Melfice

F-104 wants you to know that it vehemently disagrees. Technically it had wings, but we all know it flew on sheer anger and engine power.

Doesn't answer the question one bit~

You don't. Just select the pre-release from the dropdown menu, and you're good to go. EDIT: I am an Emergency Medical Hologram, Mark Ninja.

If there are any serious issues when using the 1.1.2 version in 1.1.3, I've not run into them. It's safe to use the current version of the mod (as far as I'm aware).

Is this open to European PS4 users? I know people are generally being right prats about the whole thing (not necessarily without cause, mind, but still... prats), but it's a legitimate question in this case. Because I can see it being really awkward having that code in your email for an indeterminate amount of time.

You don't want details, but they'd better give you some details. "Plans" is about as detailed you can get without giving details, mate.

I wonder, is it possible (either through Kerbin-Side or Kerbal Konstructs (or a new mod altogether)) to lock Kerbals to the (open) base they were closest recovered at? Suppose your pod landed back on Kerbin at KSC2, instead of KSC. Currently, the Kerbals are immediately returned to KSC and immediately available again to launch from there. With my idea, if you wanted to use that Kerbal again from KSC, you'd first have to fly him or her back from KSC2 in a plane you're piloting (or pay a handsome fee for a charter flight; ie: they'll return without your interference, albeit after a in-game day or two.)

No. And this topic is why it should never happen again. Because filtering out "bugreports" like these would take up too much time, and clutter the actual useful ones.

Can I just request this thread be linked to everybody who asks for public release testing? Because this is EXACTLY what I mean when I say that public release testing doesn't work (anymore).

This iteration of Procedural Wings is a copy of the original PWings by DYJ. The other iteration mentioned in the signature is B9 Procedural Wings, based off the work of Bac9. And finally there's a fork of B9's Procedural Wings, which you mentioned.

It might do. I've had games do very weird stuff when two different versions of MM were loaded/present.

2) I am not a native English speaker either (have had some training as a teacher English as a second language), and I can see where it might cause problems and would be a valid excuse. "Lacks functionality" can absolutely be interpreted as meaning "Isn't working". The first post also mentions that B9's version is "incontinent" Both examples (although I can't find "lacks functionality" anymore) simply reek of machine translation, which is hilarious and hilariously bad for transmitting functional information. But yes, having put my 2 pence in the derailment jar, let's drop the derailing. _______________________________________ I have a question about the mod, actually. I'm afraid I can't remember exactly where I read this, but I believe B9's version was balanced primarily against FAR. This caused some issues in stock aero, where the centre of lift displayed wrong (I think...). Is this true for this fork as well?

Are the planes landed. If I recall correctly, anything landed doesn't load until 10 kilometres away. This is hardcoded to avoid catastrophes.

Easy enough mistake to make. Carry on! Action Group remote. A function of the Weapons Module.

PAC-3 is radar guided, isn't it? Not GPS guided.

How far away is the ship? If it's just outside of the 11 (10?) kilometre loading range, it likely wouldn't fire.

It might have to do with the wingtips being at an angle to the rest of the wing. Being dihedral creates stability. Normally it should translate yawing motion into rolling motion, but who knows in KSP. I'll bet you 5 fake-bucks that removing the wingtips would fix your stability "issue".

That seems to be the absolute definition of bad luck. It truly is just random.

You'll need to specify what you're saying "what" to. If it's the first, that seems rather clear. Something happens that causes a crash, and BD needs the output_log.txt to try and fix it. If it's the second: The rail detects if there's a missile, and what type, is on the rail. It will then spin to the appropriate rail. Since it's coded to search for only one missile, if it happens to find two or more the code will stop working (properly). Since the part relies on the code, and the code is no longer working, the part stops working. This manifests in, I assume, the attachment points disappearing.

Arm the Weapons Manager, press and hold the left mousebutton.

I haven't been able to test this myself, but I'm curious if the Wingman feature works in space as well. It might be a nice fix for "Burn Together" not having been updated in a while.

Pastebin.com is your weapon of choice.

Does the BD Armory Addon not come with instructions? Which one are you trying to install?

Or forgot to change teams... It could be anything.

Because you forgot to put a Weapons Manager on your plane.