Kartoffelkuchen

Will check it out, thanks.

I think the engines were actually taken from Tundra because of their nice plumes. With the release of the "Waterfall" plugin I might consider making my own custom plumes. I've made a different design decision for my Falcon 9 compared to Tundra, which has all 9 Merlin engines as one part, which allows for the nice plumes, while I decided to model an accurate engine and give the user the freedom over all 9 engines. This wasn't compatible with such nice plumes though, but Waterfall might change that. lol a wonder that the game even boots up. this mod is compatible with KSP 1.10 only. don't complain if you're using it on another version of KSP and it won't load.

Needs more polys

I never said this is compatible with FAR, don't complain if it doesn't work perfectly. As @Kraken that doesn't exist said, making it a parachute would have made it fall straight down so that wasn't really an option. And you can land it just fine, you simply need to stall it a few meters above ground.

You're using the latest version of this mod with KSP 1.2.2 do I understand that correctly.

@Nooby_dud To quote myself from the OP: and: I marked the important words for you.

Update v2.0 has released! Many improvements have been made to the original autopilot. I've completely rewritten the GUI and simplified it, made many "under the hood" improvements, improved the landing abort triggers and added a HUD message explaining the reason for the abort and also added a "Go-Around" after a landing abort. After the abort has been triggered, the plane will fly back to reattempt the landing at the same runway. To increase chances of a successful landing, the minspeed (aka landing speed) is being altered slightly, depending on the abort reason: If the abort was called because not enough runway was remaning and we couldn't brake in time, the landing speed is reduced slightly. If we were too low on the final approach, the speed is increased to improve the control authority of the rudders etc. However, if a landing abort has been called 2 times due to not enough runway remaining, the third abort call will be ignored. Happy flyings! DOWNLOAD

Update v1.1 has released! Fixed bug where you could see through the bottom of the cockpit Fixed Airbus texture with the inverted neo on the back DOWNLOAD Also check out this cool review by @Kottabos Yes. Go to the .craft file, then change the version number from 1.10.0 to 1.9.1 and it will load just fine.

Version 6.4 | July 06 2020 * Fixed Starlink Satellite not loading * KSP 1.10 support Download from Spacedock

This is a small mod which adds a detailed Airbus A330-900neo into the game. You will find detailed models and textures, custom sounds for the engines and landing gears, 3 liveries (White, Black, Airbus) as well as a modelled 3D cockpit and cabin. The plane is configured for stock, with flight characteristics based on a comparable stock-part aircraft. At a cruising speed of 220m/s at 3500-4500m altitude, a range of 2100km or fuel for 3h will be enough to cover all major routes on Kerbin. I've limited the crew capacity to 30 (+2 pilots) for performance reasons. Please note that the parts are not designed for a modular use in other crafts. Download from Spacedock I recommend you to install my Airplane Autopilot as well. Known issues All rights reserved.

Well that certainly is a quick and dirty fix but yeah, now the solar panels won't deploy any more. Very weird that it hangs up because of an animation. I'll need to investigate further.

Oh heyyy I totally forgot about this, but it did actually gain some attention it appears. I've never finished this cockpit nor an IVA for it, but I'll publish it together with a bunch of projects which I started but never finished soon for everyone to work on or play with so stay tuned. It will include loads of airliner parts, though not all are ready to play with but you'll see. I might have something else coming up for you if it works out the way I want it to.

Yes. The easiest way to do this is to load up the part in game, then configure it the way you'd like it to behave by default (in your case, disabling all the controls for pitch, yaw, roll), then save the .craft file. Then go into the .craft file, and you'll find some entries like "enablePitch = false" in the section of the part. Can't remember the exact parameter wording from the top of my head. Anyway, copy all these parameters into the elevon module in your part.cfg and your elevon will be disabled by default.

Bounding box as in the area where the part lights up green if you enter it (so the collider)? You can't adjust that in the .cfg. You'll have to do that in Unity before exporting or use the .mu blender import / export addon to change that.

@JadeOfMaar Thank You very much for the detailed answer, this helped bring some light into the dark.

@damonvv Forgot to remove the collider render huh?

How is it that we still have to use Kerbal Konstructs for placing statics? I'd think that there must be another, more efficient method to place buildings, especially with the other built-in airports like desert airfield now. How did Squad implement this?

