Absolution

What is the mass of your payload? How are you controlling the rocket (keyboard? gamepad?) It is a known issue that the rocket becomes twitchy right as the first stage burns out but I haven't noticed any other unstable behavior. In fact my experience is that the rocket is almost too stable. If you watch my intro video on the first post you can see the control input I am giving it to nudge it along the right path. It does require a slight touch and if you try and force it you are not likely to correct it. It doesn't surprise me that pre-existing SAS modules don't help. My rocket is much heavier and more powerful than stock parts so the stock SAS doesn't produce enough counter input to stabilize the rocket. It would be like trying to push a bus down the street by yourself. I will be doing numerous flight tests to support my next update so hopefully I can recreate your issues at the same time.

Version 1.1 now available on first post. Approximately a dozen new payload fairing parts were added. I also renamed the engines and liquid fuel tanks in anticipation for the next update. I suggest deleting all of your current CORE parts before installing the new ones. Enjoy!

Update 1.2 will include more rocket parts to expand lifting capabilities. I haven't determined what parts I need but will be doing the math once this update is complete. Some sort of SRB is likely.

Update on the next update: I am now anticipating a release in a "couple of days". I've been working hard on all these minor parts and I am almost complete. Just some texturing and testing and I should be good to go. As stated previously this will be a simple expansion of your payload options. You will be able to safely encapsulate a much wider variety of oddly shaped and over-sized parts. Future updates will include re-balancing parts (as necessary) and the addition of new parts. As KSP expands I will develop heavier rockets that can take enough delta-V into orbit so you can get out to new and exciting destinations. I've anticipated the need already and have conceptual designs for Anvil II, III and even V if the KSP engine doesn't implode on me (don't expect anything radically different in visual design). TLDR, here's a preview of the up and coming release: Yeah, it's goofy looking but considering that's a 3m payload fairing on top of a 1.75m rocket stack I can't really do anything about it. You'll notice I've ditched the "tampon" style nose cone with a more rockety looking one.

First and foremost thank you all who have taken the time to download and try out my rocket. I hope it has served you well! Here is a quick update on the first update: I am slowly but steadily making progress and should be ready to release in a "few weeks". I can't be more specific than that since I am finding it hard to stay motivated enough. The work I have planned for the 1.1 update is not hard but it is tedious and there's a lot of it to do. I will be adding about a dozen or so new payload fairing bits so that your payload options are expanded. I've also done some re-texturing of the existing parts to make the whole rocket more consistent looking. You probably wont notice the difference but I do. As far as bugs are concerned I resolved the clipping issues for small radially attached parts (such as a radial decoupler). I have not been able to determine why I can not radially attach my fuel tanks though so I fear I will have to design a special radial decoupler to make it all work. I'll keep playing around with it. Lastly I have not had time to look into enabling symmetry for the fairings yet but it is on the to do list. Again, thank you all for your time and I look forward to continue serving your space launch needs! -Absolution

You're in luck. I forget exactly why I chose to go with quarters initially but the payload fairings in 1.1 will all be halves. They will also come in 1, 2 and 3m lengths to help minimize the part count. In fact the new 3m long fairings reduce the count from 12 to 4 on my "baseline" Anvil I configuration. I'll look into enabling part symmetry for the fairings to reduce work time as well.

I've fixed up the first post with the new forum standards. I will continue to fix it up as they sort out the finer details on the board (particularly I hope they enable video tags again). News for version 1.1: I will use this update to add in most, if not all, of the payload fairing options for 1.75m, 2m and 3m along with the transition parts necessary to mix and match. I've determined why some radially attached parts were sinking into the surface of base parts and will fix that in this update. However, I am still uncertain why my fuel tanks wont attach radially. Their "allowsrfattach" flag is on so it must be something else. I probably wont fix that for this update. I will also look into enabling gimbals for my engines. These are not hard parts but they are labor intensive so it will take a few weeks to sort out.

I also noticed that radial attachments are clashing with the structure of the rocket. I\'ve looked into it somewhat and couldn\'t come up with a reason. I\'ll add it to the bug/issue list and try to resolve it. @crosshunter I took a fresh look at the rocket parts and balanced them based on my preference and not on existing addons. When comparing my parts to others you will notice that mine are consistently heavier and more powerful. It was not my intent to create super parts and although you are free to mix and match my parts with others my intent was simply to approach the issue from a fresh perspective. I hope it doesn\'t disrupt your efforts too much.

I have that same problem. It probably has to do with the fact that the first stage is nearly empty and the mass of the rocket has halved from launch but is still thrusting at 100%. I\'ve had some success by reducing thrust as it gets close to that magical moment. Still iffy but better. It\'s also a good idea to try and go straight up for the entire first stage as mid-stage maneuvering tends to make the problem worse. Concerning the criticisms of it\'s plain-Jane appearance... yeah I feel the same way. I tried adding some decoration to the rocket to make it more interesting but all I succeeded in doing was making it worse. Ultimately I don\'t mind it\'s purely functional appearances. I\'ll try to improve it over time but as far as first tries go I don\'t think you can fault me too much. Also, I have added a video showing a launch montage. Enjoy!

