BudgetHedgehog

I managed to make some excellent landing legs for a large EPL ore tank with two of Bahas huge drills using IR and the long girders. Think spider legs. I can't wait until IR gets fixed.. Anyway, I'd be happy if there was at least one set that could clear the LV-N. They don't have to splay out too much or anything, I just want the height.. It gets annoying having to come up with some way of getting the engines placed high enough while keeping the CoM reasonably low..

Awesome, thank you! By 'any screen you'd like to default to latency off', do you mean like, the defRPM, Hyomoto and ALCOR patches?

Sooo any plans for this? Updates? Toolbar integration? I'd do it myself, but it's only danmy who can.. or this just considered dead now and I should stop holding out hope?

It should be \gamedata\000_toolbar\stuffandthings

Aww yis... lovely stuff! Is this getting it's own thread, as with previous MM updates?

The point is at max throttle, you should only be starting with about 1.3 TWR. Any higher is unnecessary weight. And launching small things is completely doable, you just have to scale down your engines as well to keep the 1.3 TWR at launch. If you want help and to stick with this, a picture of your craft in the VAB with the CoM and CoT enabled would help us help you design a better FAR rocket.

If you can't 'Control From Here' in the stock game (such as is the case with the AGU), there's nothing RPM can do. It only lists controllable parts and docking ports. Talking of which, there is no docking port on the claw, so you wouldn't be able to use a docking cam anyway.You're better off putting a cam outside pointing forward and using that or using the cupola pod (or the 1-2 one).

Do you have TweakableEverything installed? I had a KW fairing issue a while back, turned out TE was messing with the decouple force. If not, it's probably worth asking in the KW thread - as was pointed out to me earlier, FAR is an aerodynamics mod. It has literally zero effect in space. Second, your ascent method is what's screwing you up - you have too high a TWR at launch (especially with 2/3 throttle.. that's not just FAR, that's bad rocket design - you obviously don't need the extra 1/3 throttle, why have an engine that can give it? It's just extra weight to carry up) and are moving too fast and too high at the gravity turn. Seriously - ferram mentioned a very slow turn starting at about 50 m/s and not straying very far from prograde. This is what you should do. In actual fact, a bigger and heavier cargo (like nuclear reactors) can help with stability as it moves the CoM higher making it easier to control, as you found out. When your CoM is too low, you'll have trouble, especially with that ascent profile. You probably want to start turning at around 1km high or so - that should be when you're travelling between 50 and 100 m/s, providing your TWR is around 1.3 at launch (which it should be) and start turning veeeeeery gradually. Once you're about 10 degrees off vertical, I find it's actually better to turn off SAS and let the rocket fall into the correct angle by itself. By about 35km high, the air is much thinner so you'll need it back on to stabilise you again. Also, you do have stuff like fins at the bottom, right? They help point your rocket right tremendously. Try these and ferrams tips and see if they help. You'll be surprised how different a FAR launch is to stock once you know how to do it correctly.

Do you have MechJebRPM and SCANsatRPM installed as well?

Is there a way to turn latency mode off permanently? I find it annoying at best and always turn it off anyway :/ sorry to be a pain, because this one of my favourite mods

1, a fair point and a compromise I can live with 2, they are KW fairings and the sun was, I think, basically directly overhead. While it's true that even KW fairings have no collision mesh (like, at all, I think), I think some other panels weren't generating electricity. Mybe it'd if ferram were to include a line somewhere saying 'if a panel isShielded value=true, make it not produce electricity' or something, I dunno.. really quite a minor problem, I'll admit Yeah, that'd be why then - automatic engine fairings aren't recognised by FAR. And yeah, quite a minor little thing, I know that Ah, I see. Didn't realise it'd be that complicated - consider this struck from the record. Apologies ferram!

Hah, it happens to the best of us.. Recently, I was configuring some CoolRockets effects for KW engines.. change the value a little bit, load game, no visible change, change value more, reload game, still no change.. It took me a while before I realised I was editing a different cfg than KSP was loading. Glad yours is all working now though

Hey, ferram... I don't know why, but my engine is creating drag inside its fairing. Apparently, it's not shielded, which is interesting.. Also, don't know if this is something with FAR, but my solar panels can get sunlight inside their fairing DESPITE the isShielded value being true.. hmm...

Ah! Somehow I didn't see that option.. Silly me.. I'll give it a shot, thanks EDIT: works absolutely fine, panic over Also, I need to know if this is a problem with KAC or the stock game with its new persistent nodes: Basically, I have two crafts heading for Minmus. I sent up the first, burnt for Minmus and added the inclination change halfway. No problems there. Then I launched a second craft to Minmus, did exactly the same thing, still no problems. KAC records the nodes correctly and as far as I know, is working fine, but when I switch to the first ship, it now thinks the OTHER ships node is one of it's own. I'm crap at explaining, so here's some pictures: I'm pretty confident it's a problem with the stock game (KAC correctly shows just the two nodes, one per ship), but I wanted to confirm it here because I don't know if they'll accept this because my game's modded. If anyone has a stock version, could they try it out and confirm it please?

Ah yes, I see now. Well, I don't see why it wouldn't work in that case.. Sorry, I can't help you more

Not sure why you copied the bay code, rather than an actual part similar to what you want KASify, but I think I'm right in thinking you should use this code instead MODULE { evaPartPos = (0.0, 0.00, -0.15) evaPartDir = (0,0,-1) dropAtGroundPos = false dropPartPos = (0.0, 0.0, -0.55) dropPartRot = (-10.0, 0.0, 0.0) addPartMass = false storable = true storedSize = 3 attachOnPart = True attachOnEva = False attachOnStatic = False attachSendMsgOnly = False } What exactly is it you want to KASify? Do you want it to be a container or just something that can be carried and stored? Because this code is for the latter..

What does your KASModuleGrab code look like? Is it a MM config or direct cfg editing of the part?

Ahh thank you, much obliged!

That was posted 26th March, it doesn't refer to compatibility, more like 'what update plans for the future, if any, do you have for this mod and if you do, how are they going?'

Why not just save the craft you want to deliver as a normal craft, and the lifter as a subassembly? I can't see that being much different, apart from the fact you can already do it.

Why not just use the grabbing scenario that you already have?

*Fairings, and KW Rocketry has some fixed size ones.

Kind of... sometimes, just pressing F brings up the window, it's as if the game things Alt is already pressed. Need to Alt-F again to be able to change it.

Can you get a wiki or usage instructions up somewhere? I mean, I was following the dev thread so I know, but other might not. Anyway, for a tech tree idea, why not just follow the stock one? Put your solar panels at the same node as the stock ones, same with the discombobulator/SAS. Might need to think on the various engines and fuel tanks, but you'll need more of them to make a good decision.

Well, it's your project, you know.. your call!