blowfish

Might try quitting and re-starting Visual Studio. Also verify that when you click on the Assembly-CSharp reference, it actually points to where you think it should (it'll show the path in the bottom right pane)

It was moved back into Assembly-CSharp. Remove the reference to KSPUtil and make sure your reference to Assembly-CSharp points to an up-to-date DLL

Indeed. I took a brief look at the code and it looks like most of the behavior that makes Adjusable Landing Gear work is very specifically written for the FSwheel-derived module that these use. I think large portions of it would have to be rewritten from scratch.

If putting a blank line between the node name and the brackets causes an error, then that's the fault of KSP's cfg parsing code, not MM.

Never tried to compile using Xamarin Studio, but I found a process that works with xbuild (command line compiler that comes with mono). I only ever had to install the latest version of Mono. xbuild /p:Configuration=Release /p:ReferencePath="path/containing/ksp/assemblies" MySolution.sln You can of course specify Debug rather than Release. The path for the assemblies is something like something/KSP.app/Resources/Data/Managed (looks like you figured that out already), or copy the DLLs somewhere else.

Welcome to the forums! There's no way to attach to 2 decouplers unfortunately. Your best bet is to use struts. Or to enable advanced tweakables in the game settings and use auto-struts.

It looks like no, but you can try it if you want.

I think that may have been changed semi-recently. My recollection is that physicsless parts now add their mass to the parent part (this caused some issues with re-entry vehicle CoM because the heat shields were physicsless for some reason) This won't work. node_stack[*] will only match a value called "node_stack", it won't match "node_stack_top" or "node_stack_top01" etc So I think there's no way to do this, unfortuantely. MM cannot do wildcard matching on the left side of the equal sign.

You just need to check for the presence of node_attach @PART:HAS[#node_attach[*],#mass[<0.1]] Worth noting though, that this will pick up any part which can be surface attached and has a mass less than 0.1t, and many radially attachable parts can also be stack attached by different nodes.

No, RF Stockalike adjusts the masses of all engines such that their TWR is realistic (there is a setting to make the masses more like stock but it is disabled by default).

I think you may need to be a little more specific about what you want to be realistic and what you don't. As far as Isp goes, even stock engines are pretty realistic for modern hypergolic propellants (but there's no option to use higher performance propellants). Now, let's talk about RF Stockalike. RF Stockalike makes the masses of engines and tanks realistic, gives you more propellant options, and introduces other aspects of real rocket design like ignitions and boiloff. So for a pure rocket (tank+engines), you should be able to achieve pretty much the same thing with RF Stockalike as in RO. The key difference is that RF Stockalike doesn't touch the masses of any other parts, so they're going to be much heavier than in real life. So you need more rocket with RF Stockalike only because the payload itself (plus other secondary features of the rocket) are heavier than they would be in real life.

RF Stockalike isn't "made" for any particular rescale. It makes the masses of engines and tanks realistic. This happens to work well for a 6.4x rescale (especially since other parts like crew pods etc retain their heavy stock masses) but there's nothing inherent about that.

You would need a custom plugin to do this, again, the problem being drag cubes and the fact that the stock modules were really only designed to handle two of them at a time (for most engines this is shrouded and unshrouded).

For starters, there's no reason to necessarily expect that aircraft will behave the same in stock aero as in FAR. In fact, you should expect to see some major differences, especially in supersonic flight. FAR aircraft should probably be designed from the ground up in FAR. Now, I do have some comments on your specific problems: Vertical oscillations: probably means you have too much pitch authority. That and the fact that SAS has its limits. Note however, that pitch authority can vary with flight condition, so decreasing pitch authority may mean that you don't have enough somewhere else. You might want to look at mods like Pilot Assistant, which can help smooth some of these things out Sideslip: probably means you just need a larger vertical stabilizer, or to place it farther from the center of mass (i.e. farther back).

Remove the reference to KSPUtil. Everything that was in that DLL was moved back into Assembly-CSharp.

Tetragon Projects

If you have an effect defined in the part's EFFECTS node, you can cause it to play in a module by calling part.Effect(effectName, power) where effectName is the name of the effect in the EFFECTS node and power is a float from 0 to 1 indicating how strongly the effect should be played.

It would be a reasonable bet. Try starting from scratch and following the installation instructions exactly. If you're still having problems, please read "How to get support" in my signature. It will tell you how to post the info I need to debug your problem (the log is very important so don't forget that).

Just to provide a little more context on why this wouldn't happen, while Ven seems to have been rather absent lately, no one else has officially taken over maintaining this mod. Ven can at any point click a single button to merge these changes in then release a new version which would appear on CKAN.

B9 never explicitly required FAR, and it stopped being recommended after the 1.0 stock aero changes.

Well you definitely have an out of date ModuleManger. Try updating that, and if you problems persist upload your log again. E: best make sure all the current versions of your mods are comaptible with KSP 1.2 or later

RF-Stockalike has its own RealPlume configs. You don't need the other ones. And for future reference there is an RF stodkalike thread that might be a slightly better place for such questions E: be sure to install the RealPlume-RFStockslike folder that comes with it thoufh

Well, not sure what to say, since you definitely don't have B9 installed here. Also, you have the mod "Kerbol_StarSystem" installed incorrectly. Might want to re-read the installation instructions for that.

The news is a few posts above yours...

It's an idea. One limitation is that the tankbutts could not affect drag cubes as ModuleJettison already messes with them. The tankbutts would have to have the "Drag_Hidden" tag so that KSP doesn't see them when it tried to render drag cubes.