JadeOfMaar

Size Grow is the plume's ability to change size during its lifetime. The higher the value, the faster it grows. It also accepts a negative value to make the particle contract or shrink (as far as -0.9999 but don't put -1 which will break the plume). I don't use Length Scale or Velocity Scale but I do use Max Size which controls how large the particle can get. Raising this setting is important for particles used on engines that the player will want to zoom in on because they look good. If you don't raise this for such plumes then the particles will become small and unsatisfying when the player zooms in. I guess Length Scale or Velocity Scale therefore affect how the particle's length and speed change when the player zooms in. A critical thing you'll want to do when you make your own particles is to add the checkbox to edit Gradient, and make a gradient curve (especially in the Alpha channel) so that your particles can visibly fade in and out over time. Look at this Imgur album of particles I created for trench flames under a super heavy rocket and be inspired.

You're trying to name the "WarpJet" engines. They use a magnetic rail system (resembling a Star Trek warp nacelle) to compress air and manipulate plasma streams, making a way to escape the need to combust oxygen to be useful. It's definitely a far future breed of air-breathing engine and is partly based in real concept propulsion tech. OPT's J-81 has an undefined and unreasonable combustion scheme but is finally going to be changed to resemble, in performance, something reasonable: a KSPI fusion aided ramjet. Its air-breathing mode will only require IntakeAtm and will require EC, and its rocket mode will only require EC and LiquidFuel (cease to require Oxidizer), and EC demand in both modes will be higher. Anyone who is willing and able is invited to create a config to give these engines more "realistic" behavior. I can do my part, where needed, by making the web of OPT Reconfig's engine patches not fire under a certain condition, and so won't complicate things for such patches. Show me your WarpJet config and I'll help you out. I'd like to say that there's a certain depth to my reasoning behind making the engines very OP. Part of which is in trying to make the engines attractive to players of up-scaled or highly expansive planetary systems, and I've seen many players who do well not to be bothered to spam engines as usual, to make a spaceplane fit for their purposes. I'm pretty interested in what it would look like-- a config that balances OPT's engines as if Nertea made them.

HOOOOLY. I don't even know anymore!

@timbrwolf1121 You should. If you have the right mods installed to enable them (and preferably not the WBI mods in Classic Stock mode).

@timbrwolf1121 WBI on the whole has 3 fuel switchers: ConvertibleStorage, MultipurposeStorage and OmniStorage. If any fuel switch mods are injecting their modules into WBI parts, those mods need to go.

@timbrwolf1121 I'll need to see your KSP.log (your mod list inside of this). I suspect you have the Kiwi Tech Tree which appears to add a fuel switch to all RCS thrusters, and which is making a mess with Endurance's RCS patches. But if this is happening with just the Ranger, I'm clueless. The Kerbalism EC problem above is easily solved by not using WBI Classic Stock with Kerbalism. (In short/tl;dr: These two systems define an Atmosphere resource, but Kerbalism's own is really low density, so many more units per second are used to make up the used mass per second, and EC per second is just a multiple of the units per second of the resource that has mass.) These two are not meant to mix, though I can patch around that.

@Adoelrome The thing about sunflares or lens flares is that particular properties of the viewer's lens creates them so ideally every star should have the same flare at a given time.

Wise guy. @king of nowhere ok you got me. I didn't easily remember all that. It really does suck a lot that the only actual airbrake is only for fighter planes and stunt planes to use.

I can understand the claim about the forum being single-minded, but the idea of using your airplane wheels as airbrakes (while very novel and interesting) is simply something that no one would reasonably or sensibly consider. That has no effect on aerodynamics. There is no visible animation associated with it (like deploying chutes or inflating a shield). If it does have an effect, the effect is so small that it's not worth your time to bother with. Closing intakes only matters to mods that give it a strategic value, like mods for exotic jet engines or mods that make it so letting reentry plasma in will destroy the engine. Oooh. I like this. Have you confirmed this in-game or is this info based solely on research? Having the CoM and CoL overlap is fine for stunt planes (as they need to be able to turn very easily at any time) but not for spaceplanes which need to be able to hold their attitude most of the time. That overlap is for purposeful aero instability which you don't want. Bring the CoM forward, and where possible, pull back the CoP ("Pressure" -> Drag). Parts that add to the CoP's position are adapters, cockpits, surface attached objects that have plenty forward/prograde surface area, and stack parts with protruding bits like the mk1 Divertless Supersonic Intake (a Mk1 tank with intake scoop). The more your CoL is behind the CoM, the more your plane can resist flipping over, but bring it too far back and you can't pitch at all --> "Lawn Dart Syndrome." Consider increasing your control surface area too. The more you can do aero deflection (for pitching) in thin atmo, the better.

