StevieC

it still happens to me. Frequently.

one thing I've noticed but I'm not sure whether it's a KSP bug or a bug with one of my addons, but maybe this addon can do something to fix the problem: I frequently am offered contracts to test one of the ground launch clamps, which are designed to STAY on the ground, but asking me to test them in-flight or even in orbit or on an escape trajectory. Is there any way to make the presence of a ground-clamp have the contract ONLY ask me to test such clamps at the launch site?

how does the "all colliders must be convex" rule in KSP v1.0.5 affect HGR & Corvus Extras?

this mod and Modular Fuel tanks seem to conflict a bit.

I hereby retract my earlier request to add more monopropellant to the SDHI Service Module. The reason I was seeing so little monoprop in it was because I had two mods installed that were conflicting with each other, namely Interstellar Fuel Switch & Modular Fuel Tanks. After removing Modular Fuel Tanks, the problem vanished and now the service module has 100 units of monoprop like I remember it having before.

Small issue I've uncovered. The life-support supply calculator seems unable to factor in the presence of fuel-cells, be they the fuel+oxidizer type, or the monopropellant type, in calculating how long a spacecraft's electrical-charge can sustain the crew.

The version of this mod delivered by CKAN seems to still have the aerospike adaptor and still lack the 1.25m smart solar panels.

I still wish we could have a 7-nozzle Pulsar in 1.0.5. Alas, some fantasies aren't meant to become reality I guess. To explain the reason why I was hoping for a 7-nozzle Pulsar, when Wernher von Braun was examining the early design of the Saturn V rocket, it only had 4 F-1 engines in its first stage. He asked why that middle space was empty, and why they hadn't put an engine there. Designers said that at that point, they had calculated that 4 engines would be enough to propel the vehicle. He told them, "By the time our first actual hardware is on the launch pad, it will need an extra engine in the middle to even get off the ground." Sure enough, the Saturn V ultimately did need that fifth engine to even lift off from the pad.

the version on CKAN still has the Pulsar as the cluster of six Hornet engines on a 2.5m mount, btw

ahh, there we go. Took a while to show up on CKAN for me as being 1.0.5 compatible but it's there now

be sure to report the update to CKAN too, please

one thing i WILL suggest now, however, is increasing the service module's capacity for monopropellant. Right now it stores less monoprop than the Mk1-2 capsule itself!

Okay, On re-entry with a Kerbin periapsis of 35 km on a free-return trajectory 'round the Mün, the SDHI heat-shield is completely depleted of ablative slightly before I reach Kerbin periapsis, so the numbers controlling the speed at which ablative gets consumed need tweaking because the stock heat-shield has the same amount of ablative (800 units) and lasts me all the way to the ground with a comfortable amount to spare. but I posted this BEFORE reading sumghai's latest post, was reporting on the heat-shield of the version I had downloaded last night. Will try the new heat-shield now.

Pity. I had been hoping to build a Kerbal-X style launch vehicle with a 7-engine Hornet cluster on its 2.5m diameter core, surrounded by an asparagus staged booster pack of six more Hornet engines.

Created a file named SDHI_SMS_MMPatch_DockingTarget.cfg, copypasted sumghai's cfg sample-code, and threw it into the MM_configs folder. Worked fine with Docking Target installed. Now starting the game without docking target installed to check if that works too. If it does work, that'll be a perfect little touch for the 3.1 release! Finished testing the LES and it works like a charm. Okay I just finished getting into orbit and that docking target .cfg patch works perfectly. Now to test the heat-shield. I decided for now to wait until morning to try a free-return trajectory 'round the Mün (it's almost half-past midnight where I live) but will do a simple re-entry from Low Kerbin orbit now to test the heat-shield that way before I go to bed.

From first-hand experience, the target is in the correct position if you just put this in the .cfg file just before the actual model of the docking-port itself, no need to enter any coordinates, it'll already be in the right place. MODEL { model = FederalProductions/Parts/DockingTarget/COAS_Target position = 0,0.19,0 scale = 1,1,1 rotation = 0,0,0 } All it needs is the conditionals to detect the presence or absence of the docking-target plugin.

S'okay. I manually tweak the parachute-equipped clamp-o-tron's .cfg file to add the docking target in my installation. The part that I don't know how to add is the conditionals that would automate the detection of the docking-target addon to determine whether to try to render the model for it. I'll make do for now with my manual tweak.

One other small thing that'd be appreciated is if you could put something in the Parachute Clamp-o-tron to detect this addon and put its main feature on that model when detected.

Stock heat-shield numbers are: 800 units of ablator standard supply (it's also the max amount of ablator that you can have on a 2.5m stock heat-shield) lossExp= -7500 lossConst = 0.1 pyrolysisLossFactor = 6000 reentryConductivity = 0.01 ablationTempThresh = 500 Not sure if those numbers are of any help to you in figuring out what makes a good heat-shield but that's the stock heat-shield numbers and it holds up decently enough. Haven't gotten to testing the heat-shield yet, myself. Been testing the launch escape system. Will be launching my capsule with service module into orbit shortly and then trying re-entry. Will edit this post to include my results with the heat-shield numbers that sumghai put into this pre-release build.

Small request. Can you build a few small solid-fueled retro-rockets into the "SDHI Service Module Adaptor" to propel whatever stage we're jettisoning away from the command and service modules? Nothing too big, just asking enough to nudge the circularizing stage of a low-kerbin orbit booster back down to a sub-orbital trajectory, so something similar to the solid-fueled engines built into the command-module fairing that protects it from the escape tower's exhaust plumes?

Small tweak I'd like to suggest for the Pulsar. Add a 7th Hornet in the middle of the hexagon, and possibly rename it "Honeycomb"?

In my earlier post with the findings of changing the stock Mk 1-2 pod's mass, that bottom set of RCS is from the RLA Stockalike Pack, the upper ones are from Nertea's Near Future Spacecraft Parts pack. In my most recent post, they're all from the RLA Stockalike Pack

yep. do that and it'll be perfect.

Doesn't matter 'cuz I found a better setup, keeping the Command module at stock mass of 4 tons dry, implementing Kerbas ad Astra's suggestion to keep the service module's mass at 1.1 tons but shift its center-of-mass from -0.2 to -0.6, and using these instead. nertea's Near Future Spacecraft Components gave me the ones on the service module. The ones attached to the docking port are from RLA StockAlike

Interesting. Now to switch the Mk 1-2 pod's mass back to stock and try the CoM offset changes to the service module.