Temeter

There is an unofficial repack: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88716-Unofficial-B9-Repack-updated-for-0-24-2 Otherwise wait for the new Update, it's supposed to be out in a few days.

Neat. Will we be able to reset the locks? It's not important, but it kinda irks me when using alcor-capsules.

There are definitively some crashes caused by Unity 64 bit. I had some cases where a mod would reliably produce crashes (including the error log pointing to the mod), even after adding and removing it multiple times. And then i would try the mod later again, and everything works fine. Happened e.g. with module manager, even if it didn't actually update anything.

Only on the first glance, that stuff looks like it's ten times as big. xD But will it fly?

Not sure if i would even want to decide if proc fairing or proc wings is better. Great stuff in any case, makes plane construction so much more fun. Now i can actually manually modify plane's on the fly and check what FAR thinks of that stuff.

Well, that looks pretty damn amazing.

Well, the big gameplay-benefit of the old FTmN's was allowing you to avoid LVN-monsterstack's (besides looking awesome). So their role will shift a bit away from pure long-range engines. I don't really see much of an issue either way. It will probably only make a notable difference for really heavy long-range ships. A lander can even profit from the change. That said, it would be cool to still have a 2.5m engine which is basically 4 or 5 LVN's.

I had already did some of the stuff, like the removal of the useless middle stabilisator and modification of the rear tail stab's. Following the instructions, I now changed the outer control surface pitch, increased front stab size, and angled the outer wingtip. Also remove a number of b9 wheel's, so the CoM is now better balanced. The result was quite promising, the plane's lacking aerodynamic still have been somewhat of an issue (and lol, turns out that thing needs some dedicated roll surfaces), but it was much better controllable, if a bit instable. Especially the big front stabs are a big improvement. Had to move the tanks a bit more to the front to balance the CoM, though. I've had some suspicions about the wing-shape for a while, and your picture also pointed me in that direction. So i decided to give them a quick rework, making them wider instead of a delta-design, which also left some place for bigger control surfaces. Much more fragile, but also delivering more lift. Shown in the second picture. The only remaning issue was the lack of powerful SAS. I missed that the plane still run on a single S2-SAS, since this was originally more of a mashup instead of a serious space-plane. Added a HL-SAS, but deactivated it for the test-flight, to get a better feel for the new wing-design. In conclusion, the old wings - and original control's - probably just sucked above 20k and mach 4. The new design and improved control allowed me to bring that thing into space without using RCS for the first time. The HL-SAS should further improve the flight. Otherwise my piloting skills also need work, since i'm still relatively new to ARM. Thanks for the help, i've learned quite a bit working on bringing that brick into brick. Maybe i'll even get to assemble that duna ship now that, the original reason for building the plane (and reason for the unimaginative name).^^ Pics of the reworked original and new wing design:

Thank you, i'll work of the individual points: The body doesn't flex, it's actually surprisingly stable. I was careful about that stuff because of my experience with stock space-planes. I also forgot to mention something, which might be part of my issue: I changed the control law of some cotrol surfaces. The inner surfaces on the wings are set to pitch only, the outer ones to roll and the middle winglet at the back to yaw. Maybe it's just a silly mistake of the pitch surface's being to small? The 6 other winglets have been added after the first flight(s) for more control. I assume you are talking about a 'real' plane-tail with elevators+rudder? Never really thought about it, since i was kinda used to elevon's. Might certainly be a good idea. I didn't yet unlock the sabre-s+m cones (very close, though), but i'm planning to replace all intakes by sabre-stuff. Just looks so much cooler and a bit more efficient on the right angle. Fuel drainage is neglible, at least for my issue. The CoM actually wanders behind the CoL with empty tanks, which would be pretty bad normally, but the air-powered flight sees basically no shift of the CoM. The 2 big 2.5m tanks are the only source of fuel, so the shift is very low and only appears after some time of rocket burn. Funnily enough, i actually managed to land that thing on my second try, despite a screwed up dry CoM/CoL. Ofc still something which needs rework. edit: Now i feel a bit silly. There is actually a part called stabilisator. Seems like i confused winglets with stabilisator. Yep, that's the kind of part i usually want for the plane. I'll switch them around and add 2 horizontal stabilisator's to the vertical one, just for test. Also made the elevon's bigger, just recently found out you can change their length. edit3: Still the same issue, and weight distribution also doesn't change the plane trying to dive down. No change with high wing position and wheels zeroing out imbalance.

