BudgetHedgehog

Just a quick question: is the loading screen GUI movable, either via config or in game? I have MSI's DevHelper installed that also places its GUI in the top left, unfortunately behind AVC, rendering it basically useless.

Just a PSA about KM_Gimbal - sarbian has said he'll look into taking it on, or if not, then just making his own:

Ah I see. Sorry for misunderstanding, look forward to their inclusion then! Thanks for the help RE pictures, I (think I) know exactly what to do. Spent a few hours last night flying round to get nice shots

You'll want a situaution/biome mask for that: Don't forget to add ScienceDefs for these new places as well or they won't be runnable. Though if you're planning on making a certain experiment only work over a certain biome (say, the Poles), I don't think it's possible. It's either all biomes or none, though I'd be happy to be corrected.

Please update the .version file when you update.. I downloaded PRE0.4 from kerbalstuff and that was apparently made to run on 0.24.2, despite being updated yesterday and 0.25 support being added in PRE0.2.. Otherwise, thanks for the update, guys! Kinda sad to see Robau's icons didn't make the cut, but I like them too much to ignore Also, how would I add custom Launch Location pictures? I'm currently lacking ones for a couple of places and am not sure what to name them so they show up.

Please direct your discussion over to the appropriate thread, thank you. EDIT: just my two cents, looks like we're straying off-topic again. Feel free to correct/delete me though.

Want both of these. Don't see how Tweakscale is against Lego-like construction - if you change part X to be size Y and Texture Z, isn't that the same as picking part A that is already Size Y and Texture Z? If you have parts that are identical in all but resource amounts, scale and texture, what's the harm in making them one selectable part that has those three values tweakable? If the end result is the same as if another part that those parameters pre-tweaked, what's the difference? Not seeing it. Select Jumbo-64, not cheating. Select FL-T800 Fuel Tank, change to 2.5m (that has the same resource amounts of J64) and change texture to be Jumbo-64 - cheating! P-Parts is different as that allows a more precise scaling than stock sizes/lengths so I'm not so keen on that, but I can see the appeal and wouldn't complain (a lot) if it was included.

Let's say I'm a mod. I sticky every thread that I like - no doubt some people would disagree with me, a lot of people would think that I was unfairly promoting stuff that I myself wanted rather than what the community as a whole wanted.. Yeah, one mod thinks it's a good idea - what makes their opinion any more important or valid than anyone elses? You know, Dominos Pizza got its name from one of it's part time delivery drivers in the early days. I've seen loads of excellent ideas from forum members that haven't been stickied, why is this any different? Oh yeah, that's right - because one mod likes it. Oh ok then, then yeah, it totally deserves prime space and being stickied for an undefined amount of time. Sorry, I didn't realise that that one mod's opinion is the decider on valid ideas. Apologies for sarcasm, this has really got my goat.

Agree with everything except Gameplay 8 and 10, Antennas 2-3 and Balancing 4. Rather than Small Tweaks 9, I'd rather that it disallowed crew transfer than changing the description to say it allows it, but that's just me. Personally, I've downloaded mods to fix some of these suggestions - AntennaRange does a great job with your Antenna section, there's KSPStockTweaks for map navball, RPM for Gameplay 3 and Diazos LandingHeight for Gameplay 4. The girders are supposed to be heavy considering their insane impact tolerance and oh how I wish Cosmetic 3 was a thing.. make the fairing dependent on the thing placed beneath it.. or include simple interstages that work the same way.

No, but Mod A likes idea and has the power to promote/sticky it, giving it unfair attention and prominence. And oh look, that's what happened. con′flict of in′terest, n. : a conflict between the private interests [wanting this kind of thing to be stock] and the official responsibilities [not/stickying threads of value] of a person in a position of trust [a forum moderator]. Or, the circumstance of a public officeholder, corporate officer, etc., whose personal interests might benefit from his or her official actions or influence.

It's just one step away in both cases.

I don't like this and don't think it ought to have been stickied. For the former because it adds complexity to things that newbies already have a hard time understanding and for the latter because conflict of interest anyone? I like Vens Stock Part Revamp, but do you see me clamouring to sticky it? I've been a forum mod before and stickying this out of personal interest is out of line, tsk tsk. Anyway, this just seems to, as I said, add complexity to simple things. It's action groups, you press a button and something happens, that's how it should remain. You're already adjusting throttle to X for Y seconds, why not 'Execute Node' or 'Accelerate Until Vertical Speed = 0' - hooray, orbit achieved with little to no manual input. Why don't we just bundle MJ with KSP if this becomes a thing.. Not overly enthusiastic about the idea and less than happy about the stickying EDIT: That said.. this is just basically kOS, but assigned to action groups. Hell, if I wanted KOS, I'd download it. If this absolutely has to be something that must be added to stock in the next available update, I sure hope it's something unrelated to AGs. Unlockable tech tree part or something, I don't care - my AGs are full up enough as it is with Open Solar Panels and Toggle Intakes And Engines and Toggle Either Separately and Do Science and Toggle Torque etc etc.. I don't want an autopilot cluttering that up.

