Chris Bolland

Thanks so much for the reply Poodmund! Last time I checked out tweakscale it didn't work properly on command pods, and was generally an unstable mess. I'll give this a shot though and let you know how it goes! I'm also aware of Bluedog Design Bureau's Apollo parts which I might use for just the one Lunar module part.

Hey guys, After playing KSP's expansions for a long time, I've come to the realization that the MEM is a poorly designed part. As other threads have mentioned, the CoM and CoT for the RCS are not balanced properly, forcing players to include patches like the one from @Poodmund to actually make best use of the pod. But another problem has been upsetting my designs. It's too small. Compared to the Apollo-style 3-kerbal command pod, it's almost 40% smaller than it should be to be an accurate size for the Lunar Module. This makes designing around this scale inconsistency problematic, especially when playing with other mods like kerbalism, and expansions like breaking ground. I have no room to put extra containers of food and water, and making any sort of fold-able rover to fit on the side of the under-scaled decent stage is almost impossible. My question is this: Can we fix it? Can I change the size of the part model to more accurately reflect the proper size, and could we change the IVA to match? I have little or no experience in part/IVA fabrication in KSP so I've a little scared to bring this up, but I'd enjoy the part a lot more if it were scaled right, and the rescaled version included Poodmund's fix. Let's get those little Kerbal engineers running and figure this out. Thanks to VAOS for making this handy reference image I'll link here:

Thanks to all who have given their input so far including Leganeski, Lt_Duckweed, and DeadJohn. You guys are masters and very helpful. This is actually a great thing to hear, as I thought I was just doing it wrong, but judging by real life, it simply might not be feasible to make an SSTO at 7.6x scale with the ability to bring payloads into orbit. It might be just cheaper and easier to do it with disposable rockets instead. I mean NASA's space shuttle ended up being overly complex and in the end kind of useless, yet it was still able to put massive payloads into orbit. I might try doing something more along those lines, rather than a pure SSTO. I'm still open to more comments so keep em coming if anyone has anything to add, and I'll be tinkering away as time goes on. Thanks all!

Hey there all! I've recently been experimenting in my 7.6x rescale play-through trying to build an orbit capable SSTO with some payload mass (like 1 ton is fine, just tiny satellites). Over the course of a few weeks I've been constantly failing to even break the 120km mark, (where space begins with my rescale settings) and have been getting a bit discouraged. I just can't seem to get going fast enough on panther engines to make it up to the point where rockets can take over. I need 9000m/s of deltav for orbit, and carrying enough fuel for the rockets is taking up a lot of mass, which limits my speed. I've made a few SSTOs in stock and have watched every video on them religiously, but often people use measuring sticks and rules of thumb that work in stock, but not in rescale. How should I proceed? If you have any tips or guidance feel free to post below! Here's my rescale settings for anyone interested. From the 7,6xScale file: // Base Settings @Resize = 7.6 - everything is 7.6x bigger than stock @Rescale = 7.6 @Atmosphere = 1 - atmosphere height is 120km changed below. @dayLengthMultiplier = 1 // Advanced Settings @landscape = 0.169 - This number I got through trial and error, trying to make MT K2 (Kerbin's highest peak) the same height as Everest roughly. Otherwise the mountains next to KSC are too tall to fly over. From the PlanetSpecificConfigs file: @Kopernicus:BEFORE[SigDim2]:NEEDS[SigDim] { @Body:HAS[#name[Kerbin]] { @SigmaDimensions { @Atmosphere = 1.714285714285714 - I've found this value offers the most realistic atmosphere height and falloff. @dayLengthMultiplier = 3.333333333333333 } } }

@lassombra Thanks so much for getting back to me, I just downloaded community fixes and will give it a whirl.

Question! Why does recovering the procedural parts yield negative funds? I wanted to make an reusable SSTO out of the procedural fuel tanks, but you can't recover them for positive funds. Picture here: https://imgur.com/gallery/2aT0YeC

Anyone know if this mod works with a rescaled solar system? I play at 6.4x scale, and I'm gonna test it and see when I get a chance.

Testing this hang on.... No dice, I deleted everything under the folder 'Intercept Games' in LocalLow, but nothing changed. Still go to create new save game, and the loading hangs on "pumping sim once".

Still getting the same issue, no solution, but it's only like a few hours after launch, in an alpha game. we expected a night unplayable mess. Very Kerbal.

I'v ebeen plugging away at college courses this semester, so haven't responded and haven't had a chance to recheck the situation with your suggestions, but thank you both @Starstrider42 and @Starcatcher2009 - Modder SO MUCH for responding to my question. I wondered if there was a way (short of just editing the burn time in the code one by one,) to balance things to make it fair to a 6.4 rescale. Yall are amazing and deserving of praise. Thanks again, and hopefully after finals when I have some time I'll try to implement/test out your suggestions.