So, i had some issue with the usual random crashs, but i've made a number of pics. Mind this is a test vessel, my first big arm spaceship. It's rough around the edges and I actually never really expected it to reach space but to randomly fail or prove unusuable like stock planes somtimes tend to do. That's also why the tanks run with half their fuel capacity (see last picture), and it doesn't use the Sabre intakes of B9 i didn't yet unlock. Inside are 42 tons of freight in the middle of the two storage's. The plane is generally nicely strutted and nothing moves by alone, the wings are 2 b9-style procedural wings and two B9 wingtips. Vernors for full articulation already built in. Now i have trouble figuring out why that thing caused issues, though. Before doing the spaceflight, I added the big winglets and the small radial gimbal engines to get some more control. The inner produceral control surfaces clip somewhat into the plane when moving down, but that should afaik not be an issue when pulling upwards?

lel, somehow thought I was on the first page of the general forum. Already wondered why people still made drama about that stuff.^^'

Btw, isn't Alt-E already the hotkey for trimming roll? That might cause some practical problems.

Idk, but drama around KSP tends to feel so utterly pointless most of the time...

Thanks, i'll make some pics tomorrow. It's pretty late over here. I see. Wasn't aware SQUAD already changed the rules.

I tried this mod for some days and it's amazing stuff! Weird that people think it's harder, my planes actually tend to fly better with ARM than without.^^' That said, i had some issues with bigger space-planes. When i level the planes to accelerate to high speeds (1.2k+ m/s at 20 to 30k m), their nose tends to move downwards, and it's hard to stabilize them or ascent. What do i need to consider when constructing for stability during these maneuvers? AFAIK you can just remove gamestats from your gamedata-folder if you don't like it. Not really an issue.

edit: My mistake, you were talking about the tanks. Thanks, MFT looks interesting. I'll try that stuff.

Only Liquid Fuel? I like it, that will make Spaceplanes much more versatile. B9 should do the job for spaceship LF-tanks.

Grats, that stuff really deserves into KSP. Might make some off the older stock stuff lock bad, though.^^ On a different note, will you continue to create new plane-part's? MK3 does look a bit sad. *hint, hint*

Stuff like Deadly Reentry might be cool, but it would drastically reduce what you can do in KSP. That's why aerodynamics like FAR, as great as it might be, probably won't ever get into the game. edit: Although, on a second thought it might just be optional. Which is the best way to do stuff anyway. Although again, that's also achieved by having it as a mod. And mods are kinda already an integral part of KSP... Squad also said they won't add Delta-V calculators into the game. I generaly doubt they'd add stuff like that into the game. It might unlock the maximum potential of the game, but modding is supposed to be an integral part of the game anyway.

Maye B9? The Dev is already on board, and it's - mabye beside firespitter - the standard mod when it comes to airplanes. Would be the logical thing to do. Ofc there are things speaking against it: The graphical style, generally more high tech looking parts and plugin-dependency. Graphics style isn't much of a deal since the KSP-Spaceport already follows the high-tech style, but the parts clash a bit with the stock stuff. Also would need to work without 3rd-party plugins, that could be a bit of an issue. ARM would be pretty interesting. Don't think SQUAD would make such huge changes, though.

Thanks, that explains it. I just like the standard texture more, even if that thing is a bit low res. Changing it is pretty easy, though.

I have the same isssue. Although the Engine isn't completely missing the texture for me, more like it's looks greyed out.

Thanks for the repack.^^

Mechjeb and Kerbal Engineed can show you the available Delta-V and T/W-ratio. Otherwise use more rockets.

Stuff like Cave Systems would be amazing. Not sure how well that would work with the current game-systems, though.