Kerbal Space Program 1.11.1 is live!

[Chequers]

I've just noticed that all of my Kerbals in my new career save, despite only have one star of experience, have access to all the perks of a 5 star experienced Kerbal. As do all of my early-tech probe cores. Could this have been caused by the 1.11.1 update? Or is this another bug?

[VoidSquid]

https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/27169
https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/27162

 

[TriggerAu]

4 hours ago, Lisias said:

The upgadepipeline not being updated on the last few releases may corroborate my thesis - some things are being missed when loading KSP 1.10 parts into KSP 1.11 which introduced some new artefacts to deal with (and are not being done on loading 1.10.x crafts on 1.11).

It should be something pretty stupid that once found we will all collectively facepalm ourselves while getting drunk after hours - these small pesky bugs are the ones that really plays havoc, huge mistakes are easily detected.

I get ya, kk so for some extra info the UpgradePipeline is what changes parts/save values when we do things like remove old parts and need to reposition new ones, or make significant changes to a module that requires field changes. Every save that is opened is checked by it, but there is no code in it for 1.10->1.11 for example. For a comparitive idea a 1.10 save opened in 1.11 would be expected to have only the version stamp changed by the upgradepipeline. It would also have new fields with their default values for existing modules, but those are handled as part of the saving process and would match the old saves behaviour (unless noted in the change log) - it can be admittedly hard to see the diff between the upgradepipeline and save Im thinkin.

A good example f the UpradePipeline is a 1.6.x save being opened, which would run the upgradepipeline scripts that replaced and positioned the new separators and decouplers in place for the old parts that are no longer loaded from 1.7 onwards.

Dont mean we arent seeing an issue of course, just clarifying the differnce for some info

[Lisias]

42 minutes ago, TriggerAu said:

I get ya, kk so for some extra info the UpgradePipeline is what changes parts/save values when we do things like remove old parts and need to reposition new ones, or make significant changes to a module that requires field changes. [...] it can be admittedly hard to see the diff between the upgradepipeline and save Im thinkin.

Good point. I initially thought on the upgradepipeline because it was used to fix up a bork with the control surfaces deploy position, that was playing havoc with Atmospheric Autopilot - so I jumped into the conclusion that if it would being used to fix something like this, it would also being used to do any kind of transformations. On TweakScale, I detected that whatever was shoving back into the craft data from the prefab (overwriting the ones read from the file) was being executed after OnLoad and before OnStart (where originally TweakScale had some migration code that suddenly became dead on the water), and this also hinted me on the upgradepipeline.

Well, learnt something new today - rarely a bad experience.

In a way or another, my last hypothesis was proven wrong. Since I have a craft file that explodes on launch, and the exact same craft rebuilt from scratch on 1.11 and that works, I'm KDIFFing the parts from both files looking for something weird and... Well, nothing is different to the moment.

The parts that I identified as probable source of the problem (since changing them on the bugged file solved the issue) are the Mark2Cockpit, ServiceBay.125.v2 and cargoContainer - and these parts are virtually identical on both files, but small changes on the the fields:

• part
• persistentId
• pos, attpos
• rot, attRot, attRot0
• link, attN

And this is the last nail on the current hypothesis' coffin. So, being used to change values on crafts or not, the upgradepipeline is innocent on this one.

[alphaprior]

9 hours ago, Just Jim said:

 

Wow, I'm sorry your station blew up, but Klesh and everyone else is right. Without a bug report, there's very little we can do. At the very least i would need a copy of your game save, or a craft file of the station that blew up.
I'm sorry it's inconvenient, but there is a process we have to follow. Bug reports are the first step.
This is the first I've seen this particular issue reported, so attaching a game save or craft file at least gives us somewhere to start looking.

Well my space station is still in orbit thanks to frequent saves. The update was released just a few days ago. I guess under special conditions, mods, ship, etc. the issue appears.
As a mentioned in my other post there is a line in KSP log the moment where explosion starts.
Event Weld Started not assigned to state Ladder (Idle)

My savegame is modded. FILE

7 hours ago, Lisias said:

I'm interested on this, I'm fighting something similar on TweakScale. Can you zip the craft file and post it here?

