Taris

I would like to use Keyboard input as well since I don't use gamepad when operating Naval or land units.

One request, would you mind implement secondary binding? I would like to use a joystick and map its trigger to fire gun button. Thank you.

I know that and I am already running my War business the same way. Please, I have brain!! Problem is, Kerbals who made up BD Armory parts 'Know' what GPS is and it seems they already mapped Kerbin completely with their own GPS coordinate system. So, it just doesn't make sense to bring TGP every time they update GPS database.

I got a few questions and suggestions: 1. It seems guard mode AI selects weapon whatever it likes. I've made a ship with abrams cannon, .50 turrets, and AIM-120 but guard mode AI selects the Abrams cannon when I tried to sink it!! Also, my tank has the Abrams cannon/.50 turrets and approaching enemy AAA position with AI guard mode on: the tank selects .50 turret instead of cannon to engage the AAA gun site... Maybe we can implement a function to prioritize weapons for guard mode AI per vehicle depending on its purpose? 2. Would it be possible to access the GPS target list from external menu? i.e. Alt+B? JDAM bombing runs usually pre-program target's GPS coordinate before take-off (refer Falcon 4.0 games, Free Falcon or BMS mods). Of course, it's cool to manage GPS coordinates from TGPs but it makes a bit tedious to use cruise missiles since TGP visual distance is already minimum firing range for cruise missiles anyway. Also, cruise missile tanks (like SCUD missile) might benefit from additional GPS coordinate manager. 3. Optional. In reality, AGM-65 is a TV image guidance missile except a few models. Sure, a few variants have laser guided tracking system but they are supposed to be paired with ground forces who are supposed to paint targets with a laser designator. I guess legacy targeting mode may be compatible to the TV guidance model. 4. Super optional: Ground scan radar would be nice.

Craft Download: http://ge.tt/4d6vdf22/v/0?c Tiny space fighters for compact carrier operation. Combustion fuel version. F-100A Mini Long range scout. F-100B Mini Oolar corp. was founded by Dr. Oolar Kerman who was discharged from UKSF avionics laboratory due to raising safety concern against the lab organizer. The goal of the Oolar corp. is simple: provide affordable, safe, and reliable spacecrafts for private sector.

Craft Download: http://ge.tt/5kehHf22/v/0?c Ok, I'm not sure whether they meet your restraints or not, but let me share some of my crappy designs. The archive contains a document with craft history and specifications as well. Both of them are configured with BD Armory Weapons Manager System. UKSF L-1 Lambda (Resale refit) Mods: MechJeb, BD Armory 0.6.1 UKSF M-4 Hellrazor (Resale refit) Mods: MechJeb, BD Armory 0.6.1 Since I'm mostly playing on a laptop, I cannot make a huge craft with over 200 parts at all.

Hi, I was trying to apply Vanguard Ejection Seats to all the command modules but remote controlled ones. But it's quite troubling to select only manned modules. I tried using @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand]:HAS[#minimumCrew[1]]] but ended up selecting all the command modules. Also, I tried, @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand],@MODULE[ModuleCommand]:HAS[!RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]]] But some mods(example: Computer Core from KSP Interstellar) doesn't define the ElectricCharge resource in the MODULE{name=ModuleCommand} node. Would you kindly show me some hints? Thank you.

I got a small request... Would you kindly make a turret mount tied to the Lazor system? I guess we can use such mount to mount guns like DYJMisc vulcan or AKST.

It worked perfectly!! Thanks!!

I'm using 3.1(active texture) aggressive one. But it works without problem without Active Texture 1.5. I can use everything fine with Active Texture 1.4.X version.

Sorry for late reply. Unfortunately, I cannot find any abnormalities in the log file. I'll attach it anyway. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/711793/KSP.log And... here's how the LAZOR looks like after installing 1.5.0 version. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/711793/ksp_oops1.jpg It was working fine with 1.4.X.

1.5.0 crashes with LAZOR systems and JSI RasterProp Monitor(with KSI extension)... LAZOR: changes UI textures to Unity stock version. Mod is functional and usable but feels awkward. RasterProp: Every screen becomes plain texture, shows nothing on screen. No buttons work. Is there any way to solve those problems?

I fixed the problem editing 'Squad.tcfg'. config_enabled = true NORMAL_LIST { texture = Squad/Spaces/mk1CockpitInternal/model002 texture = Squad/Spaces/mk1CockpitInternal/model004 texture = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/RCSTank1-2/model001 texture = Squad/Parts/Aero/winglet2/model001 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model000 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model001 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model003 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model004 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model005 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model006 texture = Squad/Spaces/PodCockpit/model007 texture = Squad/Spaces/landerCabinInternals/model000 texture = Squad/Spaces/landerCabinInternals/model005 }

Got a problem with Mk. 2-3 pod (that 3 man cockpit)... with Rasterprop mod. Most part of the cockpit blacked out and I cannot see through the window either.

