Search for undocumented changes and features of 0.24

[Boamere]

The new "space-bar bug" everyone seems to have is caused by mousing over the stages and press space at the same time, it locks the stages when you mouse over them now, as far as my testing shows

Edit: Apparently the space-bar bug happens without the mouse-over, is this mouse over stage-lock a new feature or is it old?

Edited July 18, 2014 by Boamere

[GusTurbo]

Perhaps this is slightly off topic, but it's something that changed between a preview video and .24. The O-10 Monoprop engine got huge, and I don't like it. I feel like I need to raise awareness of this very serious issue.

Before:

(Scott Manley's preview video)

After:

(in-game, from this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86717-Monoprop-SSTO)

[Diazo]

The new "space-bar bug" everyone seems to have is caused by mousing over the stages and press space at the same time, it locks the stages when you mouse over them now, as far as my testing shows

Edit: Apparently the space-bar bug happens without the mouse-over, is this mouse over stage-lock a new feature or is it old?

Pretty sure it is old. At least I remember staging not working when I had left the mouse over the staging icons after some quick "mission plan rearrangement". Back to 0.23.5 for sure and also 0.23.0 I think. Possibly farther but I don't remember for sure.

D.

[The Jedi Master]

The generic tutorial preview pictures now actually represent the tutorial.

[Temeter]

Seems like they made a small change to the way oxygen for jet-engines is displayed. As it seems, Engines now flame out when the intake air is displayed as 0, which is a huge improvement when using spaceplanes.

Might again be an older change, though, i just started relying on mechjeb because the old functionality was so counterintuitive.

edit: Nevermind, this time my engines flamed out at 0.13. Strange, they worked the last time until 0.1. Oo

Edited July 18, 2014 by Temeter

[vexx32]

The new "space-bar bug" everyone seems to have is caused by mousing over the stages and press space at the same time, it locks the stages when you mouse over them now, as far as my testing shows

Edit: Apparently the space-bar bug happens without the mouse-over, is this mouse over stage-lock a new feature or is it old?

That's an old one, from several versions ago, at least. Mousing over your stage display locks the stages, so you don't accidentally trigger a stage while you're still messing around with them. IIRC, it's been a feature ever since in-flight editing of stages was introduced.

[Eric S]

Seems like they made a small change to the way oxygen for jet-engines is displayed. As it seems, Engines now flame out when the intake air is displayed as 0, which is a huge improvement when using spaceplanes.

They changed the way intake air and jet engines work back when they added the RAPIER. Basically, the number that's displayed is now the amount of intake air left over after the jet engines have taken their share. Makes it hard to tell when you're actually going to flame out, because 0 really only means that you're using all you're taking in. This behavior is easiest to see in single engine planes.

[mike9606]

Here one for you: go to the Space Center screen, then open the debug menu (Alt+F12) on the cheats page. Quickly tap and then press and hold left Alt (or whatever the modifier key is if you're not on Windows) for 5 seconds.....

Now I can do all of my career mode "testing" MWAHAHAHA

[CalculusWarrior]

It may just be me, but assigning kerbals to spots on vessels seems to be a bit more persistent now.

[r4pt0r]

It may just be me, but assigning kerbals to spots on vessels seems to be a bit more persistent now.

i dare say its just you. I emptied a command pod to launch a probe rescue mission, thought "eh, ill add a few more batteries real quick", and once i clicked the parts tab jeb tried to sneak back into the pod.

[Temeter]

They changed the way intake air and jet engines work back when they added the RAPIER. Basically, the number that's displayed is now the amount of intake air left over after the jet engines have taken their share. Makes it hard to tell when you're actually going to flame out, because 0 really only means that you're using all you're taking in. This behavior is easiest to see in single engine planes.

Thanks, that's what i assumed. Strangely enough, i got a flameout in a flight after posting, while i still got 0.13 air left. Might have been some angular cutoof or so, the plane was strangely instable from time to time.

That's an old one, from several versions ago, at least. Mousing over your stage display locks the stages, so you don't accidentally trigger a stage while you're still messing around with them. IIRC, it's been a feature ever since in-flight editing of stages was introduced.

Tbh, i'm more afraid of accidently activating to many stages, it almost never happens by accident. A bit of an overkill pressing space 3 times in a row.

[User Unrelated]

they seem to have re-implemented SAS wobble from whichever version I remember that bring a big problem in (.22 maybe?)

I still have lots of testing to do, but my game is just crashing like crazy so I'm going to give it a rest for a bit.

[problemecium]

The typo in the loading screen where it says "Generating Abalation Cascade" has been corrected to say "Ablation".

[Renegrade]

They changed the way intake air and jet engines work back when they added the RAPIER. Basically, the number that's displayed is now the amount of intake air left over after the jet engines have taken their share. Makes it hard to tell when you're actually going to flame out, because 0 really only means that you're using all you're taking in. This behavior is easiest to see in single engine planes.

Speaking of intakes, have they changed the drag code at all?

