phoenix_ca

Well as long as it's documented, easy-peasy.

Stock model: More intake air, more drag. No clue how FAR handles that though.

Dear gods! Give me a sec to get on my bicycle. I want to be nowhere near that evil element! (Seriously, have you seen the setups that chemists doing research with elemental fluorine have? That **** is scary.)

I have a question. You say the textures will be required, but I assume that we can just have the B9 textures installed, and your mod would use them, even if we dump the part.cfg files? I'm contemplating stripping a lot out of my B9 install, mostly because I just don't need soooooo many wings (thanks, PWings), and some of the fuselages I have little to no use for either.

O.o The change is made by rapier.cfg in the WarpPlugin folder. It should have the following: @PART[radialEngineBody] { @title = Intake Pre-cooler @description = A magnificent piece of engineering that pre-cools the air flow from atmospheric engines, preventing overheating at high speeds. MODULE { name = FNModulePreecooler } } Also what version of Module Manager are you using? The most recent ones have a few bugs that might be breaking it.

Jesus-shiva-allah-lao-tsu-no. Not flutter. We already have enough problems to deal with as it is! I mean...our wings aren't even contiguous parts like they are on a real aircraft! And it's not like we can control the shape of the airfoil very accurately either. I could do much better with a slab of balsa wood (and have, actually...fun times of youth).

That's a really situational question. If you could also allow speed to be tweaked with an action group, it wouldn't be a problem (especially with AGX). But I can see it becoming very confusing or difficult to sus-out a particular part for speed control. And gods help the poor soul trying to do that to many parts in symmetry or many parts that aren't even related if it's not adjustable with action groups.

I'm not familiar with the code so I might be wrong, but it's not the temperature of the intake atmosphere that's the problem, it's the relative speed at which it enters the intake. A key problem with designing a real engine for use at high velocity through an atmosphere is that you need to slow-down the air coming through the intake so that it can actually be passed through a compressor/combustion chamber. If you had it going through at full speed it would easily damage the engine. The problem then is dissipating the kinetic energy of the air. Laws of thermodynamics do their annoying "can't destroy energy" bit and by slowing down the air quickly (a lot of change in speed in a short time), it emits a lot of thermal energy. The effect is not dissimilar to reentry heating. Both are all about the compression of air, not friction (as some people erroneously may think). Once you have the air slowed it's really hot, and needs to be cooled. That's where the precooler comes in. It's really just a super-effective heat exchanger, constantly pulling thermal energy out of the airflow to the engine itself. In KSPI, this means putting a precooler part (either the modified stock part or the two B9 engine bodies that are modified by KSPI to be precoolers) directly behind the air intake. If they are anywhere else they won't work. Kinda an annoying mechanic, since sometimes (quite often in fact) it's far more preferable to be able to put precoolers in front of the engines themselves, for design purposes, like using smaller radial intakes. This won't work, unfortunately. You can see if precoolers are working in-flight by right clicking them. They will read as either active or inactive. Basically all it comes down to is always put a precooler right after the intake. If you don't, you'll get a fairly significant amount of overheating as you increase in speed. The reason that this causes engines to explode during reentry is because you're passing through the atmosphere are orbital or near-orbital velocities. Burn off a lot of that excess velocity before even touching the throttle. Oh that's useful. I suppose one could add precoolers to some of the B9 radial intakes. Those things are pretty big anyway; it'd make some modicum of sense that they have a precooler. Not sure if just adding the module would work though; not unless it can accept that it's part of an intake instead of looking for one attached to it.

Based on that logic...it would be prudent for TAC to just use 1L a day of each resource. Or some similar easy-to-remember number. "Realism" be damned, they're little green aliens.

I suppose one could avoid the bug for the moment by using KAS's undocked attach mode. Though that does require a Kerbal. Edit: You can already do that sort of engine mounting with IR, with all of three parts. Two hinges, one truss or I-beam in between. For the second idea... ... Yeah I've got no idea what you're getting at. Maybe Sirkut can tell but you might be better off at least drawing a picture, even if it's crappy.

That's pretty hilarious. I guess it'd only happen if you discard the fairings so that they can fall to Kerbin while still doing...physics things. What the hell is the right word...physics...things...screw it. I'd wager if you lose the fairings high enough that they go on rails they'll just be chucked like everything else on rails low in atmo. I suppose you could say it's a byproduct of experiments with new NERVA engines. Accidental irradiation of fairings causing blimp-like effects.

Quick! He admitted he broke something! LET THE LYNCHING BEGIN!

Gotta agree with HeadHunter on that one. Changing TAC to litres instead of the far easier to remember man-day would perhaps be more technically accurate, but far less useful to players. But I suppose that's for the TAC thread. I just hope they see the light. Gameplay should really come first.

The mode idea is a good one, assuming it solves the issue that TweakScale has with surface attach parts by using different logic to scale the part. With TweakScale, scaling a surface attach part only scales the size, but the part will either render far away from it's parent if it was scaled down, or clip through its parent when scaled up. It'd also give control to modders trying to limit, for whatever reason, how a part can be scaled. There may be (many) cases where you don't want players to be able to scale the part freely because it would just confuse things.

If you don't like it, you can always just add a tiny PNG for water on Eeloo, slap water in the open resource defs and you're good to go.

As long as it can fit in a procedural fairing, I don't care how big it is. Okay, I do. That thing looks like it might need to be launched as its own payload. O.O

I guess automated ways of doing that are out.

MKS. This is the forum ruining a perfectly good short post with character limits. Edit: You have a few options. Adding extra relays is unlikely to help unless for some reason your aspect angle to Kerbin is very high and cannot be lowered. Option one: MOAR POWER. Build even more power plants at Kerbin. Easy to put up, easy to maintain, but you'll need a pile of them. Option two: Build some power plants way out there at Jool. Maybe put some relays in a very, very high polar Jool orbit (past Bop if possible; I haven't actually tried that yet) to give reasonable coverage without resorting to relays around every goddamn moon. Option three: Probably the worst option with the most minimal return, but stick the deployable array on your receiving vessel. I will result in an increase of received power. Note that this is the only case where using the deployable array makes sense. It does nothing for relays or transmitters.

Do want. Much.

I hope this is that thing that you were talking about needing to be fixed for your new DAI update to work. So that there's more awesome. My KSP needs more awesome NavyFish! MOAR! >.> Don't look at me like that.

While this is great at showing only parts from a particular mod, is there a way to do the reverse? That is, show all parts except those of a particular mod?

Yay! Fixing things and stuff! I'm a fan of having more pretty-glowy-buttons-of-clicking for making settings changes.

*facepalm* I read that wrong. My bad.

Dude. That is fantastic (I've always wanted to scale-down the B9 Atlas to a 1.25m size). You should make your own development thread. Expanding on TweakScale could be the best thing since Module Manager for modded KSP installs. Just...imagine a world where we didn't need 3 different parts for 1.25m, 2.5m, and 3.75m. Just one. Good god that'd be glorious. If possible, it'd be very nifty to see single-axis scaling, to support trusses/I-beams and the like. Things where it makes sense to scale them say, lengthwise, but not in any other direction. Or, is that what you mean by "free scaling"? Because if it is...well **** me with a bagel. That's awesome. See the github: I sincerely hope this sees some serious wide-spread acceptance by other mods when you're done. Part-count reductions abound. We might be able to actually get piles and piles of parts with the 3.4GB limit. (No more finagling the Linux copy to work.)

Nostalgia trip incoming!