steve_v

Size: TweakScale - recommended by KSPI and probably installed at the same time. Content type: InterstellarFuelSwitch or FSFuelSwitch (used by StockFuelSwitch) + a MM patch to add it to all tanks. If you install StockFuelSwitch, you get switching on all tanks that contain LF/OX via its MM patch. You assume correctly. Look in the Interstellar download for a ModuleManager patch that adds the InterstellarFuelSwitch module to tanks, write your own, use StockFuelSwitch, or grab/adapt the appropriate patch from this set.

Interesting mechanic you have going there. I'm curious: How does eating 4 years worth of food help a kerbal with an electricity problem? Do they work as generators? Thankfully, I'm now aware of this one, it would have been most confusing.

Hmm, good point. Sounds like an excellent argument for stock nuclear reactors to me, considering that's the logical choice of powerplant for an automated off-world refinery....

Join the club. I generally loose interest and go play something else just as I'm getting to the "time to build a station / interplanetary ship" bit - where part counts exceed 150 or so and the rubbish performance starts to kick in. This cycle repeats every new release: Ooh, new parts / mechanics, shiny... plays game some... performance still sucks, stops playing. Use something other than fuel-cells to power the refinery? Like solar panels, AKA free EC? That said, I haven't actually got to using the ISRU bits at all yet, largely due to the games performance, or lack thereof.

*Rummages about* *Rummages about some more, empties desk drawers* Nope, sorry, crystal ball gone missing again. Must be those damn gremlins. As nobody knows how much of an improvement U5 will make, nobody is likely to know what kind of PC is "worth it" either - whatever that means.

I must say I have noticed this too - water drag (at least on the surface) seems improbably low. So I'll second the question: why does FAR need to modify water drag at all? Does it? I haven't actually booted the game without FAR in... well, I forget - essential mod 'n all, so I'm not sure what stock is like. Likewise with the latest FAR / KSP versions, no errors logged etc.

Cool, I'll try to contain my impatience re. next release.

Beats me, but since "on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog" I'm betting this "answer" (and I use the term very lightly) was provided by a dog. A particularly stupid dog. @GERULA Please provide me with the identity of the fool that posted that garbage on tomshardware, I have a nice blunt pitchfork with a blank name-tag ready to go.* *Not to be taken seriously, however I hope I have made my opinion of his/her/its advice plain.

Any ideas as to why the S.O.S. SS Minnow contract won't go away? I've completed it 5 times now, and it pops right back into the available list - immediately. Even if I decline the contract, it's back right away.

I've seen this issue in a variety of mod loadouts and game versions, I'm fairly sure it's just a symptom of general editor-lag/stuttering. If you do manage to nail down the cause, I'd be most interested to hear about it.

Oh dear. As someone who works with power electronics in my day job, I can only react to misinformation like this in one way: "wants more ram more voltage": A process can't "want more voltage" - If you're talking about CPU Vcore or DRAM voltage, that's set by the hardware / BIOS - to the manufacturers curves no less, unless you mess with it manually. "this really stress 'our' CPU, GPU, RAM": Yeah, a process or game can stress hardware - but if your hardware can't take it, then it's not performing up to spec. As for your "answer" from tomshardware: "its the PSU. This is not because its slow or bad" - "slow" doesn't really apply to PSUs, and if your PSU is dropping the ball (PowerGood signal) it's because it's undersized, or... you guessed it: it is "Bad". "some games can destroy PSU's which aren't above 750w" - krakens. If your PSU is too small or not performing up to spec, yeah. But the game doesn't define the power required, the load connected to the PSU does. "you need more than 750w", as a blanket statement, is ridiculous - to determine how much power you need, you need to measure... how much power your hardware actually needs. "Results like this show that the power effiency when you are playing games is reaching to the max!" - this is pure male bovine excrement, probably posted by someone who has no clue what efficiency actually means. "the MOBO is deciding to reboot the system due the high power efficiency": Just no. What else can I say, this is not how it works at all. Replace "high power efficiency" with "low power quality" and it gets closer. "PSU can BLOW up." If this happens, your PSU is undersized and missing critical protection circuits, or just plain broken. - Again, nothing to do with the game or the BIOS. The only part of that advice worth listening to is: "It's probably the PSU" (as others have suggested here) and "Buy a decent PSU". I'm sure XFX and Corsair are nice, but they're by no means the only purveyors of not-complete-garbage switchmode power supplies. Personally, most of my machines have Antec PSUs, and I've had no trouble from them - even when testing well above rated output, where they simply shut down gracefully. OTOH, I have had cheap "no brand" Chinese units that fail catastrophically (magic smoke escape) at less than 50% of sticker rating. Each to their own with regard to favourite brands, but as the saying goes: "you get what you pay for". The PSU is arguably the most important item of hardware in a PC - all the other components depend on it for stable operation. It's also one of the few that can completely ruin your other hardware when it fails. TL,DR: Go buy a decent PSU from a reputable brand, ensure that it can actually produce the continuous output power your hardware configuration requires. Then see if the problem goes away.