The inline intake used to be horrible because once it got up to 2.0 drag, it was applying that over a 300kg+ part (I forget it's exact mass)....that made it a pretty damn good air brake, since stock drag is proportional to mass*drag_Factor.

The other stock intakes are all mostly little tiny things with mass around 10kg, so they produced thirty times less drag for the same intake value...

EDIT: I've tested this, my basic second gen science plane (with science bits removed and replaced with the inline intake) can reach 268.6m/sec in level flight at 2000m altitude with the Circular Intake open and the Engine Nacelle closed, and only 230.6 the other way around. Draining the fuel from the nacelle reduces the drag, of course, letting the speed climb a bit (still not as good as one of the 10-11kg intakes though)

Edited July 19, 2014 by Renegrade

[Tortoise]

KSP can use more than 4gb of ram at once.

[Sky_walker]

they seem to have re-implemented SAS wobble from whichever version I remember that bring a big problem in (.22 maybe?)

I still have lots of testing to do, but my game is just crashing like crazy so I'm going to give it a rest for a bit.

Nothing new here.

I moved few of my rockets from 0.23.5 to 0.24 and these that did not wobbled - do not wobble now, and those that wobbled in 0.23.5 - wobble identically in 0.24 (not more).

KSP can use more than 4gb of ram at once.

That's what "64 bit version" means

Perhaps this is slightly off topic, but it's something that changed between a preview video and .24. The O-10 Monoprop engine got huge, and I don't like it. I feel like I need to raise awareness of this very serious issue.

It's not an issue. They made it in line with other engines. It doesn't look like an RCS thruster but rather a proper engine - which it is.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Sky_walker

[Temeter]

they seem to have re-implemented SAS wobble from whichever version I remember that bring a big problem in (.22 maybe?)

I still have lots of testing to do, but my game is just crashing like crazy so I'm going to give it a rest for a bit.

The SAS is definitly working worse than before. On some vehicle's, I constantly need to readjust my course, and there is a lot of really strange instability with spaceplanes.

[GusTurbo]

Nothing new here.

I moved few of my rockets from 0.23.5 to 0.24 and these that did not wobbled - do not wobble now, and those that wobbled in 0.23.5 - wobble identically in 0.24 (not more).

That's what "64 bit version" means

It's not an issue. They made it in line with other engines. It doesn't look like an RCS thruster but rather a proper engine - which it is.

It has been confirmed as an issue:

This is something confirmed as needing to get fixed.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86395-The-Grand-0-24-Discussion-Thread?p=1281714&viewfull=1#post1281714

[Sky_walker]

It has been confirmed as an issue:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86395-The-Grand-0-24-Discussion-Thread?p=1281714&viewfull=1#post1281714

Really? So now it'll be not only OP-powerful, but also tiny, so you'd have easier time spamming it? o_O omg...

The SAS is definitly working worse than before. On some vehicle's, I constantly need to readjust my course, and there is a lot of really strange instability with spaceplanes.

Yes, they changed SAS to introduce a logical progression and make SAS little bit less be-all-end-all of stability. I mentioned that change in a first post of this topic.

Use RCS and/or Vernors, perhaps with small addition of control surfaces near a bottom of a rocket - like a real rockets do to keep stable.

[Starwhip]

i dare say its just you. I emptied a command pod to launch a probe rescue mission, thought "eh, ill add a few more batteries real quick", and once i clicked the parts tab jeb tried to sneak back into the pod.

This. Holy crud is it annoying. For my Mun mission, I stuck Bob in the orbiter and Bill in the lander, (The orbiter having the 3-man capsule) then went and saved or something, and when I launched, lo and behold, a wild JEB appeared along with Bill and Bob in the friggin' orbiter.

It's annoying. (Hey, I already said that....)

[Whirligig Girl]

If yo look at the Kerbal's info-panel in the right side of the map screen, it will tell you the type of suit he's wearing, and the picture is the new updated suit model from the animations.

[GusTurbo]

Really? So now it'll be not only OP-powerful, but also tiny, so you'd have easier time spamming it? o_O omg...

Yes, they changed SAS to introduce a logical progression and make SAS little bit less be-all-end-all of stability. I mentioned that change in a first post of this topic.

Use RCS and/or Vernors, perhaps with small addition of control surfaces near a bottom of a rocket - like a real rockets do to keep stable.

It's not any better than the 24-77, so I wouldn't call it OP. Spamming it won't be that useful.

[Jouni]

It's not any better than the 24-77, so I wouldn't call it OP. Spamming it won't be that useful.

Spamming the O-10 is quite useful, because it's a physicsless part, just like the other RCS thrusters. You can probably make a reusable Tylo lander using it.

[Guest]

You can have multiple quicksaves. (Press ESC)

[Rhomphaia]

Spamming the O-10 is quite useful, because it's a physicsless part, just like the other RCS thrusters. You can probably make a reusable Tylo lander using it.

Would be very slim margins, it caps out at 6094.4m/s