Cant Deploy While Stowed is BACK?!?

[G'th]

Just an FYI to OP, seeing as nobody apparently seemed to notice why he's getting this issue. 

The reason the gear isn't deploying is because you're clipping them into the part its attached to. The gear by default stick out a lot from the part they're attached to. In OP's case, he has apparently off-set them into the part to minimize this bump. You have to leave some space between the root part and the landing gear doors to prevent this.

Generally though, this whole issue would be resolved better by just getting rid of the mechanic altogether, and just retaining the basic things like wing lift or RCS deactivating in fairings. But, it should still be toggle-able, given how people use the stock fairings anyway. 

KSP is largely popular because if its Lego like approach to ship building, and what this mechanic does prevents a lot of things you can do towards that end. Much like in this issue OP is experiencing (and me for that matter). I would kill to be able to disable this mechanic so I can hide the god awful looking landing gear pods in my fuselage. 

[AlamoVampire]

@G'th While I admire the acuity of your eyes good sir, the parts are NOT clipped in the slightest, nor repositioned using any tool. the depth at which they sit is as designed by the devs. The problem is the check the game is doing. the fact the part in question is rooted to the CARGO BAY is causing the issue.

Edited June 20, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[G'th]

Hm, indeed. After looking at the second picture in the OP a bit more (as in, for the first time :P), you are right.

Though what I said does cause the issue as well

[AlamoVampire]

when i first built the Goliath back in version 1.0.4 <and keep in mind, the actual lay out of the ship is identical to back then, since well, same craft file  only change was a docking port set up in the bay to link its smaller cousin to it for a size comparison> and in 1.0.4 the nose wheel worked just fine. only now does it have an issue. which, is why im for removing the bad mechanic anyway. 

here is why:

1. Its a bad mechanic, its having unintended consequences that are harming not only myself and my ships, but others and their vessels.

2. Its placing a "helping" hand that is not help but robbing you of valuable learning experiences. How are you going to learn to not fire a rocket off inside a fairing or in a cargo bay if the game refuses to let you?

3. Old argument, but still valid: Soyuz HOT STAGES its first core stage from its 2nd core stage while the first core is STILL BURNING. This check has been known to stop us from replicating this in game. Rumored to be toned down to allow it, but, I require others to confirm or deny that as I lack proper soyuz parts to properly test it myself.

[AlamoVampire]

Ok, so, this threads sat dormant for 10 days now, and in the interim 1.1.3 has come out. To my abject HORROR this issue is NOT resolved. 

SO, to @Claw @KasperVld or whomever else on the squad staff can answer this: Why is this mechanic STILL here? I thought you guys dumped it? This mechanic has made the use of certain craft more complicated than need be. Take my Goliath Class Shuttle way back in the OP for example. For the gear to work now while I am landing, which used to be rather straight forward, now, I have to hope it holds steady while I fiddle with opening the CARGO BAY just to deploy landing gear! This craft worked perfectly PRE 1.1 now, it does not and the only change made to the craft between 1.0.4 and now? payload. a stupid docking adapter for a picture was added to the cargo bay. The nose wheel has not moved or been otherwise altered since the vessel came to its current <payload not withstanding> configuration back in 1.0.4 and now, once its off the launch clamps the game declares the wheel blocked and forces steps that are beyond absurd just to make the nose wheel work. Can you please just remove this mechanic from the game or at least give an option to shut it down?

I honestly respect the intentional idea that was on paper for this, but, in practice? I can not find a reason for it. Prevent people from breaking ships by accidentally staging? This isnt a valid option in my opinion because where is the lesson in having the game say: "NOPE bad idea, lets not do that." I feel this goes against the very essence of the game, I really do, because as far as I knew and have known since .21 some years ago now, the point of this game is ridiculous explosions and situations that arise by player driven mistake or poor planning or over sight or something. Taking away learning chances is a mistake in my book. I know I am some lowly digit on the forums, but, this mechanic really needs to go, it really does.

Edited June 30, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[cfds]

I cannot imagine any reason but pride on the developers' part: removing it now would mean admitting that it was a bad idea from the start. Luckily for them there are enough apologists about that are happy that they can accidentally deploy gears and antennae without destroying their craft. For all the others who have mastered the rare skill of "not pressing 'G' when they do not mean to", all that remains is frustration..