Oh wow KSP 1.4.5.. that's a looong while ago. I'm afraid you will have to figure this out on your own.. You should find that info in the part description if you have the latest update installed. Size 1 for the non-rescaled version and size2 for the 2.5m one. Yea

Interestingly enough, this sounds exactly like the issue some people are getting with my Crew Dragon addon. Maybe there is a connection here @raidernick ?

Maybe check out Raiz Space on Youtube? He's building the ISS in RO, check out which mods he is using.

@Schu The current version should work in 1.8.1 as well. As for RO support, I don't know. It's best to ask over in the RO thread since I'm not a RO user. @JacobPF9 That's awesome to hear, thanks! I thought the legs I had were already quite close to the legs v2 lol but I'll see. FH decoupler: yes, will update that. Oh, didn't know that having these engines seperate would have such a big performance impact. Ok, I might consider grouping them, maybe into three engines per core (6 outer engines, 2 boostback, 1 landing engine), since I don't like to use engine modes like Tundra does for example. Guess that'd already make a difference? @B Parsons Hey, welcome to the forums! Unfortunately, this is a bug many people have encountered already. It is very hard for me to find out the cause for this bug, though your video does help, so thank you for that. I'm doing my best to fix it as soon as possible! @ProPlayer_65437 If you're using an earlier KSP version instead of 1.9.1, you need to change the "version = 1.9.1" entry in the craft files to your KSP version, like "version = 1.8.1" if using KSP 1.8.1.

@JacobPF9 Replacing the entry "rescaleFactor = 1.0" at the top of the file with "rescaleFactor = 1.464" should do it. Though you could also just choose to use the rescaled version provided with KK launchers which scales the rockets to the same size as Tundra, 2.5m. Wish I was able to do such a gorgeous plume as well damonvv

100% supported. I'm really into flying and building aircrafts, and some more difficulties and challenges there would be greatly appreciated. I know there are one or two wind mods, one requires FAR, but that one is quite old already as well and it was only of limited functionality. So yeah, storm cells, sudden turbulences would really be amazing to have! I'd code it if only I had the programming knowledge.

I thought I had fixed this! Sorry, must have forgotton to update the file. Until the next update, you can help yourself and open the engine config in "GameData/Launchers Pack/Rockets/SpaceX/m1c/M1Ci.cfg" with Editor, then change one of the "node_stack_top" entries to "node_stack_mid", save, and relaunch the game! I've also updated the OP's "Known Issues" section. @M4GiC Great to hear from you again! @chefcookinupadub @TheModfather Glad you like it! Yes indeed, the legs are fragile, though I never really ran into too big of an issue with them, as long as the touchdownspeed was <2m/s and no horizontal velocity left. I'll try to update them! @Synthiex Sorry to hear that you're having issues. If you go into your KSP main folder, then into GameData, you need to have at least 3 folders in there, "Launchers Pack", "Kartoffelkuchen", and probably your "Squad" folder. Can you confirm that? If the problem persists, please share a screenshot of your GameData folder.

Update v6.2 has been released! Changelog Download from Spacedock @msp307 @Xenooom@meynze @ChiQuit @Courtesybog3 Please try if this update fixed these bugs for you! I'm very sorry for the issues. @capkirk What does "use it" mean? Providing RO configs? That'd be great actually if there were RO configs for this whole mod! @cashaber Thank You for providing such detailed information, wish everybody did that... I think this is an issue more on the Mechjeb site, once the upper stage is at the end of its burn, the TWR is quite high and the stage isn't the most maneuverable one, so it probably has issues in the last >1s keeping up with the marker. Maybe try limiting the acceleration or lowering the thrust limiter at the end to prevent this. @Adriajoa21 Hey, great that you like it! Did you choose the rescaled sizes? If so, you need to change the power in the KK_SpX_rescale file in your GameData folder. Then scroll down to the engine you're looking for ("KK_SPX_Merlin1DV+" for example) and then increase the "maxThrust" variable. Though you should really be able to easily fly these with a proper payload, you just need to get used to it! F5 + F9 is the key sometimes... @RealKerbal3x Hah that's awesome, glad you're showing the good ol' F9 Demo some love! Aerodynamic's are weird in KSP, the second stage does have a tendency to flip backward, yes. Avoid this by choosing a higher trajectory, which is generally a good idea with the Falcon 9 for recovery reasons. @alains You're right! I wasn't sure actually how these were working or if they even were actually dracos, so I left them out then lol. Now that we know how they work, I've added them in in this update! Enjoy!