NathanKell

Once again I typo the mod to death, I guess. Sorry... :]

therealcrow999: this isn't a craft file, this is a mod. That means, since presumably it uses MODEL nodes, that paths *do* matter.

I am using a recompiled version with RSS, and it appears to work fine as well.

Don't even have to do that (wipe); you can non-destructively install Linux on a Win7 machine, it replaces Windows's bootloader with one that lets you dual-boot. As for running a linux VM--you can try, but I'm not all sure you'd get acceptable performance. You might have better luck using WINE in linux. As for what distro to pick, I'll let people who actually run linux answer that one (I maintain some Ubuntu machines but none are my own).

If a mod doesn't say it's compatible with 0.25, don't expect 0.25 to work right if you have that mod installed.

There's only one LV-N stock. I think you're confusing mod parts (perhaps mod parts that use stock-part models) with actual stock parts. Since the paths for many parts changed, the mods that rely on them will not work.

KSP Linux x64 is stable. KSP Windows x64 is not stable. It is bad enough that Squad itself says "unstable" on the option to download it. 0.25 Winx64 is far, far less stable than even 0.24.2 Winx64. Many modders refuse to support KSP Windows x64 for this reason.

camlost: I have not seen that in .25, and nothing in the cfg's (or testing) has shown that. Or did they tweak the jet's Isps themselves?

Camacha: Stock gives engines 16x the fuel efficiency they should have, for their rated Isp, because stock Isp->fuel flow calculations count "intake air" as part of fuel flow, whereas in real life one doesn't. So in effect non-AJE jets have 16x the Isp they should, since intakeAir makes up 15/16 of the used mass.

Can't speak for ferram. As for myself, weird, I've committed lots. I have things working pretty much spot on for 2-speed supercharger and for turbocharger piston engines; the problem is the R-2800, R-3350, and other latewar/postwar US engines with 2-stage *3* speed superchargers, but that just means I need to add a third boost mode. When I do that I'll also rework how intercooling/aftercooling works. Also I need to track how much ADI is used and have things overheat at high boost when it runs out, and get the temperature working right (probably have to model EGT, but JSBSim has good code for that). What still needs work is mach effects on props. I have empirical data for helical tip mach vs Cp and vs Ct for NACA 16-series and Clark Y airfoil props, but nothing else, and also FAR doesn't model drag effects from propellers when the aircraft goes supersonic (and JSBSim models mach effects for helical *tip* mach, not across the blade). I just committed a hacky "extra drag at supersonic" thingie. To test all this I've been making replica aircraft with 100% correct Cd0, so I can tune prop thrust to FAR's drag for an airframe of the correct Cd0. Example: and F4U-4 and P-47D-22 for the record, although the latter needs some more tweaking and I need to find out its wet HP at altitude.

Real Fuels is currently in holding pattern, waiting on TweakScale.

Yes, that bug was fixed by Squad in .25 (it had started occurring even for them).

I have a version of TS working, but I'd rather not chuck it out the door since biotronic has been active even today on the forums.

Not yet; that's waiting on ferram getting his jet code working (and, um, there was kind of an interruption called .25) since shaft power is needed. Once that's there though, it should work to hook up the JSBProp implementation as the way convert SHP to thrust (in addition to the exhaust thrust).

raidernick: As I said above, .25 has issues with TGA loading. It doesn't occur for everyone, but it *is* an issue.

I think I edited after you posted >.>

Sorry, is 1.6 built off master or the JSBProp branch? EDIT: I committed a .25-compiled version of that branch. EDIT EDIT: That's because you're trying my code without my files. (The extra cfg is there for a reason...) I heartily recommend staying on the Master branch of the repo; JSBProp branch is not ready for prime time, nor for your average AJE user. I hadn't had a chance to rip it out, actually, into RealAirBreathers or whatever it should be called. Sorry about that.

you can add the following lines inside the REALSOLARSYSTEM node: cam00FarClip = (new far clip distance) cam01FarClip = (ditto) You can also have per-body versions of those values, like you could set general values for them and then in Kerbin you could have Kerbin { // other stuff cam01FarClip = (other clip value) } Motokid: same way you edit the AFG, by ALT-G (IIRC)

KWR and NP2 are "just parts" and due to the rescaleFactor issue being fixed, now have off-scale parts (which also means offscale collision meshes, which means problems). Thus far they (and SurfaceLights) have been the only pure part packs mentioned, but I'll keep an eye out. Oh, and SXT is a pure part pack, but (was) also broken due to path name changes. Also: thanks all!

There are loader bugs that make TGAs take up 4-6x what they should. I would wait until ATM (which fixes that, even if you don't run aggressive mode) is updated for 0.25 before figuring out how many mods you can add.

biotronic: I've been trying to fix the remaining issue with MFT/RF interaction and TweakScale. Is there any way you could either hardcode TweakScale to not change resources on parts with a ModuleFuelTanks module, or add a moduleIgnore handler to the generic exponents syntax, so resources could be: Resourcs { !amount maxamount = 3 moduleIgnore = ModuleFuelTanks moduleIgnore = some_other_module } and it would not do that ScaleExponent node if any of the ignore modules are present?

I suggest that this line get moved to the new thread in S&D that GregroxMun started; as for this thread, let's

Updated by taniwha for KSP 0.25.

I would suggest looking at (the last page of) the KW Rocketry thread. It's usually good practice to look at the thread of the addon itself. Please take the discussion there.

Any time you see that issue. I take it pingopete doesn't have clipping distance overrides in the cfg then? (I haven't had a chance to test this beauty myself)