BudgetHedgehog

Your ladders will be in their existing position i.e. below the original hatch. So yes.

I noticed that.. I don't think it's a bug, just a misapplied intended feature. Jets could theoretically be used for a first stage vertical launcher in which case they probably would kick up a big cloud (of dust), but they wouldn't horizontally. I don't know if SmokeScreen can detect the orientation of a part, but that would be the easiest fix. On the other hand, these are jets, not rocket engines, they don't produce a visible exhaust, or at least a smoky one so really the launch smoke shouldn't be applied to them at all..

It probably was - I got the email alert about a new post, gave you rep and was like 'huh, points for part maps.. I haven't uploaded my 0.25 one yet' so I did.. probably around 8.20pm. Ahh, c'mon.. I earned those points fair and square!

If it helps, I have 25 points and uploaded my Part Map earlier this evening. I don't know how many points I had before I uploaded it though, was too busy drinking tea

Well, seeing as TweakScale automatically applies itself to everything, whether you use it or not is hard to read from a craft file. IIRC, kat was looking to see if it's possible to check against what it SHOULD be (maybe with the rescaleFactor? I don't know how TweakScale embiggens things), but I don't know if there was any progress on that. Same issue with TweakableEverything - it'll detect it and the problem comes when comparing if it's been used or not, rather that just being present.

1 - terribly easy to do, I imagine. If all else fails, just copy over the relevant RESOURCE section from an older KW Rocketry config. 2, So far, I've noticed pretty much all disadvantages - compared to a similar sized LFO tank and a Poodle, the SPS is more expensive and gives less dV. I don't think I've even used it since it was changed to monoprop. Fair enough if K&W want it to be like that, but yeah.. I haven't seen an upside to it all. EDIT: To wit - Note the cost and dV in the Engineer box in the lower left. Granted, I do have Stock Rebalance installed which buffs the vacuum Isp of the Poodle slightly, but only from 390 to 410. At least it's lighter, I guess.

That used to be a problem with SmokeScreen (HotRockets) before it got upgraded.

Yes, FAR tweaks the mass of the wings (you're using wings as structural elements...) to make them more realistic and also lowers the thrust of the engines because they're originally designed to fly through something similar to syrup - with actual air, they don't need to be as powerful. The config file you need to edit is FerramAerospaceResearch.cfg. Have fun

Not yet, but I know some of it will be broken. Off the top of my head: - the small escape tower and massive SRB will likely have scaling problems. - the SAS parts will be out of balance as the IRW is now 0.625m so SRB's values for it will be odd. - the Mk2 adjustments reference parts that no longer exist. - most, if not all, of the wing adjustments again reference parts that no longer exist. Other than that, it should still be ok, but I haven't tested it.

Just wanted to drop a note say thanks for the SP+ style wings, they make pretty planes. Good stuff!

I want to be able to able to place a ship decal that looks nice (like, the NASA one, or indeed my own custom one) and be able to plant a flag that actually looks like a flag (eg, the Default design or a custom one that has the fabric wrinkles) on the same mission. Apollo 11 didn't plant an eagle flag on the Mun and they didn't have the US flag as a mission patch. One way to do this is rename the Mission Flag option in the editors to Mission Patch and apply it to the vehicles/parts/EVA kerbals/IVA views etc. Then, when you plant a flag, it could come up with the current text box and the flag selection box as well so you can decide on which one to plant there and then. I ask for this mainly because designs that look good as a decal on a ship (transparent backgrounds, look clean and sharp etc) look bad as a flag and vice versa (fabric wrinkles and plain white background look out of place on a ship). Thanks for reading.

Ingenious! Can't believe I didn't think of that..

I want to be able to define specific engines for the CoT. Say, building shuttles - once I put the OMS on, the CoT takes into account the SSME as well which makes balancing the OMS nigh on impossible. And during the final balance, it's taking into account the OMS engines as well instead of just the SRBs and SSME. Another instance - VTOLs. Separate out the engines used for vertical and horizontal flight to tell if they're both balanced right.

A clean install of 2.6d? Because I'm unable to replicate that after entirely deleting KWRocketry folder and installing 2.6d.

While I must congratulate you on a thorough bug report, I'm using 3-7 Basic with fully functioning contracts so I suspect ATM isn't to blame. That dump log is useless, it's cut off before the main menu is loaded. Also, I may be stupid, but you don't appear to have an ActiveTextureManagement folder.. And UniverseReplacer is deprecated and horrible, try TextureReplacer instead.

It's Fine Print. Sorry to disappoint. Maybe 0.27?

That cockpit looks positively spiffing. Is the second change to the wings? They look thicker than normal...

I just tried and the 5m everything worked perfectly. Make sure you have clean-installed the very latest and removed any patches for it as well.

7-4 is working just fine for me in x86 0.25.

Excellent! Looking forward to that! Also, if I may, a feature request: in the tracking station, we're given previews of rover/aerial/satellite contracts, right? Well, would it be possible to distinguish between offered contracts and accepted contracts? It'd mean I can think of a suitable design immediately rather than memorising the details and comparing them in Mission Control. Just like, a different colour or a dashed line.. something that separates the two, really.

Senpai does not love this thread any more

Indeed, well done! Can you give out any details on this? Like, is it a 1:1 integration, or are some contracts slightly edited or something? No worries if you're bound by an NDA, I'm just curious. Congrats again!

I believe you replace your current FerramAerospaceResearch.dll with the one from here (click it, then View Raw and it should download. I'm no Githubber though).

So this effectively replaces AmbientLightShifter (not the one from Blizzy)? Downloading now all the same, I lurve me some darkness in space.

Haven't experienced any so far. Don't think I've seen any errors in the logs either.