SuicidalInsanity

Members
  • Content count

    651
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

825 Excellent

4 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

4536 profile views
  1. The Sea Kestrel has been thrown to the sharks added to the TKOL hanger.
  2. @Jivali: Do you have TweakableEverything installed? If so, it's disabling the other node for some reason. Not sure what the workaround is, though; you'd have to ask in the TE thread.
  3. @Jivali: The Cyclone engine FX is a known issue, will be fixed next update. @Steve_v: When the various IntakeAtm using engines were first added, I needed a way for those engines to function and receive intakeatm - standard intakes wouldn't work because they only take IntakeAir, installing integrated intakes on the engines worked, but was klunky and limited; writing MM patches to add intakeAtm to specific intakes would only apply to said intakes and wouldn't cover the rest, especially mod intakes, which would result in incomplete coverage and questions about why people couldn't get their engines to work with the intakes they were using, and along similar lines, making a few custom intakes for IntakeAtm would be limiting as people would be forced to use only those - A blanket MM patch adding it to everything allowed the engines to work, gave players the freedom to build as they want/use single intakes for airbreathing and non-airbreathing jets at the same time, and would permit the use of intakes from other mods. It's not a perfect solution, but at the time, it seemed the most practical way of solving the problem.
  4. @Fireheart318: Just tested the Rontgen with KSPI-E installed and had no issues with it, nor could I find anything that would disable it when I looked through the KSPI-E patches and code; can you describe the issue in more detail? @Nothalogh: Easy enough. Gave me an excuse to redo the nosecap as well. With the nosecap reworks in mind, looking through the M2X part lineup there's a range of quality between the older stuff and the new, and there's likely time to rework a few other parts before the KSP 1.3 update comes out. Are there any parts people would like to see given preference/priority for reworks/remodels?
  5. On the topic of Modular Missiles, is there a trick to the Radar guided mode? Any and all radar guided AAM designs I've tried, the missiles just go straight; this includes proven heatseeker designs I've switched over to Radar for testing purposes @jrodriguez: Possible bug, KSP 1.2.2 v0.2.0.0; the Modular Missile Guidance parts do not save Max Static Launch Range and Min Static Launch Range, these revert to 7500 and 500 respectively whenever a craft with (a) MMG(s) is loaded.
  6. First off, thanks for the video, I know what's going on now. Short answer, you're using an outdated version of M2X, and need at least the most recent version of the NFE patch (below). Long answer, earlier versions of M2X's NFE patch lacked an exhaustCooling value, which is why the Heat Rejected value for your Rontgen stays at 80kw instead of 880kw at full throttle. Replace the contents of your Mk2Expansion/Patches/Mk2X_NFE_Functionality.cfg with this:
  7. @MaverickSawyer: I just downloaded a fresh copy of KSP, grabbed the latest versions of M2X(1.7.35), NFE(0.8.6) and Heat Control(0.3.4) from SpaceDock, and spent over an hour testing the Rontgen; The Rontgen worked as it's supposed to, the Heat Control radiators, on the other hand, didn't. SpaceDock says the mod is outdated, might have something to do with it. Rontgen at 100% throttle cooled the reactor to 3000 if core temp was below that to begin with, or very slowly down to 3k if above it. Engine off and cooling with radiators only, Stock radiators cooled indefinitely, Heat Control radiators briefly provided core cooling and then stopped, resulting in core overheat. I was unable to get the core to overheat when the Rontgen was running and had active radiators, either HC or stock. Based on test results, your issues are probably linked to Heat Control in some way. If you remove the HC radiators and replace them with Stock ones, does the issue persist?
  8. Yes.
  9. @Grand Ship Builder: KSP will have to have been run, but does not need to be running for a output_log; as for which bit of the log, ideally the whole thing, if possible. If it isn't, then open it up and search for "Config(PART) Mk2Expansion", "Load(Model): Mk2Expansion/Parts/", and "PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Mk2Expansion/Parts/" and give me those sections.
  10. @Grand Ship Builder: I'm going to need your Kerbal Space Program/KSP_Data/Output_Log.txt before i can tell what's wrong. If running the KSP_x64 version, it'll be in KSP_x64_Data instead
  11. A decoupler is still needed. The trick is flipping the decoupler upside down so it'll detach whatever is attached to it, but still remain connected to the rocket. Cargo bay is connected to the decoupler, decoupler is connected to the bottom node of the central engine. Decoupler gets offset into the engine root, and cargo bay gets offset until it's flush with the bottom of the fueltank. Launching it straight up resulted in a max apoapsis of around 1.25 million meters. Replacing the Rockomax adapter engine mounts with C7 1.25-2.5m fueltanks and removing the X-200-32 from the main tank for same total weight/fuel carried increased the max apoapsis to around 1.75 million meters, so there's definite performance improvements from fuelling the skirt. As for the engine quad/skirt assembly itself, it's aerodynamically stable and will fall engines first, so a powered landing is possible, but it needs at least a FL-T200's worth of fuel per engine to do so,
  12. Experimented around with a blended wing/lifting body design, going for a pair of smaller external tanks instead of a larger one to counter the offset thrust problem 11 Kerbals to LKO with room for 5 tons of cargo or an internal tank for extended range. Went with RAPIERS for versatility/atmo cruising in case of LZ overshoot/ emergency abort/etc., but it would work just as well with LV-T30s instead. The short Mk3 Cargo Bay works well for this.
  13. @folorot: The engine FX? The only way I know of reducing/turning off engine FX is to edit the engine .cfgs and remove the various PREFAB_PARTICLE and MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE code segments from the .cfg's EFFECTS section. @MaverickSawyer: What throttle are you running the Rontgen at, and what is the total radiator capacity attached to the Rontgen? I don't know if Heat Control is messing with things, but with just NFE, the Rontgen will only overheat (temp > 3000K) if running at less than 100% throttle without enough radiators/any radiators attached and active; the Rontgen will never overheat if 800kW of radiators are attached to it and active, regardless of throttle, though in practice a full 800kW is usually overkill, since 800kw of cooling assumes the throttle never goes above 0%