Ultrop

Hi, I really like Tracking Station Evolved. I recently started trying my hand at real solar system. I am rather disappointed to see that the new planets does not show in Tracking Station Evolved. Am I just missing something?

Sorry I have been neglecting this a bit. I had to replace my main disk drive and took the opportunity to do a clean install. Not every thing has been re-installed yet. It is difficult to get of the ground, but not impossible. One suggestion that was made, was not to place engines on the top row. For now that will help, I hopefully will get back to this soon again.

Yes the updates and the broken mods. So many great mods have fallen by the wayside because of update incompatibility. Especially the Great models of popular crafts from movies and such. One of the mods I am trying to get working again, is the Eagle from Space 1999. Was absolutely mad about that show. My first computer was a Sinclair ZX81 built by Clive Sinclair the guy that built the Alpha Base really working video communicators. If only we had KSP back then and computers that could handle it.

You are right about the control surfaces, and I was very worried originally, tried all kinds of things. Then I read an article that talks about this specifically, the canard versus elevators and their position, and what is suppose to happen, but does not always happen. Apparently even stock control surfaces can end-up going the wrong way under certain conditions. It ended up saying that if it looks like your controls go the wrong way, do not worry. the physics engine will do the right thing irrespective of the graphics. I assume due to the fact that they have to take shortcuts in the simulation, strange things can happen. In my case because there really is no clear cut front, back or center, it makes it hard for the algorithm to figure out what to do graphically, and i thank my lucky star that the craft actually responds as it should regardless of the graphics. I tend to get very annoyed at Squad my self, and I have to keep reminding my self that considering what they need to accomplish, namely make every person's dumb-ass design fly by figuring out center of mass, center of lift, control surfaces, RCS directions, Engine thrust, lift generation and such, maybe they are not doing so bad. My creation certainly pushes their envelope of what they intended. However all said and done. There where some problems with my craft, and I still cannot guarantee they are all found and fixed, but there is improvement. The biggest problem was that the Reference craft was not using stock engines and a number of people would not have been able to load it and see what I intended. That did not help. As for the engines, i did consider making my own, but as you see I overdo every thing and I decided that I would for now at-least wait and see. That said I do use Tweak Scale to scale up the engines I use, but that is each persons choice. I did aim for more stock alike, and then got carried away.

Another new version 0.7.0.0 I hope I am getting there, I am running out of numbers. I have been getting help and suggestions from SpannerMonkey(smce) as you can see. Based on his recommendations, i have made the following changes 1. Trying to provide integration for TAC life support is ridicules, there are more than enough attachment points in the bay to add it if you need it. I have deleted the optional config files. 2. Not every body likes thousands of addons like me. Being forced to use Interstellar Fuel Switch may not be a plus. The standard versions, now have a set of empty tanks that you can fill as you like. Adds clutter to your recourse panel though. 3. The versions with IFS in the name, still has Interstellar Fuel Switch integrated. Forces you to use the mod, but less clutter in the recourse panel. If you need more types of fuel than the standard versions provide, you are most probably using IFS already, or should be. There are 2 hidden resources, that will only show up if you have mods that use those. They are Liquid Hydrogen and Lithium. Any one that wants a resource added, let me know, and I will see what I can do. Good luck and thanks once again to SpannerMonkey(smce) for his help and suggestions.

So the drag problem both from cargo and from plane should now be solved, but getting it of the runway is still a barely possible situation. It actually falls slightly and then starts climbing. That is with no payload at the moment. At least it is a start. The fuel configuration has been changed to be more in line with using rocket engines only. Still needs interstellar fuel switch. I will look at the empty tank thing next.

I thought it might be worth trying to place this mod into context. Once i had some satellites in orbit around Kerbin, it was time for a space station. Rockets was fine, but in the end I felt SSTO was the way to go. (Tends to be more gentle). I intermediately realized the MK2 was not worth bothering with. I could hardly fit my Grandma and her rocking chair in there. The Mk3 was not that much better. So after my 3rd or 4th SSTO launch, I was looking for something better. That is where the Mark IV mod came in. Here was something actually worth bothering with. I started using it exclusively. That is where the missing multi mode engine came in. For SSTO in KSP or RL to be worth it at all, you really do need dual mode engines. Less weight, better fuel efficiency. This is no excuse for my stupidity of including them in the reference craft. How ever I think I can be forgiven for assuming that if you are desperate enough to search for and download a mod like mine, you have tried various other solutions and that the Mark IV may have crossed your path. If not, try it any way I highly recommenced it and feel stock KSP should have included something like that by now. Even though KSP stock has the RAPIER dual mode engine, it is considerably smaller than the ones in the Mark IV mod. I do not know if they will do the job, that is why I want to experiment a little. With the Mark IV dual mode engines, this thing actually flew beautifully. With standard rocket engines not so much. It actually makes no sense, fuel usage aside.

Firstly I want to thank you for bothering to try and make this work, and to bother reporting back. 54 years have taught me this is the only way to find problems. I really apologize to you and every one else for messing up even the simple part, twice, there is no excuse for the fact that the reference craft contained non stock parts. This would already have made every ones life easier. I am busy uploading a new version with a reference craft that should load. The part with NC in it's name (No Control) does not allow for my control surfaces to be attached. The Part wit just C in the name (Control) does allow my Control surfaces to be attached. Hopefully this time the reference craft will load an one can see how i envisioned this. For the rest of the reply, I am not going to answer right now, i will still do so, but i first need to experiment further my self. I just want the reference craft fixed so that I do not shoot my self and every one else in the foot any further. Thanks again for the response.

