m4ti140

You have just made the last thing this game realy lacked. Procedural fairings + procedural wings + part generator + FAR = all mods needed to support development-from-scratch You have just won the KSP

Read that post - that rescale was not for Pandora. It was for Thor and it was to match it with BossSquirelz's Delta II rocket (64% scale)

I found some strange incompatibility with Lionhead's Thor lander - it doesn't heat up. At peak heating the temperatures are still negative. Pretty similar to previous reports of 'not heating bug' in this thread. There are no errors in log but I found that in quicksave file there is a module called ModuleAeroReentry which has it's 'isEnabled' value set to false all the time. Also note that this addon has been updated from older KSP version. Model has .dae extension (which AFAIK is an old one since all 0.20 addons I used have .mu extension but I don't know if it works like this) and it uses some part modules which are apparently out of date (e.g. stock parachutes have 'module' set to 'Part' and there is a subsection MODULE with name=ModuleParachute, while in this addon 'module' is set to 'Parachutes' and parachute parameters are put directly into part section (and they're a bit different than for 'ModuleParachute')). All other parts get heat from reentry. Could someone else who uses both mods confirm this and if he found a solution post it here, please? How does the presence of old modules and model formats affekt functionality of this mod? I'm curious to find out what's causing it but my trials to fix it myself failed. EDIT: On my install g-force effects aren't loud. This may be somehow related to part count (I use low-partcount ships). Maybe setting the effects to play only on root part (but when any of parts is under stress) would fix it?

Awesome work, thanks. It's incredibly useful. 2 questions from me though: 1. Where did you get elevation data from? 2. What sofware did you use for this? Is there any tutorial on how to do this? I would like to do some selective, high resolution maps for my landing sites but I have no idea how.

I noticed something strange - parts of Thor lander don't work with Deadly Reentry - they don't get heated at all and you end up flying at ridiculous speed with flames everywhere and temperature readings showing negative temperatures. It may have something to do with those rovers being converted from earlier versions. There are no errors in log, parts simply are invincible to heat.

I haven't used it yet, now I'm strugling to make cruise stage from resized stock parts (0.8 scaled xenon tank filled with rocket fuel and with Command module bc the thor pod faces heatshield first on launch and MCCs so additional pod is needed to control launch and MCCs (I added separate configs for them to their folders, it seems that part.cfg can be named whatever.cfg and you can have as many of them as you want in a folder as long as they use the same model, giving you separate parts in game) 0.25 sized radial engines, 0.1 sized girder segment to fit panels, resized small stack decoupler, and, unfortunately s***load of struts bc it fell appart on launch otherwise. And I still had to adjust the Delta II config to be able to circularize with second stage). Does Prometheus come with reentry capsule (it should have similiar capsule as Thor and Pandora, which also functions as kinda skycrane) or only the lithobraking shell? Opportunity used similar cruise stage and capsule to Curiosity, but smaller. If it comes with both, just resize the capsule until it's diameter is just below the diameter of the wider part of fairing (in case of Thor it was the narrower part/fariing base), than divide the new rescaleFactor of capsule by the old one, and multiply this ratio by rescaleFactors of other parts to get the new ones. If it does only come with lithorbraking shell, than you should make a resized verison of Pandora's capsule (just make a copy of part.cfg on them, call it e.g. part2.cfg and do resizing there so you have both parts) or Thor' capsule (not sure which fits the shape of original Opportunity/Spirit capsule, though I think Thor capsule + Pandora cruise stage fits the best) add some KAS and engines to the capsule (there are some animations on youtube showing what Opportunity/Spirit landing looked like) and resize the Lithobrakeing shell to fit the capsule. I'm gonna look into this one once I'm done with Thor. And nice job on Viking Yogui!!!!

Here are the rescaleFactors for 64% scale for Thor probe parts, if s1 is still trying to figure them out: Capsule - 0.57 AdvSAS - 0.5365 Engine - 0.5365 Heatshield - 0.57 Mechjeb - 0.5365 Parachute - 0.34535 Pod - 0.5365 SciTools - 0.5365 This are made laregely by eye, using trial and error, so you might want to wait for Yogui to come up with official ones.

Try lowering throttle. In MJ 2 you can add "Terminal Velocity" to your info windows. If your speed goes above it, lower the throttle. Note that your old heavy rockets become OP when you use FAR

^This. Although I usually start my gravity turns like 200m AGL, when my rocket goes nuts and disassembles it always drops the parts all arround the launchpad, sometimes causing more damage. I really missed the range safety function, thanks!

There is an APAS in KOSMOS pack, but to use it with buran I first had to resize it to roughly proper scale (so it didn't look stupid on Kristall - IIRC it is smaller than APAS-89) and than add top node to Buran docking port (and remove the animation module, unfortunately - though IRL that docking port didn't expand AFAIK) so I could attach APAS there.

KAS for despin seems logical. Though I wonder how will KSP physics handle the conservation of angular momentum, espcecially when moment of inertia is manipulated with KAS - it may act wierd. And if the spin stablization is implemented the gimbaling on Star won't be necessary - one would just point it into the node while still attached to second stage (which would have sas), disable SAS, MJ etc. once it stablizes decouple and imediatelly spin it up, like IRL - it should keep the vector than, without any input besides throttle. Also you could actually include an realistic, SRB version of Star48, though it could be added by users themselves, it's just making few changes to part.cfg file after all. That would be quite chalenging - one would need to make a node on some LKO parked dummy-satelite, and than use e.g. Tweakable Parameters mod to fill it with ammount of fuel giving exactly the dv of that node before take-off - which would require manual calculation of dv with rocket equation. Sounds fun to me, not sure about other users though

Ok, NVM, I'm gonna try to find proper rescale factor for this to match Delta II, and post it here. The diameter of capsule just has to be equal or slightly lower than the diameter of Delta II second stage fairing base. Also are you planning to add the transit stage to this one (that one with butterfly-alike solar panels), Yogui, or you're finnished with probes for now?

