't seen mentioned: Hate Inconsistency. I can launch the same rocket 10 times successfully and then suddenly it just starts crashing and failing all over the place. Love That Squad takes the time to make sure that each version of the game they release is playable. I know this must slow down development since it limits how features get added. I dig getting to play the alpha.

I like Oberth, the view is just better from up here.

Outbound to Jool.

I've just started building for my Jool Mission. I decided to go with reusable interplanetary ships and use multiple trips to build up capability. So, here's the first ship I've built so far, the Discovery (yeah, I couldn't resist), ready to make it's first expedition to the Jool system with a Station core as payload. The station core is pretty much everything in front of the cupola in these images. Subsequent missions will add a craft for transferring between the orbits of various moons, landers, and refueling facilities at the station.

Windows KOB

hmmm, I did some checking and somehow the part in my current game doesn't have torque. It must have been over written when I was copying my mods from the .20.1 to .21. Which means now that I am flying all my craft using the .20.1 versions of the stock parts. Yeah, that could be a pain to straighten out.