feanor

I know; I use this in my current vehicle; this post-boost vehicle is what I love the most. small liquids, small RCS. firing at apogee, this can make for some very exquisite targeting options. I love the ' big capability - small package ' rocket building. My previous post uses this aswell. I only changed it for the animation, so you could see the fairing decoupler between 2nd and 3rd stage. I moddeled my rocket on this animation and another one; my mod will look like this aswell. Simple tubes, but 1st stage bigger then the other 2. I\'ll tweak the firing length / weight to provide a similar T/W ratio and mission profile. The only thing I am unsure about is the 3rd stage; I think i\'ll have to make it pretty weak, otherwise the rocket might be overpowered - but i do want to be able to orbit, which is easy with 2 stages, almost too easy with 3. Ah well, tweaking galore. I could imagine modding it so that 2 stage gets you into orbit, and the 3rd is for deorbit, but it\'d prefer the 3rd stage gets you highly epileptic, with post boost at apogee for final targetting. Tweaking this might take some time. I want to preserve the action packed, high T/W ratio of the original.. Quite. There where earlier threads in the dev forum about this. A destroy package might have the same function and would be good enough as well. The fairing might be hard. I want it to be like in the video; I might edit some standard 1 meter fairing to have attachment points and press 2-3 solid escape engines on there. possibly even 4, to make the weight standardized - then you fire 2 for escape, then 1 a second after seperation to move it out of the way. edit: added in a small modification after I realized I no longer have a parachute... A nosecone, detaches after 3rd stage firing. Can\'t attach rockets to it yet...

Whelp, this thread was made for me. I am currently putting together a mod pack for an ICBM LGM-30 Minuteman missile. Base diameter will be 1.2-1.3 meters, 1 meter on top of that. As soon as command module swapping is implemented, a MIRV with air resistance of 0.01 or thereabout will be made as command module. Of course, I came to the conclusion that I wanted this pack after I made a few tries myself with other modded packs. I laid a few extra challenges on myself: -the diameter is 1 meter. -It has 3 solid rocket stages and a liquid low-capability post boost stage with RCS thrusters, just like in real life. -It has to be precisely targetable. -it has to vaguely look like a real missile -The reentry has to be ballistic, without the the post-boost vehicle. Here is my missile! - the name is simply 'ICBM' for now. On the launch pad! It\'s so smooooth. I use a mod that has a reskinned SAS module as liquid engine. *BUT* that liquid engine has a minumum and maximum thrust of 400. This makes for easy Solids in various sizes. Stack a fuel tank above one with 200 fuel and you have a big SRB, one with 50 for a low capability SRB. This was the only way to keep it inside 1 meter diameter and reasonably stumpy, like a real ICBM. Liftoff. Heavy G-loads, just like in real life... Second stage burnout. The first 2 stages used this modded SAS part. The third stage solid is a PAM, payload assist module. 3rd stage firing. Trajectory at the start of the 3rd stage burn. Not very impressive, right? And here at the end of the burn! I aim for the place between 2 big islands on the map where my trajectory ends. I must have fired a few dozen ICBMS at that area by now. In the last screenshot i\'m still quite a bit off, but luckily, I have another ace in the hole... Course corrected! With this sort of retro-burn-that-also-raises-apogee-and-finetunes-your-reentry. You can now see that the 2 islands are not actually islands at all. They are connected by a small landbridge. This vaguely L-shaped landbridge is the target! The post-boost part. Small lunar ascent engine, RCS with small tank, Retro engines ( they\'ll come later! ). Target is visible on the lower right of the screen, just above the crew portraits. After final finetuning on apogee, the post-boost vehicle decouples with a zero-force decoupler. Just like in real life, this allows for very precise MIRV deployment. Problem is that the post-boost vehicle then stays in the same reentry path as the mirv. Just like in real life, to stop this, the post boost vehicle actually backs away. I use 2 small retro solids for this, since i can\'t control the RCS after it\'s decoupled. ballistic reentry mode started! This is the speed at the start of the higher atmosphere. After modelling the command module / MIRV drag to MIRV proportions, I get 2000m/s at impact, but that\'s not in this flight, so this reentry capsule with 3 big green kerbals will slow down a bit more then realistic. The land mass is getting rendered better and better; it\'s directly below the command module. Target directly in sight! It\'s nice and flat and has some recognisable features both from space and from lower; that\'s why I chose it. End of mission! target nuked! To make range bigger, for now, it\'s pretty easy to make the fuel tanks I use bigger. But, as said, i\'ll model 1st 2nd and 3rd stage solids and decouplers, perhaps more, to make it more realistic. hope you like my try. It\'ll be better with mod packs!

