DDE

AVC reports a v1.8.5. Again.

NASA's tri-modal nuclear thermal rocket (Triton) design. Should be easy to mod it in based on the LANTR, except for the "reverse alternator" which works only when not thrusting. Ven's overhaul already has the 0.625 m generating Shiba.

So, once you've created a jet that can survive working on Eve, may you consider the Holy Grail of Spaceborne Atomic Propulsion? * starts making explosion noises *

Apparently it's chronic.Surprisingly, they still work as advertized.

Hello, Paul. Why are you - and pretty much only you - use Hydrogen and not the usual LlqH2 resource found in MKS?

PROFIT! There's also a config for Taurus-series thin 3.75 m fuel tank. /Added///////// @PART[CryoXBigmodule] { !RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {} !RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 3600,440;7200;8800 basePartMass =3.6 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[CryoXmedmodule] { !RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {} !RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 2160,2640;4320;5280 basePartMass =1.9 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[CryoXnoseConemodule] { !RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {} !RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 536,655;1072;1310 basePartMass =0.73 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[CryoXsmallmodule] { !RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {} !RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 1080,1320;2160;2640 basePartMass =0.9 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[CryoXendButtmodule] { !RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {} !RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 424,518;848;1036 basePartMass =0.5 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[Size3TinyTank] { !RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {} !RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 810,990;1620;1980 basePartMass =1.15 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[OscarEtank]:FINAL { !MODULE[FSfuelSwitch] {} } @PART[OscarDtank]:FINAL { !MODULE[FSfuelSwitch] {} } @PART[OscarDtank]:FINAL { MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 54,66;108;132 basePartMass =0.075 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } @PART[OscarEtank]:FINAL { MODULE { name = FSfuelSwitch resourceNames = LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;LiquidFuel;Oxidizer resourceAmounts = 108,132;216;264 basePartMass =0.15 displayCurrentTankCost = false hasGUI = true availableInFlight = false availableInEditor = true showInfo = true } } However, CrossFeedEnabler has had rather absurd results - the plugin is enabled for: Stock Monoprop tanks (not even needed); The added mini-Monoprop tank (added for testing purposes); The Long LF tank, and only it; The "wet" wing strake, but not the full-size wings; //Powered by ialdabaoth's ModuleManager @PART[radialRCSTank]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[rcsTankRadialLong]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[RadialMonoMini]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[RadialLF]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[RadialLFO]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[RadialLFLong]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[RadialLFOLong]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[airlinerMainWing]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[wingShuttleDelta]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } @PART[wingShuttleStrake]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %MODULE[ModuleCrossFeed] { %name = ModuleCrossFeed } } // NOTE: Normally, radial decouplers have crossfeed (HUH!?) so that could be bad. // I turn it off here, so you don't get weird effects. @PART[radialDecoupler1-2|radialDecoupler|radialDecoupler2]:FOR[CrossFeedEnabler] { %fuelCrossFeed = False }

Alright, this might sound really stupid, but: why are the antennas so big? New Horizons runs with a 2.4 meter dish. The Voyagers - 3.7 m. Yes, I know I can reconfigure the settings, and I plan to do so, but before that I'd like to hear your opinion. And I wouldn't be surprised if it were merely for the sake of balancing.

Alright, I think the solution does not lie in that direction. Because I did add the "final" bit, and it now seems I have TWO Firespitter modules per part, one with minifueltank (Oscar values and one with the values I've just written in with :FINAL. Sadly I have to point the finger at Ven and his part arrangement, which subordinates the D and E tanks to B.

Here to bother you again, Ven. I'm trying to hack together MM configs to get this to work with: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/121321-Stock-Fuel-Switch http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/76499-1-0-CrossFeedEnabler-v3-3-May-11 In case of the former, I've been completely successful with all the adapters and the Cryo series, but the existing config for the Oscar-B ends up applied onto D and E (resulting in all of them having equal capacities). In case of the latter, I am at loss for words. It used to work - through some black magic, because when I've written the file again, it doesn't seem to work. So, aside from being very happy to see such configs in 1.8.2, I could also use a nudge in the right direction. Most engines get two attachment nodes, one above the other, and one of them spawns that tankbutt. Try juggling that part up and down. The problem is chronic for the nuke, though. Also, I thing the LV-909 needs a 2.5 m tankbutt.

Thus far it seems that the stock RT-lite won't even have integrated omnis in probe cores. So we're probably going to have to go down the path of an integrated mini-DT-10.

Well, it seems that with the approach of 1.1 and its integrated mini-RT, you're going to have to focus on the RT stuff. ...no pressure ...right. Anyway, the original impactors (Luna-2-style) carried no actual scientific equipment for the surface. So what you need is a science trigger for anything crashing into the orbital body.

