MiniMatt

Is it possible you've got some recycling going on too, and it's not a case of the Noms being unable to keep up with mulch processing but rather them shutting down & not processing the mulch because your supplies are full? I'm 99% certain that recycling will reduce your supplies consumption but won't reduce the quantity of ....err... kerbal droppings / mulch stacking up. Ie, the recyclers don't turn ~70% of kerbal droppings into supplies, they just reduce your supply consumption by ~70% and leave the droppings to pile up in a corner. Remember also that the supply consumption rates have been significantly tweaked for 1.2. That said, I haven't started my 1.2 LS/MKS/Konstruction/Karibou career in earnest yet, just messing around in sandbox testing and theorycrafting.

Fresh KSP 1.2.0.1586 Win x64 GameData folder nuked (save the Squad stock folder) USI-LS 0.5.3.0 installed Create new sandbox save, default settings (no flights in progress - thought, haven't tested with a fresh save) Open SPH Select MK-1 inline cockpit Open LifeSupport status button Launch When loaded on runway, open LifeSupport status button Revert flight to SPH Autosaved ship loads up, with a blanked LifeSupport window - it seems whilst this blanked window is displayed, the log file fills up with null ref exceptions. Closing/reopening the LifeSupport window doesn't help, starting a new craft works fine (ie the LifeSupport window displays data as expected). Full log file at: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzCQMKilmnyaUXRyN1pCWkVyWVU Holler if there's anything else you need, but clearly just drop it if it begins to look like something unique to my setup.

Curious, I'm getting it on a bleached fresh install with naught else installed. Clearly it's something specific to my setup then, I'll try digging further.

Yay! Can confirm max-crew increment fixed! Am still getting null ref exceptions in the logs - I *think* it's only happening now upon scene change from flight to editor after a revert, when the life support window was open in both: (for testing - nuked game data folder fresh USI-LS 0.5.3.0, naught else but that installed)

The interim release does indeed work pretty well, Wolf. Manually adding fuel pipes as if it were a 1.1 craft, getting the DV info, then nuking the redundant pipes to make use of the (awesome) new fuel routing works pretty well. The extra mass saved from the nuked fuel pipes becomes a free safety margin The HUDs are indeed one of the best things about KER and work just fine - the DV readout is clearly going to be a little flakey dependent upon craft design, but orbital parameters, current TWR, surface radar altitude etc all seem fine.

Oooh, I do hate to do this, but yep, me too - guessed relevant log lines in spoiler below: Tested with all other mods nuked such that just USI-LS 0.5.2.0 remained. Also seeing an incremental addition to max crew capacity every time any part is clicked - repeatedly add and remove an (eg.) antenna (works with any part) from a single crew pod and max hab goes up by one on each click. Likely related, reverting a flight leaves a blank life support window in the vab, which appears to only reset upon re-loading the craft. EDIT: Forgot to say - my little kerbin-system taxi shuttle thanks you from the bottom of it's solar sails to the tips of it's cute little stubby wings* for the recycler module fix - it really is a great little module, providing just the nudge to life support efficiency needed for in-system shuttles. * may all who sail upon her enjoy delicious recycled nutrient paste

Hi folks (hopefully this can be answered in community) - quick balance question re the RT-500 recycling module vs the Nom-O-Matic 5000 in recycling mode: The RT-500 provides 60% recycling for one crew member at a cost of 0.5ec/s and 0.6t mass. The Nom-O-Matic 5000 with it's new recycling mode provides 71% recycling for one crew member at a cost of 0.63ec/s and 0.125t mass, plus it has flexibility of other configurations Now I grant that the difference between 0.5ec & 0.63ec is not insignificant, and the radial mount of the RT-500 makes placement a little easier, but still - a ~half ton mass saving, an 11% boost in recycling efficiency, and the flexibility of other configurations seems too big a boost for the penalty of stack mounting and 0.13ec/s. Have I missed something? I swear I'm missing more stuff lately, I worry all those "beer kills brain cells" leaflets were right and the cumulative effect over many years is beginning to show.... If I haven't missed anything then (a) yay! beer doesn't kill brain cells - cheers! and (b) I'd hate to make the RT-500 redundant as it's such a neat model and even if it's a little on the heavy side I did end up using it on my 1.1.3 Duna mission to "fill in the gaps" of the recycling setup (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oRo3a9A9t4&list=PLMfeAycVYV0wcxr-5EyHWBe6asCm-YF5q) (edit: ksp 1.2.0.1586, USI-LS 0.5.0.0)

Happiest thing I've learnt from the launch event stream is that Tito, the Squad Doggie first revealed in a January squadcast, is still prowling Squad offices, contributing to streams

Oh. Hell. Yes! This looks awesome and will definitely be in my 1.2 save from the start. My 1.1.x save (shameless plug below) frequently saw me launch fully built bases & stations direct from Kerbin, aerodynamics be damned, because there wasn't a satisfactory way to assemble in space (KIS/KAS and IR have come close, and remain excellent, but never quite seemed there - either offering too much or being insufficiently streamlined). This plus the MKS/USI-LS updates makes me feel my 1.2 save will be the first time KSP is, well, all I wanted it to be. So happy right now, so ignoring all other KSP drama right now, so thankful to all the wonderful modders & staff & staff/modders past and present right now.

