Rokmonkey

Alongside the contract packs, this is the best improvement to career mode hands down. SQUAD would do well to just implement this into the base game. Thank you for your service to the community.

The one in the GameData Folder

Okay, silly question then. Are you sure you didn't put the hinges on backwards? They will work fine in the VAB but not outside. The model rework places little yellow arrows showing which side is the base.

Right, but do you have the Dev version of KJR that I linked? That fixed for me.

@yorshee @Halitsu I fixed the problem on my end. Do you have Kerbal Joint Reinforcement installed, specifically through CKAN? Check here and grab the dev version of KJR linked: https://github.com/MagicSmokeIndustries/InfernalRobotics/issues/146 It fixed my problem perfectly.\ @Jackaroo0505 I tried making a robot arm after this fix and it went fine. Maybe you have the same issue?

Third. Hinges, foldotrons etc. don't work. Really the only thing I want too, to fold out solar arrays

You were 100% accurate on that one. All these settings I'm reading are great. I had no idea about the Occlusion settings, I've tweaked those now and my networks work, it's great. I'm liking the range limitation for probes, I have USI Life Support and don't have the uber relays unlocked yet, so my mission to Duna requires a mothership to remote control probes to land and report, as well as all the other Sats in the SOI. It's making for a very cool mission.

I'm curious if anyone else is: a) Using CommNet b) If so, what difficulty settings are you using? I've cranked down the DSN to a 0.20 multiplier. I've tried turning off the other DSN sites on Kerbin, but my relay network didn't help (will have to investigate further as to why) Since I'm one to spend most of my time in the Kerbin system, when I got out to Duna and still had signal strength I was amazed, it made things like the Remote Probe Control useless. I thought I would have needed more of a network like I did when I tried remote tech ages ago. Any suggestions on the difficulty settings to make it closer to Remote Tech?

I've got a very strange issue going on. I've tried docking a pair of solar-truss nodes to a station with a few construction ports on it. Now, I've had no problems connecting other items to the construction ports, however in the case of my solar nodes, the vessel is a little different and I'm not sure if it will be an issue or not. The vessel is a probe, with two solar nodes attached via decouplers (the nodes do not have a probe attached, only construction ports) When I approach close enough the magnetic pull occurs and the ship will twist and turn to get aligned but it will never fully dock. Since I'm new to debugging this sort of issue, in this case what would be useful information to supply? I can also confirm that I have not been able to dock a stock docking port to a USI Weldable Construction Port.

Aha it appears it's not a KER issue but a hodgepodge of issues all happening at once, atleast it appears so after reading that support thread that @Rantanplan1986 linked.

I appreciate you making these fixes while the mainline gets worked on the background. I am curious if you have noticed (or anyone else who has been using the early releases), the toolbar in the lower right in the VAB vanishing. It responds to clicks but it can't be seen and the text disappears from the contract and engineering report windows. I've done tests and found that it's KER but I can't say for sure if it's only KER or just it's interaction with all the other mods. I did notice it when only KER was being used during the 1.2 pre-release however.

Yes they do.

Well, it would violate the law of conservation of mass.... But if you wanted to, you could just edit your Persistantace file and make the asteroid have an enormous mass, or have a % yield of some ridiculously large number.

SpaceY and Modular Rocket System http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/100408-1-0-2-SpaceY-Heavy-Lifter-Parts-Pack-v0-12-2-%282015-05-01%29 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/93067

Try putting big ones on the bottom stage, then put smaller ones (Smaller than you have now) on the second stage.

As far as oribtal assembly goes, I changed from the "oribtal tug" method, and instead I build my orbital stage, and then optimize RCS layout using the payload and orbiter together. The orbiter is usually a small fuel tank, probe, couple batteries, rcs and an engine. After docking to the station, the orbiter detaches and de-orbits itself. I've found that the orbital tug method is a pain to balance the RCS. I suppose a way to get around this is to balance the RCS on the payload with the TUG attached in the VAB. Yay for sub-assemblies.

I can't speak to that. I only turn on Stability Assist and manually follow the prograde marker, I don't not have it set to follow prograde. I believe Jouni hit the nail on the head, they have large gimbal and it over corrects. You can try turning on fine controls, or reducing the gimbal range (is that a stock tweakable?) By just using Stability Assist, you have lots of control over the ascent profile. I have seen many cases where following the prograde would put my rocket in a nearly flat trajectory at 18-22km, and by correcting my rocket to a steeper ascent I had a far more efficient launch (This is with and without fins on the same rocket).

I don't understand the why. KSP is single player, if you don't install it how can it ruin the game? I for one use KER, Precise Node, Transfer Planners and other such tools to automatically-manually operate my space program. Where does that fall on this scale? You can believe that if I had a series of repetitive launches I would install mechjeb and do it that way.

Oh, absolutely. But we aren't making model rockets here. Early career/science, fins are very helpful, some might say necessary. However, we have gimbaling engine and guidance later on so that is another efficient method. You've dismissed that entirely valid and in many cases preferred method far too easily. By not adding fins, you reduce weight and lower the drag footprint increasing available delta-V.

I eject my fairings in the 50km region. It depends on what my payload looks like, if there is some pointing things in there sticking out. eg. accidentally deployed solar panels, I wait until closer to 60km. This is subject to change if it's still in my main booster stage or the ascent stage. If it's the former, I don't bother too much, if it's the latter, I dump that fairing as soon as I feel brave enough.

There is no optimal ascent curve and if you pick one you are going to have a bad time. Depending on your upper stages with mass, drag, geometry you may find that a steeper ascent is advantageous. This is also dependent on what engines you are using and where. The only hard rule I follow is that I wait for my vertical velocity to be >= 50m/s before kicking my gravity turn into gear. Then it's a matter of being more or less aggressive when following prograde to keep your ascent rate ideal.

@Foxster Well, you do have one of the scanners sticking out of the fairing, that's not helping your case. And they patched it so that mass of the fairing gets ejected now.

Yes, the mass goes down when ejecting fairings now. I've watched the mass vanish in Kerbal Engineer myself when ejecting.

I do like where they are going with fairings. Part Procedural, part not. It's a decent system, but the end product you get from Procedural Fairings is far cleaner, visually appealing, and sturdier.

I managed to put the Aeres 4A into orbit on release day. That's why I was so stymied when people were saying SSTOs couldn't be done. I was never able to do it before, but I can now!