I\'ll add some pictures and post a youtube video tomorrow.

C.O.R.E. Concept Rocket Engineering Inspired by Reality LATEST UPDATES (SEE BELOW): Anvil: 19JAN16 Dune Rovers: 119JAN16 First Light: 19JAN16 FEATURED VIDEO: FIRST LIGHT REVEAL 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1hvPqQXgMI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** ************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ First Light RELEASE 1 - 19JAN16 VIDEO: SEE "FEATURED VIDEO" ABOVE Future Intent: -Complete planned features Known Bugs/Issues as of R1: -No crew portraits/IVA for FL-CMU-1A -No native method to generate electricity -No native method to dock with stock craft -No native method for EVA Change Log: ---RELEASE 1 (19JAN16)--- -First public release ---PREVIEW 1 (30NOV14)--- -Preview release ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** ************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dune Rovers Release 4 - 19JAN16 Videos: The Dune Rovers are a series of parts designed for interchangeability. As of R3 there is only one body style available: Raider. At least one more body style is planned and more may be added in the distant future. In the mean time enjoy exploring the Solar System in style! Future Intent: -Add re-imagined Fire Hawk -Add additional body parts -Add means of refueling -Convert from solar electric to fuel cell electric Known Bugs/Issues as of R4: -RCS system is not balanced. Behavior tweaks necessary after further testing. -No native means of refueling rover. Stock docking ports required. -No native means of generating electricity. Stock methods required. Change Log: ---RELEASE 4 (19JAN16)--- -Updated attach nodes for wheels. No longer possible to mount backwards ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** ************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Anvil Series Rockets Release 19 - 19JAN16 VIDEOS: Future Intent: -Updates to existing parts as necessary. Known Bugs/Issues as of R19: -None known Change Log: ---RELEASE 19 (19JAN16)--- -Removed "SCALE = 1" from all configuration files (except RDM-2 and SRBs). Entry had no function. -Reversed and reduced gimbal range on CSB-926-1 to decrease sensitivity of control inputs at high altitude and to make it steer like a drunken crack addict wasn't at the wheel. -Recalculated all properties of CSB-926-1 (weight/thrust/etc) to increase flight stability at high altitude. Significantly reduced risk of snap oversteer. -Added a connection point for First Light assembly on DCM-90-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** ************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ABOUT CORE: I've been a fan of KSP since its early alpha stages and been very impressed by the quality and ease at which modders were able to add to the game. Since I have some modding experience I decided to try my hand at it and see what I could come up with. I do not like to simply copy and paste parts that someone has already created but instead try to make it my own thing. The original concept behind “CORE†was that I wanted to play "rocket scientist for a day" by designing my own rocket family from the ground up. The aim was to balance my rockets to be more realistic than what KSP has already pioneered. I wanted to respect the lessons learned by other modders but above all else I wanted to see if "it" could be done. Over many iterations and many months of tweaking we have come to the latest iteration of Anvil. My rocket program has evolved into a one stop shop for a simple and reliable platform to launch your payloads. Sure, there are lots of great mods out there that offer hundreds of different ways to create all sorts of exciting machines but Anvil is different. When you just want to get into orbit without the hassle then that’s when you break out the Anvil. I consider the whole effort a success and I greatly enjoyed the opportunity to make this happen. I hope my rockets meet your expectations and good luck! -Absolution Thanks: All contributors to 'SundayPunch' pack as this was my main guide on how to create parts KSP community for offering me help and advice when I ran into trouble ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** ************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---LICENSE--- COPYRIGHT © 2015 ABSOLUTION THE FOLLOWING ARE THE ORIGINAL WORKS OF ABSOLUTION FOR THE KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM GAME. ALL FILES CONTAINED HEREIN ARE THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF ABSOLUTION EXCEPT WHERE PROHIBITED BY LAW OR EXCLUDED BY PRE-EXISTING RIGHTS. DO NOT COPY, REPRODUCE OR RETRANSMIT DATA OR OTHERWISE REPRESENT CONTENTS OF THIS PACKAGE AS BEING OWNED BY ANY OTHER THAN ABSOLUTION. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

What is the value of 'g' at sea level for our fictitious planet Kerbin? I am assuming it\'s set to 9.81m/s since that\'s what we are all familiar with but wanted to confirm with someone who isn\'t also assuming.

AHA! My mistake. It burns 33 tonnes worth of fuel. I made a typo and I apologize.

~43 tonnes initial mass; ~33 tonnes of fuel burned; ~10 tonnes final mass. So if I understand the equation correctly '2392.34*ln(42.96/9.96)' would be the correct result for the equation, yes? I think you may have swapped final mass with fuel mass burned (yes, it\'s quite a gas guzzler).

