NathanKell

false true. The heightmap is just one of the "mods" applied to Kerbin's terrain; there are many others, and they're all based on noise functions. The actual mesh itself, too, is procedural, just some of the information used to create it (the base heightmap) is non-procedural. Sounds like the deformity of the heightmap, and the frequency and deformity of the other PQSMods, needs to be changed.

I don't think anything attached above it will decouple when the cap is hidden, though.

Unless you use a plugin to alter minThrust to 0 when throttle goes to 0, you'll have problems messing with minThrust (FX-related, as well as problems with dV calcs and autopilots).

Given the last few pages, I just want to take this opportunity to say thanks Biotronic! for a wonderful mod. All mods have their issues, but let's not lose sight of how awesome this one is.

Because it's a mount for RD-107/108? Or perhaps more usefully, RD-0108 (Block M, IIRC).

Quick note, GoSlash27, arkie87 explained why you're misinterpreting the info I gave you. What I said (which is true) is that in FAR, pressure is the same as in stock Kerbin, but density becomes a function of pressure and temperature, rather than just pressure. This means, first, that drag (which is a function of density, not pressure) will not scale linearly with pressure. Second, you are missing the significance of the fact that Cd varies with mach. If an object has a high enough ballistic coefficient, it will accelerate falling past Mach 1 and you will watch terminal velocity go down more slowly than if it had a lower BC (because the decrease in Cd past Mach 1 somewhat offsets the increase in density). It is *absurd* to claim there is One True Ascent Path, since performance at various mach numbers will vary with rocket shape--again, unlike stock, Cd is not fixed and it doesn't just vary with mach, but the *amount* and *direction* it varies with mach depends on craft geometry. If you want, you can literally read the code that creates the FAR terminal velocity readout. It does nothing with vessel acceleration; it is based on getting the force of gravity at the position the vessel is.

Yes. They are KSPFields, just like, say, maxThrust is in ModuleEngines. That means you can specify values for them in the part cfg. Here's some of the fields.

s/Porkjet/Ven/ Oh wait....

Yes, the tilting is as I described above, the best we can do right now. It's better to have some tilt, and Earth with the correct tilt, than either (1) no tilt at all or (2) tilt normalized for some other body. Pluto was included for basically that reason, and that there were enough gas/ice giants already, but nothing super-far-out.

Yes, I believe there is firm textual and precedential evidence pointing to the answer that yes, such images can be shared.

Ah, gotcha. Well, I'll keep watch then. As for Atlas, the one thing to remember is that there is a quite long vernier burn after MECO (for Atlas C and beyond, after SECO).

Glad it's working for you! 1. The only way we can simulate axial tilt for the Earth (a *very* important thing to simulate) is to tilt the whole universe around it. KSP doesn't support axial tilt... 2. KSP hard-codes planet names in some cases, so changing them would break a lot of things (including, for example, making it impossible to recover craft). 3. RSS doesn't add planets, it just changes what we have. Kopernicus will, however, but it's in a bit of limbo right now.

thyriel: since KSP does not support axial tilt, it had to be faked by inclining *everything* such that Earth has the correct tilt vs. the equator. That means that the ecliptic has an inclination of ~23 degrees vs. the game's reference coordinate system. For that reason, it takes a fair amount of math to calculate what ingame inclination an object should have (talk to eggrobin, he did it all ). Also, the typo is on purpose, there was a typo in the filename too. Namolis: Sorry, I got confused. Thought you were talking about Earth, not the Moon...I'll take a look at the heightmaps. Nutt007: there's a page on the RSS wiki detailing those parameters. peadar1987: it's in the Realism Overhaul OP.

karamazovnew: (1) stock KSP's prices (any many other things) don't make sense. Real Fuels sets the price of resources based on 1 fund = $1000USD in 1965 dollars (and yes the cost of LH2 absolutely does take transport into account). I have mentioned to Raptor831 that it might make sense for Stockalike RF configs to change fuel prices for ~balance~ since some people like fantasyland pricing. (2) If Procedural Parts are causing you to not use various old tanks, they are working as designed. The point is to no longer need the RAM sink and partlist-space sink that is eleventy million tank parts... (3) If you are playing sandbox, where everything is available, then of course you will use the best. But lack of technology may prevent you from using the best things early in career; certainly in real life I'm sure the V-2 rocket team would have just loved staged combustion kerolox, but that wasn't an option. (4) Raptor already mentioned that other mod, but I just want to point out that no one is forcing you to manually select propellents, the autofill buttons exist for a reason. sidfu: please leave the multipliers alone, they are already set for "basically stock" masses. If you change them to 1, then useRealisticMass = false will do nothing, and if you change them to less than 1 useRealisticMass = false will make them lighter. Literally the multipliers are there to multiply the mass up when useRealisticMass is set to false.

Here you go. Though I do agree that the old engines looked like engines.

Are you using any arguments for KSP, like -force-opengl or -force-d3d11 ?

GoSlash27: Scaleheight and pressure (which is directly exponential decay via scaleheight, by default in KSP) is unchanged, but *density* is calculated correctly (from pressure and temperature) rather than being a linear function of pressure as it is in stock KSP.

Looks like I need to fix that.

Felbourn: I am now subscribed to this thread, so hopefully I'll be more timely with any extra info. (EDIT: Thought 03 was out based on your above, seems not.)

If you're not at all lazy and not at all impatient there's also Mechjeb. Let's not have another flamewar about Mechjeb please.

When you installed RSS, you had to select a texture pack. Select the one that says 2048 DDS.

You're thinking of Addon Controller, and it only works to the extent that other addons are set up for it. KSP is not the sort of game where you can just change what's running while it's running.

Look in the Tools and Applications subforum of Addon Releases and you should find the mbm to png converter.

Because you didn't include the info to know for sure (the guidelines in that post exist for a reason! ) this is pure guesswork, but my guess is KSP ran out of processs memory. Try a lower resolution texture pack for RSS, removing partmods, installing ATM, etc.

bandi94, not sure what you mean by wobbling, but you will have to fly quite differently in FAR. You should pitch over to about 85 degrees once you reach 100m/s in speed, and then keep slowly pitching over until you're horizontal at about 40km, keeping inside the circle of the prograde marker the whole time. If your liftoff TWR is > 1.8, reduce it; 1.5 is the sweet spot, with 1.2 totally possible.