Problem is, that is NOT POSSIBLE with Turbo Jets!! Yeah, I'm talking about space planes. Also, adding such unnecessary parts move centre of mass confuses design. Moreover, why do you need to tax PC with such unnecessary parts?

I've just made a small fix to the fusion reactors. Apparently, they need some kickstarter power supply. So.... how about installing a very small power pack inside the fusion reactor(with the dark art of part.cfg edit)? Oh, well 200 MJ doesn't seem THAT small but it does the job. I think we can find minimized value for such kickstarter part. A bit strange thing is.. even though I installed the pre-charged MJ, the reactor does not start right away. In fact, it starts from 20 MJ drained at the launch pad and I had to start the reactor manually.

I think I reported exactly the same problem yesterday. As seen in your screenshot, antimatter reactor is powering your thermojet engines but you don't have any antimatter on board. Since antimatter is supposed to be mined up in space or generated in the lab module... we usually start with 0 antimatter to run the antimatter reactors instead of nuclear ones. Currently, if we connect a single antimatter reactor with a thermojet engine, I guess something positively feedbacking the thermal power and fires up the engine and the engine works like the antimatter reactor is running at its peak efficiency. Of course, this is not logical since the reactor should not generate any heat due to lack of antimatter. But if one reactor-one engine setup is there, it generates cheat like power. However, if we install one of more antimatter reactors and engines attached to it, only ONE engine operates the bugged (or cheat) way. It happens in VAB vessels as well. But does not happen when you're using plasma ion engines since they are run by Megajoules instead of direct heat. Thus, no antimatter -> no heat -> no Megajoules -> no power for engine, and it makes perfect sense. But for thermal jet or thermal nozzle engines, no antimatter -> no heat -> but the engine has prevent flameout mode ON -> game logic thinks reactor must be running -> runs the antimatter reactor -> generates heat -> runs engine -> heat dissipates -> no heat again but the engine still has prevent flameout ON -> ... and so on(and this faulty logic works on ONE engine ONLY.) Since we cannot start the antimatter containment filled from ground, running antimatter engines from surface is not what the author intended, I think. So, I decided not to even bother with antimatter reactors for SSTO...

Uh oh... apparently... Vista engine kills everyone in other vessels as well... I thought Kerbal spacecrafts were equipped with radiation shield(?) but not against Vista? I just killed 12 Kerbals in my space station by turning on Vista engine I thought Vista radiation kills only EVA Kerbals...

No, I meant a single engine craft. The craft I linked has two engines. But I also have a single engine-single antimatter reactor craft and it works like cheat. http://ge.tt/4VFTRxw/v/0?c Requires MechJeb2, This mod, and B9. This craft should flame out on the ground if antimatter reactor requires antimatter... by the way, I'm running these crafts in career mode.

Well, I just said you can actually design better craft with B9 mod.

It doesn't flameout at all. The engine turns on. Also engine noise intensifies and the nozzle expands when I throttle up. Looks like the engine is working in perfect manner. However, when I hover mouse on it, its thrust shows 0. Then the single reactor-engine pairing was bugged, I guess. The reactor shows "Antimatter deprived" but the engine still fires up and provides massive TWR. Of course, when i reach the end of atmosphere, it loses power.

lol you can do better with B9 mod.

Of course, they are both active and I didn't change fuel settings at all. So, they are using intake atmosphere. Also, when I tried push the limit, one of solid state generator(attached in front of the antimatter reactors)s shuts off due to lack of reactor heat. Maybe antimatter reactors are supposed to be operated with actual antimatter(which needs to be harvested)? Thus, requiring antimatter containers and collectors. I'm not sure.

Hi, I've mocked up a space plane with antimatter reactors. It looks like this. However, when I try to throttle up to take off, one of thermal turbojet engine doesn't power up and spins the aircraft. If the design has only one engine and one antimatter reactor, it works like a sci-fi starfighter. But this twin engine setup seems bugged a bit. Also, this plane was completely flyable when the reactors were nuclear ones. Thus, I definitely think that whether I'm not using the antimatter reactor correct way or it's bugged. Would you kindly look at this problem? Thanks!

I compiled MechJeb2.dll with Mono to find out the output file was 'tad(about 500 kB)' smaller. Here is the link for MechJeb2.dll compiled by MonoDevelop IDE(3.0.5.2, yeap, that one in Ubuntu repo...) with Mono C# compiler 2.10.8.1(Yeap, mono-gmcs in current Ubuntu repo...). Also, compiled with optimization option, without debug symbols. The OS was Gubuntu...errr Ubuntu GNOME 13.10. I checked the sources out yesterday (GMT -5:00) morning from the GitHub with 'git clone -b dev ~~~~'. I'm just curious.. well, 500 kilo bytes are something can completely be ignored these days... Maybe I'm overly curious for a n00b without any experience in C#(actually, I don't have any professional experience in programming at all, just a few MATLAB scripts and VHDL codes to drive active matrix LCD displays...) ps. I can use Mono compiled .dll in Windows KSP without any problem. Everything just works. Of course, I don't know how to compare plugin performances in KSP... but I didn't feel any notable difference either.