blowfish

Latest iteration of my cargo delivery spaceplane. Figured out that having a cockpit helps balance out the engines and wings (which are toward the back) nicely. Between that, various utilities (reaction wheels, probe core, batteries), and a secondary cargo bay (useful for satellites which weight next to nothing), the CoM is centered almost perfectly on the main payload and doesn't change as fuel drains.

When do you loose control? It looks like your rocket would become unstable after solid booster separation because those have the fins.

Sounds like an outdated firespitter.dll

Yes, I suppose I should make the distinction between "impossible" and "unreliable." In any case it's not officially supported.

I don't know a way to see overall drag (except multiplying dynamic pressure * reference area * Cd as seen in the FAR flight data window), but there is a way to see the drag of individual parts. In the space center scene, click the FAR button and somewhere there should be a show aero forces option. When enabled, you can right click a part in flight and FAR will tell you how much drag and lift (where applicable) a part is creating.

They definitely create drag, but less than you might think. Remember, Cd (what is highlighted in yellow) is referenced to (usually) surface area, so a small part that isn't very aerodynamic will be highlighted even if it's creating much less drag than other parts. It also matters less with rockets because you're not going as fast at the same altitude - by the time you pick up speed you're already above most of the atmosphere.

It looks like Kerbal Engineer or TweakScale is to blame, and probably TweakScale.

For most updates, you should be fine to just rerun dds4ksp on the folder and it'll re-convert everything. There are occasional cases where a particular update will move or delete a texture in which case you're in trouble but this is rare. DDS textures have to be flipped vertically in KSP for some reason. Not sure why. They look correct in-game.

It does work in 0.90 assuming you have an up-to-date firespitter.dll. The "toggle heatshield" button doesn't do anything except change the texture. I think if you wanted to add a heatshield you'd have to add it in by hand with a MM cfg, though it would be there all the time rather than switchable.

It would probably be possible to use an aerospike nozzle on an engine like the SABRE, but would that provide any benefit over the planned expansion/deflection nozzle?

I don't think the S2W shape lends itself very well to wide rolling payloads, since the bottom isn't flat (this would also mean that any ramp would need to have a very complicated shape. If you're trying to transport big rovers, I might recommend nertea's MkIV system. - - - Updated - - - SXT already has one if you're interested, and what do you mean by SABRE compatible?

I'll consider it, but it seems like a very specific use case. Is the 8m one in B9 too long for you? I've been contemplating this for a while, so it'll probably happen eventually. The hard part of a cylinder with textures is the textures though, and that's the weakest part of my design process right now. - - - Updated - - - Thanks - I'll try that. For now I've just been sorta approximating the CoM visually but this will definitely help.

I haven't used the KW struts specifically, but my experience with the B9 struts (which still use the old code) is that they still work.

You can do science with FMRS, but only once. The key is to make the dropped pod your primary vessel. Make sure your dropship is flying stably, then, upon separation, focus on the payload - FMRS gives you 10 seconds to select which vessel is the main one. Let the plane fly out of physics range, land the payload safely, then switch back to the plane and land it. Recover, and you should be brought back to the payload with no restrictions. This won't work if you're trying to do multiple drops of course.

Unwrapped, AO baked, imported into KSP, producing thrust, gimbal working. Now comes the hard part, AKA texturing.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92630?p=1732204&viewfull=1#post1732204

Ah, sorry, confused you with achroma, who's issue was coming from the DaMichelsFuselage mod. If you don't have this mod, then there's something else in your install telling MM that RF or MFT is installed even though it isn't. You've deleted the B9 patch, but there are plenty of other mods this could cause a problem for if you don't figure out what it is.

It looks like DaMichel fixed the issue recently. Probably best to update in case you run into other mods with RF patches.

DaMichelsFuselage mod is telling ModuleManager that RealFuels is installed. You should report this in the thread for that mod. The patches should be @PART[Whatever]:NEEDS[RealFuels but instead they're @PART[Whatever]:FOR[RealFuels]. The FOR keyword tells MM that that mod is installed, hence all of the B9 patches for RF are activating even though RF isn't actually installed. - - - Updated - - - Try it with the stock 6 way hub, and you'll get the same result. The only option is to (a) rotate it until it attaches, which probably ruins symmetry, or ( enable part clipping. Not much B9 can do to fix it...

