madadam

Good stuff Claw, much appreciated! Out of pure curiosity: does anyone know how similar/dissimilar this model is to how FAR used to work in 0.90?

Nice! I have a couple of those as well: Enable quicksave while moving over the surface. Don't limit timewarp in orbit. Timewarp should only be limited when the current orbit is not stable, which means that it's periapsis is either inside the atmosphere (for bodies with one) or below the altitude of the highest peak of that body (for non-atmospheric bodies). The in-flight right-click part menu should not move once opened. It's position is now locked to the parts center of mass, but that makes is difficult to use when the part is moving. I would simply open it at the position of the mouse cursor and let it stay there until closed.

Hi Ven, I had the same issue with the docking port sr, and this patch seems to have fixed it. I suggest you include it in the next release. Thanks!

Hello, This is really nice mod, great job! I want to bump the issue that Ramon91 mentioned earlier: When using FAR, the K-F.A.N. VTOL Lifter Section is generating excessive amount of drag. Actually so much that when my craft is flying faster than 150m/s, it disintegrates due to aerodynamic stresses . Anyway, I found that when I remove the ModuleResourceIntanke module from the part, the drag disappears. Obviously, I also lose the intake, so this is a poor fix. I also noticed that the excessive drag only appears when the craft is moving forward. When flying upwards (in the VTOL mode), the drag is normal. So this leads me to believe the issue happens only when the intake is oriented perpendicular to the direction of flight. No sure what can be done about it. Someone could ask in the FAR thread, maybe they would have a solution.

@ghostnineone: I had the same problem you are describing. Installing the mentioned libcurl4-openssl-dev package via apt-get seems to have fixed it for me.

Hello there, I created an updated config file for this awesome mod. It removes the dependency on AdvancedAnimator (which does not seem to be maintained anymore) and replaces it with the stock animation module, which seems to do the job just fine. The animation plays a bit slower, but I think I can live with that. Also while I was at it, I changed the category to from Pods to Structural, as that seems to be where all the Deadly Reentry heatshields live. Finally I changed the decoupler node from bottom to top, which makes more sense in my opinion. It is also how the Deadly Reentry inflatable heatshield is set up. Grab the file here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1003097/NASAaeroShield.cfg and stick it into GameData/OLDD/NASA, overwriting the original file.

NecroBones, Open an issue here: https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/NetKAN/issues and paste/link your file there. Not sure if you need a github account to do that, but I'd recommend you to set one up anyway. It's quite easy and useful. As for the KSP location issue, I think you have to explictly tell ckan which KSP install is the default one: ckan.exe ksp default default So the first default is the command (set default ksp install) and the second default is the name of the install you created with ckan.exe ksp add. I think I read somewhere that in the future, this step won't be necessary as ckan will automatically consider the install named "default" to be the default. Don't quote me on this though.

@NecroBones, I had the same problem. NetKAN is very picky with the license identifier. It has to be "CC-BY-NC-SA" (note the dash). EDIT: You can override the license from KerbalStuff by putting "license" : "CC-BY-NC-SA" into your .netkan file.

@pjf sounds great, thanks!

Hello there, I have a small issue with CKAN and I'm not sure whether I'm missing something obvious or it is rather CKAN missing a very important feature. The issue is: how do I upgrade my already installed mods to their latest versions? Or, at least, how can CKAN tell me which of my installed mods have been updated since I installed them? I know that there is ckan.exe upgrade but that requires me to know which mod to upgrade, doesn't it? Apart from that, I just want to say this is a fantastic project. Keep up the good work!

Hi there, Just tried this mod and it looks absolutely gorgeous! I have one small suggestion though: The mk1 Fuselage - Intake is tricky to attach radially, because the intake part gets embedded into the part you attach it to. I think the fix is really simple, in Squad/Parts/Mk1/mk1fuselageintake.cfg, just change this line: node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, -51.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1 to this: node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, 51.0, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 1 or alternatively, rotate the model 180 degrees. Looking forward to playing with this more!

@GabeTeuton: Thanks for your reply, but most of what you wrote I already knew. I know that I can put speed and air density into the stability derivatives and get the angle of attack necessary to maintain level flight. But what I don't know is whether my craft has enough pitch authority under those condition to actually achieve this angle of attack. So i'd like to know if this information is somehow available in the stability derivatives or somewhere else. @DaMitchel: Thanks, that sounds promising. I'll give it a try later on today. One thing though: I don't think you can put the air density into the static analysis window so not sure how I can use it to figure out the pitch authority in high altitudes. I'll check it out anyway. Thanks!

Hi Ferram (and others), Is it possible to figure out whether my craft has enough pitch authority to maintain level flight under certain conditions (speed + atmospheric density, etc...), just from the data provided by the analysis windows? Sometimes I build a craft which seems aerodynamically sound (all the stability derivatives green, etc...) but then during low speeds (as when landing for example) it cannot keep itself level and it noses down until it crashes. Another situation where this problem sometimes occurs is a spaceplane in very hight altitudes when the plane cannot pitch up enough to keep climbing higher. So, is there a way to predict these problems while still in the SPH? Or do I have to actually flight it to find out?

I believe this is a feature of the latest FAR version. Look in the changelog: Removed vector from CoL indicator to reduce confusion No idea about the no lift thing though.

Cool! Thanks.