Bit Fiddler

is there a way to scale back the failure rate? I want the random failures but I also want to be able to expect to fly an Aircraft to the pole and back for instance without it failing. I would like it such that the failure happen just not so frequently.

like this but without using the Chines. Just the Mk2 body with an inset. the RCS could even be built into the body section and have it include a Reaction wheel as well. sort of an all-in-one attitude adjuster. Just for saving on parts, I would not need to use the chines in this case. Also; there are a few Mk2 parts mods out there, and I have all of them installed that I can find, as the Mk2 is my favorite system for ssto craft. Maybe you could get together with the other authors and combine into one pack, so the textures all match, and the part count will not be so high for the redundant parts.

Ok update.... I found a drawing of the real deal and did some measurments. Went back and remade it as close to scale as I can. it does fly now, but needs a lot of work to get it just right. still no idea if it will make orbit. but I will get back to you. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qb9zj0gqgedmr4h/AAAS-HINMv4SN53qUJsn_nx5a?dl=0

How can I save my ckan mod list with the GUI in such a way that I can A) post it to a forum thread, or be able to wipe my GAMEDATA folder and have CKAN reload all the mods for me? option B is also useful for porting my KSP setup to another computer as I can just copy that ckan list to the new machine and it will see an empty gamedata folder and fill it up according to my saved mod list. If these are already possible, how do I do it. and if not possible could it be added?

IDEA: could you make a short Mk2 body part that has the RCS built into it such that they are recessed into the side flairs. so if you then place a wing over that body section the rcs ports will be recessed into a cutout and not be buried in the wing? or for that matter just make a generic body part with these notches on the side flair to give us a small spot to mount anything "under" a wing. If you need a picture to understand what I mean I would be happy to make one for you. reasons for this are on a long space plane if you want to balance your RCS you have to place all your RCS ports on the upper or lower surface as the wings will be attached to the sides. however it would be more efficient on the thrust to have the rcs ports facing vertically, so a side placed RCS port is needed. as of now I just place them on the upper and lower surface on the angle just as you show in your pictures, but I have always wanted them in a small cutout between the body and the wing. Just looking at your parts closer and a Combo RCS/Reaction wheel part is the ideal place for this side notch. just make it slightly narrower to accommodate an RCS port between it and the wing.

LOL ORBIT?!?!?!?!? it will not even get off the ground. but I have hopes. I am working on some tweaks. switch out most of the fuel tanks for the empty structural parts to save on weight etc. I will get back to you with updates if I solve the problems. I also may actually find a drawing with measurements and do the conversion to make it true to scale. this one is just an eyeball's guess.

makes no difference, just want to be sure I do not loose track of it is all.. KR-71 https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qb9zj0gqgedmr4h/AAAS-HINMv4SN53qUJsn_nx5a?dl=0

So then the only difference in any of the air scoops, no matter what the description seems to imply in their fancy talk, is the "Area" value? so basically just stack on as much "Area" as possible and ignore all the text that seems to imply aerodynamic differences at speeds or altitudes?

ok question... KSP has incorporated all your Mk 2 stuff in stock now yes? or are there still some parts in this pack that stock does not use. my game is running at max memory and I can afford the entire pack, but I would like to add any Mk2 bits that stock did not incorporate. Oh, and what about the multi mode engine, (SABRE?) is it compatible with 1.0.2? or do I need to wait for an update to use it?

ok I always build balanced so never noticed this before... but on my latest craft it was an SSTO so it had 2 engines and about something like 21 intakes... so it did have an odd number. the build aid would assign the intakes asymmetrically to try and balance the load and this explains why... So another question. Does the auto build function always assign the "closest" intakes assuming they are designed symmetrically? thus left engine will always be assigned the 10 intakes on the left of the craft?

