MarvinCZ

A Paypal donation link is in the first post. Sorry if you know that and are just offering an alternative.

This is my first aircraft with area ruling. The engine is way too powerful for it, but I don't want to bother with redoing it for the Basic Jet. There is room for improvement, but with 0.3 m2 wave drag area already, there isn't much point. I went for a simple design with area ruling just from wing shape & position and no extra parts (except gear).

The X-15 quote was about losing control authority from control surfaces, not about stability.

I'll second a question asked and unanswered in the thread: What does it mean, if the CoL arrow returns with the placement of certain parts? B9 procedural wings do that. I can include illustrative screenshots or anything else, if needed.

Go to the KerbalStuff link in the first post, open Changelog. Under each version, you have a Download link.

Does BDArmory still change physics range, or does it use just the stock settings now? Do I have to fear any physics range problems in orbit? Thanks

The download link to GitHub in the first post is broken. It should be this: v0.15 Euler Anyway, thanks for the work and persistence!

I mostly use a procedural decoupler w/ fairing. For stuff like engine clusters on a thrust plate, small rockets on a larger tank, etc. I sometimes also use an interstage fairing base with both structural and separating fairings, so I open up the cargo but keep structural support. Like this:

I have an idea, that might not be too hard to implement. I would like to make a part explosive when destroyed with the addition of a config node. No firing, no weapon manager integration, nothing. Just a damaging explosion when the part is destroyed. That could be used both for warheads or regular parts that should be dangerous when destroyed. Reactors and antimatter storage from Interstellar come to mind.

What are the usual problems with the extended physics range? When I tried using the BD default 5km, I encountered a lot of NullReferenceExceptions when trying to change screens. When I reduced that to 2.5k, it was more stable. Then I launched a ship with a USAF laser on it to orbit, which behaved quite strangely - When a different object (I tried only debris) got to my physics range, its velocity changed to match mine. I tried that several times. Is that a known issue, or should I spend extra time investigating it?

Hello, I have a question about BD Armory. What are the effects of the mod, when I'm not actually using any weapons? I know about the physics range, is there something else? I want to know if it will be OK to use it on the same installation as my main Career save. Bonus question: is the physics range setting global or per save?

Good idea, I will do that. Edit: Done.

Is it OK to post larger chunks of code inside the post or should it be elsewhere? It's OK license-wise. Anyway, this is the KW_modularFuelTanks.cfg updated for KW Rocketry v2.6d2. KW_modularFuelTanks.cfg Edit: Converted to link.

Not only the 5m tanks are missing. MFT is missing all the changes from KW version 2.6, which is * 5m parts * 0.5 length parts for all sizes * balance tweaks on many tanks - MFT has the old values, negating KW's rebalance. Edit: * also missing the unpainted 2.5m / 3.75m tanks (that's why they have different stats than the painted ones.) I am going through the KW_modularFuelTanks.cfg and correcting / adding values. I'll post it when I'm done.

You don't have to manually edit the save file. If you open the tech tree inside the game, you will see that the nodes have a number beside them, and if you open them, the missing parts will be highlighted. There you can "buy" them, one by one.

I did that once as well. I don't know the exact mechanism, but you need to have some side fairings there for it to hold shape. I guess some part of the procedural process isn't performed until you add the fairings. It makes sense, after all. You can't expect it to hang in mid air, can you?

Hi! I'm loving the 3.x updates, it's a joy to use. The planned decoupler with shroud will be perfect with the thrust plate, although the interstage plate with fuselage sides is good enough for now. I encountered one small issue: Setting the number of fairing nodes to 1 produces a nice one-piece fairing, but it has an off-center Center of Mass. It's not a big problem, you can always use more nodes, but if the option to use 1 node is there, it would be nice to have it usable.

I tried running KSP on a 7 year old laptop of mine. It wasn't thigh end even when bought. I use it mostly on a better PC. I expected it to fail at loading, or when encountering some 3D scene, but it worked. It isn't great and the graphics are broken, but it is sort of playable. The FPS is mostly good. Perfect in VAB and pretty good in space. The only problems are loading times (loading parts on game start and moving to launch pad) and the broken graphics. Specs: Windows XP SP2 AMD Sempron 2800+ (1.6 GHz) 448 MB RAM (512MB - 64MB taken by integrated graphics) SiS M760GX integrated GPU, 64MB shared memory I expected memory to be a problem, but apart from the loading times it was OK. Even with NovaPunch installed.