Starwaster

And, I just realized but the update yesterday also included a fix for Kerbals not properly removing themselves from parts after death. Now it's for keeps. If your Kerbal asphyxiates, he's not going to magically reappear inside the ship, or be available to EVA. But don't think of them as dead. Think of them as.... eating snacks. ​IN ANOTHER DIMENSION.

That's ok, no need to apologize to me, I was just confused. Hope your interview went well!

Wow has that been like that the whole time? That's strange because mine isn't... or wasn't.... but that's on a machine that I'm keeping shut off because it's failing. Can't check it right now. I'll write up a proper version for PJ Ok, I'm looking at the version off of CurseForge right now and this is what I see: @PART[mk2Cockpit_Standard]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch] { @module = Part !dragCoeff = DELETE !deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE @dragModelType = default @description = FERRAM AERO SPACE } @PART[mk2Cockpit_Inline]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch] { @module = Part !dragCoeff = DELETE !deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE @dragModelType = default } What file are you looking at and where did it come from? Because I just went through the entire SP+FAR.cfg file and it's all written properly.

@Porkjet: I think you're going to keep seeing these complaints about lift-less wings until you make ModuleManager 2.1.5+ a part of the download, in the GameData folder

We have Monkey Kibbletm. Four out of Five monkeys were unable to tell the difference. And a real steal at only K0.99 per kilogram.

@ctbram Do you still have a Keramzit folder in your GameData folder? You should delete it if you do. (and forget what I said earlier)

How long has it been showing up? Since before version ~2.x.x of Module Manager? Or after?

Unless you rename the extension. I like to rename config files that I want to disable but still keep around to *.bak (i.e. RealSolarSystem.bak)

The search function was how I found my spaceport upload. (stretchy tank deriv)

I apologize for any implication of deliberate deception on your part. re: download counter When you look at the listing of available downloads there's an icon with a number next to it that looks similar to other download counters. (it's next to a rocket looking icon that shows a KSP style version number) Looking at the page source shows it to further be labeled as 'download' It's possible that it just doesn't work; given how new the site is there are undoubtedly bugs that need working out. And, Syrio Forel may be dead but Syrio Kerman lives on forever.

One with real shader and uv support....

It's been awhile since I thought RSS was 'ugly' but you've sure got me thinking it now! (or at least, compared to those pictures)

You almost had me fooled. However, I have googled for this parts pack repeatedly over the past month and that site never showed up. And anyone could have uploaded under the name Semni. I've spent the last 10 minutes browsing mods and seeing that NOTHING there has any downloads. Not even Mechjeb. The site itself was originally registered this past February. That site seems to be a lot of old spaceport downloads that someone put up recently with no consideration for licensing issues. So no, I'd say it's not ok for you to be posting that. I understand that people want to see old Spaceport content preserved but you can't just go around bypassing Squad's requirements and advertising your backed up database in violation of Squad's rules. Edit: Here, you see this HERE? http://kerbal-space-parts.com/space/modpart-stretchy-tanks-0-2-2-modular-fuels-compatibility-unofficial-fix-727.html I most certainly did NOT upload that to that site. Not only that, but when it was on Spaceport I removed it from public listing because it was made obsolete (even more so now). When news was first released that Spaceport was going down, there was a mad dash to 'backup content' by certain forum goers and they seem to have used a technique that even let them get access to unpublished content.

sorry I dont have one and I wont play with tha feature enabled anymore

there's no way my g forces were nearly that high, even allowing for bugged physics. it would have triggered a DREC warning about kerbals nearing their tolerances. I dont remember what it maxed at but but if wings snapped that easily in the real world, jet travel wouldn't be viable and we wouldnt have all these airlines in business.

they shouldnt snap on take off.... at 100m/s or even lower

what log are you checking? dont use ksp.log use player.log (for linux) Just noticed a page back; RedAV8R says this is known about and being worked on...

That was the old way of simulating interstages, before we got real interstages. Turn a normal fairing adapter upside down and on top of whatever you were attaching to the bottom fairing adapter. If that was an engine, turn on crossfeed and boom! ​you got yourself an interstage.

???? Is this still an issue ???? Edit the fairing's config file (probably named part.cfg; I don't currently have it installed so I'm trying to go off memory) There should be a MODEL node in there with a line pointing to the mesh file. (it will say model =). That's what says 'this part's mesh lives in that folder' There might also be a texture declaration that works similarly, but probably not. Edit: I visited the thread you said it was linked at but I don't see any functioning download links and I don't have it on this machine. (ironically it's sitting on a hard drive 1.5 feet from my right knee but I can't do anything with that right now) If you make the fairing's part config files available to me I should be able to have it working in a minute.

Look at the Saturn V as an example: If the Saturn V were to be built in KSP, you would have the interstage adapter sitting atop the third stage fuel stack. The lunar lander would be connected to stack node (non-moving) on the upper surface. Actually with a decoupler between them, unless you are like me and you hacked your interstage adapter to have a decoupler on that node. The Apollo vehicle would be connected to the floating node by its engine's lower stack attachment node. Then you would put the fairings on. In space, when it is time to dock the Apollo and lunar lander together, you would jettison those fairings, which would cause the Apollo to decouple from the floating node. Then you would dock to the Lunar lander and then decouple that from the third stage.

Must be a trick!

About 10-15 years ago, "watch this" were the last words of a new chopper pilot (to another news chopper pilot flying some distance off) in Miami He then proceeded to climb a such a drastic angle that his tail (and therefore, tail rotor) were sliced off by his main rotor. There were of course, no survivors.

Banned because heartbleed.

Dev version build #253 introduced sun tracking to orient your ship with the sun as its target. That may not technically be the same as what you're asking for but it should do.

You're not supposed to have to stop it. The reason you can't enter is because there's a bug with the animations or the habitat plugin. There's a workaround that I posted above. If you change the module for the spinning animation to FSanimateGeneric (instead of ModuleAnimateGeneric) you'll be able to enter and exit the habitat once it's inflated, regardless of whether you set it spinning or not.