Ah. excellent! I saw your 3d pictures and assumed they showed a single part for the boosters + core stage. If they are all liquid you\'ve fullfilled the wish! And the detachable fuel tank is nice, since you can make R-7 ICBM\'s with this set aswell then. I assume you know about the soyuz staging? The core stage fires at the same time as the boosters at liftoff time, so that it\'s fuel / consumption rate are balanced so that it burns out after the boosters. Looking forward to it!

Oh woe is me! When will someone release a soyuz model that actually has correct staging? Still looking forward to your release, nonetheless

I\'m sorry! I guess i\'m brainwashed and think of a certain frog named Kermit when I see your name...

True, but spaceX engines certainly throttle. I look foward to the other ones; They probably won\'t make possible the very nice 0.6 m/s landings I can do here - I just went to lunar orbit, came back, deorbited, deployed parachutes, and landed on the ground, without exceeding 4.5 G, thanks to this part. fire a short burst at 1 km ish or so, deploy parachute, slowly ramp up throttle when below 100 meters till you get to 1 m/s on the ground. Works extremely well. Tips.. hmm. There could be a bit more fuel. 40 wouldn\'t be bad - it\'d give some hover. weight of the fuel module could go up aswell, then. As long as the assembly ( tank + engine ) stays below 0.3 or something it\'d be very usable. I\'m currently making drawings of parts like this I want to model. To make it look more realistic, I went with a 1.25 meter diameter for the parts, and a slope the same angle as the command pod. That way, it looks like these parts are actually part of the pod, instead of sort of hanging below it. The Tank would have a sloped diameter going from 1 meter at the top to 1.25 at it\'s bottom - the heatshield/ engines would be 1.25. Ah well, that\'s just an idea, and I\'ll try my hand at it myself, but if you\'re able to scale up yours easy, it\'d be a nice solution. I also like the heatshield/ engine texture, pretty nice.

ah, and a next question - I really like your parts. For the next release, could you rename the folders with a prefix, like your username - BenpartbreakDisk and Benpartmicrotank or something, just the folder names - that helps with part folder sorting and the like, and makes accidental overwrites impossible. Case in point: a mod maker named Xermit has already made a part with the folder name 'microtank'. So, please add a prefix! Thanks in advance and thanks again for the parts, I\'ll be using them!

I actually disagree. In real life, you would have to mess with throttle aswell - it\'s the only way to make a lander that actually decelarates slowly. RCS would either be underpowered for breaking speed or overpowered for touchdown. Throttle is the ideal resolution, and also realistic. So, don\'t make it RCS.

beautifull parts. I really gotta step up my modelling. The parachute only has 2 modes - non-deployed, and totally deployed. Even if it\'s above 10km height and non-functioning, it shows its deployed animation. Is that intended?

I think it\'d be RCS and a small ASAS. ASAS should be smaller and ligher then normal SAS anyway - it\'s just computer that steers thrusters. solar panels - meh. Folded ones - perhaps just do a quarter of the texture somewhat solar panelly - untill we get moveable pieces, i like that better. There are other solar panels around that can be attached, should someone want that.

You could do a normal 1 pod that is tapered, and a ring/ donut fuel tank below that - and then add 4 engines embedded in there.

We consider that humans that use the system are equal, on the average. This removes the 'I know some stupid metric users ' and the ' I know some very smart imperial users ' - and vice versa - out of the equation; they no longer matter. Now you can talk about the systems. One is consistent in it\'s steps, the other one is not. That\'s all there is to it. The definition of a meter does not matter. That\'s preference. i have no idea how heavy 10 stone is; I might not have any idea how much 2 meters is; but once I know that 1 meter is 100 cm, 2 meters becomes 200 cm easier then 10 stone becomes pounds. What we are doing here is removing the human problem, and argueing about the inherent superiority. Actually, the definition does not matter one bit; the superiority lies in the system, not in the values or definitions of the units therein. Powers of 10, that\'s what it\'s all about.