Saying it is broken, is unfortunately not very helpful. I was hoping for some constructive criticism. Pointing out what is not as good as it can be and suggesting changes. It can not be all that bad, i have taken several payloads in to space already and returned safely. Granted, I am a horrible pilot, but the fact that i could still land safely, just proves it can not be all that bad. The fact that the air brakes was producing acceleration rather than deceleration, was not helping, and it just shows how bad i am at landing, if i have only now figured that out. However it is now fixed. I welcome criticism, but this is not helping.

Updated the Air brakes to case deceleration instead of acceleration Added Liquid hydrogen / Oxidizer and Lithium to fuel configuration I have added support for TAC life support. Unfortunately this ends up filling your resource list with unused clutter if you are not using TAC, so the default config files does not contain the resource statements. To enable it, go to your KSP installation/GamesData/FlyingWing/Parts in there rename the FlyingWingNC.cfg and FlyingWingC.cfg to something like FlyingWingNC.cfg.noTAC and FlyingWingC.cfg.noTAC. Then rename the FlyingWingNC.cfg.TAC and FlyingWingC.cfg.TAC to FlyingWingNC.cfg and FlyingWingC.cfg. Restart the game

I have Uploaded a new version: 1. There was a strange problem in the Flying Wing Ref.craft. The new file is a better representation of what is needed to make it fly. 2. Some minor adjustments made to the wheel well graphics 3. Some tweaks made to the config files. Added CoP statement which seams to improve the craft handling in the atmosphere.

Love this mod, simplicity it self for the end user. Now I can finally make use of the RSS. Thank you

It might be worth expanding a little on the dry and wet CoM, CoL thing. As the craft is now, the wet CoM and CoL is pretty well placed when empty of cargo. Unfortunately the dry CoM is quite far back and can not be moved indipendant of the wet CoM in the config file. This will make the craft un-flyable upon reentry when all the flue is burned. Using the config file to move the wet CoM and CoL to align with the dry CoM wil place the CoL almost inside the engines, this is not a good situation. The only way to move the dry CoM forward, is to increase the mass of the craft. by the time it coincides with the current wet CoM, the craft is far to heavy when empty of cargo. Pretty much moving the dry CoM forward is accomplished by making the fuel weight insignificant compared to the craft weight. Not good either. As there is no actual tanks in the craft for fuel, there is no way of controlling its location or effect. KSP must assume the whole craft is a fuel tank. So in the end the mass distribution will depend on the payload, as it should be. How ever then your design of the payload will suffer. In the end the best way i could think to handle this, is make the craft light and provide small objects with significant weight that can just be placed to balance it all after the fact. Usually in my previous crafts, at-least i could move the wings to control the CoL. This is the wing, and there is nothing to move. I will be experimenting with the CoP today, and maybe see if I can not improve the situation, and so we learn. This is the scientific method, the only method.

The file is now available on CKAN as well.

The Config file actually does contain CoM and CoL statements, not CoP though. Yes they do alter the points as needed, but if for instance you ad additional fuel tanks, the dry CoM and the wet CoM starts separating rather drastically and trying to rectify it in the config, makes the craft un-usable without additional fuel tanks. I spent a lot of time trying to come up with good average values, more time than the average person is going to spend trying to solve it. In the end I decided for the craft to be as versatile as possible, there just had to be a simple user mechanism for manipulating the CoM. I pondered the problem for a long time, and experimented for days. In the real use situation, you are going to lose a lot of weight in used fuel, and most of the weight in cargo before you return. the craft that goes up, is nothing like the one that comes down. Also a space station for instance is not necessarily build for balance. It is going to hang in space, not fly through the air. In the past my space station design was always hampered by needing to be launch able. My whole reason for making this craft, is to no longer have to worry about such tings in my design. If i could count on my payload being sensible, i agree the config file could be made optimal. I am sure I will fiddle with the values again in the future, but for now this will work. Actually I did not even see CoP in any of the config files I used to try and piece this mess together. Obviously this is worth trying out. The one thing that was clear very quickly, is that Squad did not want one to know how to make mods. They provide all the parameters that you could ever want, but no idea what they are or what they really do. Trying to piece it together from small hints here and there is no joke. Most is gleaned form guesswork of others, or their hard earned experience, and then the information is often contradictory. Don't even talk about different game versions. This mod is actually far from perfect. I hate having to put something like this up for use. In the end I decided to just post it and see what others like SpannerMonkey(smce) can suggest or reveal to me. So I am not ungrateful for suggestions, this is what i want, but a month of Maya, Unity, KSP, Maya, Unity, KSP............ gets to you. I must have reloaded the KSP database a thousand times or more in the past month. With proper info I could have been done in less than a week. I have gained great respect for the other modders out there in the process. I don't think people realize just what they put in to provide these mods, and I have not even looked at programming yet. It is a shame modders can not make money from their effort, but i guess one does it for the love of the game.