Kaa253

Linux Ubuntu 64 bit over here. I am having exactly the same problem. I am brand new to Map Overlay today so I have no config file. According to Player.log it is initially trying to write to the path /PluginData/KSP for which it will not get permission because this path starts in root and will not exist. For diagnosis I created that path and gave permissions. Now from my experiment it appears that if new users copy the file Base.cfg from ~MapResourceOverlay to ~MapResourceOverlay/PluginData/MapResourceOverlay and rename the file as MapResourceOverlay.cfg it will correct itself from then on, but I am still testing. If that is all that is bugged then I expect it will be easy enough for Cyrik to find the wrong path assignment and do a fix (but then again I don't speak C# or Unity so who knows!) Edit: For some odd reason it needs write permission to a folder "/PluginData/KSP". I cannot remove that folder without breaking it, but it appears that it does not actually write anything there.

As I say in another post. It would be great if this thread could be made sticky again.

Thank you very much for re-establishing the thread. I think it should retain its sticky and [official] status which are currently missing. I appreciate your remark regarding the long time official support and I cannot emphasize too highly how much that means to me. It is likely that I would never have even tried the KSP trial version if it had not been available for Linux. As it has transpired I have been a dedicated fan of KSP since version 0.18. It is true that as that thread has been going for a long time it is long to read and search, contains many pages and in some cases out-of-date information. However, I realised today that the Linux compatibility thread was inaccessible because I saw a post in a mod thread asking if there might be a Linux compatibility issue with that mod and of course, that is possible. It does make me feel strongly that there should be a sticky and official thread in the Forum (probably under Support) for Linux users to discuss their "compatibility" issues even if that is simply a place for long time Linux version users to post reassurances to new users that the problem they may be having is not due to some Linux version compatibility issue. For example it seems clear that the Linux 64 bit version is currently more stable than the new Windows 64 bit version. There is deservedly an international section on the Forum for discussion about KSP in languages other than English. I think there is equally a need for a place in the Forums for KSP discussion between players who speak languages different from Microsoft. Personally I would be happy and comfortable with the thread being restarted afresh provided the useful notes in the first post and the included links in that first post are retained (after vetting for continued relevance - some of these may indeed be out-of-date too). This assumes that sal_vager is willing and able to continue providing his wonderful effort and support with moderating the thread.

Something has happened to the The Linux compatibility thread! .?? I don't have "permission" to access it via the above link and it does not appear as a sticky thread anywhere I can find under Development and Support.

I run KSP + MCE2 and around 70 other mods besides near perfectly on 64bit Linux Kubuntu (yes, in English) and I have not had any trouble getting repair contracts so it probably has nothing to do with your excellent super-stable 64bit operating system.

For my last few career game play throughs I have ended them wondering why I never went through a stage where a Mk2 spaceplane with a cargo bay was useful. I just now realised it is because the majority of Mk2 parts come at supersonic flight in the techtree but the Mk2 cargobays are at high altitude flight which also happens to be when the bulk of the S2 parts including the S2 cargobays get unlocked. So in effect, the Mk2 cargobays get superseded at the very moment they get unlocked. Just a suggestion, but it seems a bit odd to me. I have edited the required tech on the Mk2 cargo bays for myself this time. Absolutely loving all of B9 R5... thanks a lot.

The instrument on the top of the BoxSat is from the Mission Controller 2 mod which adds contracts and adjusts the game economy. It doesn't do much but I needed to deliver it to the Mun to get paid. So it was the whole point of that mission really. The micro landing struts are the stock LT-5 Micro Landing Strut just scaled down to 0.625 size using the TweakScale mod. Actually there are some better looking tiny landing legs in the AIES mod but last I tried them they were broken at KSP 0.23. I should re-check them as they can probably be fixed and would be ideal for BoxSat use. and before someone asks ... other useful small 0.625 scale parts are from the RLA Stockalike mod. That BoxSat Mun Lander uses the MPR-1 Monopropellent Engine which has the perfect max thrust of just 1.0. Thanks again for BoxSat, its a wonderful mod.

BoxSat lander delivered to the Mun's Farside Crater. Total mass of fuelled up delivery system + payload a tiny 8.8 tonnes at launch! Awesome, thanks.

