NathanKell

Yes, I had to remove the tweakables buttons for engine config changing. Good find about the autoconfigs, I'll need to add some message sending so the tank code reruns the 'find engines' code on config change.

No. That mode ignores crossfeed rules entirely, just like ALL_VESSEL does.

It's possible some of your Physics.cfg settings got messed. Try a clean copy of that file, and start KSP, then compare that clean copy with GameData/ModuleManager.Physics to see if some mod is screwing with them.

Please.

Warp11: Come by #RO on espernet some time, we'll be happy to teach you. FinnishGameBox: Awesome, thanks!

Yes. The toggling is a persistent field, so just set crossFeedOverride = False in your MODULE.

Ratzap: That means, if the venting acceleration from boiloff is > the threshold, no diffusion at all takes place. If it's <= threshold, then the diffusion is proportional to 1- acc/threshold (which will be 1 when there is no venting accel from boiloff at all). Even if it's 1 (no venting at all), as I showed above the value used in the lerp is small. The formula I gave is what it uses when there's no venting at all, and you can see the result is only a lerp factor of 0.00112. If you want to change how slowly the propellants diffuse to fully diffused, lower the naturaldiffusion factors. Temeter: I wasn't aware you could save with engines running (i.e. providing acceleration). If you throttle back an engine to "zero thrust" that _is_ turning it off. What docs would have made your life easier? It sounds like we need more docs. And awesome! Mitchbra: SolverEngines should have fixed that issue. What engine(s) are you getting that message from? (Can't ignite while shielded)

Yep, and AJE makes the IO-550 an actual IO-550 now, not a turboprop.

Why would the heating behavior of SRBs be altered in a hotfix? That hasn't changed since 1.0.

Temeter: I have experienced no trouble restarting Aestus II stages with some RCS ullaging. Similar approach works for LM (and CSM). Engine Ignitor supported external (KAS) ignitors. I'll add that to RF eventually, just haven't had a chance yet. What do you mean by "Seems like the ignition automatically kills engines after reloading" ? Ratzap: where are you seeing that? I'm looking at the venting section (where natural diffusion is done), and it lerps between present value and fully-diffused value using a lerp of 0.00112 per tick when the tank is full. That's 1 / (.5 + fuelRatio [1 when full]) / 1.4) * 0.02 [fixedDeltaTime] * 0.06 [diffusionRate] Sure I can make a debug version though. Temeter: What do you mean by "actively preserve the pressure"? See above for why pressure has nothing to do with ullage. kendoka15: Issue with the smokescreen released yesterday. Check the SmokeScreen thread.

My understanding was that the Apollo shield, too, was incredibly overengineered--that it used something like 1/3 its ablator on descent. The amount proportionality dates back to goozeman's suggestion, but perhaps you're right that it should be surface area covered by ablator * (some thickness factor).

AJE used to recommend it. I believe it's been lowered to suggests for this reason.

Um...you can change FOV ingame, and most cockpits allow you to double-click on window to get an expanded view.

In addition, it sounds like you're trying to use RSS alone (without RO). In that case make sure you have 10.1 of RSS, that includes physics tweaks.

Ramjets only produce thrust up to Mach 5. The RAPIER uses Witchcraft to work past Mach5. Balancing multimode engines for KSP is hard, because jets have 2x the TWR (or more) of real jets (and even in 1.0.4, about 1.5x the Isp of real jets), but rocket engines have 1/4 to 1/8 the TWR of real rocket engines. So how should the RAPIER behave? If you make it balanced against rocket engines, it'll be horrible as a jet. If you balance it against jets, it'll be the most insanely OP rocket engine ever. Or you can balance it against both, and have the rocket mode produce comparatively pitiful thrust.

This is a bug in UKS.

You could increase the convectionFactor -- that will increase heat transferrence without increasing shock temp. Burning 1/4 your ablator is _tons_--Mercury burned maybe 1-2kg (1-2 units of Ablator) on reentry, and Gemini burned something like 1/6th of its (IIRC). The reason for this is twofold: (1) safety, you want one heck of a margin, and (2) loss rate (and thus heat loss) is proportional to the amount of ablator, so the more ablator you bring, the faster it will ablate and the more cooling you get. With very high heat fluxes you can need to burn off quite a bit of ablator, proportionally, for those few seconds of q"max, and to get that rate, you may need to pack a lot of ablator.

Huh. That _should_ work. I'll try it tomorrow.

RSS the plugin no longer modifies bodies. RSS uses Kopernicus, and so should this.

...the clouds in mainmenu have literally nothing to do with planet names, or clouds during the game proper. It's that when Thomas P swapped planets around in the mainmenu scene the new body wasn't instantiated quite right for EVE to find, IIRC. The stuff you see in the main menu doesn't come from the set of bodies, it's a separate scene with just some meshes. Thoma's change to Kopernicus does make the stuff in mainmenu come from (your homeworld) and (your homeworld's moon(s) ) and, per above, had a bit of an issue with EVE to start with, but that issue has nothing to do with the whole cbNameLater thing. Well, in Kopernicus Beta 0.2 (and Beta 0.1) the System.cfg was last changed on June 5th. And since System.cfg is supplied by Kopernicus itself, not RSS, you'll always have the correct System for your version of Kopernicus when you install Kopernicus.... Yes, Kopernicus probably should have some kind of metadata, though that's probably best a discussion for the Kopernicus thread, not here.

That message is expected, since you don't have ModuleEngineIgnitor installed, since RF does it itself now. Pastebin a patch for an engine, would you? And make sure you're on RF 10.4.4.

Awesome! Here's our todo list: https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/154

Ratzap: Heh, yeah. Bladder/membrane/etc, yes, that will avoid ullage issues (with the cons noted). But Apollo SM, or Able/Delta, or whatever--those are subject to ullage despite being hypergolic pressure-fed stages. Oh, right, one more case where (at the macro level) you don't have to worry about ullage: if your stage has boiloff, you can direct it to give a constant slight acceleration to settle the tanks. As to upper stages: yep, working as designed, you either need ullage motors or you need to hot-stage, just like real life. Generally RCS won't be useful except for small stages (though the sim will need tuning for stage size). How big a stage are we talking about? Redhotita1: See Felger's post here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/71630-1-0-SmokeScreen-2-6-5-Extended-FX-plugin-%28July-7th%29?p=2065904&viewfull=1#post2065904

Either should be fine. RSS doesn't use landcontrol so that's not relevant, and (unless it changed) EVE Overhaul doesn't add clouds to mainmenu anyway. They're relevant to using Old-EVE, or people using 6.4x, 10x, whatever, but not RSS.

Those pictures are taken with very wide FOV. Try increasing your FOV to match ingame.