Would someone be kind enough to indulge me and double check my math? These are the relevant values for a rocket I am modding from the ground up. You will notice the values are a lot higher than a 'stock' KSP part. This is due to my effort to design a more realistic rocket. The reason why I ask is that my delta-V appears to be notably higher than what I\'ve seen considered to be sufficient for obtaining orbit (~6300 vs ~4500). I can achieve an orbit of 150km reasonably well with this rocket and find it to be fairly easy to fly and thus assume my delta-V is not being wasted too badly. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Tank and Engine Properties: LFE-7E3-A1 (Stage 1 Engine) = 2000kN thrust, 62 units/s burn rate LFE-7E1-A1 (Stage 2 Engine) = 373kN thrust, 14.17 units/s burn rate LFE-705-A1 (Stage 1 Tank) = 82.51 tonnes (mass of fuel in tank not including tank mass), 7500 units Fuel LFE-702-A1 (Stage 2 Tank) = 33 tonnes (mass of fuel in tank not including tank mass), 3000 units Fuel *I determined a standard fuel density then calculated how much fuel could fit into the tank I modeled accounting for its internal volume. So fuel density should be identical for each tank. ----------------------------------------------------------------- delta V Calculations: Stage 1: fueled mass = 132.79 tonnes mass of fuel burned = 82.15 tonnes Ve of LFE-7E1-A1 = 2932.55 m/s delta-V of the lower stage is 2848 m/s Stage 2: fueled mass = 42.96 tonnes mass of fuel burned = 33 tonnes Ve of LFE-7E1-A1 engine = 2392.34 m/s delta-V of the upper stage is 3497 m/s Total: delta-V of the entire stack = 6345 m/s ----------------------------------------------------------------- Does that add up?

How does one set the directory 'correctly'? I see the file path but I do not know where it is starting from so when I click 'write' it says that my part was written to 'parts' but where is 'parts' located?

'node_collider' not 'collider_node'. I don\'t know if that will solve the problem but it\'s the first thing that leaped off the page at me.

It is my assumption that the node_collider is what is defining where the rocket sits as the rocket sits on the engine and the engine 'sits' on its collider. The game needs to know where the 'bottom' of the rocket engine is and I must be doing something wrong to make the game think it\'s somewhere where it shouldn\'t be. This is all assumption though so I was hoping an experienced mod maker has run across this issue and has determined that magic property that confuses KSP.

In my case I copied the 'working' engine\'s part config file and put it into the 'non-working' engine. Everything about them is the same except for the geometry. My node_collider is almost exactly the same size as my engine part and is a complete cylinder. This is what is making me scratch my head on this one.

I am making a liquid fueled engine for a rocket. When I roll it out onto the launch pad half of the nozzle is stuck into the ground and the rocket wont leave the pad. I\'ve swapped my engine with a 'stock' engine just to make sure that the rocket itself isn\'t too heavy and it\'s not. What parameter does KSP use to define at what height the rocket should sit on the launch pad?

Probably why I didn\'t notice it. I usually scan the first few pages to see if I can spot relevant topics. I will be sure to do due diligence in the future.

Yeah... pink. My texture is not pink but when I load it up in KSP it\'s pink. It appears that the texture itself is mapping properly as I can see all the little details and a hint of its proper color but it\'s as if there is an additional layer that wrapped itself around the part. I used blender to make/map the part and Gimp to make the texture. *resolved* PNG needs to be 32bit.

This one is making me scratch my head. I\'m unwrapping a cone. I\'ve marked all the seams such that I expect to see 4 independent quarter sections of the lateral faces and two separate end faces. All but two of my sections are successfully separated as I expected. However, two faces remain linked at a single vertex despite a seam line cutting right through it. Is there a way to break up the two 'islands' in the UV editor to separate them without having to re-unwrap the faces independently? *edit* Alternatively is there a way to make two UV 'islands' scale equally to each other? I am trying to make two sections of my cone line up such that I can make one texture that will accurately repeat itself on both faces so they need to be lined up and scaled to the same size (give or take).

Presumably one would still have to triangulate that face before exporting to KSP? Also a question of my own: Can you group a selection of faces while in the editor? I have some small geometry on my part that is time consuming to select every time. I have to find each face individually and it\'s tricky with so many other nearby faces.

Unwrap it one section at a time. Even expensive fancy tools have a problem guessing what your part should look like when properly unwrapped. For a quick example if I were to unwrap a cylinder I would first grab all of the faces that make up the vertical walls and unwrap them. Then I would grab the top face and bottom face and unwrap them second. The logic applies to even the most complicated geometries. It appears you have marked your seams reasonably well so you\'re on the right track. To get your unwrapped faces back go into edit mode and select all (press A). The faces that you do not have selected are hidden.