Anquietas314

This shouldn't be an issue; the code for displaying the flights in progress (note: this is the only thing I am proposing be changed) should be something like this: // Pseudocode - I'm not especially familiar with C# // 1: Get vessels from save file // 2: Count vessels "in flight" int count = 0; foreach (Vessel v in vessels) { if (!v.isDebris() && !v.isAnAsteroid()) // Should just need "&& !v.isFlag()" or equivalent ++count; } // 3: Print "<count> flight(s) in progress" on the screen I imagine the actual code has a more general approach to filtering (using string identifiers for instance), but that's pretty much what I expect it does. Hiding the flags in the tracking station or map view (by default) is a separate issue, but should also be a trivial fix.

I completely agree! In fact I usually name my Mun missions "Munar I, Munar II" etc, though this time I've just went with calling them "Mun I" etc for the sake of consistency Eh, it doesn't really work as well for Duna though :/ We should probably stay on topic though before a mod comes along

I tend to mark every single landing with a flag.... so, yeah... It never occurred to me to name the flags in a way that identifies the biomes though... I should do that. Mental note to replace the flag I deployed in the Mun's Southwest Crater yesterday

I think it's quite obvious I didn't mean you should try it while the plane is moving That did make me chuckle though Also... we use metric here at KSC

It's more of a minor irritation than an actual problem. Plus, some of us forget what we did last week, and in particular with interplanetary missions (especially to Jool) if you do lots of other things while waiting for the mission to arrive, it's very possible you'll forget that mission even existed. Especially if you have a LOT of flights in the tracking station (which are not flags)

Currently, flags count as "flights in progress" in the "Resume Saved" list. Since flags are obviously not actually flights in any meaningful way, they shouldn't be counted as such, similar to debris and asteroids. A quick search found this thread that was started almost a full year ago for exactly the same suggestion, and the posts seem to be overwhelmingly in favour: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/62903 There are several good reasons for suggesting this mentioned in the thread, such as not having 20+ "flights in progress" that are all flags, and then forgetting that the 22nd flight is actually a real flight that, let's say you're sending out to Jool and want to do something in the meantime instead of time-warping all the way there. So... why is this still a thing? It seems like it should be a completely trivial thing to change. Note: I am not suggesting flags be made invisible in the tracking station, treated as debris for the purposes of "max persistent debris", etc as several people suggested in that thread.

Since nobody's mentioned it: if you set the EVA report marker as navigation target (map view, but you managed to figure out where it was so I guess you already know this part), the navball marker will start flashing when you're in range. You also get a nice yellow popup message that says "You are entering <location>" at the top of the screen (and a similar one for when you go out of range again). As for the EVA report... technically you don't have to be on the ground, but your kerbal does need to have both feet on SOMETHING (your plane counts!) and not on a ladder.

I currently have Kerbal Engineer, StageRecovery and Kerbal Alarm Clock, however I encountered the problem before those mods were updated to 0.90; this is a stock issue. Incidentally I haven't experienced the bug since installing the mods, but that's probably just luck.

I can confirm the new "hold marker" commands are a little buggy. They do work most of the time, but at least for some rockets I've built they are way off. I don't have useful logs/ships to hand though. Somewhat related: these commands also hog far too much electric charge, even compared to regular SAS (up to 50x in some cases)

The StageRecovery mod would solve that particular problem. The UI for it's a little cryptic at first but it's very helpful for career mode It does take away most of the benefit from recoverable SSTOs though.

Just to clarify: you need *both* the astronaut and R&D complexes to be tier 2 for surface samples. Likewise, you need the tracking center *and* mission control to be tier 2 for maneuver nodes.

very nice apparently I was wrong about you needing the kerbals there, but hell, I'd send them anyway for the fun of it (and as an incentive to not screw up)

MoridinUK: how expensive are your rockets, and what difficulty are you playing on? Roughly speaking your rocket only needs to cost ~8-10k funds to get to orbit, although that doesn't leave a huge margin for error. Plus if you're on moderate or below, or just turned it back on in hard difficulty, "revert flight" is your friend

Alternatively, you could also use the navball in "surface" mode to overcome that problem - it includes planet rotation (though of course it's not a perfect solution). If you don't mind mods, Mechjeb also gives very nice landing predictions, and is already updated (however, in career mode it's also quite restrictive early game.)

