Info from the 1.1 Beta Testers

[bewing]

1 hour ago, N_Molson said:

Landing a plane using the low-tech landing gears seems incredibly difficult to me. They seem extremely fragile. I tried with suspension on or off. Also the nose wheel steers the same angle regardless of the aircraft speed. That's a recipe for disasters. The basic runway is simply impossible to use, the aircraft simply bumps, turns and hops in a crazy dance of disintegration.

So I feel I'm missing something there. Has anyone experienced the same difficulties, and found a way around ? Also, I wonder if that "friction control" thing plays a role in that mess.

They are fragile. You have to practice being gentle. Suspension disable is not currently working on those wheels. Don't steer while you are going more than 20 m/s. Turn on your capslock to enable "soft steering mode".

Don't use the L1 runway, use the grass instead. You can use the grass on the side of the runway -- it is perfectly flat. The KSC grass is a little bumpier than it used to be.

You need to play with the friction control settings. "Auto" lets the steering system apply brakes to prevent sliding. Switching to manual is often wise. Reducing the friction on the wheels to very low values is often also wise. New version = do lots of experimenting!

1 hour ago, A_name said:

I'm having this! What settings should I tweak?

Try looking in that thread. Don't be afraid to PM people!

 

Edited April 20, 2016 by bewing

[A_name]

3 minutes ago, regex said:

It enables the legacy shader model 2 terrain shaders, should give much better performance on lower end graphics cards (like the Intel 4000 I'm stuck on) than the default SM3 terrain shaders when looking at the ocean from LKO or while in Duna orbit looking at Duna.  This was a huge performance boost back in 1.0.5; apparently the devs would prefer you spend more on hardware than on KSP merch...

Thanks, I'll give it a try. While we're on the topic, I recall back in .90 I think that Astronomer released a custom config file that included a change to something related to oceans on Kerbin and Eve that also improved performance when looking at the oceans. Do you know what this is?

Edit:

Also, does changing back to SM2 come with a trade-off?

Edited April 20, 2016 by A_name

[regex]

2 minutes ago, A_name said:

Thanks, I'll give it a try. While we're on the topic, I recall back in .90 I think that Astronomer released a custom config file that included a change to something related to oceans on Kerbin and Eve that also improved performance when looking at the oceans. Do you know what this is?

In the settings, something about PQS subdivisions.  Might still help.

2 minutes ago, A_name said:

Also, does changing back to SM2 come with a trade-off?

Yeah, the terrain is generally darker and looks crappier.

[theJesuit]

3 hours ago, bewing said:

Docking ports: they have been falling off sometimes.

I LOLed.

Peace.

[DonaldPK51]

My Mun and Minmus bases using LT-2 landing struts are sunk into the ground a bit, and my flags also just fall over after Steam upgraded me to 1.1 "Final" today

[HebaruSan]

Further info specifically for Linux, the 1.1 release shipped with at least two known CTD-at-launch problems on this platform, see these links for details and workarounds that may or may not apply to your situation:

http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/7514

http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/7515

[Kamuchi]

8 hours ago, sgt_flyer said:

nice list @bewing

i'd like to add a few things -

Docking ports falling off : this is even more true for multidocking currently - 3+ multidocking ports submitted to torque, and 1 of them will break very easily under torque.

so beware of multidocking currently

Just so it`s out here:

This was adressed during the Twitch release stream: multi docking ports is still broken but they are working on getting it fixed, time frame was for a couple of days (depending the required work) and to be released as a hotfix patch when done.
As this is something that we all require to do large and stupid things, have a bit more patience regarding this issue as it is not a simple fix

[sgt_flyer]

15 minutes ago, Kamuchi said:

Just so it`s out here:

This was adressed during the Twitch release stream: multi docking ports is still broken but they are working on getting it fixed, time frame was for a couple of days (depending the required work) and to be released as a hotfix patch when done.
As this is something that we all require to do large and stupid things, have a bit more patience regarding this issue as it is not a simple fix

i know it was going to be fixed sooner or later - it's too important as a feature  i just wanted to warn about it until the fix is there  

[Kamuchi]

8 minutes ago, sgt_flyer said:

i know it was going to be fixed sooner or later - it's too important as a feature  i just wanted to warn about it until the fix is there  

Figured that, ment it in a general sense so that every one is aware it`s know and worked on with a hotfix coming soon

[Lysius]

Also be careful when trying to plan a maneuver full retrograde to reverse your orbit. This can break maneuver nodes completely.

[swjr-swis]

11 hours ago, bewing said:

The Klaw Kraken cannot be summoned anymore, because only the klaws on the focused craft are active now.

Are you entirely sure about that underlined part?

In my bug report about a Klaw oddity (visual reversal of the 'grippers'), I used two identical rover-like craft to reproduce the problem with independently launched craft. When I backed up one rover to the other, mashing both their armed Klaws together, they both become grabbed on (both show a 'Release' button, and both have to be released for the rovers to come apart again).

To me, that suggests that both Klaws are in fact active, not just the one on the focused rover.

 

Edited April 20, 2016 by swjr-swis
link

[Renegrade]

Re: Jitterbug dance

It's not always possible to evade this one, but if you construct rovers like I do, such that the wheels tend to be mounted on modular girder segments or beams, it really helps to strut the segment the wheel is attached on, to the main body.  I believe the jitter is a positive feedback loop between the wheel suspension and the craft's own flexing.

In some cases this won't be possible as the wheels may very well be attached to the main body directly, but for other cases, try strutting.  Moar™ struts!  Just be mindful that they have insane aero drag.

