TeeGee

Does real plumes currently only have cfg for FASA engines or is KW rocketry also supported? I would like to only use real plume supported engines right now and aside from FASA Im not sure what other engine packs are supported.

Howdy! My KSC is umm, in the middle of the ocean in RSS. I installed all the mods recommended in RO and RSS and my KSC is floating in the water for some reason. Did I do something wrong?

Ya I was just going to notify the thread this as well Nathan. The engine ignitor script which is now included in real fuels requires a overhaul in stockalike scripts for all the engines. As of right now, there is no ullage or limited ignitions in this engine pack. Just fyi everyone!

Ive been having trouble getting engine ignitions in my install of KSP. Im using stockalike engines for ven revamp engines using real fuels however none of my engines or tanks experience limited ignitions or fuel ullage trouble. Basically engine ignitor included in real fuels right now doesn't seem to be working for me.

Hi everyone! Just out of curiosity, Ive been trying to find and delete Mon-Hydrazine CFG in the stockalike RF folder to delete it because I don't want to use hydrazine in the place of monopropellant on my craft (due to the fact I would like to be able to use RCSsfx) but I can't seem to find it. Has it been renamed or ignored in the recent updates? Because even though it isn't in the folder, my craft are still arranged to use hydrazine in the place of monoprop on my craft particularly in stock ven revamp.

Does this mod have any other requirements like FAR etc? I installed it and it isn't working for me.

Here is a pic. It's no big deal I just wanted to let you know =)

For some reason my space station with the irretractable solar panels doesn't have any reflections on them. The ports are fine, just the irretractible panels dont reflect anything..

What do you guys/girls think? Would anyone else like to see this feature be added? I think it would give us much greater freedom with what we would like from our spacecraft in terms of performance and versatility. Same with our engines.

I'd also like to see sound simulated like in atmospheric sound enhancement mod; like it compresses into a sonic boom as it approaches mach 1 etc.

So no ideas anyone??? The flickering shadows issue is very distracting

I used to use astronomers fps fix for the framrate problem but it doesn't seem to work anymore. I've turned down the terrain detail, pixel # etc but I still get big frame rate drops. I also have gotten that flickering shadow issue again on my craft: like the shadows casted are flickering in and out of existence all the time. Anyone know of a solution to one or both problems?

Whoa where is that command pod from?

I've always had a few problems with stock kerbal: 1) No explaination for how the rocket gets to the launch pad 2) no launch towers If someone could make a mod or parts that could cover the MLP problem, that'd be aweseome. For example: Have different size treads, different engine size clamps etc.

Space elevator

Cool! So we turn to a heading of 90 degrees after launch. Ya I noticed that the latitude of the KSC is not equatorial anymore, that means we need to plan our launches according to launch windows; when our space centers are at the same inclination as our target orbit. This is AWESOME!

So should I be heading at 45 degrees? 90 degrees?

What heading should we use for optimal launch to orbit? I noticed the planet is tilted and am used to launching at 90 degrees in KSP. But since using SKY ive been requiring 7000 m/s delta v to even make orbit with headings in both 45 and 90 degrees after lift off. Any tips? I'm using stock aero and heating. And just out of curiosity... what altitude is considered exoatmospheric? Is it 100km? 80km? Basically I'm asking what is the altitude I should be aiming for to achieve MIN orbit in SKY?

Pure stock parts.

[2.2H Accusatory comments that lack merit, offer no proof of concept or are of a potentially slanderous nature]

Ok I'm gonna to vent a little on this subject. 1st off: KSP has ALWAYS been a notorious underperformer in terms of physics. I don't think ANYONE on this forum has the capability of running this game with phycis calc above 0.04 on the scale bar in the menu. If you CAN'T run a game on max on ANY PC, you have a baaaaad game engine. Unity 4 is NOT GOOD ENOUGH for what Squad wants to do with this game. I'm sorry, its just not. 2nd: Harvester stated that he will not port KSP over to Unity 5 until after 1.0 comes out. This is one of if not THE dumbest things I have ever heard from him. All this time he has passed off all the problems with KSP to the fault or limitations of the Unity engine. Well lo and behold Harvester, we now have a solution to that limitation and you aren't even going to use it until AFTER game launch? If I was a critic of the game that reviewed KSP on a technical stand point after 1.0 launch, I'd rip it apart. You can't release a game in 1.0 that is NOT as good as it could be for the time of release. Unity 4 should be ripped away from this game and never used again. There is no excuse to NOT delay the release of 1.0 until after the game is ported to Unity 5 with all the new features. 3rd: Why is 1.0 being pushed so hard? WHY?? This game has been in alpha state for over 3 years and they are talking about shoving it through beta to 1.0 in 1 update? ...?? The community has stuck with this game and it has only gotten more popular as the years have gone on. What I would do: Delay 1.0 first. Call the next update 0.95 with all the features they planned on releasing with 1.0. After 0.95 is out, port the game over to Unity 5 and optimize the hell out of it. Then start adding all the extra knick nacks that will make the game truly polished and great. Jeez man my blood is boiling with all this 1.0 crap... it doesn't make any sense to me at all why they are doing this! They have SOOOO much left to do still!

OHHHH! I assumed because it said in the VAB that it was remote control capable.. ok thanks for clearing that up!