Yes, thanks ferram. As the message is regarding g-force tolerance it would appear to be at least partially DRE hence, I have posted here. It is not the aerodynamic failure message I get when I tear the wings off things. I have thought about it some more. It could have been happening since I upgraded KSP to 0.24.2 and I possibly just took some time to notice. Therefore it could be an interaction between DRE and any of many KSP setup/mod changes I made at the time, not just FAR+DRE. I am also thinking that this is in some ways a symptom of the comic theme of KSP in opposition with realism adding mods. From an engineering perspective the 4 little wire-like struts that are depicted on the sepratron really have to break off given the significant g-force that will occur upon sepratron firing. Why should I expect otherwise? Really it is probably the joint that is too weak. Perhaps Kerbal Joint Reinforcement may help and as I uninstalled KJR at 0.24, it was possibly helping in the past. I am still interested to know if anyone else has seen this. If I am alone or nearly alone in experiencing the sepratrons blasting off from their attached part and flying chaotically all around the sky individually then I should investigate further to diagnose what is unique about my KSP that is causing this extraneous pyrotechnics display. Perhaps by doing the classic clean install followed by a progressive mod add procedure. Otherwise, if many are experiencing this then I am comfortable to accept that I/we have modded in just a little bit too much realism.

The hatch on the MK2 crew tank 2m always reports for me "Hatch is obstructed, can't exit". Maybe that's just the way it is for now?

I use DRE, FAR and stock sized Solar System. I am finding that all sepratrons (the stock one and the 2 KW parts) break away from the part that they are attached to (i.e. solid booster) when they ignite and the log reports "Sepratron I exceeded g-force tolerance". Sure, they go off with a bit of a bang - they are meant to. The problem is they go off by themselves and leave the main booster behind to slam into and damage the core stage. I have attempted to search this thread but I don't see anyone else mentioning this effect. It seems that the new Aerodynamic Failure feature in FAR may be related as that is when I first started seeing the problem but, it is fairly inevitable that as the solid rocket boosters approach expended that the craft will be passing through a phase of high dynamic pressure. Has anyone else seen this? I can prevent it by tweaking down the thrust on the sepratrons to around 40% prior to launch in the VAB. It is a bit annoying however. Maybe I should "permanently" edit the thrust in the part configs. Alternatively, I guess I could increase the G Tolerance Multiplier some. Can anyone provide me with a guide on how much to increase the multiplier without effectively turning it off completely?

KSPi I did install for a time last year and after about a month it had succeeded in driving me to the point of not enjoying KSP any more so I uninstalled it and started a new career. I doubt I will ever use it again. I concede that it has one or two aspects that I found to be quite good, such as the inverse square law treatment of solar radiation. It is a well done mod, it just doesn't fit with my taste in KSP play style. But you have piqued my curiosity. Where exactly do you see a "cheat"/absurdity in ORS, which may or may not have originated from KSPi?

This career I have switched over from kethane to karbonite (largely for the novelty). I just found the different behaviour of the recycle bins. I guess there is no way I can force recycling to metal rather than rocket parts short of re-installing kethane?

I am fairly certain I have seen the same. I have definitely had 2 ComSat missions validate too early.

Thanks. I appreciate the tip. Never mind about the typo. I have my own big bunch of those. I don't think that any extra indication that the data has been collected correctly is really lacking. Of course, it wouldn't hurt if you do choose to add it. I eventually found that the problem was coming from an unusual inability to transmit the data back to KSP directly from the Multispectral Imaging Platform. Upon pressing the transmit data "blue" button there was no normal stock game notification that the data was being transmitted but the instrument thereafter reported the data as gone and unrepeatable for this asteroid. I had double checked that I had good electrical power and connection (I use RemoteTech) before pressing transmit. I then restored a quicksave and this time I sent an EVA Kerbal to take the data off the Multispectral Imaging Platform and return it to the command module. Then by transmitting the data from the command module instead everything proceeded normally and the contract completed. ??? I had no trouble transmitting data directly from the magnetometer boom while grappled to the asteroid. I have had no trouble transmitting from other Multispectral Imagers located elsewhere in space.