Rusty6899: you want to go a decent bit higher than 20-30km if you're using rockets. At that altitude, drag slows you down pretty fast; 40-50km is more suitable, higher if it's very far away . But yes, they are easier with planes (until you get ones that require you to land on a bloody mountain.... or land 5 km away and get out and walk)

capi3101: it's important to consider that you start off only able to accept 2 contracts at a time, and there's a penalty for cancelling them (which strangely is not always the same as the "failure" penalty); MoridinUK could already have 2 active contracts and insufficient funds to upgrade mission control. These contracts are perfectly doable with inexpensive rockets early game, provided you understand the navball, and in my experience the "above" ones are no harder or easier than the "below" ones, unless you're flying a plane equipped with basic jets which struggles to get above the ~20km markers.

No no, you don't need to go all the way to orbit (unless your target's on the other side of the planet.... in which case go for it ). Just find the target on the map, and guess the heading you need to fly at (0/360 = north, 90 = east, 180 = south, 270 = west, etc) to get there. once you start turning over in that direction during the "gravity turn" part of your flight, the marker should be visible on the navball if it's below the horizon. The part of your orbit that intersects the planet should tell you roughly where you'll land (there's also the planet's rotation and atmospheric drag to worry about, but that's where practice comes in). In general, the navball in surface mode is more reliable than the orbit prediction on the map though. Just make sure your prograde vector is either above or below your target marker, depending on how far away from the target you are and whether you need to be above or below the required altitude

The stock ships are stored under <KSP directory>/Ships/..., NOT /saves/<save name>/Ships/... like the ones you create. I don't know if there'll be issues from deleting those though. EDIT: I missed the last part of the post. Whoops! Have you tried just deleting the .craft files in VAB/SPH, but leaving the folders intact? Hope this helps

I haven't quite gotten far enough to get those contracts yet (hard difficulty... because masochism is so much fun), but I would imagine you need to have however many kerbals in the outpost for it to count; it wouldn't be much of an outpost if it was unoccupied

You should be able to see the navigation target immediately after setting it from the map view. It may be far below the horizon though, depending on how far away it is - the navball doesn't seem to take the curvature of the planet into account As for how to get there (assuming you don't have plane parts yet), you should basically start off as you would to get into orbit, if that orbit passed over your target... but stop short when your landing location (may take some practice to guess this correctly) is where it needs to be. Hope this helps

As mentioned in the title, the new edge highlighting effect in 0.90 causes some lag; whenever I mouse over a part in the stack list, the game drops to under 1 fps for a few seconds while it renders the effect, then returns to normal. This happens both in the VAB and in flight, although it seems like mousing over the same part several times reduces the time it takes to draw the effect. A single 1.25m capsule with a basic SRB is enough to replicate the effect. KSP version: 0.90 Windows 32 bit, steam version output_log.txt DxDiag.txt Possibly relevant: I noticed in the output log that KSP thinks my graphics card uses shader model 3; it actually uses shader model 4, although it's one of the earliest cards that did so. Since shader model 4 added geometry shaders (at least in OpenGL), which are very useful for things like edge highlighting, my guess would be that KSP or unity is using some sort of CPU-based fallback and then caching it, hence the lag. Obviously in the meantime I can just disable the effect and everything works fine, but it would be nice to enjoy the new effects like everyone else EDIT: I decided to try -force-opengl, it seems to mostly resolve the problem. There's still a very slight frame jitter when mousing over the stage list, but it's no longer severe enough to warrant turning it off