hmm may need to check FAR version... as yes I am patched with the new DLL here. Seems I have the latest FAR installed... So the question still remains. Does pwing support FAR and vice versa? if these 2 mods are supposed to work together I will have to go strip down an install and test it, as I just reconfirmed that when I remove the pwing parts from my SSTO the CoL indicator does not move at all. Or is this a bug in the CoL indicator? I have read a few posts that seem to indicate it is just a display error for the CoL indicator. I will have to strip an install down to just FAR and these wings to see if this still holds true. As if may be some other mod mucking things up. I will report back after I do this. Ok Fresh install... FAR v0.15.2, ModularFlightIntefrator v1.0.0, pWingForked v1.2.2.0

And on a side note I am running this with FAR and they do seem to work ok.. maybe not to full potential I guess. But my planes do fly while running FAR. Yes after reading 75 pages of forum posts I found the answers to my questions... But thanks for the reply. As to the Fuel bit. I was looking for it on your new GUI rather than the tweak GUI so I missed it. I guess this is not possible to add on yours? or just redundant and thus not priority? EDIT: as a test I went and removed all the pWings from my plane and indeed the CoL does not change as I remove the wings. so no these are not working with FAR I need to retract that statement. All lift is from the Lifting body and the small bits of wing that were not pWings.

so what happens in game terms if I make a jet with twin engins with only 1 intake?

Ok, well I will have to go try some things as this craft maxes out at about Mach .9 until I get very high altitude. like say 20KM I assume this is from the oscillations in the yellow line at the engine section? Once I get it up to 25Km or so it will easily cruise at Mach 5+ which brings me to another point... How do Air scoops work in KSP with FAR installed. I assume some work better at high speeds and or high altitudes, while other work better al low speeds etc. Does it hold true that the "area" is the altitude/speed factor. as in high area scoops will provide more air at high speeds and altitudes? yet also cause more drag? while the "Amount" is some multiplier of this area that determines the over all resource available? Thus 2 scoops with same Area but different amounts will be the same as far as drag goes but the one with a higher amount will give more air? While 2 with the same amount but differing areas will vary in that the higher area will multiply with the amount to get more air when it is thin, at the cost of more drag?

So what am I looking at exactly? The text tells me small smooth curves are best but what is it I am seeing here... There are some black horizontal lines, are these marking some critical point? or just an arbitrary scale? and how small and smooth do I need to be etc. If all this is spelled out somewhere feel free to point me in the direction, as I would also like to know what all the other numbers and data this mod reports means as well. I guess just a basic delving into aerodynamic theory will answer most of those questions other than the specifics about this graph. And on a side note; I was just reading some of the latest posts, and I see the one about asymetric voxel display... I have this issue as well. you can't really see it in this picture, but I was looking at it and trying to figure out the cause last night. I thought maybe I had just placed some parts crooked or something.

ok so an idea... on your gui window let us drag, click check boxes etc. to rearrange the intakes on the list. and a question... Is it possible to assign 2 engines to 1 intake? if have 2 engines and 3 intakes how do I balance this?

First off. Sweet mod. Replaced the old procedural wing mod and use this one now... Secondly, some requests: 1) Is it possible to allow compound shapes? what I mean is I want to duplicate the shape of the "Big-S Wing" but have it still be one part. 2) can you make the root/tip have an option to "flare" such that right at the root or tip the surface will flare out to match a cylinder. So that if we attach a wing tip pod or where the wings meet a fuselage the surface will flare out to meet that cylinder to make a nice smooth transition. 3) can we get a surface texture to match the stock Mk2 parts? Or if it is possible I guess I can maybe make my own textures? (have not looked into this yet) 4) can you add support for having the wings carry fuel. Like modular fuel tanks etc. (I guess I could do this with MM?) Going back to read this thread now to see if any of these have been discussed before, as I just posted this without having read this entire thread.

Thanks. as soon as I get my new laptop I plan to install a Linux distro on it so I can play KSP 64 in Linux. I hope it will solve my MOD hungry problems.

will you add this to your other cockpit pack once it is done? or will it always be a separate mod?