Whoops, I meant the DP-10. RT includes the Flight Computer. It can hold directions like SmartASS, and has a forced action execution setting. So, I'm seeing the procedure as: Decouple from main probe, remain in range of ersatz-DP-10. Retroburn Set FlightComp to Prograde-Surface Set forced delay to, say, 3 h Schedule antenna activation; it appears in the action schedule at current signal delay plus forced delay Set delay back to 0 s Deploy airbrakes, decouple the tank and ditch the ersatz-RT-10; decoupling occurs after only the mandatory signal delay Penetrator descent Radio activates ??? PROFIT!!! So what I'm proposing is an omnidirectional antenna wrapped around the fuel tank.

Alright, my experience with RemoteTech probes is rather bad - mostly due to parachutes and bouncing, though - but is it possible to add the equivalent of an RT-10 onto the tank, and then order a delayed activation of the penetrator's own antenna before separation?

Just out of curiosity, then, how do you use MM to edit the Firespitter Fuel Switch modules?

Well, if by the service compartment you mean DERP's thruster unit, then it makes perfect state, because I was hoping for a parachute! I really don't understand the motivation behind ditching the parachute landing; sorry if this has been already explained.

To continue my complaints, with stock aerodynamics the pod spins around into service compartment-first. Don't know if a glitch.

Hey, Roverdude! Why neither the Survivability pack nor the generic Containers (bundled with MKS, IIRC) no longer support TAC LS?

Wait, how we are supposed to land then? Also, could RoverDude bring back TAC-LS compatibility? Reverting to the pre-1.0 version I should have on file.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=481353505 Unless I aim for one of RPM's buttons, that frame in the window lights up green. And, since I can't explain myself better, I'll keep it simple: I don't like the visual changes you've made to the general appearance of solar panels, and miss both the colour of the panel and their reflectivity (yours seem to be almost non-reflective).

BUG REPORT: Disappearing tankbutts - see thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/125847-Fairings-and-Tank-Butts-Disappear Also, a couple of aesthetic requests: could you please alter the IVAs to remove the new frames of the viewports from sight? Right now they are blatantly visible on some of the pods. And could your panels have the same gleam as stock ones? I even tried to unpruned them. Also, please fix the clamp-o-chute. Without it, the LES blast cover fits poorly. Also, its decoupler is OP in its normal setting. Awaiting eagerly for the 1.0.4-approved version.

Additional thread: http://steamcommunity.com/app/220200/discussions/0/598198356180941441/ Relevant mod: Ven's Stock Part Revamp (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92764-1-0-2-Stock-Part-Revamp-Update-1-8-1%21) Basically, during my Mun and Minmus missions I noticed a rather disturbing glitch with no practical effect - the fairings on the command pods' shields disappeared, leaving a gap between the shield and decoupler. Later, the fairings on interplanetary probes also disappeared. I have also consistently observed the tank butts from the abovementioned mod to disappear, leaving the engine similarly hanging at a distance from the tank. Finally, I observed the behavior of a 6.25 m NTR on a 1.25 m tank while putting a probe into a polar munar orbit. The tank but on it remained in place for the duration of transit, but once I switched to and from another munar satellite, the butt was gone. No, it does not happen in LKO. UPDATE: Glitch still present for tankbutts in 1.0.4.

Weird. The fairing icon is the one previously used for fuel tanks? Also, isn't it no more relevant in 1.0, now that there are memory-sucking overheat bars for everything?

*headdesk* Thanks. The resulting system is a bit temperamental, but works. Also, this just bugs me: why are radiators listed in staging as fairings?

Pics? http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=462323872 The decoupling system works as it should. The node is supposed to trigger the fairing. And yet there is no visible fairing.

Good day, Randazzo. The fairings on the multinodes in 0.24 fail to show up. The functionality is otherwise impeccable. Staying with 0.23 for now. Mod list: Adjustable Landing Gear, Atomic Age, EVE, Chatterer, CRP, Crossfeed Enabler, DMagic Orbital Science, Firespitter, Fusebox, Heat Management (duh), RPM, KAS, KIS, KJR, Klockhead Martian Shuttle Engines (culled), AVC, MechJeb 2, DPAI, Near Future Electrical (culled), Solar, Ships; RealChute, RemoteTech, SCANSat, Smart Parts, Stage Recovery, Stock Bug Fixes, TAC Fuel Balancer, Throttle Controlled Avionics, Life Support; Trajectories, KAC, Universal Storage, Ven's Stock Revamp, Vessel View, Wheel Sounds, Stock Fuel Switch, MJ and KER For All. I imagine there's a compatibility conflict in there. What have you derived the fairings from? Edit: reverted to vanilla 1.0.2, installed today's download of 0.24. The situation is the same. Also, am I correct to presume that the upcoming model update will not break anything already built?