[AlamoVampire]

@cfds The horrible part is Goliath is pretty much grounded until they fix this mechanic. Opening the cargo bay in ATMOSPHERE with or without payload is not an option. I should NEVER HAVE TO OPEN THE CARGO BAY IN ATMOSPHERE to deploy the gear. 

I am sorry devs but its clear this "mechanic" is not helping, but instead its harmful and has to go.

[FizzerUK]

Getting this also.

Just started building my first refueling station.

Both payload launches using 'Procedural fairings' (not cargo bays) has Antenna Dishes and Solar Panels with the error 'Cannot Deploy while stowed).

Thought it was just me, but maybe something has surfaced.

Going to check my old RemoteSat network deployment I used for Kerbin and Minmus network, see if that has any bugs now.

IS there a way to hack the save game to have these deployed??

[FizzerUK]

39 minutes ago, WildLynx said:

If you manned mission nearby, you can use KAS/KIS mod (need both?) to detach part, quickly deploy it, and even more quickly bolt it back. Practice required.

I have both, along with tools onboard, just need the engineer. I will try this. Thanks...

[AlamoVampire]

@WildLynx I like the kis/kas idea but have a problem with it. Its good for small things but not so much so for landing gear. 

"Servicing" antennae or solar arrays is a cool mission idea, one I intend to use fully cuz hey EVA is FUN! Also its a neat RP idea  But it shouldnt be expected of us, the players to fix what we are now facing.

[AlamoVampire]

Hello again ladies and gentlemen. I have found something that deserves its own thread. We are well aware of this fun little check the game does to see if something is closed inside a cargo bay or a fairing or service bay. We also are aware of how this check prevents you from using an engine lets say inside a fairing or cargo bay. Well, what I found just now was absolutely SHOCKING. I will also say, this will or could be a long post, but, will decidedly be picture heavy. With that said, I want to say this: This check is NOT CONSISTENT. We all remember this little test craft made for a dev during the experimentals phase of 1.1.3:

This craft as confirmed by forum user @swjr-swis shows the landing gear failing to move after being rendered inoperable after the cargo bay even TWITCHES. Doesnt matter if its launched or not. I was playing around with a plane inspired by Mobile Suit Gundam Wing, and put a rocket engine into the cargo ramp. This ramp when closed occludes the engine. The engine in question is the LVT-30 "Reliant" Liquid Fuel Engine. I decided to punch the engine as a lark and to my shock, this happened:

Hence this thread. I thought this is odd. SO, I went to the SPH and made a test stand. Available here for SPH version: http://www.filedropper.com/stowedteststandsph_1  the note in the hangar says Action Group 1: Toggle Engine. Here are some pictures of the ship in hangar, immediately as it loads to the runway and well, firing the engine THROUGH an occluded end Mono Prop Tank. No where does the game complain that the engine is stowed. The odd part here is, the landing gear remains OPERATIONAL after moving the cargo doors??

In SPH to show the parts: First shows top-ish down inside the bay, 2nd is showing 3 of 6 RTGs <3 each side, same holds true of the VAB version>

Loading in:  

Testing the LVT-30:  

Now, we move onto the VAB version of this ship: http://www.filedropper.com/stowedteststandvab

Inside VAB same as the SPH:

Loading onto the launch pad:

Testing the LVT-30:

Testing the Landing Gear and getting told that IT is stowed:

I want to point out to the eagle eyed here, that the time codes do not add up on the engine test <launch pad> and gear test <launch pad> thats because it hit me to double check and grab a picture of the games alert after starting the thread. The take away from all of this is, at least to me, this check is so absurdly hit and miss as to be useless. I am frankly floored by this, completely FLOORED by this. It completely ALLOWS the engine to fire while CLEARLY stowed, but heaven forbid I use something that is clearly on the OUTSIDE after I move the cargo bay? I have been, and shall continue to be a proponent of this check being removed completely. It is clearly not doing its job and when it TRIES, it is missing so badly as to completely FAIL. Look, I am one guy, who is absurdly frustrated by this. I will leave this up to anyone who wants to make a tracker report on this to do so. I leave this thread here as I really do not know where this truly belongs, if you are a moderator and reading this and know a better home, place it there. But, let this stand tribute to the oddity that is this check and why it should go.

 

Edited July 13, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[Vanamonde]

Overlapping threads have been merged, to keep the discussion all in one place. 