 

There is no craft file it's a space station which was built in many different stages over time, but you can check savegame.

[Just Jim]

19 minutes ago, alphaprior said:

Well my space station is still in orbit thanks to frequent saves. The update was released just a few days ago. I guess under special conditions, mods, ship, etc. the issue appears.
As a mentioned in my other post there is a line in KSP log the moment where explosion starts.
Event Weld Started not assigned to state Ladder (Idle)

My savegame is modded. FILE

There is no craft file it's a space station which was built in many different stages over time, but you can check savegame.

OK, thanks. It says modded... what mods are you using? I need to rule out if it was a mod-related bug or not. We don't really support those. It's up to the mod maker.  but I'll still take a look.
What concerns me is two lines down in your log from what your wrote:

This is an error:

[ERR 16:18:22.762] Can't remove Rigidbody because ConfigurableJoint, ConfigurableJoint depends on it 

And worse... this is an NRE... NRE's are bad, and this very well might be the issue:

[EXC 16:18:22.910] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
    KerbalEVA.ragdoll_OnEnter (KFSMState st) (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0)
    KerbalFSM.RunEvent (KFSMEvent evt) (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0)
    KerbalEVA.OnCollisionEnter (UnityEngine.Collision c) (at <2afc64dea36946459d4707808bdac511>:0)
    UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object)
    ModuleManager.UnityLogHandle.InterceptLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object)
    UnityEngine.Debug:CallOverridenDebugHandler(Exception, Object)

I can't promise anything...  I don't actually fix bugs, except on very rare occasions. My job is to find them , confirm them, and provide as much information as possible for the devs. But I'll do the best I can to try and pin down what's going on, promise

[alphaprior]

I understand mods are outside devs control but like all modded games they cause issues quite often but they are so important that are part of the game. This issue don't know if it's because of a mod or not but before the minor update there were no explosions.

Here is the KSP.log if it can be more helpful.
At line 46520 Bilkin goes EVA
At line 46539 First error, I guess when I attach the spotlight.

I have 104 mods... here is the list from CKAN. 
 