Have to admit, I was really excited about the new wheel engine.  While I consider rovers mostly useless in stock at present (if we had KAS-style fuel pipes, they'd be much better for ground IRSU operations), they're still fun to build and putter around in.  So I'm kinda disappointed that they're not production-ready yet...

 

[bewing]

1 hour ago, swjr-swis said:

Are you entirely sure about that underlined part?

In my bug report about a Klaw oddity (visual reversal of the 'grippers'), I used two identical rover-like craft to reproduce the problem with independently launched craft. When I backed up one rover to the other, mashing both their armed Klaws together, they both become grabbed on (both show a 'Release' button, and both have to be released for the rovers to come apart again).

To me, that suggests that both Klaws are in fact active, not just the one on the focused rover.

Hmmmm. Well, I tried multiple times to get an unfocused klaw to grip, and failed miserably -- but I was doing docking maneuvers in space. However, the important part is the kraken. And if the kraken were still around, then the instant your 2nd klaw attached, Kerbin would have vanished. No vanish = no Klaw kraken.

1 hour ago, Renegrade said:

Re: Jitterbug dance

It's not always possible to evade this one, but if you construct rovers like I do, such that the wheels tend to be mounted on modular girder segments or beams, it really helps to strut the segment the wheel is attached on, to the main body.  I believe the jitter is a positive feedback loop between the wheel suspension and the craft's own flexing.

Yes, sgt_flyer has the same idea, and I am convinced and agree with both of you. However, I think that most users are going to run into the jitterbug dance when building jets and not rovers. Because any sensible design puts the rear wheels out on the tips of the wings. So while there is a likelihood that the joints of the wings play a role in the feedback loop that creates the jitterbugging -- you can't strut a jet's wings (as you said).

Edited April 20, 2016 by bewing

[bewing]

One other important feature I forgot to mention in the original post:

Jets are much more stable now. It's a lot harder to lose control and go into a flat spin or other assorted nastiness.

And I don't know how many people besides me are affected by this one:

You can no longer walk up the shafts of the LY01 landing legs.

 

Edited April 20, 2016 by bewing

[Terwin]

3 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

In my bug report about a Klaw oddity (visual reversal of the 'grippers'), I used two identical rover-like craft to reproduce the problem with independently launched craft. When I backed up one rover to the other, mashing both their armed Klaws together, they both become grabbed on (both show a 'Release' button, and both have to be released for the rovers to come apart again).

To me, that suggests that both Klaws are in fact active, not just the one on the focused rover.

I have not done any testing of the Klaw in 1.1 yet, but the behavior you describe could be related to the inactive craft becoming part of the active craft, and thus the previously inactive klaw becoming active with something already aligned to activate it.

A proper test would need to avoid letting the inactive klaw become active through any means other than grasping the active vessel.

[Hodari]

4 hours ago, Lysius said:

Also be careful when trying to plan a maneuver full retrograde to reverse your orbit. This can break maneuver nodes completely.

You went full retrograde, man.  Never go full retrograde

[Lysius]

26 minutes ago, Hodari said:

You went full retrograde, man.  Never go full retrograde

I find having a full retrograde maneuver node directly above the surface a great help when timing landing burns on moons.

[KerikBalm]

Last night I already experience the docking ports falling off, and the not so bad clipping I used to make my previous 2.5m rovers that fit in mk3 cargobays now results in completely non-functional rovers.

I had some surface exploration designs that relied on clawing "fuel trucks" to refuel stuff... I hope I can still manage to grab what I need to grab in order to refuel.

In one case I had a small juno powered jet (external command seat, 0.625m parts) that would roll throught the water(reaction wheel torque+ wings = electric propulsion through the water :p) into the claw of the (amphibious) fuel truck. I guess that won't work now, and I'll need to switch the the fuel truck with the claw at the right time to get the small jet refueled.

[Archgeek]

16 hours ago, bewing said:

Pressing / cancels timewarp from any level in one stroke.

We've a kill warp button now?  Sweet!  I've been testing the whole time and never did catch that.

[N_Molson]

About shaders :

I'm in the same case than Regex (old graphic card), and the LEGACY_UNSUPPORTED_TERRAIN_SHADERS True trick really boosts the performance. But it definitively has side effects : terrain is overall darker, making KSC very "light green" in comparison, and also the ocean behaves weirdly (textures seem to "swap in squares" every second or so).

About low-tech landing gear :

Ok, I get it, this is the kind of stuff you can find on a very light plane like a Cessna. Still, what confused me is the description specs that display something like "crash speed : 230 m/s". A Me-262 would use something like the next one (which can be retracted). Maybe its simply a typo in the specifications description then

Edited April 20, 2016 by N_Molson

[smjjames]

6 hours ago, Lysius said:

Also be careful when trying to plan a maneuver full retrograde to reverse your orbit. This can break maneuver nodes completely.

And if I run into it, how do I fix? Just wondering, maybe I can find the bug report though.

[Lysius]

7 minutes ago, smjjames said:

And if I run into it, how do I fix? Just wondering, maybe I can find the bug report though.

quick save+reload should help.

http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/8212

[Archgeek]

2 hours ago, Lysius said:

quick save+reload should help.

http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/8212

Would a scene change suffice, or does it break it harder than that?

[bewing]

3 hours ago, N_Molson said:

Still, what confused me is the description specs that display something like "crash speed : 230 m/s". A Me-262 would use something like the next one (which can be retracted). Maybe its simply a typo in the specifications description then

It's an old/obsolete description from 1.0.5. That number does not correspond in any way to the current functionality of the part.

[BLB263]

21 minutes ago, Archgeek said:

Would a scene change suffice, or does it break it harder than that?

Going to KSC then back to the mission would fix it for me.

Edited April 20, 2016 by BLB263