Just booted this up and have been playing with it for a while on my 6.4x scale install. Do the stock engine rated burn times ever go up? Is there any way I can increase them? I'm trying to fly a Mercury-Redstone style rocket, where the LV-T30 burns all the way into a suborbital trajectory. Burn time seems to be fixed at 100 seconds, even while I've increased it's reliability to like 95% chance of ignition. In the editor it shows the full burn time at 40 minutes now, but in flight it's still just 100 seconds. Any tips? Is this a bug or a feature?

Seems to work fine in 1.12 I got this mod because I'm playing a 6.4x scale install, and needed to make sure my kerbals didn't die.

I FOUND THE ANSWER. You have to go into the config in the mod files, under the folder "upgrades" and then change the configs 'techrequired level' for the unlimited size upgrade to, say engineering 101 or something low level. You can delete all the other upgrade levels, since unlimited is what you want.

Reading this tread now is so frustrating, I have the same issue, but he just fixes it but doesn't help me. OMGGGG

So bit of a noob question, I can't get the toolbar icon to show up in-game at all, and so... I can't really use the mod. I wanna make my parts more metallic and shiny. Anyway how do I get it to show up.

Thanks, that worked! Epic, now I can get MOUR SCIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How I download it and in what folder do I put it? EDIT Oh I get it. I think I just edit the .cfg file for SEP_plug Edit 2 That didn't work, hmm.

Can you give me any details on how to do this? Is there a place I can find the legacy folder? I'm running Ksp 1.6.1 and none of the power plug links are visible. I get no hud when right clicking on the plugs.

Naw, that didn't do anything. Probably because the bomb doesn't have a cruise mode at all. If I can't change it, it's fine I'll just have to send bombing missions at lower altitude and risk the flak and fighters. I changed the stats on the Flak88s so they fire at 30rpm. I've got 6 batteries of 3 guns each with a max range of 7km and I have to fly at 5km to bomb accurately. I made the tracers invisible so it's a surprise when I'm hit, and I'm constantly biting my nails.

I don't have anything like that in my .cfg file. here it is. PART { name = ANM65 module = Part author = VintageXP mesh = model.mu rescaleFactor = 0.225 node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.6, -1.12, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0 node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, -1.01, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1 TechRequired = start entryCost = 0 cost = 800 category = none subcategory = 0 title = WW2 AN-M65 1000lb Bomb manufacturer = Roaken Armory description = Extremely efficient against buildings, can take down heavily armored ground targets even indirectly. Meant to be mounted on the Structural Bomb Mount. attachRules = 1,1,1,1,1 // attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision mass = 0.445 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.1 minimum_drag = 0.1 angularDrag = 2 crashTolerance = 12 maxTemp = 1000000000 bulkheadProfiles = srf MODULE { name = MissileLauncher shortName = 1000lb blastRadius = 59.42 //meters blastPower = 55.44 blastHeat = 80 thrust = 0 //KN thrust during boost phase cruiseThrust = 0 //thrust during cruise phase dropTime = 3 //how many seconds after release until engine ignites boostTime = 2.2 //seconds of boost phase cruiseTime = 80 //seconds of cruise phase guidanceActive = false //missile has guidanceActive maxTurnRateDPS = 20 //degrees per second explModelPath = BDArmory/Models/explosion/explosionLarge explSoundPath = BDArmory/Sounds/explode1 useSimpleDrag = true simpleCoD = 0,0,-3 missileType = bomb homingType = none }

See I tried, and since they're dumb bombs they don't have a line in .cfg for range at all! I think it's a hard coded limit in BD armory, so idk if I can fix it.

I'm using aviator arsenal's unguided ww2 bombs, so is there a way I can make it show above that altitude?

If anyone could help me with this I'd be very grateful. Been trying for hours to get RPM to work with no luck. So far, my folder looks like this: Gamedata> JSI > [Agencies] [RastorPropMonitor] [RPMPodPatches] I also have the ModuleManager.4.0.2.dll under gamedata as well. I'm running KSP 1.6.1.2401 so it SHOULD all be working fine, but none of my command pods have the RPM screens. The RPM version I've got in .0.30.6 Any suggestions? I'm getting no black RPM screens in IVA. EDIT: I found out that I have the intractable screens in the mark 1 cockpit (the really pointy one) and the Cupola. I think this is due to the updated IVAs of all the others. Is there any more recently updated version that adds the RPM screens to the new IVAs?

Can anyone explain why the BDArmory green bomb sight disappears above 4500 meters? Is there any way to fix it? I've been looking into high altitude bombing. like 7000-8000 meters.

Thanks for all the help! I'ma just stay away from artillery guns then.