RuBisCO

This? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/98707-0-25-Win64-Enabled-NEAR-1-3-10-FAR-0-14-4-Real-Fuels-8-1-MFT-5-2-3 Does not cover RSS. I understand that this is not your problem, but Win32 bit version is useless to me because it can't handle the number of mods I want to use (What use is 16 GB of ram unless you fill it all?), the Linux verrsion works but graphically is horrible because AMD hates linux for some reason, The win64 version works for me, it works great, all I ask is you throw me a bone, I won't complain about any problem that I experience on 64 bit, promise.

1. How? 2. Ok 3. Sure. I would also like to point out I'm using this with 10X kerbin, has the 10X kerbin version of RSS been specifically compiled and thus I can't use the RSS source code?

How do I go about enabling RSS in 64 bit?

Interesting, but I think you will be limited by clipping: I have ships with "antlers" (seen in images above) that simply fly through each other because they were moving too fast for the physic engine to recognize that they that made contact. You need to turn up the physics calculating speed to max. I'm trying this now again in .25, think I tried this last year in .20.

Well when this challange was made there was no claw or asteroids, so sure why not. I love to know at what speed the claw can get up to before breaking, I would think the kind of contraptions like KAS or the robotic "anters" can handle greater speeds because much of the kinetic energy remains as spinning of both craft after harpooning or butting each other.

Well the new Cataylst is out... and I'm seeing no improvement in performance

I use the first driver, the proprietary, I guess it works with my older card. Still sadly it does not compare with the graphical performance I can get out of this game on windows with directX and windows driver, AMD must not like linux. I've been testing out Linux Mint 17.1 Cinnomon, think I'm going to go back to Mate, the 17.1 supposedly has compiz fusion support out of the box!

Well I've seen 412 s claimed for 2520 K nuclear engine, LH2+LO2 is combustion temperature is 2985 K with a nominal ISP of 459, certainly if reactor temperatures above 3000 K could be achieve ISP even in the 500 could be possible with water, hydrogen would get an ISP above 1000. The problem is H2O super heated would come out the nozzle as not just water but also equilibriums of H2, O2 and even monoatomic hydrogen and oxygen ions and radicals, thus changing the ISP calculation. Can such temperatures be achieved is my question, I've seen it been proposed with hydrogen but water is far more corrosive then hydrogen at such extreme temperatures, that free proton-free oxygen equilibrium is a near ultimate solvent (I well I guess *H+ and *F- is the ultimate) I can't imagine anything that could be resistant against it.

Its been several versions since then, certianly the robotic parts have change with IRP 19, I'm going to test this again see how fast I can get crafts to slam into each other and not break. Any takers?

what ever I'm not a "prove people wrong" stickler. Anyways nuclear engines (topic change): I've always felt alot more could have been done with them. rotating cores (cores held together by centrigual force rather then by structural strength) could have allow high thrust to weight and higher temperatures. One statement I've seen is that nuclear engines could run on just about any propellant, be it hydrogen, ammonia, water, N2, CO2, methane, etc, I'm pretty sure this is false, though hydrogen and ammonia have been tested those fuels are reductive and not as corrosive as water at exterme temperatures: >3000K mono-oxygen radical is a mean figher, and the latter three are just plan silly for their low ISP and chance of coking. Water would be nice though, all you need to do is mine for water, filter it and your good to go, if the nuclear engine was capable of a ISP above 400, the avantages of nuclear+water of LH2+LO2 would be phenominal! This study (http://www.neofuel.com/space98/) assumes much lower ISP and still comes out requireing ~60 times less materials to mine and process fuel if it is water and not LH2+LO2. My question is how high do you think water could go in a nuclear engine?

You sure about that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Propellant_Infusion_Mission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrous_oxide_fuel_blend And then there is the whole methane+lox thing, sure it not new chemical engineering, but large in-production engines using the stuff would be a new thing.

Won't work... that not a very kerbal thing to say. Certainly it is a grossly impratical, but a little pressure feed, raditively cooled engine could probably run on it.

So little problem happens with the Astronomers Oblivion or BA packs in conjuction with this one on Linux 64: Sort of a game breaker.

If SpaceX is going from an open cycle Kerosene+LOX to a full flow close cycle Methane+LOX that is going to be an improvement. If it was closed cycle Kerosene+LOX verse full flow close cycle Methane+LOX the advantage in ISP would not be great enough to warrant the extra tank mass. My personal favorites Storable Propellants: H2O2+Kerosene: Less ISP then N2O2+DMH/MMH/Hydrazine but cheaper and less toxic, not necessarily safer though N2O4+B5H9: Highest ISP "storable" propellent, crazy dangerous, highly toxic, highly reactive, burst into flames in contact with air, etc, a better kerbal fuel there is none! And it makes a green flame!

AA works fine for me, using an old RD 5860 and Catalyst Driver 14.301. I noticed this awhile ago when I was playing around with linux KSP (I use the Windows one normally because that where most my games are, but the 32 bit problem when I run enough mods is forcing me back, especially now with so few wanting to support win64 ksp) so what I did was I downloaded Catalyst Controler directly from AMD: http://support.amd.com/en-us/download you should get... amd-catalyst-14-9-linux-x86-x86-64.zip... hum that the old one, guess that new one talk about above is not out yet, any times THIS week I guess. Anyways unzip that install it, open it up and force AA on, then start KSP and you should have AA.

Angry? Making some assumptions there.

Question: Is there a delta-v map for the 10X size kerbin system? I heard rumor that its on this thread somewhere, but have not found it yet.

Question: does changing the FX range change when the special effects come on? I try changing it but it seems to do nothing (I hit save).

Yeah that seemed to fix it.

Part name is "Dishy_Jeb.9000" there is also "Dishy_Bill.9000" --- Beta is a lot nicer, thanks.

Well may problem is a little more odd then that, I can get the Mk1 pod back from 250X60 km orbit, as long as I don't using physics warp, with 115 out of 250 ablative cork left. If I use physics warp it blows up at 60 km going ~6500 m/s. Also things go crazy if I activate debug mode (Alt+D+R), phantom forces, gee force off the chart, crazy kraken attack. If I don't physics warp and don't activate the debug menu, all is well except a specific part, my Jeb 9000 burns up and heats up as if it is unshielded, not other parts like parachute or side decoupler which heat up as if they are shielded despite the mechjeb part being between them.

I'm having trouble with deadly reentry on 10X Kerbin, none of the heat shields work, simple de-orbit from 250 km to 60 km is death.

Realism Overhaul is a whole list of mods, which one in particular does this?

Is there a mod that makes SAS and the gryos more realistic as in weaker, even torque saturation, such that you have to use RCS more?

Why does this not work in 64 bit mode, let me guess because everyone hates win64 mode. Is there a way to get this to work in win64?