AdmiralTigerclaw

That's Kerbal Konstructs working as it should. Keep in mind when you click the button in the SPH called 'Make Selected Runway DEFAULT', That's what Default means. To get KSC back as your default, go into the SPH and bring up the runway selection, find KSC, and select that. Then hit the 'make selection the default' once more. Also: Check over with Kerbal Konstructs, I don't recall the 1.4.X versions of kerbal being very happy with KK.

It's a placeholder for those using Kerbin City. The approach lights are where the KC airport runways sit. I asked about that myself. That's why Cape Hook Global is off to the south. So it doesn't sit on the Kerbin City site. EDIT: It would be responsible of me to mention that I'm sitting on hold here and not doing any more airports for the moment. Eskandare's latest show-offs of tower and hangar models has me wanting to add and modify to existing airports. That means, the more I do now, the more I have to redo later. Those playing the test versions, how are they working out for you?

Yes and No. The issue with the U-2 is that it's a gigantic glider with a jet engine hiding in it. It's designed so that it has a LOT of lift at a low indicated airspeed, so that it can soar really, really high up in thin air. When the Dragon Lady is trending towards an empty tank, and really light, it will descend very slowly unless you want to figure out how to get rid of excess speed. So it just takes a LONG time to come down, and likes to stay flying at really low speeds. Ground Effects on such a design make it REALLY hard to settle. It can fly at speeds as low as 70 knots. For comparison, a Cessna Skyhawk, your typical civil single engine prop you might see fly over your house on a given clear day, takes off around 55 knots, while air liners will take off more around 160 knots. The SR-71's problem is different in that its induced by its shape in ground effect specifically. Delta wings are known for getting extra lift in ground effect. But I think the chines on the Bird also play a part. When they interact with ground-effect, they get a little more lift themselves, torquing the nose up just a bit. Where most aircraft have to flare to smooth out the last few dozen feet of descent into a gentle touchdown, the SR-71 flattens out without the flare to the point that the plane won't settle on the ground. Combined with a small amount of upward push from the chines, the bird likely naturally flares and tries to climb. A little extra forward stick input corrects for the natural flaring, and cuts the lift the aircraft has, allowing it to settle. Usually, on landing, the flare is induced by aft stick movement from the pilot. To not only not need it, but need to reverse it, means a LOT. However, for all this difficulty, the SR-71's doing its landings at a teeth-clenching 200 knots, not 70 knots.

Not sure why you didn't PM it to my like you normally do. Anyway, a thought occurs. Are the new tower and hangar assets already in KSR? Or was the last update just the 4km + runway? I've been procrastinating badly.

Nifty. I might have to go back in to existing airports and do overhauls. Hangars with open space, and Towers that aren't bolted onto the side of them will be wonderful.

Hey, a good measure for the effect of this mod would be with an SR-71 Blackbird. The Bird has a behavioral quirk in ground effect on landing. It likes to 'float' so much in ground effect that pilots have reported that you have to force the stick forward and push the nose to get it to finally touch down. When you can get that kind of performance, the ground effect is working very much correctly. Also, a suggestion for your code, use the radar altitude as a processing gate. IF RAD-ALT < 50 meters, THEN execute code. Saves on raycast passes. Also, how's this work against FAR?

Watching and lurking. Ground effect is very important for aircraft behavior, especially helicopters.

@Ger_space Manually created a NewInstances folder and it looks like it created the decal file for it. I'm kind of glad I was feeling lazy and only did the map decal and not the whole airport before I ran into this. That would have left me Enraged.

@Ger_space Question: When you fixed the Map Decal glitch, did you change how new Map Decals got stored? I planted one yesterday to make the next airport, and I discovered today that it didn't stick. And when I went and checked the KK folder, the NewInstances folder isn't there. Any new procedures I should know about?

Wut? *Blink* GUYS! Come on! @Ger_space , @Eskandare Are you two not in constant communication with each other about how this stuff works? Because NOW Ger_Space is making a post like you've never even exchanged posts before.

The mesh drift problem is less about the model being large, and more about the model being scaled up using the KK scaling option. The gaps tend to still be there, it's just that when the model is scaled to normal size or smaller, the gab isn't pronounced or dangerous. When you scale the model up, the gap becomes wider in direct proportion to the upscale. Get big enough, and landing gear slip into the hole.

9-ish paragraphs, 20 minutes. (Some of those lines I don't call a 'paragraph' because they're one-sentence points.) I'm a writer. I can put out a LOT of information in a very short amount of time. If I know what I'm talking about, I can put out up to 4,200 words an hour. Or around 8 to 9 pages. I don't normally go that high because I need to think about what I'm saying and/or give my eyes a break. But I've spent entire days just typing. The Delta-V explanation can be simple, but I want you to understand what it's doing under the hood. You don't need to know all the math, but as my calculus instructor in college emphasized, if you can RECOGNIZE what's going on, you can make the computer do the work. (Which is especially important in Calculus because there are equations that you actually CAN'T put in a computer or calculator because they'll just get stuck in a recursive loop trying to solve them. Learning to recognize when an equation was going to get stuck looping was a big point there. And not knowing that could happen would have been... BAD.)

