0111narwhalz Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) Reported Version: v0.1.3 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Kubuntu (via Proton Experimental, up to date at time of post) | CPU: Ryzen 5 3600 | GPU: Radeon RX 5700 | RAM: 32 GB Title: TD-06 (extra small decoupler) or TS-06 (extra small stack separator) will, when attached to ST-Micro-1 (tiny cube strut), fall off at any decoupling event. Specs: Spoiler Severity: Medium (breaks certain vessel designs, otherwise invisible) Frequency: High Description: Place a cube strut (ST-Micro-1) on a part, either surface attach or node attach. Place a TD-06 (arrow pointing either direction) or TS-06 on the cube strut's node. Then place a decoupler anywhere else on the vehicle (again, arrow pointing either direction). (My test vessel includes some other structural parts.) The extra parts on each decoupler are not necessary (though see next caption regarding arrow direction of the trigger). I've pointed the arrow on the TD-06 towards the beam on this craft to disambiguate "decoupler fires" from "decoupler just falls off." However, I believe every permutation of arrow direction exhibits the same behavior, so long as the "trigger" decoupler actually causes a part to fall off the craft. Take it out to the launchpad, fire the "trigger" decoupler, and the TD-06 falls off. Note that there is no ring, in violation of the expected decoupling behavior (because it didn't decouple). Additionally, the part is still considered to be a member of the vessel, as demonstrated by the fact that it appears in the PAM and can be triggered. When multiple instances are involved, the parts which fell off are seen to not collide with one another (further demonstrating that they are still members of the vessel). So far as my testing has revealed, this behavior occurs only between the ST-Micro-1 and either the TD-06 and TS-06. It appears to be triggered by the activation of any decoupler or separator, but not when the vessel is modified by a part exploding on impact. Included Attachments: Edited July 9, 2023 by Anth12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KUAR Posted June 23, 2023 Share Posted June 23, 2023 (edited) I think there is a very good chance that this is related to my bug here: The symptom where the objects connected directly to the tiny cube strut fall off is common. My theory goes that the fallen objects remain part of the ship, and so the camera centers on the combined CM of the now detached fuel tanks and the remainder of the ship. Perhaps they are still "attached" but the rigidity / springiness / some other value of the joint is zero allowing them to move? Edited June 23, 2023 by KUAR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0111narwhalz Posted June 24, 2023 Author Share Posted June 24, 2023 (edited) I might speculate that joints between physicsless parts and certain small child parts get culled incorrectly upon decoupling, but the part is not removed from the vessel tree. 17 hours ago, KUAR said: I think there is a very good chance that this is related to my bug here: I'm almost certain that your camera issue is a result of this bug—if you then stage the decoupler or destroy the part, the part which had erroneously fallen off is removed from the vessel tree and the camera returns to normal. Edited June 24, 2023 by 0111narwhalz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o.o Posted June 25, 2023 Share Posted June 25, 2023 (edited) Reported Version: v0.1.3 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Windows 11 | CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 5800H | GPU: AMD Radeon RX 6600M | RAM: 16GB Attaching regular parts to physicsless parts causes them to detach from your craft when any decoupler/separator/docking port is used anywhere else on the craft. Other physicsless parts will not be affected in such a way. I have demonstrated this in the attached video by using parts STJ-3125 and ST-Micro-1 (the smallest truss pieces). This is disastrous for small rover builds as they will fall apart when a decoupler is used. It also means you cannot attach any subassemblies to a craft using these small parts or the subassembly will glitch. Notice how they fall and clip through the rest of the craft as well as making the camera act strangely. They are not actually "detached" from the craft; the game still thinks they are part of the craft, so the camera attempts to adjust to focus on the new centre of mass as they move. I have used a radial decoupler on the side of the craft to show that it should not be affecting any other parts, but this should be reproduceable with any other decouplers. Video: Edited June 26, 2023 by o.o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anth Posted June 26, 2023 Share Posted June 26, 2023 @o.o Merged yours with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralequi Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 Reported Version: v0.2.0 (latest) | Mods: none | Can replicate without mods? Yes OS: Windowns 10 | CPU: Intel i7-4770 @ 3.4GHz | GPU: Nvidia RTX 2060 | RAM: 16GB To whom it may concern, I am experiencing a very strange behavior when launching vessels that have a rover docked. As can be seen in the video, there is a point where the vessel completely loses control. It can still be timidly maneuvered with manual controls, but the SAS stops working entirely. Additionally, another very odd behavior is the gradual "zoom out" that occurs. This is further exaggerated as the subsequent stages are activated (prematurely in the video). If, for some reason, we force the rover to undock, everything returns to normal. Note that I have tried everything, from leaving the rover "by default", setting it "upwards", hibernating it, deactivating its control, etc. Nothing changed. With that in mind, I think it doesn't seems to be a problem with the vessel configuration, but with the game itself. I'm open to provide any further required info. I just want to put a rover in duna! Thank you in advance, Rale. Included Attachments: KerbalSpaceProgram22024-01-0621-39-52.mp4 Duna1.json Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DibzNr Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 @0111narwhalz Moved your report out of the archive @RalequiMerged your report with this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Space Peacock Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 i've moved this report back into the archive. there are already (seperate) reports for both of the bugs for the current version Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts