Starwaster

Ok thx for the reply

Problem is that you would think that any non-zero value would show up in the debug page for those parts. I'll check that again after installing this mod. I'll also try taking a ship into deep space with this mod running. With a nuclear engine on it unstrutted. (They tend to fall off spontaneously. Even on stationary ships)

Wow, this looks great Ferram! But I have a concern. I glanced through the source and noticed a few places where it's multiplying existing parts breakingForce & breakingTorque My concern is that a lot of parts do not define breakingForce OR breakingTorque in their part config files. Surprisingly, the main offender is Squad themselves. Several engines (*cough*nuclear*cough*) and pretty much all probe and command pods. I didn't look through the entire source, so apologies if this is already done in there somewhere, but could you check parts to see if those properties are absent and set them first instead of just 'breakingForce *= 1000' Or do you know if those properties have a non-zero default value? (which would probably make this a non-relevant point)

Last example is correct.

Ah I forgot about Career mode. (haven't had a chance to even really play with it myself) It works fine in Sandbox and yeah you'll have to edit the parts to add them to career mode. Strange, for some reason I thought someone might have posted some config files for them but I guess not.

I see. Ok, sorry but not me. If you have Notepad++ there's a way to do it that will simplify your task. (this assumes Windows. If you're using a Mac or Linux I'm not sure how you'd do it) (also, this will work in Windows 7. Can't vouch for other versions) First, navigate to the Squad folder in Gamedata. Second, do a search for part.cfg Third, in the search results list select all results and open them all in Notepad++ (either by right clicking and selecting from the context menu or because you've previously associated *.cfg with Notepad++) Fourth, Ctrl+F and search for name = Make sure that you select the option to search all open documents. The results will appear below. You can select them all from the results window and copy. So, you still have to do some work at this but you can automate it quite a bit.

Are you aware that scaling isn't really linear when using MODEL nodes? There's a thread around that talks about it.

Sounds great! 80 more times to go

In the AR202 module I suppose?

Show me 100 consecutive successful launches from the runway without even a single UPD and I'll think you're on to something. Otherwise I'm calling it coincidence

No. Fusty created the original Fustek parts. These are created by Sumghai to extend the Fusty's work, with his permission.

What's wrong with the file that Kaa posted just a few posts back? Actually I should probably ask what you wanted added to the stock parts.... you didn't say precisely.

I was getting that a lot when I was trying to get in LKO for Earth-Sized-Kerbin. (ESK?) I had only just got my second rocket in stable orbit when that awful clicking sound started coming from my drive. You know the rest.

ModuleDockingPort has a property named nodeType that controls what it can be docked to. A given port can only dock to a port whose nodeType matches its own. It COULD be edited to force it to be dockable to stock parts and it will not look right. They will have noticeable gap between them. It's a sad situation that is pretty much true to real life. If you design a new series of ports it invalidates older designs and that's just the way things are.

Well I'm pretty sure the drive in question is NOT the one with my KSP stuff - it's a 6 year old 250 GB that's 3 years out of warranty so I figure I've got some decent use out of it. I would have liked to see it last longer but whatever. There's probably some movies on there that I will be sad to lose. We'll see if I'm able to recover them. That's not going to happen until I have a new hard drive. I thought about just reinstalling Windows to one of the other two drives but after pricing out some drives on Amazon I'm getting a 1 TB Black Caviar. I'll do without the PC until it gets here. Nathan has said that he's only designated most engines as having limited fuel options because he doesn't think it should be that easy to switch fuels. If I can offer my opinion on that subject (as if I've ever asked ) we should instead look on reconfiguring engines as total re-designs. (hint-hint-hint) Looking at engines.cfg it does seem as though a lot of engines are completely re-scaled to smaller sizes.... so I'm guessing that is deliberate to give KW options to the smallest tanks? Can I suggest as an alternative however (@Nathan), defining new parts that use those models scaled down? You can do that even in the same engines.cfg file. Look at my config file and you'll see I do that to add new tanks. There's like 6 PART{} nodes defined in there.

Is there something wrong Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation??? It's worked great for a number of space fairing nations for decades!!!

Same. Maybe you have too much fairing debris in orbit though.

the changes are driven by a few people worried about what happens if the solitary copy of module manager is overwritten by an older copy. the format of the configuration files isn't really relevant because it's driven by the game's confignode format. So unless that changes there shouldnt be a reason to expect such changes between different versions of modulemanager.

Yes. It does.

And hope there aren't any hard coded model transform dependencies. And... actually since it's KW fairing bases he's going to need to relocate those connect nodes. They stick out quite a bit Why do you want to do that, Darth? Just curious.

This isn't multiple mods as you're trying to describe it. This is (or WAS, pre-1.4) a single mod whose plugin executes once during KSP startup. It looks through the config nodes (which have already been loaded into memory. All of them. No matter where they are.) and if they use MM syntax it interprets them and applies those changes to the config nodes whether they're parts or resource nodes, whatever. And currently does that rather well. The changes being discussed haven't even been given proper testing nor discussion as to the consequences before pushing them out.

Sorry? I don't have to worry about maintaining it now!

That being the case I'll take mine down or replace it with a link to yours. Been meaning to do that for a while anyway.

lolwhut? I thought I said that btw I've a thought for a new heat dissipation part. I dunno how much real need there is for it just thought I'd throw this out there. Using the heat pump module it would have only conductivity set so it would function like a heat pipe. It would then have to have radiators attached to it. Just something I was thinking about because I didn't like the look of my fuel tanks with these things sticking out. Not even zzz's attractive radiators. So I was thinking of one of my ship designs using the tri-hex struts it would look better if the radiators were out on the strut near the engine. Then I thought about putting the module on the strut with just the conductivity set. I never got to try it because my PC went down and I'm still not fully up and running with ksp Edit: btw, the thing about the periods was wrong, sorry. Wouldn't work.

It's a Unity3D issue with ConfigManager. It does not like whitespaces. They're illegal within its URL specification. If you look at a save file you'll note that they're converted to periods. or dots if you prefer. So internally it doesn't even preserve the spaces, it seems like it just works around them. sorry that's wrong. Underscores are the ones converted. I've tried to get it to handle spaces myself btw by escaping them but it doesn't seem to respect accepted escape characters.