Hurry- Starfish!

I'm guessing you've never been to Gilly

Wrong forum, but Hooligan Labs Airships should be what you're looking for. However I'm not sure if it works in the latest KSP version atm;, it says 0.25 in the thread.

Holy cow. These parts are beautiful.

I think I might just have accepted an espionage mission... The problem is, not everyone has the kind of supercomputer required to run a station like that, nevermind the lifter to get it into orbit. I agree this would be nice, not only for stations but bases too. Another idea: requiring a certain electricity generation capability.

Alternatively, you can try the Kerbal Attachment System mod, which allows you to connect ground bases together by laying pipes between them on EVA. It is perfect for this kind of thing.

I'm getting a strange bug. At certain times, the buildings in the KSC overview become unresponsive. I can still move the camera around and interact with GUI items normally, but moving the mouse over KSC buildings doesn't highlight them and clicking on them does nothing. The single exception to this is the flagpole. My modlist is large, so this might be caused by a conflict with some other mod (and took me ages to pin down) but adding or removing TimeControl to the installation "enables"/removes the bug. I can reliably replicate it by doing the following steps: start KSP load or create a save go to the VAB choose the RC-L01 or another probe core launch use HyperEdit to teleport into Eve orbit use HyperEdit to land on Eve (will result in explosion if DeadlyReentry is installed, doesn't matter) revert back to the VAB leave VAB Some of these steps might be unnecessary or more specific than they need to be; for example, I've also encountered the bug without using HyperEdit and without going to Eve. But this is a fast and reliable way I found to replicate it. Im playing on 32bit KSP under Windows. I've used TimeControl for a while and I think this bug only started happening recently; possibly since 0.24.2 or since the newest version of the mod.

I was planning to do both, but if I'd only accepted one of them at a time, the other one would probably have expired.

Still one of my favourite part packs. Small rocket parts are something hardly any other pack provides, and the new monopropellant engines are lovely too

What kind of magic supercomputer are you using? Cause I'm not sure if I'd get multiple frames per minute if I loaded that ship on mine.

Whoops. I just put a contracted base on Minmus, but I also had a Kerbin orbital station contract in my list and after landing the base I realized that it accidently fulfilled the station contract on the way. Is there a way to prevent this from happening?

"Neutralize controls" is regarded as completed when the player timewarps, even if SAS is still turned on. Not sure if that's intended or not, but it recently led to me completing a satellite deployment contract before I was actually done circularizing my orbit. The perfectionist in me complained

Another amazing utility mod <3

Doesn't the color make that obvious already?

Yeah, the F119 is definitely good for maneuverability and efficient subsonic engines make sense too. It's just that the D-30F7 takes long to change throttle, eats more fuel than the nerfed TurboJet and goes less than 100m/s faster, so I'm not sure where its niche is.

Oh okay, so users of NEAR and FAR cannot get to Mach 7 already. I had assumed the FAQ were adressed at them, since that's already listed as a prerequisite now. Hmm then which applications would you say the D-30F7 and the (nerfed) stock TurboJet respectively are best for right now, compared to the F119 and to each other?

You might want to check out this

Yeah, the orbit preview is useful. I only wish there'd be an easier way to find out which orbit preview belongs to which contract when multiple ones are shown. Oh and I wish they wouldn't rotate at such insane speeds, it disturbs the serene peaceful feeling of being in space somewhat

Sorry, I wasn't actually planning to continue this discussion, but I've now read the FAQ update you mentioned and it states the following: I'm assuming that "2500m/s" and "Mach 7" aren't sarcastic exaggerations here, since you mention Mach 5.5 as a more or less realistic reference value. So now I am confused. Mach 5.5 corresponds to about 1800m/s and this value is in fact what NEAR caps the stock TurboJet's top speed to via velocity curve. FAR does the same. Given that you've stated this mod only supports NEAR/FAR installations now, might I ask where you're getting the 2500m/s from? I'm no modder, so this might just be me misinterpreting the configs, but then again as a NEAR user I've never been able to get any of my spaceplanes to go above 17**m/s on jet engine power. What am I missing here? How would one achieve Mach 7 with stock jet engines?

Well yeah, that was one of my points. IMO balancing changes to stock should be left in the hands of such mods when possible, because sneaking them into part packs hurts modularity. FAR isn't there to make the game harder, it's there to make aerodynamics more realistic. IIRC someone said before that part of the reason for this mod dropping stock aerodynamics support is that pushing the heavy new HX parts through air is actually too hard without NEAR or FAR. And "cheating" is a very loosely defined term in this game anyway, what with every player basically using their personal combination of parts, utility mods and gamemode. That's been said before, no need to repeat it. I already said I know how to do that in an earlier post, where I also tried to explain why that is not my main point and why I started discussing this in the first place. Alshain on the other hand couldn't find the .cfg. Neither of us needs the "remove" advice now, or needed it before. That is also unproductive. I am not "looking for" B9. I am using it, have been for a long time, and I like it a lot. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't bother writing long posts about it on the forums. I was just trying to get across my concern about one of the recent changes.

Why irony? Doesn't need to be big and red, but a warning should be there. I suppose this doesn't count as a pixiedust-powered futuristic device then.

Oh wow, I never knew about this. Ever since I started using B9 I've wondered why most of my larger planes would keep trying to yaw on their own, suspecting a faulty COM in one of the S2 parts or something, but when I tried narrowing it down by building smaller test crafts, I could never reproduce the problem. That explains a lot.

I know how to do that, that's not a problem. I'm worrying about it causing frustration for others who haven't read through all the changelogs (I'd imagine many people don't) and don't realize what's going on, as Alshain's recent post illustrates. Installing or uninstalling a part mod changing the behaviour of unrelated crafts makes managing mods pretty difficult. ("Okay, I'm gonna uninstall this mod now, I need the RAM and I never used it anyway - wait, why are all of my crafts behaving differently now?") Removing B9_Aerospace-Squad_Jet_Balance.cfg from the root B9 folder should do the job. Ah thanks, that explains the reason I was wondering about. So in other words, I take it you don't want to make your engines stronger at specific aspects than stock for reasons of being OP, and you don't want the stock engines to be all-around solutions that at on par with the specialized B9 ones at their respective specialities. That makes a lot of sense, I'm just kinda concerned about the implications of your solution; because if it was common for part mods to change other parts to fit their balancing system, I'd imagine that the game could quickly become unplayable with multiple mods installed at once, because their changes would either overwrite each other or possibly stack in unpredictable ways.

Yeah, that's what I meant. If undocking from the transfer stage sets the launch dates of both ships back to their correct values, does that mean that launch dates are saved on a per-part basis? Maybe in that case it would be possible to only check the launch dates of all those parts the contract specifically requests. That would remove any possible problems with transfer stages altogether.

It should however be FAR/NEAR's job to fix the immediate balancing problems caused by its own aerodynamics changes, not some arbitrary 3rd party mod's, and to my understanding they already do that by specifically adjusting the values of all stock jet engines (and also cutting the thrust of any other airbreathing engines in the game in half). B9's new changes to the stock engines get applied on top of that, so I assume there is some other reason?

But this is not a balancing mod. Shouldn't new parts be made compatible with stock values and not vice versa?