As good a place as any to thank, wholeheartedly, those who have worked on KSP past and present, those who have left and those who remain, for making my most played & enjoyed game in many years. All who have had a hand in this wonderful game deserve every success in their future endeavours and I can't wait to see what you do next.

Yeah, wanted to test scientists under a clean Science mode test (ie. their performance in labs) but that means levelling up a fresh save. Have to say I'm hovering over the submit button on the bug tracker right now, as some old v.0.90 threads suggest universal piloting skills were in place back then - Wondering if this has come about as far back as v0.22ish when career mode was first toyed with (and became the science mode we have today) - perhaps the desire not to brick 0.21 saves meant everyone has unique pilot abilities but features release subsequent to that (eg. mining, science labs) can safely be tied to specialities under sandbox/science modes. edit: yeah, this is definitely an old design decision - just double checked, even the stayputnik probe has full SAS abilities under 1.1.3 sandbox mode. Think I'm going to log under feedback rather than bug on the bug tracker - I think we can safely brick v0.21 saves, but appreciate others may think differently. edit 2: logged feedback http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/10845 - think this is an issue that's grown from a design decision that made sense three years ago that has increasingly become problematic as new features are added. Right now under Sandbox mode every single probe core is functionally identical - the only differentiator is in built torque wheel strength. edit 3: looking forward, with v1.2 introducing unique pilot skills under the communication array re-work, I suspect what initially started as a clear design decision of "everything is unlocked under sandbox" is only going to become more convoluted over time - we'll have "everything is unlocked under sandbox - everyone can pilot a ship and repair wheels but remote piloting can only be done by pilots, and mining can only be boosted by engineers, and all probes are functionally identical, and only scientists provide lab bonuses, not that they're relevant in sandbox".

Interesting, thanks. In that case we definitely have a bug as silver suited new hire scientists & engineers under 1.1.3 Win x64 definitely have full SAS pilot abilities in Sandbox and Science gameplay modes. I just tested mining, and what I think confirms it as a bug, is that in sandbox mode engineers on board definitely give a mining rate bonus: Silver scientist alone: 0.005255/s at lauchpad Orange Pilot (Jeb) alone: 0.005255/s at launchpad Silver scientist + silver engineer: 0.131371/s at launchpad (25x the rate, as expected for 5-star engineer) I can't see it being a design decision that engineers provide unique bonuses in sandbox/science, but that pilot skills are universal. I'll get it logged on the bug tracker.

I genuinely can't remember if this is expected behaviour or a bug, so asking first before submitting to bug tracker. I get that under science & sandbox gameplay modes all kerbonauts start with 5 stars in their fields and thus their abilities are not graduated by experience, but could have sworn individual specialisations were still supposed to be in effect? Is it expected behaviour that Bill & Bob can fly a Mk1 Command Pod just as well as Jeb? Corollary - do mining rigs in sandbox/science modes function just as well with only Jeb on board as if engineer Bill also tagged along? Sorry, been so long since career was introduced and since it was my sandbox saves are usually just used for testing.

Snagged a pretty shot after a couple of the taxis docked (most of the flash parts either USI Kolonization/Life Support or Near Future Solar): As daft as it is I think I'm most proud of those little taxi shuttles, always seems the smallest craft require the most thought and refining, they're doing sterling work now ferrying tourists & crew between the Kerbin system stations. Anyway, the whole kaboodle was launched in one shot (who needs streamlining when you have boosters?) in the video below (I think the series also has those little system shuttles & other bits of Kerbin system infrastructure)

Today, in an effort to combat the crippling funding crisis which coincided entirely coincidentally with the mysterious, ahem, "disappearance" of a huge space station and all hands (its replacement deployed on page 1032), I ventured into space tourism - deploying an orbital tourist attraction around the Mun and the first in a fleet of shuttle bus system taxis:

Today I put a station around Kerbin, largely to avoid starvation of the kerbonauts deployed on page 1030. Actually I deployed two stations. But we don't talk about the first station. And those bright lights seen over the night sky are ENTIRELY COINCIDENTAL.

