Wanderfound

Screenshots of the rocket in the VAB would help. When this is happening, what is your speed, altitude and angle of attack?

Thanks! Mostly working so far, but a couple of things I've noticed: * No paint for the standard nacelle. * The paint jobs for the Mk1 cockpit are rough enough that I suspect that the wrong file got someplace. Using single-colour cockpits for now. Collecting all of the required Kerbpaint patches (landing gear etc) into a single download would be very helpful. Or does the latest patch include the previous ones? So far so good, though.

Small cargo bay + drone core. Or use the specialised SP+ one. Saves wear and tear on your Kerbals while prototyping. Failing that, a decoupler behind the cockpit, some parachutes and a few Sepratrons to get clear.

Have you considered combining Science Box and Bombs? An air-deployable science probe with a micro command core.

Enjoy. https://www.dropbox.com/s/g6cfdj0ioz3be0k/Kerbodyne%20Essence%20SPR.craft?dl=0

Has there been any alteration to aero or thrust apart from the re-weighted wings? I'm getting a lot of high-altitude instability and nose tuck, which might just be inadequately adapted designs, but... - - - Updated - - - Dynamic Control Authority. Winds down your control inputs as you speed up.

This is my project for the month. Rather than exact conversions, it's likely to be "in the theme of". Expect a big tanker, small sportster, trainer, long range cargo, passenger, etc. Still working out the bugs with the tweaked Ferram, though. My new designs work, but they're a bit trickier to fly than I'd like. Don't want to post substandard stuff. I've got a nice little aerobatic sportster that I'll chuck up later, though. The new tougher wings let you get away with some crazy stuff. Does anyone have a list of where the new parts come in the tech tree? I'd like to do some low-tech things for the career players.

Then you need to learn how to fly. It's plenty doable, though:

Controls: tap, never hold unless you need absolute maximum pull. You've got three control settings: normal, precise and trim. Most of the time you should be using normal (after trimming for level flight), controlling the turn by altering the rate of your taps. If the situation is so extreme that this will break your wings, hit Ctrl to engage precise controls and keep tapping. Holding down a button with precise controls on gets you just as much turn as without precise control, just a bit slower, so don't do it. If even precise controls are breaking your wings, use trim. Alt-up or whatever and again, tap tap tap. In all cases, watch the G-meter more than the nav ball. When it approaches dangerous levels, stop tapping and wait for it to settle. Aim to keep it steady rather than surge and plunge.

Ferram altered the weight of wings in order to account for the newly increased strength. All old designs will need to be rebalanced.

It'd have to be a cluster bomb, surely. Or possibly a bunch bomb.

I've been finding timewarp a bit more dangerous than usual as well, but it may just be my imperfect quick new designs. The weight change is going to upset the balance of every existing plane design. The wings still flex under timewarp; you need strutting for aesthetics if you're flying a jigsaw winged ship that way. Otherwise we can dispense with the struts; major part count saving.

There are some other features I'd like to see to make time more of an issue in the game. * Scientific experiments that require particular equipment to be in a certain place at a set time. Advance planning can save fuel, but last-minute overburns work too. Especially if the slow mission that was planned to deliver the instruments just crashed. * Urgent rescue/intercept/divert missions that need to be launched immediately and succeed first time. Save the out-of-power spacecraft, deliver supplies to the damaged space station, drop firefighting foam on the power plant. Etc.

Is that the purpose of strategies, though? You could have had the same tech boost by tweaking % science rewards or starting science in the difficulty screen. But I think the strategies can be more than just shortcuts and customisation options. A bit of actual strategy by the player is required if they get the balance right.

Not quite part-for-part, but... Stock Benchmark: Tuned-up SP+ version: Stock fuel tanker: SP+ Tanker:

That sounds like a bug. I'm finding the new tapered swept wings very good for small aerobatic planes. And when you combine them with some strakes and the parallelogram swept wings, you can make some very nice big stuff. I haven't found a spot yet where the square SP+ control surfaces won't fit. They go fine mounted on reversed strakes stuck in between flanking RAPIERs and a central nuke.

Fresh downloads of everything this morning, but no idea if that was pre- or post-bug (where is the bug mentioned?). Redownloading... I've been enjoying Ferram's recalibrated aero failures, though; casually getting away with tricks that were guaranteed wing-rippers previously. He may have gone too far. It seems like half of what I use most (RCS Build Aid, Kerbal Flight Data, etc) is reliant on Blizzy's Toolbar. Hope that gets up soon.

The Soviets had recurring issues with damaged launchpads as well. There's already a toggle in the opening screen to disable building damage. Anyone who doesn't like it can turn it off.

That is why the black bit is there, too; it's a visual alignment guide. Shuffle the wings together until the black bar disappears and you have 'em as close as you can get them without inducing flicker. Sometimes I want the black line, sometimes I don't, and even when I don't it's easy to get rid of and useful.

So now that you've got the tree revealed, care to share with us exactly where in the tech tree the new parts are found?

Just tried it again with a fresh download and clean install. Crash on load, before any incompatibility warning. Output log at https://www.dropbox.com/s/4whbre8kasq497h/output_log.txt?dl=0

If you wind the difficulty down to easy level, and it's easy, then it is working fine right off the bat. If the "too easy" goes away on hard mode, then it isn't a problem.

Yup. Paddock landings need to be stickier/bumpier/more slippery. At present, it's easier to land next to the KSC runway than on it.

I've had a few aerodynamic surprises as well; the first one I put up had a strange pitching oscillation, and the second would roll like a drunken sailor on takeoff. The weird thing is that they were both very close in design to planes that were perfectly stable pre-update. There are some subtle differences between the mod and stock SP+ parts that are going to take some getting used to. I think Ferram may have fiddled with wing mass, too.

It does look like they've failed to get the science/funds exchange rate right. What difficulty settings are you playing on?