Wonderful, brilliant mod and excellent contracts work here! I have been especially enjoying it since I installed Science Values Editor as you recommended which I have set to make earning science points fairly difficult. Thanks for the advice on that. Unfortunately, I also seem to have found a problem with a pair of contracts. I have two asteroid contracts active. One for class C (collect multiple scien"c"tific observations - mag scan and broad spectrum analysis) and another for class A (bring into Kerbin orbit. I am attempting to do the class C first because that was the first asteroid that came close to Kerbin for me. I have the Magnetometer boom and the Multispectral Imaging (I love this one as it is my RL job, LoL) platform. I cannot get either of these tasks to turn green. I notice that when I grapple the asteroid it reports "This asteroid is not the size that was requested by" the company who issued the class A asteroid contract. Maybe this is the problem? I am continuing to investigate. There is a class A asteroid still about 18 days out from a good rendezvous opportunity, perhaps if I complete that contract first (I accepted it first).

This sound wonderful. I use Fine Print together with Mission Controller 2 (MC2) as do others from what I have read on the forum. In MC2 I have opted for "hard core" mode which makes all your craft up to 6 times more expensive. This is great for balance against the stock game contracts which pay far far too much and hence would give me no economy management challenge to my career whatsoever. Fine Print by default currently has sensible contract funds payouts compared to the stock contracts but when used in combination with the hard core multiplier I cannot do many of your contracts without making a significant loss. So I do them anyway as they rock With tweakable funds (and assuming I stay with the MC2 hard core setting) I could multiply all your funds rewards by a factor of about 4X (a first guess). The aim being to make about half of them just marginally profitable.

Only 950 ISP! OK now that is a really important fact about karbonite that I have so far failed to discover. As I said, I am an absolute karbonite beginner. Edit: I just checked my karbonite install and it does have some very strange ranges of ISP's listed for the various engines. The KAE-150S Inline Turbo jet however says 1550(ASL)-1750(Vac). Probably near enough to Vac at Duna. Maybe something is wrong with my karbonite mod? It is version 0.2.2. I am willing to hold on the discussion until I have actually flown at Duna under karbonite power.

Trivial Mass = 0-5? Rather than 1-5 or something small like 0.1 if zero causes issues. Just a thought.

Yes, me too. It has proved to be the only way I can make a steady profit in HC mode. But I am not sad to see it go as it was clearly cheating. I would not mind if I have to turn down the cost multiplier from 6x to 5x perhaps. The aim is to force me to manage costs but not to kill my space program outright! I have been especially enjoying the balance I have found at the moment where I have to do company satellite contracts to pay for the big missions such as the Mun base I am currently building. In HC mode I have a contract to land a base on the Mun and the reward is 141,750 funds. The cost is running at about 1 million funds so clearly the KSP agency itself wants to do this or they would not wear the huge loss Whatever happens please don't disallow very tiny probes as I love the challenge of trying to minimize payload mass while maintaining mission viability. I use RLA Stockalike and 2 other mods that replace the stock SC-9001 Science Jr. part and thereby allow me to construct basic science probes with mass well under 1000 kg (i.e. 1 t). At the same time I applaud the objective of requiring the player to build something that’s not always the same.

@Fiontar; I noticed it and I realised it was the Infinite Fuel cheat getting activated. I just had no idea which mod was causing it. @DMagic - Thanks for the quick fix.

Hi to all brother and sister Duna flying elite !! I have this week installed and investigated the Karbonite mod and of course it is channelling whispers of flying Duna into my ear too (@StevenRS11). Having tried the aircraft engines on Kerbin already I would have to say they are OP. I respectfully suggest that the court of Judge Geschosskopf should invite argument on whether Karbonite ships belong in the Interstellar category. I humbly propose that they probably do indeed belong in the Interstellar league but as always I am open to debate. Cheers, Kaa

I am new to this mod but as far as I am aware, it no longer recovers funds for dropped parts. I think someone said, (a few pages back?), there is a new mod for doing that (personally, I just drop my stages wastefully). I think the recommended mod was this one.

I am really enjoying HardCore mode. I have scrimped and saved and finally got my first million in funds. I also just reached the Agena mission and it was excellent, engaging and great fun to do. Given my current place in unlocking career technologies and the set of mods I have installed at the moment here is my take on the Gemini 8 & 10 missions. Bob Kerman becomes the first Kerbal to achieve a docking in space! The OP states "This story mission is the test bed for future story based contracts for mission controller." Test successful! I look forward to more of these in the future. (BTW, I took a Clamp-O-Tron along for the ride but it wasn't actually used to perform the docking)

Thanks. A very, very helpful mod. I would dearly love to see the ability to re-order or possibly group contracts so I can easily focus attention on the contracts that apply to the active mission/SOI.