I have tried to make a contract pack, and it is not working... I know it is something simple I have missed so I was wondering if there was documentation on this somewhere I have not seen. something that might help me find what I have done wrong. I was trying to estimate memory requirements for contract packs and such so I decided to make some and see what options are available and what they various options do to memory requirements. I have read the Git Hub page, but I was looking for something like a list of "gotchas" things that are easy to overlook and cause problems.

I have tried Open GL but for some reason my KSP does not like it. But DX11 did help on memory quite a bit. As for the 64 bit hack... so many mods disable themselves in 64 bit, and some of these mods I really like. So I have not tried the 64 bit hack. However this does bring up a point I have been wondering about. Does the Linux 64bit version have this issue? all these mods that disable themselves in 64bit mode... Do they disable themselves in Linux 64bit as well? As to the icons. The Blue cross on the left is the "Keep Fit" mod. makes you keep your crews healthy. the IBA is "Intake Build Aid" to help you get your air intakes and engines to play nice. the clock in the gear is "Kerbal Construction Time" it makes it so you do not just pop your vehicles out as fast as you design them. it adds an element of taking the time to build them. it also adds time spent on research so research does not just pop out as fast as you can drive around KSC and do all the science stuff. and lastly it adds an idea of recovering stages/debris is more important. Basically I only load sandbox mode to be used as a "Drafting table" I can design freely and play with ideas. but my entire game is run in Career mode so I have many mods installed to make the career mode more interesting / difficult. Remote Tech, Construction Time, Keep Fit, Kabin Kraziness, TAC life support, FAR, Connected Living, etc. Basically if it add an element of "realism" I probably use it. Not to say that it is realistic, but just that they add some new dimension that if it was real you would have to deal with. anything I can find to make the career mode more interesting.

never get to flight so I do not know. but the VAB is so laggy the game just ends up crashing after a few min. and the log file is 500MB as I said. here is a log file after only a short time in the VAB. maybe a minute. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/75023494/output_log.txt ampyear.dll "properties window" reports file version 0.14.5596.37114 I do not find any BTSM.dll anywhere on my computer. And just to be sure, if I remove AY and KabinKrazy the lag is gone, and game runs fine for hours.

Hard to say they change so often. I run mod my game till it dies, then delete some stuff and start modding again. I am always at 3.5GB of RAM. so I have to delete all the time. but I find so many cool mods to play with I have to try them all. If there was a specific icon or part in the screen shots I could direct you to the mod however. And here is the "final" version of my latest ALCOR. This is a single stage MP fuel only lander. Since it is single stage the entire lander ascends and docks with the service module for return to Kerbin. The service module is then deorbited, while the entire lander then lands on Kerbin. This lander is really the heart of the entire operation, as it is the only part on this entire round trip to have crew capacity. It is the cockpit for the entire mission, from launch to splash. The lifter and the service module are just fuel tanks and engines to move this thing around. It is designed for Mun/Minimus missions and has TAC-LS rating of around 60KD (Kerbal Days). Depending on the configuration of the "Universal Storage" bays, it can sustain a 3 Kerbal crew for about 20 days. I can configure the Universal Storage bays for a wide variety of missions however the fuel and TAC-LS requirements make this impractical for anything outside of Kerbin's system.

can do... I s just using the version CKAN gave me. but I will re install it and see what happens. if the problem is still there I will give you the log. Problem is the log file was over 500MB it had so many of these error messages in it. Another symptom is my FPS drops to slide show speeds, (or even slower... oil painting speeds) when I have this mod installed. I assume it is because the game is so busy writing log entries it cant be bothered to actually run the game... I will reinstall and report back

this is spamming wrong BTSM messages in the log file. I see many similar reports of log spam, but not for this one specifically. I do not use BTSM so yes the version will be wrong...