Rocket Science is 'Rocket Science' for a reason. As others have pointed out, Delta-V stands for Change in velocity. The 'Delta' part of it is actually a term used in Calculus. The reason calculus comes into play here is because you are trying to determine the behavior of things that are always in motion. Moreso, you are trying to do so to an object that changes as it performs an action. Calculus is thus known as the 'mathematics of change'. But we're going to ignore that. You don't need to know calculus to know Delta-V. It's just useful to know that Calculus is not as intimidating as it may look. In fact, it's a shortcut. For Delta-V, we're going to imagine we're in a car. But we're going to make some assumptions. For example, the car never slows down when you coast, and the brakes don't work. When you put your foot on the gas, you accellerate from zero to say, 100 miles per hour. Then you take your foot off the gas, and the car remains at 100 MPH. If I phrase this in plain english, you have had a 'change in velocity' of 100 MPH. Or, you have executed a Delta-V of 100 MPH. Now, let's say you only have enough gas in the tank to accellerate from zero, to 70 MPH. (Not a lot of fuel, but work with me here). The Delta-V available to you is 70 MPH. Once you accellerate your car to 70, it stays at 70, and you can't do anything else but coast at 70, forever. Your Delta-V 'Budget' was 70 MPH. If you wanted to say, accellerate to speed, then slow to a stop, you need to find how much you can put your foot on the gas, and then pop the car into reverse and put the foot on the gas again. In this scenario, you can speed up to 35 MPH, then you have to put it in reverse and slow down 35 MPH back to zero. Simple enough, right? Let's move to rockets. First and foremost, the notion of 'fixed speed' like in a car on the highway is almost pointless to use as a metric once you're in orbit. That's because an orbit is simply you falling AROUND an object as gravity pulls on you. At any given moment, your speed changes depending on where you are. A low orbit around earth, for example, tends to be faster than a high orbit. Or, in an elongated orbit, you're REALLY fast at the lowest point, and slow as molasses up at the highest point. You still need to know your speed relative to the object your orbiting, but that's only so you can do the math needed to figure out what your orbit is supposed to look like. We have computers doing that for us here, so we don't care beyond understanding that it is happening. Let's say we want to execute a change in orbit, going from a low orbit, to a higher orbit. We need to perform several 'burns' of specific length and power. The lower the power, the longer the burn, and the higher the power, the shorter the burn. Either way, in order to get into the higher orbit, you need to think about what you're actually doing. Since an orbit is simply glorified falling, you need to 'fling' yourself faster so that you'll 'fall' farther up to the higher orbit. Flinging yourself is a change in velocity. No matter how big your engine is, or how long you have to burn, the change in velocity is your fixed value. Once you get up to the higher orbit, you have to burn again, or speed yourself up more, so that your new velocity keeps you up high as you fall around the parent body. Once you have done so, the only way to come back down is to slow yourself down in that high orbit with another burn, usually, a change in velocity equal to the burn that stabilized your high orbit. Every move you do from one orbit to another in this manner requires this to happen, and thus you have to burn fuel for any change you make. Now, the reason you use 'Delta-V' instead of say, 'gallons' or 'liters' when talking about rockets is simple. No two burns use the same amount of fuel. If a rocket weighs 10 tons, you need to burn MORE fuel to change its velocity than a rocket that weighs 5 tons. But wait! There's more. As you burn fuel to change velocity, your rocket becomes significantly lighter, really fast. That 10 ton rocket BECOMES the 5 ton rocket in a hurry. That means the math you need to do to find how long and how powerful a burn you need changes by the second. This is where the 'calculus' part actually comes into the picture. Regular algebraic math cannot easily solve this problem without making you rewrite the problem over and over again dozens of times a second. A computer can do that, but a rocket scientist with a slide rule back in the apollo days can't. Calculus, while more abstract a math system, has the tools needed to solve these 'changing' equations in real time. Again, we're going to skip over it. Anyway, because you can't base your ability to go places based on blind fuel capacity and a 'gas mileage' like a car, you have to determine your range through a different method. Luckily, rocket science does allow you to find out how much total change in velocity your rocket will have. As long as you know the total mass of your rocket, and the mass of your fuel, you can determine how much it can change in velocity. Likewise, orbital changes are all based on velocity changes. Thus, the Delta-V budget can almost instantly tell you where you can go, and whether or not you can come back. It is the single most important number out of all the statistics on your spacecraft. Even above the Thrust to Weight Ratio of launch. If you pull up one of the 'Delta V Maps of the Kerbol System' that are on the internet, you can chain the paths to determine how much Delta you need to get to say, low Duna orbit from Low Kerbin orbit. Then, you can look at your rocket and go 'I don't have enough, need a bigger rocket'. This isn't as 'simple' an explanation as others might be putting out. But I feel that making the explanation TOO simple may become a bit misinforming, and understanding the background usually makes the knowledge more solid. But amazingly enough, the end point of all this is pretty simple, even if the journey to get there is filled with complexity. Then again, the point of these kinds of systems is to simplify the complicated into something nice and bite-size.

It's in your folder because I chose to put it there specifically... 1: To ensure that it references your assets correctly and gets removed if they remove KSR (without having to go 'what all went with this again?'). 2: To keep it easily located and the information compartmentalized, especially while I'm busy editing new bases in. Also, at this point, the folder nesting call for all the base thumbnail images are based on KerbinsideRemaster's folder structure as the parent.

This is inaccurate. This doesn't remove anything. KSR Airports a completely different brand and set of airports that share no lineage with the original Kerbinside. Please read the information I placed in the OP. I express this fact rather explicitly in the FAQ, among several other things. Then you won't 'notice' anything, you'll flat out KNOW.