AlphaMensae's Modular Launch Pads (ModularLaunchPads 2.1.2)
Animated Decouplers (AnimatedDecouplers v1.4.2.2)
Antenna Helper (AntennaHelper 2:1.0.7.2)
Astronomer's Visual Pack (AstronomersVisualPack 2:v4.05)
Astronomer's Visual Pack-8k Textures (AVP-8kTextures v1.11)
AT Utils (AT-Utils v1.9.6)
B9 Part Switch (B9PartSwitch v2.17.0)
BetterBurnTime (BetterBurnTime 1.10)
BreakingGround-DLC (BreakingGround-DLC (unmanaged))
Chatterer (Chatterer 0.9.99)
ClickThrough Blocker (ClickThroughBlocker 1:0.1.10.15)
Community Category Kit (CommunityCategoryKit v5.2.0.0)
Community Parts Titles (CommunityPartsTitles 0.6.8)
Community Parts Titles Extras: Categories (CommunityPartsTitlesExtrasCategory 0.6.8)
Community Parts Titles Extras: CCK - No Duplicates (CommunityPartsTitlesExtrasNoCCKDup 0.6.8)
Community Resource Pack (CommunityResourcePack 1.4.2)
Community Tech Tree (CommunityTechTree 1:3.4.3)
Configurable Containers (ConfigurableContainers 2.6.1)
Connected Living Space (ConnectedLivingSpace 2.0.0.6)
Contract Configurator (ContractConfigurator 1.30.5)
Contract Pack: Bases and Stations Reborn (ContractConfigurator-KerbinSpaceStation 2:3.7.2.3)
Contract Pack: Field Research (ContractConfigurator-FieldResearch 1.2.2)
Cryo Tanks (CryoTanks 1.5.6)
Cryo Tanks Core (CryoTanks-Core 1.5.6)
Cryogenic Engines (CryoEngines 1:1.2.1)
Deployable Engines Plugin (DeployableEngines 1.2.3)
Distant Object Enhancement Continued (DistantObject v2.0.2.0)
Distant Object Enhancement Continued default config (DistantObject-default v2.0.2.0)
Docking Port Alignment Indicator (DockingPortAlignmentIndicator 6.9.2.2)
Draggable Navball (DraggableNavball v1.0.12)
Duna Direct (DunaDirect 1.10.1)
Dynamic Battery Storage (DynamicBatteryStorage 2:2.2.1.0)
Easy Vessel Switch (EVS) (EasyVesselSwitch 2.2)
Environmental Visual Enhancements Redux (EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements 3:1.11.2.1)
Firespitter Core (FirespitterCore v7.17)
Global Construction Core (GroundConstruction-Core 2.6.4.1)
Hangar Extender (HangerExtenderExtended 3.6.0)
Hide Empty Tech Tree Nodes (HideEmptyTechNodes 1.2.0)
IndicatorLights (IndicatorLights 1.7)
IndicatorLights Community Extensions (IndicatorLightsCommunityExtensions 1.6.2)
Interstellar Fuel Switch (InterstellarFuelSwitch 3.23)
Interstellar Fuel Switch Core (InterstellarFuelSwitch-Core 3.23)
Karbonite (Karbonite 1:1.4.0)
Kerbal Alarm Clock (KerbalAlarmClock v3.13.0.0)
Kerbal Atomics (KerbalAtomics 1:1.2.1)
Kerbal Atomics - NFE Integration (KerbalAtomics-NFECompatibility 1.2.1)
Kerbal Atomics - Other Mod Support (KerbalAtomics-NTRModSupport 1.2.1)
Kerbal Attachment System (KAS 1.7)
Kerbal Engineer Redux (KerbalEngineerRedux 1.1.8.3)
Kerbal Inventory System (KIS 1.28)
Kerbal Joint Reinforcement Continued (KerbalJointReinforcementContinued v3.5.2)
Kerbal Planetary Base Systems (KerbalPlanetaryBaseSystems v1.6.12)
Kerbal Research & Development (KRnD 1.16.0.8)
Kerbal Reusability Expansion (SpaceXLegs 2.9.1)
Konstruction (Konstruction 1.4.0)
KSP Interstellar Extended (KSPInterstellarExtended 1.26.17)
Making History (MakingHistory-DLC 1.11.0)
Malemute Rover (MalemuteRover 1.4.0)
MechJeb 2 (MechJeb2 2.12.0.0)
Module Manager (ModuleManager 4.1.4)
Near Future Construction (NearFutureConstruction 1.3.1)
Near Future Electrical (NearFutureElectrical 1.2.1)
Near Future Electrical - Decaying RTGs (NearFutureElectrical-DecayingRTGs 1.2.1)
Near Future Electrical Core (NearFutureElectrical-Core 1.2.1)
Near Future IVA Props (NearFutureProps 1:0.6.4)
Near Future Propulsion (NearFuturePropulsion 1.3.1)
Near Future Propulsion - Xenon Hall Effect Thrusters (NearFuturePropulsion-XenonHETs 1.3.1)
Near Future Solar (NearFutureSolar 1.3.1)
Near Future Solar Core (NearFutureSolar-Core 1.3.1)
Near Future Spacecraft (NearFutureSpacecraft 1.4.1)
Near Future Spacecraft - LFO Engines (NearFutureSpacecraft-OrbitalLFOEngines 1.4.1)
Patch Manager (PatchManager 0.0.17.2)
PlanetShine (PlanetShine 0.2.6.3)
PlanetShine - Default configuration (PlanetShine-Config-Default 0.2.6.3)
Procedural Fairings (ProceduralFairings 1:v1.8.3)
Procedural Parts (ProceduralParts v2.1.2)
RasterPropMonitor (RasterPropMonitor 1:v0.31.4)
RasterPropMonitor Core (RasterPropMonitor-Core 1:v0.31.4)
Real Plume (RealPlume 2:v13.3.2)
Real Plume - Stock Configs (RealPlume-StockConfigs v4.0.5)
ReStock (ReStock 1.3.1)
ReStock Extra - Rigid Legs (RestockRigidLegs 1.3.1)
ReStock+ (ReStockPlus 1.3.1)
Retractable Lifting Surface Module (RetractableLiftingSurface 0.2.1.1)
SCANsat (SCANsat v20.4)
scatterer (Scatterer 3:v0.0723)
Scatterer Default Config (Scatterer-config 3:v0.0723)
Scatterer Sunflare (Scatterer-sunflare 3:v0.0723)
SmokeScreen - Extended FX Plugin (SmokeScreen 2.8.14.0)
SpaceTux Library (SpaceTuxLibrary 0.0.5)
Stockalike Station Parts Expansion Redux (StationPartsExpansionRedux 1.4.0)
Stockalike Station Parts Expansion Redux - Metal Surfaces (StationPartsExpansionRedux-Metal 1.4.0)
TextureReplacer (TextureReplacer v4.3.1)
Textures Unlimited (TexturesUnlimited 1.5.10.25)
Toolbar Controller (ToolbarController 1:0.1.9.4)
TriggerAu Flags (TriggerAu-Flags v2.10.0.0)
Tundra Exploration - Stockalike Dragon V2 and Falcon 9 (TundraExploration 3.3.0)
Tundra Technologies (TundraTechnologies 3.3.0)
TweakScale - Rescale Everything! (TweakScale v2.4.4.5)
USI Core (USI-Core 1.4.0)
USI Exploration Pack (USI-EXP 1.4.0)
USI Freight Transport Technologies (USI-FTT 1.4.0)
USI Kolonization Systems (MKS/OKS) (UKS 1:1.4.1)
USI Life Support (USI-LS 1.4.0)
USI Tools (USITools 1.4.0)
Zero MiniAVC (ZeroMiniAVC 1:1.1.0.1)
 