The nuke engine masses 2.5t more. So the nuke becomes more efficient once you're hauling an extra 2.5t of fuel for your more fuel hungry terrier craft for a given delta-v requirement. So low total mass craft, or low delta-v requirements, will often see the terrier/poodle/etc a better choice.

Today I realised the mining base deployed on page 1027 wasn't much use without a way of getting the free fuel some place useful. So I designed & deployed a system supply tanker. Actually I designed about 12. Tested 3. And edited 2 hours of footage down to the 11 minutes which give the wholly unjustified impression I actually know what I'm doing. Everything else exploded. Or caught fire. Or caught fire then exploded.

Certainly sufficient to attain orbit from Pol, so > ~150ish. The wiki suggests Minmus orbit can also be attained. You may get better results over at the Gameplay Questions & Tutorials section. edit: ooh, just noticed the wiki page linked above actually states 600m/s dv. So plenty enough to both land on and return to orbit around Minmus.

Gosh you're all a dark bunch with your vacuum gulags The purpose of prison is not merely security, or deterrent, but rehabilitation. Given that I refuse to believe Kerbals could ever do anything beastly to one another (they're far too cute), and therefore Kerbal "crimes" are things like noise nuisance caused by flying supersonic through a residential neighbourhood at night - the primary emphasis in Kerbal prisons would be rehabilitation. So drop them some place out of the way where they won't disturb Kerbling's sleep, supply them with all the tools, snacks, entertainment they need, drop a bunch of parts, KIS/KAS/Extraplanetary Launchpads, and tell them they can come home once they've built a <100db supersonic jet, or something equally ingenious.

That was awesome I'm routinely astounded by the grav-assist shenanigans displayed on this board. But looking over the Rio schedule, I'm disappointed to see that the 3000m face tumble has yet to be made an Olympic sport - the IOC really needs to up their game

Just 1080p - I know there's a UI scale option under general settings but I don't think I've tinkered with that (back when it was introduced it fuzzed up screen fonts somewhat, this may have been fixed). There are also individual screen element settings options when in flight (escape, settings, flightUI elements)

Yeah the friction is weird, some places I'd gladly have less, others far more - every time I tweaked it I ended up with far too much in some places so it would dig in and roll rather than powerslide, or far too little. In the end, after much unsatisfying tweaking I just left at defaults I'd often wished for a "handbrake turn" button, so action group deployable downforce might not be a bad call

Final entry - was hoping to beat the lightning pace set by @Hesp but in the end only managed to narrow the gap. 3 minutes, 16 seconds with 2 passengers for (I believe) a total score of 186. There's potential, with a generous interpretation of "flip", to accrue up to 30 bonus points at flag 1 & flag 4, but I'm not entirely comfortable with that - Hesp deserves his spot and displayed far better skills than my cack-handed driving There's a good extra 10 seconds available from this rover, I got a 3:11 in practice but of course wasn't recording at the time - and that run was still far from perfect. But unfortunately I don't have the time for further attempts at this stage. So, lessons learnt: For the purposes of this challenge a total loss battery power solution is probably going to be more mass and drag efficient than fuel cells/RTGs/solar. Contrary to my initial expectations, drag counts for a *lot* in this challenge - a lot of distance is covered at max speed from the start to flag 1, and (particularly) from flag 9 to 10 - just a couple m/s difference here can add up to significant time savings. 3 kerbals in cabins can likely be propelled a good 10+m/s quicker than the same three in command chairs, despite the cabin solution weighing a couple of tons more. Hesp's trick of splitting the sepratrons into two groups is one worth stealing Significant time is lost in accelerating, being able to boost both the initial launch and the straight from flag 9 is probably better than having one almighty double-sepratron powered kick. SAS has different modes now. Experiment and find which works best for you. Personally I had better results with "SAS only". Splitting out keys to separate forward drive from pitch down is another option. The extra large XL3 RoveMax (tank steer) wheels retain a bug left over since 1.1 pre-release whereby rapidly cycling the left/right steering allows them to far exceed their stated max speed - hundred ton vehicles can easily exceed 100m/s - combine this with several of the 16 capacity mk3 passenger compartments to break the challenge and record a negative score (but that would be naughty, don't do that ) edit: oh, and because I've had so much fun in this challenge you all get a bonus trike compilation reel. Three wheels good, four wheels bad - as George Orwell might say. Was surprisingly good, but never quite got it under 3 minutes 30.

Greenhouse c/o USI Life Support/Kolonization Systems - provides supplies in exchange for fertiliser, "mulch" (aka kerbal droppings), and electricity. Love the Mun Kow - are you double docking that to (I presume orbital) fuel station? I haven't attempted double docking in 1.1.3 yet (and I was never particularly good at it in earlier versions)