eberkain

v0.3 Added an additional 0.35 scale for USI Sounding Rocket comp. Removed the free scale from everything but the adapter types. Not sure what else to change, other than doing some testing and seeing that it is all working. @FlexGunship I have tried to use KR&D a few different times and always end up dropping it from my list for one reason or another. @White Owl I'm on the fence about solar panels, I can see the argument either way. As for engines, I think I'm going to start working on a new alternate set of engine configs for real fuels and part of that would be disabling scaling on engines.

Yes, that is something that definitely needs to be looked at, I couldn't find a good reference and just copied values from another config.

He has squashed alot of those bugs, I still haven't tried done any testing since the last update.

I was thinking about this same thing, making Gael and Iota an Earth/Moon clone while leaving everything else at something like 10.5x. I did calculate 10.6183 for the Resize and 10.74472 for the Rescale for Gael, haven't done the others yet, or tested them. With all the issues I was having with 10x, I was thinking about starting over with 1.2 and playing on 6.4x.

Yeah, I don't like scaling crew parts with IVA's for that very reason, which is part of the reason that I started working on Tweakscale Limited. It removes scaling from some parts like wnything with crew seats, and restricts how big or small you can scale a part based on its default size.

I've not seen any other mods that use or override the build button in the editor

Are you opposed to the rest of the parts getting tweakscale, I'm going to update my local file for it since I'm doing all the rest of the mods I'm using. EDIT: Thank you for having sanity in naming your parts, I did a pull request with the update if you want to use it.

GPP 1.1 doesn't support Kerbalism, but 1.2 will, and it is about to get released, I see activity on github in the last couple hours for them gathering updates for the 1.2 release.

Finally got to the end of all the config updates I started on, pull request submitted.

The only real reference I could find was on the Wiki page for the ISS Airlock which says... To me that implies that the space shuttle airlock would loose quite alot of air when used, and that even the current airlock on the ISS is not 100% loss free. Wish I could find some real numbers.

@EnzoMeertens great to see you pop back on. The current version of the mod needs a couple tweaks, the amount of impact force required to get a model to deform is much greater than it used to be. Low speed impacts will cause a bounce instead of a crash.

CRP is a dependency of many of my mods, I can't really remove it. Is it possible to make a MM config that would remove the unused resources from the switch. If you could show me one working example I can fix it up for myself.

Anywhere, doesnt' matter. Just pull up the list of vessels, click one of the vessel names and you should get detailed info about that vessel, along the bottom are tabs, go over to auto and click up, then you should see some labels with checkmarks, there are mouse pointer tooltips to help explain everything, you can uncheck the different things to disable the messaging, which disable the time warp stop.

the part SXTSmallFuselage appears to be a duplicate of the stock Mk0 jet fuel tank part. EDIT: I did a pull request with an updated tweakscale config, should now cover everything.

assuming you are using RealPlume, just use the smokescreen interface in game to tweak the plume, then make a config with those settings. There is probably already a config in the RealPlume-Stock folder, just match up the name of the part. I've noticed a couple that do not look good.

Ah man, I redid all the NFT mod configs yesterday. EDIT: So far I've done all the mods I use except these. I'll do another PR when I'm done. SXT (just a ridiculous number of parts) Mk3 Expansion (has not config) Stockalike Mining Extension (has no config) Feline Utility Rover (has no config) Planetary Base Systems (not sure about this one)

The tweakscale config is missing a number of parts, the srb nosecones, the oms/rcs blisters, and a few of the interstage adapters. I updated my local file if you would like to use it, I also added the engine behavior to all the engine parts. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_wAo_KZdHCraEsweXNkRTlIUGs

I did a pull request with tweakscale updates.

You would just need to use multiple ladders, if you scaled the ladder the bars would probably look too far apart.

The Tweakscale config is missing 3 parts, not sure if those were left out intentionally or not. Also need to add the engine behavior to engines. Here is an updated file. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_wAo_KZdHCrclNWQm1CUGdGSkk

I've been working on a tweakscale addon and checking mod parts, I did a pull request with alot of updates to the tweakscale config.

Tweakscale config includes ladders? Kerbals are always the same size, so that seems like something that shouldn't be tweakscaled.

I rebound mine to numpad buttons because of this.

v 0.2 Added scaleFactor overrides to each scale, this fixes problems with some parts having defined the scaleFactors directly inside the part config. Added to the forbid list, docking ports, antenna, scansat parts. Fixed a bug with parts that were 10m default, some parts use 10 and some parts use 10.0. The MM filter doesn't match them both as you think it would. Removed the SXTBox filter I put in, totally didn't work.

Can you remove a field from a module? For example... @PART[ITSLeg-L]:NEEDS[TweakScale]:FOR[KerbalReusabilityExpansion] { %MODULE[TweakScale] { type = free defaultScale = 100 scaleFactors = 85, 100, 150, 200 } } I want to get rid of the scaleFactors line from every Tweakscale Module, because I am doing my own in the :FINAL step. How can I make sure something is executed before FINAL, but after everything else? I tried this, but no joy... //remove any predefined scaleFactors that may be on parts @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[TweakScale]] { @MODULE[TweakScale] { !scaleFactors } } EDIT: Figured out a better way to do it, still wonder if you can delete module fields that way though?