cremasterstroke

Hi lo-fi, big fan of your mod. Is there any chance of a new public release soon? The one in the OP is 6 weeks old (it appears you've made a lot of changes/additions since) and I can't find a working link to the right github page. Thanks.

I just mean the reflections off the oceans in map view/tracking centre - especially along the shores, the shimmer is gorgeous. I haven't had much time lately to play, so was just enjoying the sights I'm just using the textures from your github 0.25 download, so I think they're full res ones (but I'm away from my gaming comp for a few days, so can't verify that). That triangle is without ATM installed. I actually haven't looked at whether it's still there when ATM *is* installed. I've booted it with all the RO-necessary mods (including FAR 14.3.2) with the overhaul release from 10 days ago (the x86 release), and it seems to load fine - the only incompatibility I could find was the ATM issue. But then again I haven't had time to fly anything, so whether everything actually works is another matter . I run OpenGL in administrator mode BTW, so dunno if that might be a reason.

Hi pingopete, I just tried out the 0.25 version, and am loving the changes (especially the reflections). I have run into an issue or 2 though. RVE and ATM together prevents Earth texture from being applied correctly - I'll get clouds and citylights, but with Kerbin ground texture. Here is the output log, using the latest of your compiles from github (from yesterday), ATM 3.8 basic, latest EVE overhaul from github (from 9 days ago), DDSLoader 1.5.0.0, MM 2.5.1, and RSS 8.2.1; running 32-bit on Windows (usually OpenGL, but have tried without). I have tried excluding the RVE and RSS folders from ATM by setting them to false in the cfgs, but that doesn't seem to work - only removing ATM (or RVE) resolves it. A smaller issue is this dark shape (? shadow) (over Indonesia, the Western Pacific, and Northern Australia in the pic) in map view. Is there something I need to adjust in the settings? I'm pretty clueless as to what most of the EVE settings do, so could easily have missed something. And do the clouds in that pic seem sufficient? They seem a bit sparse compared to your previous releases.

Erm, there's a thermal fin (under the Science tab) that already does that - there's only one size, but it should be easy to make a cfg for larger/smaller versions, or just use multiple.

Take the RealSolarSystem folder from inside the .zip, and paste it into GameData - choose merge when prompted. If installed correctly, you should have a bunch of .pngs in GameData\RealSolarSystem\Plugins\PluginData.

Have you seen it in previous versions? It's not included in the last release by PolecatEZ. Not all the parts pictured are included - the list above that is more accurate. Unless PolecatEZ comes back, or another modder like Eskandare picks it up, probably never . The weapons require the Lazor plugin, included in any of the Lazor mods (the docking cam is probably the lightest, if you don't want the other Lazor stuff). Unfortunately Lazor hasn't been updated to 0.25 either, so could be a bit buggy. It might be better to use an alternative weapons mod like BDArmory. Do you have FAR installed? If so, swing wings won't work: Even disregarding the swing issue, those wings don't have FAR modules, so aren't compatible with FAR anyway. The other parts (whisper rotor, folding wing etc) should animate correctly. I suggest using Infernal Robotics if you want to make working, FAR-compatible swing wings.

HW (no overclocking at the time): ASRock Z87 Extreme4 Intel Core i5 4670K 16GB DDR3 RAM Radeon R9 290 (Catalyst 14.9) Samsung 850 EVO (boot) WD Caviar Green (KSP) SW (at time pic was taken): Windows 7 SP1 Ultimate x64 KSP 0.25, running in OpenGL mode, 2560x1440 borderless window RSS 8.1.2 (4K Earth textures, 2K for other bodies) EVE Overhaul 9-2 RVE 0.2.2 (larger textures downscaled to 4K) TextureReplacer 1.7.3 ActiveTextureManagement 3.8 (basic) Unfortunately I don't have an output log from when this happens - I'll upload one if I encounter it again with updated mods.

