Taverius

Hmm. Sure, I might do that. I'll take a look.

Dock from the front, we don't want free-floating panels, and splitting up the endcap supports would mean creating new geometry. Install deprecated parts, convert the craft to the new parts (some will be broken regardless), delete deprecated.

Lets play spot the probe core Issue #51: HX Command Bridge

... not really. Any old probe core hidden somewhere works, all you need is a SAS to keep it going the right way. They should, I don't think I broke anything major in the last few days. Backup your saves just in case.

All I can tell you there is that its not B9 - there's no way to set the stock alternator module to only work in one engine mode. FAR de-rates air-breathing engines by 50%, so this is normal. I'll make a note to change the description when FAR/NEAR are detected. I'll be happy to try the new sound FX Squad are adding for 0.25, but until then there's only like 4 we can use.

Do you have the base RPM mod installed? Its B9 patches can cause problems. We provide a file to blank them out but that only works if you overwrite the ones RPM provides. Otherwise there's a list on the wiki with the mods other people have found cause issues.

Some users had issues that we managed to track down to TweakScale - more than that, I really don't know, because we haven't had time to test it ourselves. Hopefully its just a matter of TweakScale learning how to manage parts with FS switchers in them.

No idea what's going on there, I suspect its the firespitter switchers messing with it. Nothing we can solve on our end anyway - none of us are coders.

Issue Tracker

I'm not interested in including TweakScale for one part - that kind of thing is for the TweakScale mod to cover. They're using the same stock Multi-mode module, so yeah. Compared to the RAPIER, better thrust, slightly higher mass. This because I actually balanced mine, and when Squad copied my part they just pasted the values from existing engines into it Air fuel consumption is slightly higher, but they can fly higher without flaming out. Tell it to RoverDude, please, after you make sure you're not just running out of memory. No? Don't turn on rocket mode? That's up to NKell, really, and he's tackling DRE configs first. We're co-ordinating for MFT/RF coverage, its coming. Main issue right now is ModularFuelSystems doesn't support tank cost, that has to be added.

It works fine for some, won't run at all for others, for no apparent reason. If it works for you, great! But we can't and don't support it.

P.S. R5.1 will include the relevant bits of Taverio's Pizza and Aerospace that make the stock jets not stupid.

That's correct. Even the D30 is a little OP - the highest speed achieved by anyone ever with a turbine engine is an unofficial record of an (Iranian, I believe) MiG escaping from an Israeli missile. The plane (briefly) achieved Mach 3.2 over the Sinai pensinsula, before the HP turbine stage overheated due to overspeed and spewed metal all over the countryside. The D-30F7 in B9 will top out at mach 4 ... the stock TJet will go way past mach 5, where even ramjets stop working due to hypersonic dissociation and the heating of the intake air from the deceleration to subsonic velocities. Sure. The SABRE intake is 10% larger than a ram-air, and is pointed 5 degrees down - since you're generally at something at or over 5 degrees of angle of attack, that gives better performance when you need it. Its designed to let you operate like the real ones, which have a final settle altitude before the climb to orbit of 26k. I suggest going to 23k, though, holding till you reach mach 5.5, and then dropping briefly to 20k before you smoothly start pulling up to 15-20 degrees pitch. Kerbin atmosphere isn't as tall, so you don't have the same lift at 26k as someone on earth would. Your speed should hold at mach 5.5-ish, and the thicker air will let you change pitch-up more without stalling. At about 28k you want to manually switch over to rocket mode - due to being past the peak thrust you can keep going for longer, but you won't be producing much thrust, so you won't be accelerating. Flown that way the HL spaceplanes can carry a red tank into 90km orbit with more than 1/2 their LFO left after circ. I'll make a wiki page when I have a little time about stuff like this.

Makes perfect sense, actually - even with them derated KSP jets have much better TWR than real jets, and you still need ~1/2 as much engine as you do in stock. That's kind of a limited-use thing, but here: +PART[B9_Utility_DockingPort_CDP]:NEEDS[B9_Aerospace] @name = B9_Utility_DockingPort_CDP_Small @rescaleFactor = 0.5 @title ^= :$: Jr.: @description ^= :$: Junior version, for baby planes!: @cost *= 0.6 @mass *= 0.125 @MODULE[ModuleDockingNode] { @nodeType = size0 } } Untested, but if you paste that into a new .cfg file and put it anywhere in GameData ModuleManager will create a scaled-down version.

I'm not sure what the use case would be of a Jr port in a pack with 200-ton spaceplanes? But if you can think of a compelling reason, sure, I'll think about it.

Blame squad for useless tooltips. TFE731/CF34: subsonic VA1: mach 1 and a bit if you're lucky F119: mach 2+ D30-F7: Mach3+ SABRE: SSTO The larger intakes are heavier because the connection strength depends on the mass of the part. Since you can stick landing gear to the DSIX, it has to be heavier. Likewise the RBM/RNM must be heavier because of their size and what you can stick to them. If you're using FAR/NEAR, drag won't change much since they're all roughly the same size. If you're not using FAR/NEAR, we have nothing to say to you because stock model is not supported (though we perform black magic maths with intake values to make it have the right drag, roughly speaking). As far as actual performance goes, only effective intake area matters, because ModuleResourceIntake is ...., and you cant actually differentiate by speed or anything else.

No. ATM does the low-resing for you, and caches it for future loads, so why would we do it manually when a plugin can do it for us and each user can tune it for his/her needs?

No, because you should be using ATM anyway.

Yep. Few tweaks I need to make before we package, and as you can see from recent posts the RPM configurations are not quite finalized yet, but its a matter of days.

Not the case when its attached to a stack node. Anyway, we don't want them to be compatible with stock docking nodes. Its quite intentional.

No. You can do this yourself by using only HX1 docking nodes and their alternate models. No. Largest stock node is size 2. Smallest HX node is 9. We will not sacrifice the stability of 50000-ton HX mega-structures so you can attach piddly little toy rocket parts to them. No. Its not very useful and we have more than enough parts. No. That's because there only IS one docking port per node adapter. Read the descriptions again.

Probably, since me and bac9 replace as much of stock with KW as possible.

That one is a bac9 original. B9 + SPP + BahamutoDynamics for the little pop-up engines around the B9 Atlas engine.

No to the first, yes to the second.

trunk is cvs-era terminology for the same thing, but yeah.