@Oblate Prince If you're still looking for something to roll with, I'd highly recommend the Soviet concept air-launched spaceplane: Tupolev OOS. It's a very inviting (simple geometry) and promising design and there's decent room for slipping in new parts for modularity's sake (like a crew cabin. There will always be a demand for a high capacity cabin. As for IVAs, just use the placeholder. It'll be sufficient for many players just to get to see a crew portrait to know that there's a kerbal in the cabin or cockpit). As an air-launched spaceplane its engines are therefore high thrust vacuum engines (Poodles on steroids), very poor in thick atmo (unlike the stock Rhino or the SSME which are mid-range or sustainers). The body itself should definitely be just over 2.5m tall and over 3.1m from port to starboard (you can anticipate a great need for a spaceplane body that can hold 2.5m cargo and has lift surface, or a 2.5m-alike spaceplane body...which will, of course, hold < 2.5m cargo). Skipping the cockpit for a drone nose you can make it fill X-37's role with Tweakscale. With some adapters and/or angled engines it can fit the MAKS's role too.

It lives! At last!

@Sanwich Robot I'm unsure, but I'm leaning towards yes.

There are no plans. It's a waste of time for the part makers to make parts for experimental stuff that practically changes every few weeks, is only good for the brief time that they exist, and won't add actual progression or mission value to the game. The mod would become bloated with junked prototype parts.

@hemeac I considered Minor Planets Expansion actually (and forgot to name it in the changelog), and I polled a few guys in a planet modding Discord server. I anticipated that a LOX ocean would freeze out a big chunk of whatever atmosphere (other than Hydrogen or Helium) might happen to be with it so I ended up with variants to the LOX template.

Release 1.13.0 DOWNLOAD :: GitHub :: SpaceDock Added Antimatter presence to gas giant templates. Added LqdDeuterium presence to ice atmospheres. Added templates associated with Event Horizon: WormHole. Added templates associated with Galaxies Unbound: AtmOxygen (not for gas giants), AtmGasHelium, BlackHole, StarNeutron, StarCarbon, StarDyingRedGiant. Added templates for LOX oceans: OcnOxygen (pure), OcnOxygenC (with CO2 and various traces), OcnOxygenN (with Nitrogen). Note: configs for giving the templates to the bodies in the named planet mods have not been done. Added/updated explanations for templates on the wiki page.

Release 0.2 JNSQ support is in (featuring Lindor). Come and get it! DOWNLOAD :: GITHUB

@Idleness All correct.

@Ricarius I guess the author would have to fix/rebuild them. If they are fine without my tweakscale config then I have no suggestions, sadly. Perhaps some mod other than Tweakscale itself or AllTweak adds a Tweakscale module to AP+ parts.

@Ricarius I would advise not to install AllTweak.

@Ricarius That problem with craft files happens when its parts have carried Tweakscale modules with different settings/scaling present beforehand. The craft file is poisoned and must be replaced/rebuilt when the Tweakscale settings change. I presume you had AllTweak or the like installed before.

It would, yes. Rather, it would give extra, unwanted maths to the mass changes. The default values of OPT's own mass-rebalancer are all 1 (so no effect) and it's only available if you have RO installed (which I don't know yet if you do). The mass balancers conflicting or overlapping would (I hope) be error-free. (I've never had to install SMURFF). If your error is one that shows up in the in-game console, share your KSP.log/Player.log and perhaps I can help you to identify the cause by the error info. If your error is indeed directly related to SMURFF, then try this patch and let me know. If this works out I'll make OPT's mass re-balancer available without the need for RO. @PART:HAS[#manufacturer[OPT*Division]]:BEFORE[OPT_Reconfig]:NEEDS[SMURFF] { %SMURFFExclude = true }

@Soyuzturtle please ensure that you have the latest of OPT Reconfig (and I think, the latest of OPT Legacy). That problem has been fixed.

Please take support requests here.

@OhioBob @Gordon Fecyk I've had a B9PS problem on KSP 1.10.1, and I've seen complaints in other mod categories but all unique to this KSP version so (not-very-helpful-comment) I'm confident there are a few glaring base game bugs crawling around right now.

@Incarnation of Chaos I believe SMURFF on its own will affect OPT. For that not to happen, I believe there is a blacklist system that parts can be opted-into, and I haven't done that. However, there is a SMURFF-ish setup in OPT's RO configs for users to mess with because I don't know how much the parts should be made heavier or not for RO. @Ebo_ You must have CryoEngines installed without CryoTanks. Do one of the following to fix your issue: Uninstall CryoEngines. This will restore engines' need for LFO. Delete OPT_Reconfig/CRP/OPT_CryoEngine.cfg This will restore engines' need for LFO. Install CryoTanks. This will activate the LH2, LH2O tank options.