Think about it - LEO has an orbital velocity of ~7.7km/s, so with a ~9.4km/s dv requirement, the loss to gravity drag is ~1.7km/s. Low Kerbin orbital velocity is ~2.3km/s, so with a dv requirement of ~3.4km/s (with FAR/NEAR), the losses are ~1.1km/s. Then take into account the fact that atmospheric limit for Earth in RSS is nearly 2x the height of that for Kerbin. Higher TWR is good, up to a point - given that dv requirement is so high, many designs have upper stage TWR of <1 - this means that they have to maintain a pitch above the velocity vector to maintain vertical velocity - which reduces the dv being effectively used to accelerate horizontally. So a TWR>1 during the entire ascent would mitigate this. But higher TWR usually means less fuel, smaller payload fraction, and/or heavier engines - which means either less total dv and/or more massive rocket. So in the real world, many (most?) launch vehicles have upper stage TWR<1. And too much TWR also makes it difficult to pull off an optimal gravity turn, which is probably more important for overall efficiency. Gravity drag is a real thing - it's much easier to just say gravity drag than 'the sum of gravity losses and drag losses'.

I can confirm the puffballs These spawn in a square grid around the current viewpoint. But other times, the cloud layer looks normal: And RAM is tight on Windows - even with OpenGL and ATM basic, I can't run full-res textures from your pack. Perhaps include smaller textures (2-4k) as default? People running Linux64 or somehow getting Win64 to work can download a higher res texture pack.

Oops there was a mistake with the link. Try it again - it should work now. If not, I'll have a MediaFire mirror up soon (stupid slow internets:rolleyes:). Edit: mirror

Thanks for picking this up - I hadn't realised that B9 changed their file structure again. Here is the new version, with some additional fixes (mainly for attachment nodes) for the Mk2 parts. Note though that a lot of the IVAs aren't finished so RPM monitors won't be available. Let me know if you find further issues.

There aren't enough celestial bodies in stock KSP to replicate the whole solar system, so Neptune (among others) is left out. A mod like Kopernicus or PlanetFactory is needed to add extra bodies - here is a pack using Kopernicus to add Neptune and a couple of moons. IIRC PF doesn't work with newer versions of RSS any more, since it hasn't been updated/supported for quite some time.

The ones listed on the AJE OP should work: NB: if you're using B9 5.x, you'll need the fixed version found here, otherwise a lot of the textures won't load. I haven't tried it with B9 5.2.5 yet, but it seems to work fine with 5.2.4 on KSP 0.25.

FWIW the delta wings, control surfaces, and structural wings do have FAR modules, so should work, to some extent. The movable wings are difficult to model with FAR from what I understand. The canards, swept wings and winglets also don't have FAR. However, given pWings and Infernal Robotics are available and supported, I don't see much point in using D12 wings. So if you're just using the pack for the cockpits/engines etc like I do, the wings being FAR-less is not an issue.

I was going to use eye soap, but a neuralyzer sounds better.

The latest version is compiled for 0.25, so I guess you should try 7.4 (on the Github, linked in the OP) if you're still running 0.24.2. Or update KSP to 0.25 (get with the times, mate ).

If you don't mind a smaller size, Coffee Industries and the new version of RetroFuture both have rear-opening cargo bays (RF also has an awesome side-opening fuselage). B9 has a reasonably large one to fit the HL fuselage parts.

Just out of interest, how hard would that be to implement in a mod? I'd love to have everything oriented to the ecliptic in RSS rather than Earth's equator (I'm starting to get wryneck when looking at it ). And would it mean that we can have realistic tilts for other planets as well?

I've done all my launches manually (haven't had the balls to trust MechJeb yet), so I've got a pretty good feel for it. This is the method I use (I think I learned/adapted this from one of metaphor's comments): go to the tracking station, and zoom out so that your viewpoint is just outside lunar orbit pan around until you're at the Northernmost point of lunar orbit - try to be as exact as possible once you've determined that point, timewarp until KSC is directly at the centre of your view (it should be right under lunar orbit, even slightly below it) launch directly East, and keep heading East - when high up (>100km), start following the orbit prograde marker (keeping an eye on MechJeb's relative inclination indicator is handy too) if you get a significant relative inclination, adjust the timing of your launch It might take a little trial-and-error initially (took me 4-5 launches at first to get it right), but now I can launch reliably into orbits that have relative inclination <0.5º within 2 attempts. Of course this mainly applies to Cape Canaveral (which has a latitude closely matching lunar inclination) - if launching from a higher latitude site (e.g. Baikonur), you cannot avoid having to do a dog-leg and/or in-orbit plane change. If launching from the Southern hemisphere, you'll need to switch to using the Southernmost point of lunar orbit.