[SpaceFace545]

So for some reason the new lights don't save their color choice when you load the craft. I would change the lights to green and then launch and then the lights would all be default.

[Dunbaratu]

I wonder if it would be helpful, as a mandatory field in the bug tracker, to make people have to tell you *both* the KSP version they're playing on now *and* the KSP version their campaign started with.  Some bugs may require going through the version upgrade path to exist, and don't exist on games newly created from scratch.  Such bugs would be impossible for the devs to re-create (and thus impossible to solve) if the reporting user never mentioned the crucial fact that it happened on a game that spanned a version update.

[Rafa Hdz]

6 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

So for some reason the new lights don't save their color choice when you load the craft. I would change the lights to green and then launch and then the lights would all be default.

Hi!
We see our craft with lights save their colors when loaded. Is the craft you are using new? Could you share the craft file?

Could you try loading this one?

Police Rover.craft

[MZ_per_X1]

I would like to thank @Just Jim and @TriggerAufor the little insight. I hope console bugs get looked at just as quickly as the ones reported in these forums. (The state of the game has been very unstable since the autumn.) 

[Krazy1]

6 hours ago, Rafa Hdz said:

Hi!
We see our craft with lights save their colors when loaded.

I was having this problem in 1.11.0 too but I couldn't reproduce it quickly 1.11.1.

However, I do see that blinking lights aren't right... the light emission of the Mk1 light does blink but the light source stays on solid. 

But I do not care about the lights. I just want you to fix the broken Ctrl-Z undo in the editor! It changes invisible parameters like fuel level, fuel flow, cargo items, deflection angle... everything in the PAW. It doesn't include parameter changes in the undo history. AND it undoes these hidden parameters back to the second prior visible model change. One Ctrl-Z can undo numerous invisible parameter changes. It's like I'm getting punished for making a mistake. Some users may not even realize what happened. Bug report 13492 has been open 4 years. 

