bigyihsuan

I have this patch that sets every feature to be unlocked on the start tech node, and applies it to everything that has MechJeb on it: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[MechJebCore],!MODULE[KerbalEVA]]:FINAL { %MODULE[MechJebCore] { %MechJebLocalSettings { %MechJebModuleCustomWindowEditor { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleSmartASS { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleManeuverPlanner { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleNodeEditor { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleTranslatron { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleWarpHelper { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleAttitudeAdjustment { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleThrustWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRCSBalancerWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRoverWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleAscentGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleLandingGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleSpaceplaneGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleDockingGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRendezvousAutopilotWindow { %unlockTechs = start } %MechJebModuleRendezvousGuidance { %unlockTechs = start } } } } AFAIK these are all the features with unlock techs. The important part is setting the unlockTechs field to the tech node you want it to unlock at, and making sure to target everything that has MechJebCore.

This should work in theory (it has not been tested): (spoiler for big code block)

Think this could be put onto CKAN?

Hoo boy up to 25 launches per year? That's a launch every 2 weeks! I can't wait for Starship launch tests to become as routine as Falcon 9 launches.

Ooo new tree. Might check it out on a JNSQ run.

It replaces the stock system.

Note that the main branch doesn't have the new 1.14 parts in properly assigned nodes yet (that's what I'm working on), and it's using its "best guess" automatic tech node placement. I will consider moving Mercury a tier earlier.

Reposting from the Skyhawk thread since I'd like some ideas:

Still working on the Skyhawk update for BDB 1.14, and I've been wondering about game balance, especially in the context of historicity. As it is right now, the Delta IV is unlocked at the same time as Saturn V, and Atlas V with the Saturn IB. For post-Saturn V nodes, there's only 3 nodes. The ETS stuff very obviously will go in the post-Saturn V nodes, but I'm not sure if there's enough space for Delta IV and Atlas V. Since they came out around the same time, I think they should be put in the same post-Saturn V tier. Thoughts?

I'm actually working on a MR for BDB 1.14 specifically, here: https://github.com/CessnaSkyhawk/SkyhawkScienceSystem/pull/84 (early days, started it an hour or so ago) I'm planning on splitting up the BDB file into multiple files based on rocket families; it's simply too large in its current state.

IT'S HERE! 1.14 IS HERE! Maybe it's time to finally get Skyhawk updated and the ETS parts moved to their proper places.

Skyhawk already starts unmanned, there's no need for UnKerballed Start with Skyhawk.

(Preface: my goal is to combine this with the existing Skyhawk Kerbalism config pack.) So, from what I understand, is that Kerbalism turns on anything that's defined in the Profile module? So, that means I should strip out everything in Skyhawk Kerbalism's Profile module that does not exist in the ModularScience's Profile module? Or completely replace the contents of the Skyhawk Profile with the ModularScience profile?

There's a tech node fairly early on that unlocks the hydrolox switch. What mod are the tanks from? Some mods aren't affected by the hydrolox switch config.

I mainly use the Community Category Kit tabs and that covers 90% of my use cases. The other 9% is searching by mission/probe name and the 1% is by a series of parts (usually station parts like the Gemini station stuff and Skylab). I'd be nice to see Centaurs with Atlases etc when searched, even better if it shows up in the CCK tab. It would also be nice to search for specific stages, so if I search "saturn ii" it should show all the parts related to the Saturn II stage (tank, adapters, couplers, docking ports, RCS, etc).

Blackrack's volumetric clouds mod also adds in (cosmetic) weather.

For the poll, my answers are: Vanilla Kerbalism Config Science (but you do you with SIMPLEX) No ISRU, no harvesters, no nothing. Just science and transmission. No stress, no radiation, no part breakdowns, no life support. But the poll had it as required, so I selected stress. Ideally, it should be a drop-in replacement/config option for Kerbalism: if I took Science-Only Kerbalism, and installed it with a Kerbalism pack that has science configs, it should have nothing but science. No radiation, no part failures, no stress, no life support (I want to use Snacks instead).

I wonder what the fastest trajectory is to the Moon and back? Free-return trajectory and 5 days (Apollo 13)? Imagine taking the week off of work for a casual swing-by of the Moon

Going full sideways in the atmosphere is a sign of PVG pitching too fast because it thinks the predicted TWR is higher that it actually is. A fix for this is either-inclusive-or: increasing pitch start velocity (100m/s is what I use), decreasing pitch angle rate (0.5 deg/s usually, but 0.25 dec/s for rockets with particularly weak 2nd stages), or increasing final orbit altitude (200km for inclinations close to/perpendicular to KSC, 300-400km for inclinations that need a major dogleg, like RSS equatorial orbits). Any or all of these can help, it'll need tuning for the specific rocket you're using. Using the Attach Altitude option can also help, as that specifies the altitude the rocket will be when PVG finishes orbital insertion. (By default, PVG tries to finish orbital insertion at periapsis.) I frequently use the Titan 3/4 stack with UA120s, and often the combined LR87 and SRBs' high TWR towards the end of the SRB burn tends to make the PVG pitch down too far. I highly recommend clicking the "Reset Guidance" button right after SRB separation to get the PVG to recalculate using the LR87 burn. This should get the rocket pitching back up to the correct attitude once it finishes recalculating. This also applies, but less so, to any other rocket with SRBs. For example, I usually don't have this problem with the Delta II with all 9 GEM boosters, but I do it anyway because it gives more accurate results.

I use PVG all the time, with the caveat that I'm doing it on scaled systems (2.5/2.7x and 10x), and often with Skyhawk hypergolics, Cryofuels, or Real Fuels. I've been able to get most of the implemented rockets in BDB to orbit just fine (Atlas-Agena/Centaur, Delta II, Saturn V, Saturn IC, and most variants of Titan are the most reliable ones). Most of the time I have to have a coast phase after the 1st or 2nd stages due to how small the planets are on 2.5/2.7x (not needed on 10x, with Real Fuels and such). Most of my launch failures are due to the stack being wobbly (usually the Titan 2nd stage decoupler for some reason being really weak for a 1.825m part), staging SRBs too early, or setting the Atlas skirt auto-decoupler G force value too low (not enough TWR in the sustainer). Are you doing it on 1x-scaled? What usually happens when you try to use PVG? (Are you using FAR?)

Idea: Split Transtage into 2 parts: the AJ10 variant and an integrated fuel tank containing everything else. This would allow for interstage stuff, and reduce certain headaches since Transtage is no longer an engine. (this is not a serious suggestion but it would be cool)

Will this come to CKAN?

I'd imagine that any byproducts in the tank would either be shot out with the rest of the LOX, and/or drained with leftover LOX when landed. Though, solid ice is a thing, which can be a problem with the "shoot it out with the rest of the LOX" plan. ...Hmm, does water ice float on LOX?

Maybe it's due to the old Scatterer version? I do know that JNSQ has been stuck on 0.7xx because no one's been around to migrate the Scatterer configs to 0.8xx.

Positively salivating to use this in Skyhawk career