What the heck are you trying to prove here? Are you trying to compete? Than you chose the wrong game and forum. These are FREE addons, made in their FREE time by volounteers. They are not paid for this. Thus there is no competition here. It's a rule on EVERY modding forum, for every game, all arround the internet, that asking for ETA is punnishable. If it wasn't an official game forum but a webside deticated to modding only, you could be banned for this. Cepheus answered you ("Soonish") and than asked you to stop asking.

rescaleFactor = 0.75 on which parts? BC all the parts in Thor lander already have some rescaleFactor - some have 0.85, some have 0.8 and one part has ~0.5, so if one is 0.75 the remaining would need to be calculated from that.

It doesn't... lol, missed the time window... see the edit.

Yea, all 3 ULA rockets have 64% scale, same as ISS. Just tell us what is the scale of this, everyone will be able to easily calculate new rescaleFactor themselves than.

Yogui, what is the scale of your Probes actually? Especially the Thor lander? BC I was trying to launch it with BossSquirrelz's Delta II, which is 64% scale, and it didn't fit...

Are you going to add spin-up engines and yoyo despin system for Star48B in future? I know they are useless since we've got SAS for stabilization, but it's the most kerbal stabilization system ever made IRL IMO: 1. We want a cheap interplanetary stage - let's strap it of control systems! 2. Oops, it doesn't want to point into burn vector long enough - let's spin it up to ridicoulus rotation rate and use teh physics! 3. It must be cheaper - let's make it an SRB! 4. Oops, the probe is falling appart due to spinning and we've got nothing to stop it... Hmmm... Let's throw away 2 counter masses on ridicoulusly long rope and use dah physics. Though I think the letter would require some plugin work...

Dude, with so many mods installed my game wouldn't even start... I have seperate install for each space program... But I have 32 bit OS.

Is there any chance for g-force tolerance to be adjustable for each part seperately by cfg editing? Bc current limit is sometimes either to low or to high for specific parts.

^This - the starfield dimness when looking on Kerbol is alredy simulated, so if you just lowered the brightness until stars disappear completely when looking towards Kerbol, it would be OK. Of course for all of this to work properly, KSP would need to recognize planets as light sources as well, but it still would be better then stock + engine sounds should be removed too if you are planning to simulate silence of space. IRL these aren't heard in space, neither in cockpit - AFAIK, no, it doesn't go through the spacecraft's body bc the engine sound doesn't exist in space, it requires air around nozzle, resisting the escape of exhaust gases, for the sound to be produced - nor outside.

Yep, that's what I do as well. I have a separate install with Soviet pack and functionality mods (MJ, DR, FAR) only, with even some stock parts removed. Same with Constellation. And the limit of RAM for 32-bit apps is not 3.8GB. Actually 3.25 GB is an upper limit of whole RAM used on a 32-bit OS. The actual limit for 32-bit application is 2GB. This can be increased if an application has IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE flag in image header. I don't know if KSP.exe has this but it probably doesn't. There was once an application that force set this flag on binary level, I used it with Unreal Engine 3 based games (e.g. Mass Effect 2) and in Battlefield 2, but it should work on any 32-bit .exe AFAIK. Unfortunately I don't remember its name. MS Visual Studio also has an universal tool for this AFAIK.

Well, that's interesting, bc there is a whole page in this thread about this issue...

1. It does affect your a/c - if you make a standard-configuration plane (main wing and rear stabilizers), if you leave pitch at ailerons, they will counter elevator's input - if you pitch up they will act like spoilers, pushing you back down, and if you pitch down, they will act like flaps, lifting you up. Also if you leave roll on rudder, it may overdo its input, leading to unnecessary yaw + IRL it's pilot's job to take care of rudder and apply correct yaw to prevent side-drift. Leaving pitch on rudder and yaw on elevators/ailerons shouldn't do any harm since they don't work in those axis anyway but only if your wings/horizontal stabilizers are perfectly horziontal, and vertical stabilizers are perfectly vertical, otherwise they will make unnecessary input in axis they are not meant to work in. Also leaving roll on elevators is only a good idea if you build a fighter and use winglets for elevators. 2. I guess some study on aerospace engineering XD. I'm starting my studies in October, so I guess I will find out . But wikipedia should be enough. @Ferram - I think I also hit the node drag problem, I was reentering with soyuz descend module from bobcat - since it has both, top and bottom node, free at reentry, the torque from drag they made them cancelled out (though it should've been applied on top node only, since it isn't aerodynamical, forcing proper orientation) which togeather with intentionally offset CoM allowed me to stay in correct orientation. However, the drag of whole pod was so ridiulously high, that while normally I would probably overshoot the target with FAR (since it lowers drag), I landed almost 300 km short of target. I had like 5G on flattest possible reentry trajectory and didn't even see reentry plasma. It worked almost like a parachute. Maybe you could allow to disable additional drag at specific node with a part.cfg parameter/module (name = FARNodeDrag; disableDrag = [node name])?

Thanks for info! That's good to know. I have a question about wing parameters: How to handle a part that is an actual wing, not a canard or such, that has built in control surfaces? Should I add both FARControllableSurface and FARWingAerodynamicModel or just FARControllableSurface?