[specialopsdave]

Crazy story, but... I got the same message in the editor... WITH SOLAR PANELS. They were the retractable 1x6 panels, and when I tried deploying them to see how it looked... There it was. I had to delete and replace the part, and it worked fine, bud how does that work on a solar panel?

[The_Rocketeer]

Guys, really, there are and always have been a bunch of issues like this that are completely resolved by simply avoiding them. For example, SAS doesn't work as intended during physics warp, so I generally avoid and take extraordinary care if ever doing this. Having discovered an imperfection, I would never put myself in the position of being entirely dependent on an imperfect game mechanic. If this problem is badly affecting your game experience, I suggest you adjust you play-style.

Here's a simple rule to help u out: DO NOT MOUNT LANDING GEARS ON CARGO BAYS EVER.

Also, the devs do have human lives to live without endlessly responding to user gripe-threads. When at work they basically live KSP, when at home they might like a little break from it. They have replied to this thread already. They have many thousands of bugs to resolve, and they're working thru an almighty backlog or reports of various quality. This issue might be a major deal to you right now that u want fixed pronto and that u think is easy to solve, but to them it's just another issue on the top of a monstrous big pile of issues which have to take their turn, and they have an obligation not to just eliminate hours of someone else's work but to devote time to finding the best solution. Given how much noise @AlamoVampire has made about it, and the fact that they've checked in here, I imagine this has landed on somebody's desk - that doesn't mean it's Priority 1.

Lastly, this forum is not the proper channel by which bugs are officially reported and sorted, it's a community forum that the devs are decent enough to participate in on a fairly frequent basis. They're under no obligation to respond to anything posted here, ever. You're totally free to be disappointed, but frankly I'm awed by the level of dev involvement, interaction and discussion out of the KSP team around this forum.

Edited July 13, 2016 by The_Rocketeer

[AlamoVampire]

1. I really wish that @Vanamonde had NOT merged my post from 16 hours ago into this thread as it points out something should NOT BE BURIED in a similar thread, so I beg for an unmerge please. Thats why my opening said "deserves its own thread" but here we are....

2. The devs or at least Claw, Squelch and Arsonide are aware of this BS at least insofar as gear/cargo bays go. I should know having spoken with all 3 on that.

3. Already made a bug tracker ticket on the gear portion and it was confirmed by another user.

4. @The_Rocketeer #3 and #4 are for you, not putting gear on a cargo bay ever just isnt realistic.

Edited July 13, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[Corona688]

17 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@swjr-swisWe are well aware of this fun little check the game does to see if something is closed inside a cargo bay or a fairing or service bay. We also are aware of how this check prevents you from using an engine lets say inside a fairing or cargo bay. Well, what I found just now was absolutely SHOCKING.

Thanks, this testing and reporting of results is no doubt very useful to the devs.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Corona688

[The_Rocketeer]

17 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@Vanamonde3. Already made a bug tracker ticket on the gear portion and it was confirmed by another user.

4. @The_Rocketeer #3 and #4 are for you, not putting gear on a cargo bay ever just isnt realistic.

Vanamonde, if you're reading this I'm sorry but I couldn't delete your link from the quote. Something  buggy about the forum, or perhaps just my browser?

@AlamoVampire 3. great, so ur problem is definitely in the heap of problems being worked thru. So why are u still banging on about it here?

4. Why not? Perhaps the engineers at KSC have compatability issues between the circuitry that operates landing gears and the circuitry that operates cargo bays, making their interaction unreliable. That sounds pretty realistic to me, much more so than 100% reliability, just takes a little imagination.

[AlamoVampire]

@The_Rocketeer Im making noise because im not the only person having this issue.

as to the other bit, not even a kerbal, not even jeb is that reckless lol.

[Corona688]

27 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

@The_Rocketeer Im making noise because im not the only person having this issue.

"Noise" is unhelpful.  They know.  Constantly telling them how angry you are doesn't make them work any faster.  Their hands are full with a bunch of things, but with the console release out, major bugfixes are literally the first thing on their agenda AFAIK.

If you seriously want the bug solved/worked around faster?  Drop the noise but keep doing what you're doing -- testing.  Explore the boundaries of the problem, find the shape of it.  Provide files and screenshots for any difference in behavior you see.  Post at the tracker.  Help them.  Right now you're teaching them to ignore you, and this is a bug, not a tribunal.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Corona688

[The_Rocketeer]

3 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

@The_Rocketeer Im making noise because im not the only person having this issue.