[rmaine]

On 1/28/2021 at 6:42 PM, rmaine said:

Maybe so, but that's not at all what the description says. The description specifically says it cannot be built in parts using EVA construction - nothing about the timing of assembled parts. If that is indeed what it meant, then I'd say the new string makes it more confusing rather than less so. Granted I haven't yet seen the actual string - just the above description of it. Granted further it does say that the change is just in the contract description, which implies that the actual contract working is unchanged. I sort of hope so because I pretty much always construct large bases by launching a small hub and expanding it using ExtraPlanetary LaunchPads (or something comparable like SimpleConstruction). That definitely works for those sorts of contracts now. I have to launch the hub after the contract is accepted, but then I can expand it later to meet all the other conditions.

Started a new 1.11.1 career a few days ago and I can verify that base contracts *CAN* still be completed by launching a small hub and expanding it using Extraplanetary Launchpads. Thankfully. :-) I just completed a mun base contract that required a cupola and the ability to support 6 kerbals, neither of which were met by my initial hub. So I'd say the new description is just plain wrong; no the base does not have to be launched complete. I can't testify as to exactly what the actual requirement might be, but it clearly is not "launched complete." To be at least a little fair, I admit that Extraplanetary Launchpads is a mod. It might be that the description is accurate for the unmodded game. I still think that the new description is more confusing than the original.

[Issac]

Great udpate! I love the new fearture that kerbal can move heavier parts

I'm working on an Exoskeleton mod that can make a single kerbal lift more weight. It seems i have to review my code to fit the newer version

[Rakete]

@TriggerAu

Thanks for your Post on the patching strategy. Can we expect a 1.11.2 in order to get some more fixes before the development train moves on to whole new features in 1.12 ?! 

 

Thanks in advance.

[KerbMav]

2 hours ago, Issac said:

Great udpate! I love the new fearture that kerbal can move heavier parts

I'm working on an Exoskeleton mod that can make a single kerbal lift more weight. It seems i have to review my code to fit the newer version

“Get away from Val, you..!!!”

[Rakete]

New visual bug found since 1.11.1 

Bug #27233: Stock Engine Plume broken since 1.11.1 - Kerbal Space Program - Squad Bugtracker 

Engine exhaust does not match current engine throttle even if the thrustlimiter is set to 100%. See Picture:

Broken Engine Plume KSP 1.11.1 - Imgur 

The exhaust is far to less for 100% Throttle and thrust limiter on 100%.

@ the fabulous community here: Please add some evidence pictures to the ticket.

 

@TriggerAu @Just Jim

Can you please adress all the cumulated visual bugs in the next update please. Such as the one mentioned above, or for example this one:

Bug #26879: Graphic Bug: housing of the SP-L 1x6 and or the SP-W 3x2 appears half opened - Kerbal Space Program - Squad Bugtracker 

There are some more.

The visual bugs are really a bummer to satisfying gameplay. Engines need (!!!) a full exhaust plume to be satisfying to the player experience. Rockets without the nice exhaust are like soft parts of the human body under certain circumstances: not satisfying. You get what I mean

 

At the moment, that I am at a point where I stop playing due to the cumulated visual bugs. They really disturb my gameplay experience - more than little functional bugs.

Edited February 6, 2021 by Rakete

[Just Jim]

7 hours ago, Rakete said:

@TriggerAu @Just Jim

Can you please address all the cumulated visual bugs in the next update please. Such as the one mentioned above, or for example this one:

I can certainly pass this on. but I have to explain, I do not actually fix bugs... except for a couple very, very rare occasions. Nor am I the one who decides what gets fixed, or when. Those decisions are a lot more complicated than it might first appear, and made far above my head.  I am a QA Tester... which is pretty much what it says. I test things, and then provide as much information and feedback as possible for the engineers... including hundreds and hundreds of bug reports. I'm not sure how much more I'm allowed to say. 
But having said that, I will absolutely pass this on.