It would also exhibit this behaviour without FAR - because the parts are no longer stock, FAR doesn't change them. On a completely stock 0.25 + FAR game, infiniglide planes are impossible. As your game isn't completely stock, it's possible. Not sure where the confusion lies. I'll repeat: you have put parts into your game that are unavailable to a stock 0.25 player which means your game is not stock. If you give that craft to someone who downloaded KSP 3 minutes ago, they would not be able to load it. (bolded for TL;DR) It probably uses very small increments such as milliseconds to calculate real time acceleration (or indeed, however long you tell it to update).

I made a thing: Excuse the GUI being too much to the right, it seems KSP doesn't like too small a resolution on fullscreen. But the pics and GUIs go from left to right, pretty simple. Cargo bays and adapters can now hold a variety of fuels, with various weights of initial tanks and stuff and things.. available setups are Structural, LF, LFO and MP. You'll need Firespitter and this patch won't fire if you don't have it. It's probably a little unbalanced, but I got the numbers from both stock and Nerts initial amounts, with a bit of fiddling. Feel free to change the amounts/cost/weights as you see fit, it's probably a bit unbalanced.. I've no idea, I'm a little drunk. Was debating about using FStextureSwitch for the fuselage but it seemed like too much work for just one less part in the part list.. Though, I have to hand it to Snjo, FS is very well documented, no wonder it's so widely used. ANYWAY! @PART[mk4cargo-1]:NEEDS[Firespitter] { MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = Structural; LiquidFuel; LiquidFuel,Oxidizer; MonoPropellant resourceAmounts = 0; 500; 360, 440; 500 basePartMass = 0.8 tankMass = 0; 1; 1.56; 2.76 tankCost = 0; 392; 367; 500 displayCurrentTankCost = true hasGUI = True availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = True } } @PART[mk4adapter-1]:NEEDS[Firespitter] { MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = Structural; LiquidFuel; LiquidFuel,Oxidizer; MonoPropellant resourceAmounts = 0; 500; 360, 440; 500 basePartMass = 0.5 tankMass = 0; 1; 1.56; 2.76 tankCost = 0; 392; 367; 500 displayCurrentTankCost = true hasGUI = True availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = True } } @PART[mk4adapter-2]:NEEDS[Firespitter] { MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = Structural; LiquidFuel; LiquidFuel,Oxidizer; MonoPropellant resourceAmounts = 0; 500; 360, 440; 500 basePartMass = 0.475 tankMass = 0; 1; 1.56; 2.76 tankCost = 0; 392; 367; 500 displayCurrentTankCost = true hasGUI = True availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = True } } Was contemplating putting it on more parts, but those already have other uses/functions and I didn't want to encroach on Nerts already marvellous models (like the MP slice - that's why the MP setup has only slightly more MP despite the much larger size) Anyway, yeah, go have fun! Gonna build a Shuttle with this now, brb.

a = (Velocityfinal - velocityinitial )/(timefinal - timeinitial) = ÃŽâ€v/ÃŽâ€t or acceleration=distance/time2 Change in velocity divided by change in time. Usually noted in metres and seconds, giving an acceleration of m/s2. EDIT: For example: At 0s, you're travelling vertically at 0m/s. After 10s, you're travelling vertically at 50m/s. This would give an average acceleration of (50m/s)/(10s), or 5m/s2.

Yes, that please

Not including a way to separate your payload - put stack separators, decouplers or docking ports on the inside of the cargo bay and attach your payload to them, not directly to the fuselage.

Don't know what can be fixed - I've had no problem with it.

That is, I believe, a stock bug introduced in 0.25. Download this and see if it helps.

I stand corrected.. learn something new every day!

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/97285-0-25-Stock-Bug-Fix-Modules Also, your request is really vague. "new stuff, parts, better UI".. what new stuff? What parts do you want added? A better UI for what? Do you want fuel tanks? Antennas? Engines? Command pods? Wheels? Batteries? Structural parts? Plane propellers? Do you want more ion-like propulsion? Parts to make building stations easier? More choices for spaceplanes? A better UI for the editors? Visual enhancements like clouds? Do you want a realistic atmosphere (or not quite as rubbish, anyway)? I'd link every single one of those, but I don't have the time. Help me help you - be a little bit more specific than "I want more parts"

Yes, by itself, I don't believe it can control anything - you'd need a probe core or similar to actually be able to do things. Once you have one of those onboard, you can control from the seat.

Known issue, rbray explains it here:

Attach a base to payload, right click the base, tweak size.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65365-WIP-MSI-s-Infernal-Robotics-Model-Rework-(Structural-Pre-Release) There's nothing in this IR thread that falls under Structural, but there's a whole bunch of those in the rework thread.