SuicidalInsanity

@TheHengeProphet; I'll take a look at it @TomatoSoup; Reiver nailed it. The lower hatch was originally the only hatch, but because of the vagaries of how airlocks work in KSP, it didn't work very well, and never consistently. So I added the top hatch. At that point, you'd still get the 'hatch obstructed' message, but could manually EVA kerbals from the top hatch, but not the bottom, and they could enter through the bottom or the top. I decided that was silly, and simply got rid of the problem at its source. @Grumman; I haven't really done engine FX before, so a little room for improvement is to be expected. I'll clean it up for the next update @Reiver; Fighter-type engine? You mean the 'Vector' turbojet? Its pointy because I based the model on the Pratt & Whitney F-119's engine housing.

@ABZB: A generator part? The next bunch of parts I have planned for the next update are mainly mining/utility parts, so a generator, or something that could be re purposed as one is possible. I've never used KSPI, so I'm unfamiliar as to how power generator works in that mod - anything specific I should keep in mind? As for the MM patches, I can include them, it seems simpler that way.

I've updated the .netkan, so CKAN compatibility should be back as soon as the pull request goes through.

Update 1.5 is finally up, grab it from KerbalStuff. Version 1.5 ================= -New Part: 'Pegasus' Fuselage VTOL Engine -New Part; 'Siddeley' Fuselage VTOL engine -New part:'Jumpjet' Radial VTOL engine -New Part: fighter cockpit -New Part: Mk2 tail boom -New Part: Mk2 reactor -New Part: 'Spirit' Mk2 Ion Engine -Mk2 Science Lab rebalanced - increased weight to 2.5, max science to 500 -Mk2 service bay fixed: Should now shield parts correctly -Model rework: HS-X cockpit retextured -Model rework: R-71 cockpit retextured -Model rework: Inverter tank retextured -Model rework: SC-TD dropship cockpit canopy enlarged, front hatch removed -model rework: 'Rontgen' atomic jet remodeled -IVAs reworked, windows adjusted -Interplanetery Launchpads MM patch added - science lab workshop compatibility -Near Future Electric MM patch NFE reactor functionality on the Mk2 reactor -New Engine FX -J. Edgar VTOL engines move to legacy folder pending final depreciation in ver 1.6 Note: The J.Edgar engines are being depreciated. They are included with version 1.5 so any craft that has them won't break, and can still be loaded, but the engines will be removed in the next update.

In regard to engine balancing, I went for the ~150% thrust for ~150% weight compared to stock because I found it was a nice balance - It granted more power than using single 1.25m engines, but if a player needed even more power, then the option of paying the additional mass cost of a coupler and extra engine was available to them. For an engine that does have a 200% power/weight value, look at the MATTOCK - it's basically two RAPIERS bolted together, and its crazy powerful. In regard to the ramjets, they are working as intended - lower efficiency at low mach and true potential unlocked post mach 3. If I had made them true ramjets, they wouldn't produce any thrust below ~700m/s. As is they should have enough power to get a craft to that speed; Crisk, what sort of craft and flight profile are you using?

Worked on some custom FX today Shock diamonds still need tweaking. I might play a little with the plumes color gradients but overall I think they turned out decent enough.

I'm not 100 percent sure, and I'll need to do some testing, but I think it's a stock bug; I've had satellites explode in the cargo bay of a SSTO I was testing a while ago, which I think was stock, when I toggled the cargo bay, and I've seen others report similar.

RE: wing area vs mass, if I recall correctly the FAR editor analysis window has a readout for wing loading and wing area that could be used; admittedly, this would require switching to FAR, which would be a boon and a bane. On one hand, stock aero is remarkably lenient and tolerant of, shall we say, unorthodox airframe designs, but also open to abuse of wing spam and so forth. FAR, on the other hand isn't, but requires more skill in building planes that fly well.

same here - 4 cm pods will negate the majority of missiles. If anything, putting a limit on CM pods or increasing their price might be the way to go. At present, 4 pods are only 20 points out of 60 available. If we had to actually make sacrifices in armament to have decent missile protection from CM pods, I think it would result in some interesting design philosophies emerging.

In testing various airframe and weapon configurations, the vast majority of scored kills I got were from missiles. This included gimmick designs that tried to cram on as much dakka as possible - missile armed designs blew them out of the sky before they could close to gun range, although those that did manage to survive eviscerated the enemy plane with cannon fire.

Looks like I'm up soon, and I'm facing an opponent armed only with cannons? This should be interesting.

