NathanKell

@nablabla please update RealFuels. You may have to do so manually, I had to repack it and CKAN might have cached the bad original version.

Apologies, there was a packing error. The version of SolverEngines shipped in 10.8.3 did not have the right metadata. That has been rectified; if you've downloaded 10.8.3 before, please do so again.

@LeoBlueSpikes RealFuels was not updated yesterday. It is today, update it.

@yryrs @SoTOP I have now released RF 10.8.3 (which I was supposed to do yesterday but forgot ) and it fixes the issue.

v0.43 Avionics updates for American LV parts, tech node updates for American engine parts. (Thanks Chrisl!) Fix issue with not displaying part requirements in stock satellite contracts. (Thanks ntimpe!) Add more science result text. (Thanks ntimpe!) Add tech requirements for integrated avionics. Make RP-0 play better with filter extensions. (Thanks PhineasFreak!) Increase 2m avionics to 130t. Place and price OLDD Saturn V parts. (Thanks PhineasFreak!) Place a few more SXT parts. (Thanks winged7!) Tweak avionics and mass of some early probe cores for better balance. Update preset to support KCT 1.3, take advantage of new multiple-pad support. Changed life support resources to require Survivability, not Early Capsules (this allows life support in X-15 parts). Fix some nodes that could unlock with any parent. Size limit "parts" now have size limit in title. Add a silent bonus to PF fairing base and thrust plate in TL2 to support Saturn I-style stages. Place and price NK-9 and NK-9V (and fix price and placement of SXT Blok V). Increase level 2 pad limit to 800t. Place/price VSR VA capsule. Place/price a generic Apollo-era docking port. Remove duplcate specializedControl node, add titles and descriptions to the avionics nodes.

Changelog: v10.8.3 * Fix engine thrust display formatting in tooltips. * Add a bit of insulation to tank type Default (it represents S-IVB-level insulation). * Show cost display again in the tank GUI. * Update for SolverEngines 1.15.

Delete the ships in your game's Ships/VAB folder. If the error persists, please post on the CKAN thread so they can help you further.

It's an issue in the drag cube system, it can't tell if somehting is a bucket or a cone, all it sees are the surface normals' dot products to calculate taper.

It's my fault. I was supposed to release RF last night but did not. I am doing so ASAP. EDIT: released.

Please upload the output_log.txt and list what mods you have installed. Meanwhile, try running in OpenGL mode ( -force-opengl ).

AIES has a *very* nice RL60.

1.2. 1.1 is not the part/graphics update.

And I said you'd be satisfied with the results of Porkjet's labors. Being as mysterious as always.

You may have missed the dev notes over the last month or two where Porkjet reveals he's...doing exactly that.

Then it sounds very much like a thrust vs power problem: recall that ship propellers, like air propellers, develop *way* more thrust when you're moving slowly (and this is why SHP required for a top speed is roughly proportional to speed cubed, IIRC). Happily, in 1.0.5 you can do that fairly easily.

Alas no. MEC doesn't support changing resources.

It's not meant to be used in an atmosphere. Use the DP-10.

Drag is increased below approximately one knot. Are you saying you can't go faster than a single knot? Note that propellers are constant *power* not constant *thrust* so you will probably need to change how the engine is modeled.

Try to replicate it without radiators? That will help isolate it. Either way, best to loop @RoverDude in.

My choice is either to make it work with the release versions of other mods, or the dev version. I believe I made the correct choice. That said, yes, presumably soon we'll release the changes to solver engines and AJE (and redo RF).

Yes. And as I said, please let the CKAN people know. That's a bug in the client.

Sorry, haven't heard of that mod.

@Sput42 as it happens, Radiernick fixed it for us. Replace your copy of the file (in the FASA folder) with this one: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5cCJeD9k76sd2hrdTRMTmlrX0k/view @MissMolly you would be better served replicating the stage masses rather than sizes. Also, make sure you're using the same engines as the real things--if the second and third stages aren't hydrolox, it's going to be too heavy to take off anyway. Oh, and it's a bad design for low orbit work--if you just want to get into low orbit (or even medium orbit) you'd be better served replicating a launch vehicle more optimized for that. @Hotaru cool! Oh, and I just updated that False Lessons link today, in response to @illectro's latest video.

It's back.

TestFlight. Basically built for RO. It desperately needs more configs though.