Freshmeat

@Tabb It would definitely tell what your code think the control state is. However, if you change vessels, it might be out of sync. In the VesselData struct, look for the UInt16 ActionGroups (VData.ActionGroups if you program looks anything like most here), it holds RCS status in second bit. However, the order of ActionGroups is not the same as MainControls, so you need to take care not using the RCS alias. I would go #define RCSSTATE 15 And your check could be if (getMainControls(RCSSTATE) == 0) { With getMainControls defined as below: byte getMainControls(byte m) { return VData.ActionGroups == (1 << m); }

@Fraktal: Have you tried making a taildragger? I am a poor plane pilot be most standards, but I find the early planes being much easier to land with two wide wheels in front and a small wheel in the rear. The other difference is that I do not use multiple science containers, while you do not get every single point of science, it is often enough to have just one.

I think you are making a praiseworthy decision with respect to your your spare time, and I wish you all good in those endeavors.

A and hardly surprising small observation: While trying to make additions to my client, I crashed it quite a lot. After a while, KSP (1.6.1) started stuttering. I installed MemGraph, and allocated a bunch of ram, only for the stutter to return after several more crashes. Turning off kRPC and turning it on again in game freed a lot of ram and stopped the stuttering, so it might be that the mod does not handle crashed connections all that well. Is there a time out on connections? Anyway, the workaround is really simple, so it is probably not worth investing time into. This is more of a heads up for other people having the same problem.

@EccentricTea That looks like an extremely ambitious setup. I envy you the space. Your workspace looks like a research workshop of some kind?

@c4ooo I have honestly not considered aircraft, but rather rockets with light and/or wide payloads. Happens when I launch parts of bases, and when I launched my Eve Descent/Ascent Vehicle. But it would definitely be useful in aircraft as well.

I had a bit difficulty understanding the image, but I think I get it now. I would probably get a 3d print first if I where you, to see if it works out before getting a milled piece, my guess is that it will be hideously expensive. Have you considered a 120 mm ball if space is a problem? My experience is that things always ending up taking a bit more space than you plan on a drawing.

You will need to upload to somewhere else. The forum used to play well with Imgur, but you can use whatever you fancy. If you make a thread over at Fan Works, we can all chime in with our applause.

@EccentricTea Same happened to me, should have thought about that as well when I tried to help. A lot of functions only need updating every second,. I used to do it on 250ms rolling updates, spreading the computationally expensive updates even (Arduinos are not exactly found of trigonometry). BTW, do you have any pictures of your console? I am rather intrigued by now.

I can chime in on above error as well, but given a very messy install I thought it was my own doing.

Thanks for the warning. I do not use GEP at all, as I wanted to do a bit of exploration in the Ciro system before considering moving on, thus keeping the old Scatterer (high tides included at no extra cost). Unfortunately, it turns out it was not Kerbal Health that caused the crash. If I find a reliably way of reproducing it and/or the conflicting mod, I will make a proper bug report at appropriate places.

And finally I think I figured why gpp kept crashing on me. I have tried all kinds of mods, but having 30+ it was very much trial and error and little hope for my very limited playtime, and logs gave me little to work with. Then I saw that you had added a kerbal health config, and once I removed that mod a couple of tests went fine. I guess that I should have read the fine print about per planet radiation configs. Anyway, thanks for updating, I hope I now finally can start playing in earnest.

I have used the Spark for just about anything vacuum for its TWR and ISP. While this might need me to redesign and look to other engines, but the actual mass change is not that big. If you shoot for an acceleration of about 0.5 g, the Spark can move some 4 t. A change of 0.03 t is about one percent less acceleration, I can live with that.

I like your reasoning. My hardware altimeter has the same functionality.

Here we go