I tried copying the sections from the stock pWings, and now the all-moving control surfaces don't have adjustable deflection angles . But they do seem to function correctly otherwise. And AFAIK NEAR uses the same wing-modelling mechanic as FAR, so a FAR config should also work for NEAR. BTW here's my latest creation using your mod: A moderately accurate U-2 on a recon mission over the Himalayan foothills

Hey nli2work, firstly gotta say that I love your mods. The aesthetic is excellent across the board, and the new Retro-Future parts are amazing. I just have a few questions/issues/suggestions, if you don't mind: The Retro-Future wings seem to have a larger collision box (I'm not sure if that's the right term?) than their visual appearance, which isn't the case with stock pWings. So when I try to adjust the size/shape of a nearby wing, or attach something to another part, I hit the other wing instead, and have to remove it or flip the camera around to do what I want. They also hit things that they shouldn't in-flight. Any plans to make larger Retro-Future cockpits? Would go nicely with your sweet new fuselage/cargo bay parts. I think a cylindrical 1.25m fuselage piece would also be handy - right now the round-ended 1.25m cockpits can only fit a Retro-Future fuselage via an adapter, which tends to make things look a bit awkward. It looks like there are a few mistakes in the wing cfgs - the control surface (not the all-moving one) lacks the check for pWings at the start, and there's a typo in the name when checking for FAR/NEAR, so the FAR/NEAR aero model isn't being applied. The other wing bits lack the line checking for FAR/NEAR so they're probably applying FAR/NEAR settings even in stock aero. Could you add the Firespitter wheel alignment guide module to your landing gear? It's a super useful feature. Any way to fix the Transparent Command Pod HUD being black when running OpenGL? Cheers

@ Hevak - it's as simple as you think - just place them in GameData, no need to muck around. The main caveat is that if you have Environmental Visual Enhancements (rbray89's other major mod), make sure to *merge* the BoulderCo folder. The download includes cfgs for major mods as well as the stock parts. This means that any parts not covered by those will not be processed by ATM, so if you want ATM to compress other mod parts, additional cfgs will be required. @ backedbattlestar - if you're running the 32-bit version of the game, use the x86 release. The x64 release is only if you run KSP_x64.exe. Edit @ rowns: there's no x64 KSP on Mac, so use the x86 ATM.

4 variants of dragonflies: Common part mods: Retro Future, Procedural Dynamics (pWings), Firespitter. Engines vary between different variants, so other mods are required. CTOL variant (album): Uses Bahamuto Dynamics engines. Simple, agile, light, and very fast. ER variant (album): Uses the same Bahamuto Dynamics engines as the smaller CTOL. Larger, still quite fast, and greatly improved stamina. VTOL variant (album): Requires B9 and TweakScale. Restricted performance (<Mach 2) due to the thrust curve of the engines. B9 air-RCS ports provide greater control if activated. Hover throttle level is ~95%. SSTO variant (album): Requires B9, TweakScale, and Procedural Parts. Capable of reaching and returning from LKO with scope for limited orbital manoeuvres, capable of flying unmanned (e.g. for Kerbal retrieval). Action groups: toggle wheel motor on/off (middle pair of landing gear) - VTOL has motor on by default, other variants motor off toggle ladder VTOL: rotate engine back in 22.5º increments; SSTO: toggle intakes and switch engine mode VTOL: rotate engine down in 22.5º increments; SSTO: switch engine mode only toggle intakes only blank toggle Klaw SSTO: toggle solar panels blank toggle airbrakes Notes: Only tested with FAR - may not work with stock aero. Very unlikely to work with NEAR at this time (incompatible with current version of procedural wings - either wait for PD to update or use FAR). The large gimbal range of the Baha engines (CTOL and ER variants) can occasionally cause exhaust to hit the tail - it shouldn't actually damage anything but may lead to a bit of unwanted yaw. This can be largely mitigated by reducing the gimbal range of the miniJets to ~4 in the part.cfg or with a ModuleManager script - some turning performance will be lost, however. SAS is recommended, especially when manoeuvring at high speeds. The short wheelbase and low nose mean care needs to be taken when braking. Using the airbrakes, pitching up and cadence braking (as well as sufficient runway) is recommended when landing conventionally. Minimum take-off and landing speed is around 80-90m/s. The rudder is likely to hit the ground during take-off - this shouldn't cause any damage. Craft files

@rottielover - If you're on Windows, try forcing opengl - it's working well for me, even with ATM on basic and EVE/RVE/custom textures installed. Running in borderless window will address the main side-effect (Alt+tab causing lag/crash).

There's currently an incompatibility with RealFuels and Tweakscale. It will be fixed in the next release.