Unable to undock from station anymore

[Mythos]

Hi,

I need your help with fixing my persistent file or any other clue. I have a station in mun orbit consisting of 2 permanent parts and currently 2 landers docked to it all in one line in this configuration:

engine - command module - lander - lander

Both landers already had some missions on mun including successful undocking and re-docking. The engine and command module are connected for quite a while, actually the station was built connected to my kerbin station and then undocked and launched from there. Suddenly (after a supply visit from my "taxi" on another sideways docking port on the command module) I realized the docking ports got messed up.

Usually when I dock a small ship to a large one, the game decides which one to keep as for the name and so on, I guess the larger one. And then usually the docking port on the smaller ships side says "undock" and on the "mothership" side it doesn't say "undock" but "decouple".

My station now has this behaviour only between the two landers, and I can undock the outermost one. The other two links say "undock" on the command module side (which I consider the wrong one) and no option (besides "crossfeed", "control from here" and "rename port") on the outer sides. And when I click "undock" this button gets erased but nothing happens.

I tried switching to another ship and back, to KSC and back, reload quicksave, quit game and restart, no change.

I made a backup of my quicksave and edited any line that belongs to that vessel to say "... PART { ... MODULE { ... EVENTS { Undock { active = True ..." which was "False" before. But reloading the changed one also didn't change anything.

Thanks in advance

Mythos

P.S: Can someone give me a hint, how to deactivate automatic spelling correction in this forum input box? It always wants to capitalize my words

[Sirrobert]

I think the spelling thing is browser based. So turning it off should be somewhere with the options there.

As for your bug: There is indeed some line in the persistance file that can be changed to fix it. I'm sure someone who knows the details will be around soon

[Mythos]

I think the spelling thing is browser based.

Thanks, maybe I should have known that Didn't turn it off, added new language but without changing keyboard layout. Feels much better now.

There is indeed some line in the persistance file that can be changed to fix it.

I would test any variation if it was a small ship. But on a station with many docking ports fiddling with the file without knowledge will end in a mess

[WuphonsReach]

As for your bug: There is indeed some line in the persistance file that can be changed to fix it. I'm sure someone who knows the details will be around soon

It's a bug that has been around for a very long time.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78863-FIX-Dock-Undocking-Bug-in-0-23-5

Also, F5/F9 sometimes fixes it.

[lextacy]

add this line of code to any docking ports you use. THis requires knowlege of part editing

MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleDecouple
        isOmniDecoupler = True
        explosiveNodeID = top    
        ejectionForce = 5
    }

This will force out the offending port , you will of course be physically decoupling the port away so you must also use Kerbal Attachment system to reinstall the docking port on the station side.

Pro Tip: Try to decouple on the departing ship side so that you can just dispose the docking port since most likely you will be doing a Kerbin landing.

[Mythos]

I don't use KAS and no ship was planned to return home now, so I didn't try lextacy's method.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78863-FIX-Dock-Undocking-Bug-in-0-23-5

That first method "Super quick and dirty instructions" worked for the Sr. docking ports between engine and cmd section, I could now undock and re-dock a couple of times there.

For the other pair that method didn't work and I have some problems with the further method from that thread "In-depth Instructions" in short or long version. There's the point of getting the part number, where I get confused.

I identified the pair of docking ports by renaming instead of disabling crossfeed and they read like this (left out the brackets and capitals):

portName = kaputt-Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port
uid = 705835744
parent = 0
attN = None, -1
attN = bottom, 0
state = Docked (same vessel)
dockUId = 2730936619

portName = kaputt-Clamp-O-Tron Shielded Docking Port
uid = 2730936619
parent = 46
srfN = None, -1
attN = bottom, 46
state = Docked (dockee)
dockUId = 705835744

I know understand the relationship between the pairwise uid and dockUId and this looks ok, where I could identify both ports by that uid vs. dockUId and also by the changed name. I also see that the unshielded port is the (same vessel) port, what fits to it being on the stations cmd and the shielded one being on the lander and thereby the (dockee). Also that fits to the way I've built them, both were connected on top of the root part during the building process, which was the 3-kerbal cmd in both cases. So the parent in both cases is attN at the bottom, where the unshielded one's parent is in fact the root part of the whole station, which should be number 0. So far I understand.

But both were built top-down and then connected at each one's top side. Each port is only attached to it's vessel by that "attN = bottom, x" relationship, nothing else is connected to these docking ports besides that docking-link, that for now only struts but doesn't want do undock or decouple. So what would be the part number that I could use on both sides to be "attN = top" and to transform that link into a "state = PreAttached"?