Okay, I think I know what's going on. It's an issue with stock intake drag, explained here. Try this patch (hoisted from B9): @PART[mk2_ramIntake]:NEEDS[!FerramAerospaceResearch&!NEAR] { // Set unitScalar to default if its not present @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake]:HAS[~unitScalar[]] { unitScalar = 0.2 } // set maxIntakeSpeed to default if not present @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake]:HAS[~maxIntakeSpeed[]] { maxIntakeSpeed = 100 } @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake] { massRatio = #$/mass$ @massRatio /= 0.01 // area, / (mass ratio) @area /= #$massRatio$ // default is 0.2, * sqroot(mass ratio) unitScalarRatio = #$massRatio$ @unitScalarRatio != 0.5 @unitScalar *= #$unitScalarRatio$ // default is 100, * (unitScalar + sqroot(mass ratio)) / (unitScalar + 1) maxIntakeSpeedFirst = #$unitScalar$ @maxIntakeSpeedFirst += #$unitScalarRatio$ maxIntakeSpeedSecond = #$unitScalar$ @maxIntakeSpeedSecond += 1 @maxIntakeSpeed *= #$maxIntakeSpeedFirst$ @maxIntakeSpeed /= #$maxIntakeSpeedSecond$ // cleanup variables !massRatio = delete !unitScalarRatio = delete !maxIntakeSpeedFirst = delete !maxIntakeSpeedSecond = delete } } @PART[turboRamJet]:NEEDS[!FerramAerospaceResearch&!NEAR] { // Set unitScalar to default if its not present @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake]:HAS[~unitScalar[]] { unitScalar = 0.2 } // set maxIntakeSpeed to default if not present @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake]:HAS[~maxIntakeSpeed[]] { maxIntakeSpeed = 100 } @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake] { massRatio = #$/mass$ @massRatio /= 0.01 // area, / (mass ratio) @area /= #$massRatio$ // default is 0.2, * sqroot(mass ratio) unitScalarRatio = #$massRatio$ @unitScalarRatio != 0.5 @unitScalar *= #$unitScalarRatio$ // default is 100, * (unitScalar + sqroot(mass ratio)) / (unitScalar + 1) maxIntakeSpeedFirst = #$unitScalar$ @maxIntakeSpeedFirst += #$unitScalarRatio$ maxIntakeSpeedSecond = #$unitScalar$ @maxIntakeSpeedSecond += 1 @maxIntakeSpeed *= #$maxIntakeSpeedFirst$ @maxIntakeSpeed /= #$maxIntakeSpeedSecond$ // cleanup variables !massRatio = delete !unitScalarRatio = delete !maxIntakeSpeedFirst = delete !maxIntakeSpeedSecond = delete } }

Are you using FAR? If so, try the dev version on Github. There was an issue with intake drag that has been fixed since 0.14.6.

So wait. You can see the fuel switch options in the VAB/SPH, but they don't carry over in-flight? If firespitter wasn't working outright, you wouldn't see them at all, so this would seem to be more complicated. 1) Do the tanks show up as empty or do the tanks not show up at all and 2) Could you post output_log.txt?

If they're using the stock engine modules then more intakes will help. If they use FSEngine I'm quite sure - FSEngine makes thrust decrease as the air thins regardless of how many intakes you have. So if the engine in question does use FSEngine, I guess the question to ask is does it flame out (in which case intakes would help) or is it just not producing much thrust (intakes won't help).

What do you mean radial engines? If it's a rocket engine then intakes won't effect it. If it's a jet (i.e. it uses the IntakeAir resource), then more intakes will improve high altitude performance.

It's really a soft cap. You only get 10% of any thrust gains above 400 kN. Without it you'd be getting 4 MN out of that engine. Isp stays the same though, so you're not sacrificing fuel efficiency.