A small issue i just found, when trying to make a SRB-X. ( 3 shuttle solids bolted together, the middle one airlit - described as 'the single worst shuttle -derived rocket ever proposed - which makes it perfect for KSP ' ) I found out that one of your SRB\'s has a weird attachment point: The attachment point seems to be mismatched with the rocket - or perhaps the rocket doesn\'t fit? this is the KW series Globe CS-1 Mk II.

....Excellent And just in time for the mun update! What parts program are you using? I\'m trying to learn blender, keeping it simple so far; simple ICBM solid round parts.

Sorry if I sound grumpy; I don\'t mean it like that all; merely what happened when i downloaded it, and what I then did - and I asked for a fix for me. No entitlement at all, but I can\'t help to disagree when I hear someone say 'if you don\'t like it you can\'t ask for a change' or something in that direction. And well, foamy can just as easily release a version without ponies and give 2 links; that\'d make a lot of people happy, and I think everyone can understand why. I thank each and every mod maker for parts, but if I don\'t like something I\'ll ask (!) for a fix for sure, or atleast give a suggestion - and that has nothing to do with entitlement. so, basically ; I don\'t like a part. I don\'t use it. Fine, right? I also make a post about the part; feedback. Nothing wrong there I think. Still love all of you, but all you pony guys are just heresy worshipping xeno scum, and I think you all need a good visit from a battalion of space marines. That\'s all.

That sounds very good. Any hints? partial screenshots?

Weight factors are more realistic. normal KSP actually makes Single stage to orbit ridicilously easy, and staging is very inefficient due to the ( relative ) weight of the decouplers and engines.

I could go on a rant about how you have a target audience and how you cater the product towards that audience ( and yes, mod packs are a product and have an audience ) and how you make decisions about design. Also how there is competition, texture swaps and factors which would stop some people from using, buying or installing the product, and how this counteracts your market penetration and costumer response. This certainly applies for design choices that are either highly polarizing, totally unnecessary and without any benefit. But i won\'t. I\'ll settle for a reskin, or use some other guys advanced SAS. Especially if that guy actually implements ASAS as it should be, ie smaller and lighter then normal SAS.

That wouldn\'t work; Current RCS emptying rules would start on a single tank and emptying that completely, before starting on the next; This would only imbalance your rocket worse the more you use RCS to counteract that. We\'ll have to wait for either updated ruleset, or RCS thrusters that use normal rocket fuel ( from the tank they\'re attached to - and this too would require fuel balancing options ).

Downloaded, then deleted; texture has ponies on it. Perhaps you could release a version without them?

Thank you! downloading now, will update all my rockets with this pack edit: Loving the RCS tanks. Hoping for even more options in the future - one in 2 meter scale but with the same capacity as the normal one ( that\'d make it very flat, I know, but it\'d add in options available for the gentleman rocket builder who wishes to optimise his craft of getting to the blackness of space ) One thing ( and I guess i have to hit harvester with this request ) - What is the strength /efficiency of your RCS thrusters? Is 1 normal? I guess I\'ll poke harvester to show these values ingame.

Well...... no, not really. The abort system had to seriously beefed up, and there where a lot of issues that where not completely resolved with Flaming chunks of SRB fuel hitting the parachutes. No solids on people rockets is a good rule to abide by. And it wasn\'t a terrible idea - it was based on a diffirent paradigm. ( ares 1 was actually a terrible idea, though - i\'m glad it\'s dead - and I hope ATK\'s 'liberty' launcher never gets past the drawing board ) As I said, no solids on people carriers pretty please, whatsoever. ( pyro bolts / possible LAS excluded )

Agreed. Slow burning is really not an argument. I still don\'t think you EVER want a solid on a people carrier. Ever. The simple fact that you can\'t shut it off safely is reason enough. On sat carriers, sure. if it fails, it\'ll get destroyed either way. Not so much with people.

Indeed, that is the thing I\'d do. And will do, for a nice ICBM.

In the 10 minutes since I saw that post, I decided to finally just do that. I\'m uploading a redbug-fixed, 'SundayPunch' tagged version of the latest release of this pack. All parts, textures, cfgs and whatever are the same- just the folder names are pretagged with SundayPunch. Ships will still load just the same with these tagged folders. There you go. Perhaps a mod could add this link to the main post, since this is a widely used pack - and with this, it\'s atleast semi-up-to-date? http://www.multiupload.com/AAN4ZRWHUJ Also, here is a mediafire link for those so inclined. http://www./?crl9u4rqk8c7kw2