Zorg

LE9 (Fuji) and RL60 (Pavonis) in action

Just to expand on what @TimothyC already said, BDB's own tank switcher and CryoTanks do not interact with each other in any way. (at least they shouldn't, I've been using them together for ages) With respect to boiloff, since BDB focuses mainly on historical rockets it does not have a provision for cryo-cooling. So BDB LH2 tanks are only suitable to send a payload on its way and not for long duration missions. If you would rather not deal with it, you can turn it off but yes there is no in game method for eliminating boil off. CryoTanks on the other hand covers use cases that include what can be considered "Near Future" uses such as zero boiloff interplanetary nuclear stages etc. It abstracts the equipment needed for cryo cooling by having a built in cooling function and related EC consumption for the tanks it configures. Tanks that have LH2 in them by default like the CryoTanks own gold foil tanks will have lower EC consumption for cooling and will be turned on by default. Not sure what you mean here? If you are talking about a BDB tank, the boiloff will be unchanged and there should be no EC consumption related to BDB tanks. If you are having further difficulty some screenshots of the situation might be helpful I think.

I have solved the problem

Yay

For Jamestown I would recommend the 3.75m Stockalike Station Parts Expansion redux parts (SSPXr) with the optional metal variants.

tbh we're leaning towards making the change permanent, so far we havent seen any issues and no one has complained so far. I'll try to do some testing with various Atlas models and see how it does but it seems like the change from 37% to 25% doesnt make a huge change to playability.

I hope that if the LR105 thrust adjustment is permanent, it will be a simple matter for you to adjust on your end 0_0 As an aside, in addition to the thrust adjustment, there will be a B9 switcheable upgrade, LR105-NA5 for the early Atlases and LR105-NA7 for SLV3 onwards. The RS56-OSA seems to a rebranding of the NA7 with identical stats so there will be no separate subtype for that.

I would suggest looking at the Realism overhaul repository for data. It’s well researched and has a lot of primary sources in the engine configs. I don’t know the balancing rules for stockalike real fuels configs though as far as thrust and mass are concerned but you can compare the existing configs with their RO equivalents. Compatibility patches are not that hard once you get the hang of it You just need the right data and a good sample config to go off of plus the enthusiasm to do it.

Not entirely sure if that would work. It would be fairly straightforward to write a module manager patch that would remove the key for ignitions limits in the realfuels patches. However engineIgnitor itself inserts its own ModuleEngineIgnitor and the plugin is meant to interact with the stock ModuleEnginesFX. RealFuels on the other hand deletes the entire stock engines module and replaces it with ModuleEnginesRF. While it may work, I doubt it. If Engine Ignitor can handle ModuleEnginesRF that would be a fairly major unadvertised feature.

I've never used RealFuels but my understanding is that it comes with its own ignitions limits within the ModuleEnginesRF? (I assume this is the case as thats how it works in RO). As such I wouldnt expect it to be compatible with EngineIgnitor reignited which is a standalone limited ingitions mod. The RealFuels configs in BDB extras are quite out of date, none of the mod authors use it so it needs someone who uses it to make a pull request to update it. For instance none of the new engines (and there were many) added in BDB 1.6 would have configs. If all you are interested in is ignitions limits, then Engine Ignitor is well supported. Rock3tman did a great job researching and updating those configs for BDB 1.6 and both Cobaltwolf and myself both use it too so we have been updating the EI configs in the dev branch as new engines are added too.

I assume you are talking about inside the VAB and not in flight? I suspect some kind of mod conflict because the animation button should read "Toggle Doors" in the VAB, not Toggle Animation. Could you please provide your 1) modulemanager.configcache inside Kerbal Space Program/Gamedata (in the same level as the modulemanager.dll) 2) Your KSP.log inside Kerbal Space Program/ 3) Your output log (output_log.txt or player.log) after trying this in the VAB If you dont know where this is you can look here Vikram and Beresheet were the Indian and Isreali moon landers both of which er lithobraked on the Moon. Perhaps they should have built them out of balsawood like the Ranger hard lander probe Of course none of the real world Ranger rough landers actually made it either so..

In fact the vast majority of IRL rocket engines do not provide instantaneous thrust. However not all of BDB's engines have the spool up feature. Trimming the orbit with RCS is how precise orbits are achieved in real life. Its best to cut off just a little bit early and then complete last couple of m/s for the burn with RCS. There is an optional patch in BDB_Extras (as of the latest release, BDB v1.6.2) to remove the engine spool up time for people who dont want to deal with it. This is done through the Engine Ignitor Re-ignited mod and will not be native to BDB. The compatibility configs have been included since BDB v1.6.0 so if you install Engine Ignitor you will have pretty comprehensive support for realistic ignition limits for all BDB engines. Hmm will take a look.

I actually included it in the last PR, just rename the extension for "RemoveEC_EngineIgnitor.cfg.disabled" in EngineIgnitor/MM_Configs

On the list for fixes now Er I'm not able to reproduce this. The lights seem to work fine for me. Do you have any mods that control lights or anything?

Are you referring to these engines in the current release or the new combined part in BDB_1.7 gtihub development?