I think that goes without saying. The very nature of bugs and game issues is that they effect every copy of the game and user. But not every person experiencing a bug or game issue makes as much fuss about it on the forum as you have over this one. They submit a report and avoid the problem until a release comes out claiming to fix it. I strongly advise you to try this.

[AlamoVampire]

I want to posit something. This is for the camp of put it on the tracker and hush. When in the history of anything has file complaint, then say nothing any more ever worked? To my knowledge, never. 

The problem is, there is no indication by the game, in construction or on mission that something you placed externally on a cargo bay or service bay will and sometimes DOES become deactivated because of the cargo doors. Take my Goliath Shuttle, the very craft that sparked the resurgence of this conversation. Had I not by intentional design had a secondary method of recovery, namely a ton of parachutes, the lack of any indication that opening the cargo bay rendered the nose wheel inoperable I could have lost the crew. But I am an experienced player so I know to plan for failures. The fresh from the box newbie? Nope.

No, as Wildlynx said, we, the vets must fend for ourselves, and by extension we fend for our incoming brothers and sisters. We must rise as a chorus, we must sing loud of these issues, only then will they hear us, only then will things like this take priority.

[The_Rocketeer]

@WildLynx @AlamoVampire it's perfectly obvious that Squad are already investing considerable quantities of man-hours in bugfixing KSP. The idea that they won't do this unless you scream from the rooftops how annoying the bugs are is frankly absurd. Recent updates in the scale of weeks, not years have seen dozens of fixes for game-breaking and long-standing bugs.

All that continuing to berate the devs for failure to prioritise your demands will achieve is to force them into reclusion, because being drawn into public confrontation with an angry customer is potentially far more damaging to their brand than simply letting that person throw their toys out of the pram. If you want to see results, try doing what is asked and be grateful that anybody even bothered to answer at all - I've seen plenty of other videogames that totally lacked the human touch from the devs, the KSP team are practically the archetype of the reasonable fan-oriented development process.

Time to pony up, thoroughly and scientifically investigate the problem yourself and deliver the relevant details through the proper channels, or pipe down and let them just get on with it in their own time. You've made your point, loudly and repeatedly, and I think it's time to realise what you really have here is a storm in a teacup and your contributions to is are far from productive.

[Corona688]

31 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

I want to posit something. This is for the camp of put it on the tracker and hush. When in the history of anything has file complaint, then say nothing any more ever worked? To my knowledge, never. 

That is exactly the opposite of my suggestion.

Keep testing.  Keep doing useful things.  And above all keep posting them on the bug tracker, the thing the devs built so people could bring bugs to their attention.  Don't post that you're doing things. Post what you're doing, post screenshots, post files, post examples, post details.  That's what it's there for.  They notice it.

That is much harder for devs to overlook than angry excrementsposts here and all over, with no conceivable use to them or anyone, in the wrong subforums of a forum they rarely read anyway.

In short:  If you want the bug fixed, post useful things, in the right place.

If you're just enjoying your tantrum, by all means keep doing what you're doing, but don't pretend you're doing anything but embarrassing yourself.

P.S.  LOL at "vet".  I remember bugs that could curl your hair.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Corona688

[AlamoVampire]

I posted this issue to the tracker some days back. I find it rather difficult to use. I test as best I can and post my results where I can. This sadly seems to be insufficient for people. So, they blindly chastise with out looking deeper or simply asking why the noise is being made here and call it a tantrum.

I am tired of the slings, arrows and barbs flung at me. This community overall has been wonderful but I find more and more that people would rather attack than ask. 

Closed minded barbs, attacks and insults finally win. Thank you for showing me I do not belong, that I am doing wrong the only thing I know how to do to try to help fix a problem. 

Edited July 16, 2016 by AlamoVampire

[The_Rocketeer]

@AlamoVampire I don't mean to attack you personally, I just feel a lot of people have all been telling you more or less the same thing and your consistent response has been 'but that doesn't apply to me because this is a BIG deal'. This is the same size deal as all the other bugs in the tracker.

Please don't feel like a pariah, you seem like a decent and friendly-enough guy, and there are certainly some other folks around here I'd far sooner see beaten into intellectual jelly. If any of my remarks have seemed barbed, I apologise and I hope you can see that actually my involvement here is made with the best intentions - it would be as bad for your game to let this one issue become the focus of all your KSPing as it would be for my forum time to keep on reading about it.