The M2X engines provide on average around 150% thrust compared to their stock counterparts, for about 150% of stock engine weight. As for stock engine performance: Stock Aero, never went above 250m; I hit mach 1 by the end of the runway with the Whiplash. RAPIER was air-breathing mode only.

Re:rocket pods - Edit: just tried them again just now and I cant get the AI to use them. So I guess no on the rocket pods?

What node sizes are we talking here? 1.25m nodes a linear tricoupler might work, but anything greater - quad and quintacoupler would be better suited for mk3. If its 0.625m then sizes remain reasonable, but there aren't that many 0.625m parts unless you use mods, so short of stacking massive numbers of ion engines or Oscar-B tanks, I'm not sure how practical they would be.

@senoiurkabls: I sorta want to stay within the realm of stock tech, so no fusion reactors. I am making a thrust reverser equipped rocket, though. As far as I know, you can only change engine thrust with speed and the ISP with atmospheric pressure via the velcurve and atmosurve in engine .cfgs. Is there a way to change ISP based on speed?

You got me curious about what a <10 ton 2 engine fighter would be like, so I gave it a try and ended up with this: Tested it a little, and its quite the capable little air-superiority fighter. Used to be 7.8 tons before I took the Whiplash engines off - they provided wasted thrust in exchange for a powered flight time measured in seconds

It only needs one:

See you space cowboy...

Sign me up. Fighter Pod mk1: http://kerbalx.com/SuicidalInsanity/Fighter-Pod.craft 7.9 tons, 58 parts, single J-X4 Whiplash engine. Armament: 6x Sidewinder, (24 points) 2x .50 turrets fixed forward, (8 points) 2 ammo cans, (8 points) 4 CM pods, (20 points) 60 points total

@Yokito Zumi;That might work, I'll give it a try. @MaverickSawyer;No problem; consider it done. Out of curiosity, whats the use you found? @senoiurkabls; Heh, yeah. That ship was the main inspiration for the cockpit. Given its size, there's room for decent tankage, so no worries there. I don't want to raise the bubble too far, since aerodynamics are a concern, but keep in mind the deceptive size of the mk2 parts - that bubble as is will offer a bigger, better field of view than the mk1 inline cockpit. See you space cowboy...

So I saw this thread a little while ago, and on a lark decided to build this: 6 Sidewinders, 4 countermeausre pods, 2 .50 turrets locked forward, 2 boxes of ammo, 60 points Some quick testing and it seems to perform well. Fighter Pod: http://kerbalx.com/SuicidalInsanity/Fighter-Pod.craft Are entries still being accepted?

@123nick: What. ...I'm definitely going to have to try that. In other news I've made decent progress on new stuff, so I hope to have update 1.5 out in a fortnight or so. As a teaser, I'll just leave this here:

@TrainEngie;They're a sort of middle ground between the stock jets. The 1.25m one there is currently 1.4 tons, 110 thrust, 5600 isp. I think I might need to increase their weight slightly since the 'Wheesley' is 1.5 tons. If you want them now you can grab the dev version mk3 stuff from the OP. In general progress news, got some model reworks done: The front hatch I was never able to consistently to work, so I removed it, and increased the cockpit are about 20%. I sort of like it this way better, so unless there's outcry the front hatch is gone for good. I also reworked the Rontgen Atomic Jet: It now looks like a proper nuclear engine! I also found an old WIP cocpkit that I reworked for mk2: Texturing is still sort if WIP, and it needs an IVA of course, but there's now a bubble canopy fighter cockpit for those who want it. The model went through a few iterations of other potential nose shapes if you guys think its currently too swordfish for your tastes. Depending on how things go, I hope to have an update out in a few weeks.

@Reiver; Thanks. Got any screenshots? @CarnageINC; I don't know if it conflicts at this point, I haven't really been following the progress of the Stock Revamp mod for a while. Originally, there were some texture issues, hence the list of textures to restore. If everything is playing nice with the newest version, though, I'll remove the conflict warning. For now, though, I'll leave it up for a little bit just in case. @TheHengeProphet; Known Issue, my fault. I forgot to update the included readme when I last updated the mod, hence the confusion.

"Good-Enough-For-Now" texture on the engines and made a resized 1.25m variant. @TrainEngie; No idea on the shadows, I don't remember adjusting any graphics settings,although I do vaguely remember something about no shadows on Linus KSP, which might be it? 2.5m and 1.25m versions of the engine are up on my github dev release of the mk3 stuff. A double-decker MK3 crew cabin with fuel is a decent idea, I'll add it to the list. Not so sure about the 1.875m stuff @CptRichardson; Huh, that's one way to do it. I'll have to take a look at Nertea's stuff, then.