[Rakete]

11 hours ago, Just Jim said:

I can certainly pass this on. but I have to explain, I do not actually fix bugs... except for a couple very, very rare occasions. Nor am I the one who decides what gets fixed, or when. Those decisions are a lot more complicated than it might first appear, and made far above my head.  I am a QA Tester... which is pretty much what it says. I test things, and then provide as much information and feedback as possible for the engineers... including hundreds and hundreds of bug reports. I'm not sure how much more I'm allowed to say. 
But having said that, I will absolutely pass this on.

Alright. I didn't know your job splits. I just saw, that some bugs are assigned to you, so I thought it would be a nice idea to give you a ping. :-) 

It didn't mean to put pressure on you. I just wanted to make it clearer, that visual bugs are also relevant, even if they not prohibit progression in a direct way. At the moment there are some bugs of this visual kind accumulated, and i think, it would be nice to take a look at the visuals in the QA-loops. 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Rakete

[Just Jim]

3 hours ago, Rakete said:

Alright. I didn't know your job splits. I just saw, that some bugs are assigned to you, so I thought it would be a nice idea to give you a ping. :-) 

It didn't mean to put pressure on you. I just wanted to make it clearer, that visual bugs are also relevant, even if they not prohibit progression in a direct way. At the moment there are some bugs of this visual kind accumulated, and i think, it would be nice to take a look at the visuals in the QA-loops. 

Oh, it's cool. No problem. I'm very strict about the NDA's I've signed, and I don't really talk about my job on here, so no-one really knows what I do outside the team... not even my family. 

Actually, the best way to see who does what is to watch the game credits... I'm in there somewhere, as is TriggerAU 

[VoidSquid]

23 hours ago, Rakete said:

At the moment, that I am at a point where I stop playing due to the cumulated visual bugs.

Probably a redundant question, but simply playing an older version, not an option?

[Rakete]

27 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

Oh, it's cool. No problem. I'm very strict about the NDA's I've signed, and I don't really talk about my job on here, so no-one really knows what I do outside the team... not even my family. 

Actually, the best way to see who does what is to watch the game credits... I'm in there somewhere, as is TriggerAU 

Yeah, nobody reads the credits. Anywhere. Sorry to say so. But I will take a look, when I start KSP again. Probably after the next bugfix, as the situation is currently very buggy and doesn't delivery satisfying rocketry with real potent kawoosh-engines.

Yeah NDAs are pure fun - it kinda feels like being secret agent. Have some on my own job. 

[Lisias]

4 minutes ago, VoidSquid said:

Probably a redundant question, but simply playing an older version, not an option?

Not if the older version has anothet bug that you won't tolerate.

That's the problem with the current development process: there's no stable release of the product, ever.

Every new release solve some problems of the previous, but also shoves a lot of new bugs or misfeatures - and only some of them will be solved next release, when new bugs and misfeatures will be added.

Edited February 7, 2021 by Lisias
Tyops! surprised?

[Rakete]

2 minutes ago, VoidSquid said:

Probably a redundant question, but simply playing an older version, not an option?

Yeah, but i updated my vehicle/lifter/ssto arsenal to new standards already... they won't run on older game versions.

[Lisias]

9 minutes ago, Rakete said:

Yeah, nobody reads the credits. 

I do! Nemo is my name?

 

 

4 minutes ago, Rakete said:

Yeah, but i updated my vehicle/lifter/ssto arsenal to new standards already... they won't run on older game versions.

I manage to "downgrade" craft files by editing the file and manually changing the version value to the desired one. It's not perfect, sometimes you need to reconfigure a lot of thingies, and another ones you need to manually remove some modules or rename some parts.

But it works most of the time for me.

Obviously, do it with backups.  Lots of backups

Edited February 7, 2021 by Lisias
Brute force post merging