Grassland

What is the most popular sector of the forums, by the frequency of new posts? What if by the sum of views or posts? If it’s hard to answer then I’ll quit asking it.

I just took a look at the wiki again. Here it shows the mass, thrust, crash tolerance and all the values {temporarily} needed for this mod to function and has some penalty for less mass. I will write the config files myself. Also, I have learned that, in fact, Module Manager can give you a system to get values from config files via “some way”, so I will finish all the necessary cfg editing when I have time, and I shall only need the internal part names to make it work. I will acquire the cfg names later.

This mod is currently not complete and I will listen from the community. I’m starting school so future updates will be slow as I will take my time to learn advanced mathematics and also deeper into Physics.The trust cut was to have some sort of “penalty” for less mass. The cut may be lower if I can figure out the best way to deal with drag. I will work on the thrust and Isp curve though. All the figures just came out of nowhere in my brain as of now, and I will examine them after completing most of the mod’s features. That check should be based on the engine’s IRL analogs, if they weren’t created completely by KSP. It could be in late October that I finally release the mod as V1.0 in the release sub forum, and anything can change significantly while a mod is under development. But for now I’d like to put things like 3D modeling for parts on the list, since these figures could edited in less than an hour if needed. Thanks for your advice and I sincerely hope to make this mod better with all you guys!

I suddenly found out that the wiki does not provide internal part names for MH engines. That is provided for stock ones though. So I need help. If you would like to contribute, fork me on Github! See this if you would like to help me with this mod. (Or skip some parts of it if you already know a lot about module manager and B9PS.)

I have released Variant Mass Effect V0.2! ChangeLog for V0.2: Bugfix. Add separate config files for Poodle. Add patch for mk2LanderCabin_v2. Download: https://github.com/Grassland-CN/Variant-Mass-Effect/releases/tag/V0.2 Source: https://github.com/Grassland-CN/Variant-Mass-Effect

I will add VME behavior to Mk2 Lander Can and have a version update. Monoprop will be cut according this poll voted by 4 members. And monoprop cut makes more sense than EC cut, anyways. Because there is a "service bay" on either side of the lander can, the mass will be cut by 15% and monoprop cut by 15%.

I think I now understand where these warning came from. ModuleEngines is different from ModuleEngineFX. I’ll try to fix it.

There are “B9 Part Switch Serious Warnings”. But the intended changes are applied. I suppose there are no bugs with this release.

Release made at Github: https://github.com/Grassland-CN/Variant-Mass-Effect/releases/tag/v0.1 I still consider this mod a WIP though.

The issues are fixed with B9PS and I'll upload new patches later. The original post have been updated. However, the stock variants and B9PS Subtypes are not merged together so you actually have two rows of choices in the VAB now. One for stock variant, which changes the engine graphics, nodes, etc.. Another is B9PS subtypes, for actual numerical changes of mass, cost, etc..

I think I have to post here for help. I hope to replace stock variant modules with B9PS, for stock parts. The problem is, I doubt if B9PS can deal with stock variant module for stock parts. VARIANT { name = TrussMount displayName= #autoLOC_8007113 primaryColor = #999999 secondaryColor = #000000 sizeGroup = GroupA GAMEOBJECTS { TallShroud = true ShortShroud = false Toroid = false LgTruss = true SmTruss = false } NODES { node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.8, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 1 } } This is taken from the config file of stock terrier (liquidEngineLV-909_v2.cfg), somewhere near the end in ModulePartVariants I particularly want to replace this with B9PS because I aim at adding more changes to the stock variant choice, more than just node/texture/shader switch (So I finally turned to B9PS after writing some failed MM patches). But I don't know how to deal with GAMEOBJECTS and sizeGroup. I believe B9PS can handle changes of other parameters as I can just change the name but leave the value there. [for instance, I know I can change displayName into title but leave the string there, the same with nodes but a bit more complex. (And I also don't know how to change nodes into B9 style, that means. to transfer 7 values into 3 coordinates...)] I don't know what GAMEOBJECTS and sizeGroup are for. Is there a way of using B9PS to completely replace the stock variant module? If they were related with textures, then how do I write a patch to replace those lines? [I read some posts on page 30 to 31 but it was about mod parts, so ther were different (I suppose)] BTW, this is what I intended to merge with the stock graphics variant. (or part switch, if successfully changed.) I hope moduleengines and modulegimbal are supported and not so “highly experimental”

The test was worth it. Only the Ant, the Spider, the Spark, and the Terrier showed changes in mass. The 2.5m parts didn’t work. At least that’s what was seen in the VAB. There seems to be a problem. I’ll still try to upload the files but no release now.

I failed to upload the file due to technical issues... OK, I am going to run another test for all engines to see if it really works, when I think about fixing the upload problem.

Well, practically, not now. It may take some time to study how the stock aero system works... I looked into some engine configs and found out that all have: (This is from Terrier) dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.2 angularDrag = 2 And for docking ports: (This is from the standard port) dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.25 minimum_drag = 0.25 angularDrag = 0.5 MK3 Cargo Bay Long: dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.3 angularDrag = 1 The drag feature seems a bit harder to understand than mass, cost and thrust, etc.. I may look into that in the future of several weeks. Actually, I also first thought about drag tweaks, but I got so confused... I may ask people for help for this. If you know what these values mean and tell me how to edit them, what about I add you to contributors? Basically and straightforwardly, (I think) Shroud/Full drag < Truss/Mid drag <Bare Drag. Adding it to the to-do list. I have completed editing the patch for stock engines applying the current features, and I will upload it to Github right away.

I thought there should be some "penalties" when using variants with less mass, so I chose to lower thrust. The idea was, I think the shroud also includes robotics parts inside the engine [which is very complex IRL as we all know]. So I thought removing some parts of the engine will lose its capabilities, such as thrust and gimbal. Crash tolerance was because the engine lost shroud and truss for protection. Thrust decrease should not affect TWR on a large scale as it's just a 90% cut at most. But you could get a little more Delta V and save some cash. Also: issue fixed by testing on the poor terrier, and currently re-writing patches for every enginge.