GC must happen, and by nature it must stop executing managed code in the process. Offloading the work into another parallel thread will probably reduce the length of each GC run, but the better solution is to reduce the need for it to run in the first place, in this respect, it appears there's still plenty of optimisation that could be done on Squads side - for example: the resource calls walk the entire craft, often more than once per frame. Here's an obvious example of inefficient code at work, exacerbating the Unity GC issues. U5 will be nice I'm sure, but it's no silver bullet - slow code paths and unnecessary repeated operations still abound, and U5 won't fix that.

That's because it's new. It doesn't come with the auto-configuration stuff that Quarterdeck did, but it can move pretty much anything out of that precious lower 640k. Yes, some crazy fools are still writing stuff for DOS... that gem comes with FreeDOS 1.1.

This would get much approval over here, I like realism. But yeah, some would most certainly complain.

Provide a manual override for the desktop / mobile site layout, currently this appears to be auto-detected from screen/window dimensions. i.e. resize browser window below certain width -> switches to mobile site = annoying. ( I was referring to the unwanted behaviour in my desktop firefox. Unsurprisingly, I have no "request desktop site" here, yet it switches to the mobile layout if I resize the window.)

Provide a switch to toggle between the WYSIWYG editor and a plain-text+BBCode mode with no added frills, such as auto paragraph breaks.

@Claw I 'like' everything on your examples list, here follows a one liner. Not sure whether this is for "it's broken", "wish-list", or both, so starting with broken things: Fix the Activity feeds: e.g. "Threads I Posted In" doesn't appear to work: Shows "There are no results to show in this activity stream yet". only post from the last hour.

Apparently so, and here's me staying up after my bed time arguing with a fool. *Note to self, stop doing that - sleep deprivation might cause autism.

Science can't "prove" that something doesn't exist, otherwise god would have disappeared in a puff of logic long ago. The scientific method can only test a theory against the available evidence. No evidence has, so far, been found that links GMOs to any known disease. This doesn't mean they are 100% safe, it simply means they are not known to be unsafe - just like pretty much everything else you eat. To say otherwise requires demonstration of a causal link... If you're going to use words like "Crime against humanity" it'd better be a good solid link indeed. Grapefruit might cause cancer, but there's no evidence to suggest it does, do you like grapefruit? Smells like a conspiracy theory to me, got anything to show they did? That something has happened before is not evidence that it's happening now. And yes, I too have seen "Cosmos" , it's a TV documentary, not a scientific journal. Though that bit is true, again it's not evidence that that's what's happening in this case. Do I care? If I were to get all my information from "public opinion" (or YouTube) I might end up believing all manner of bizarre things. Anyway, enough. I'm going to sleep now.

No, no, I really can't resist. Why not, we've been doing it for centuries. Where do you think domestic dogs came from? There are numerous examples of how this practice has benefited our species, and arguably our current civilisation wouldn't exist without it. Again, why? Got any real science to back up your opinions there? Please do post your statistically significant evidence that GMOs and vaccines are unsafe, and that the risks of such outweigh the benefits. Vaccines in particular have saved countless lives, and eradicated several lethal and highly contagious diseases. I sure don't want polio, and if your lack of vaccination causes anyone I know to catch it, or anything else for that matter, I will be a mite displeased to say the least. Arguments like this cut no ice here whatsoever, anyone can sue for just about anything. Scientific significance == 0. Data please.

Join the club. Any idea when we can anticipate some work on the numerous glitches, or the eyeball searing theme guys? There's certainly been enough noise by now to suggest some changes & bugfixes are warranted. Hows about a list of what's on the list to be fixed, so we can all stop reporting the same issues? Sure looks like "nobody" to me.

How long is a piece of string? Platform? Feature set? Definition of "Half decent"? I run GNU/Linux and my video editing needs are fairly basic, as such kdenlive usually does what I want. If you want more, there's OpenShot, Cinelerra, LightWorks etc... or just use Blender, if you know how to drive Blender. For Windows? Dunno.

Dude, whut? There's no way for software to "screw" a PC, if you have unexpected shutdowns it's almost certainly a hardware fault or overheating. Unless KSP is directly calling the BIOS to initiate a hard reboot (which it isn't), it's simply not possible. OS or driver crashes might be able to cause something like this, but certainly not a game. Have you load tested your machine? Have you monitored component temperatures? Have you tested your RAM? Have you tested your PSU? There are many potential causes for this, KSP is about the most unlikely I can think of - your assuming it's the game because it happens after playing for a while: Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Those landing gear are screwey, not only do they tend to hover slightly above the surface (causing bouncing), they also tend to spawn slightly below the surface, making craft leap into the air on loading. Stock bug as usual, and unlikely to be fixed before the 1.1 wheel overhaul.