Tex_NL

I have no reason to doubt your statement but do you have an explanation in the performance difference between 0.20 and 0.21? If they aren't supposed to be even slightly superior have I been designing my planes on a bug/error?

@Bac9 Great job on the new release. I knew editing the parts myself was going to be a waste and you would come with an update sooner rather than later. But I want to draw your attention to a little problem I found. The B9 air intakes seem to suffer greatly in 0.21. Two RBM/RNM intakes used to sustain 2 small Sabre's at full throttle up to 40 km. Now they struggle to get past 20.

The new B9 3.3 did not solve the issue. In the mean time I tested the efficiency of other B9 intakes to compare them with stock. All B9 intakes pretty much all suffer from the same. The RBM, RNM and Sabre intakes are supposed to be superior but now are on par with the stock circular intake.

YAY! I hope this fixes the problems I had with the lack of intake air.

OK, I just finished a stock intake test. Full throttle take off and wheels up ASAP. Pulled the nose up to 30 degrees and left it there for the entire test. Three ram intakes for one turbojet engine. Here are the results: 0.20 Intake air reduction at ~11,5 km Full throttle flame-out at ~25 km 0.21 Intake air reduction at ~11,5 km Full throttle flame-out at ~25 km Conclusion: No significant difference. The cause of my original findings are probably rooted in the B9 mod. Edit: Bac9 just released a new B9 version. Changelog does mention changes to engines so this might be solved. I'll keep you posted.

As far as I know there has been NO update for B9. I used exactly the same in both 0.20 and 0.21 Far is not of any issue. It's of course possible could cause some effects be but in my case it isn't. I have never used FAR in any installation.

I have rarely seen such a crap blockbuster movie. Best money I didn't spent in the cinema ever. (I admit, I downloaded it.) They say Pacific Rim is not a reference/homage/rip-off of Neon Genesis Evangelion but those familiar with NGE can't deny the overwhelming similarities.

I think you're right about that Chris. To exclude as many variables as possible I am currently re-downloading 0.20.2 and 0.21.1. I'll build and fly a simple stock plane in 0.20 first, then transfer it to .021. to fly it again for comparison. After that I'll build an identical craft from scratch in 0.21 to confirm findings. Any suggestions to improve the planned process are welcome.

I doubt drag could cause this major difference in altitude. Drag is a force slowing you down the faster you go, it has nothing to do with the amount of 'breathable' air.

And now for the proof it is not a MechJeb issue. Even IF MechJeb caused some difference it can't be this big. I've flown both the 0.20 original and 0.21 version of my Hammerhead SSTO with exactly the same MechJeb settings. The first two images are from 0.20. The first is from the moment the intake air starts to decrease, the second is where MechJeb started to throttle back. And I did the same thing in 0.21. The first is again where the intake air starts to decrease, the second where it throttled back. Someone please explain why in 0.20 I get 'events' at 30 and 40 km and in .21 the same 'events' at 10 and 20 km. A few km difference I can understand as my two versions aren't 100% the same (I had to replace the small KSPX fueltanks on the back for Firespitter droptanks) but there is a 20 km difference! Wing surfaces, intakes, fuel tanks, engines, EVERYTHING is exactly the same in both ships! (Except the KSPX/Firespitter tanks and minor canard adjustments to balance weight change)

True. MechJeb is a bit iffy in 0.21. But that doesn't explain why a plane previously capable of reaching orbit with ease now can't break atmo. I am running out of air way before I used to. In 0.20 most of my SSTO planes would go past 30 km before I had to throttle back to avoid flame-out. Now, same engines, same intakes, same intake to engine ratio, I start running out of air at just 20 km.

I am pretty sure it is not the SAS. My SSTO's are all stable designs and I use MechJeb's ascent guidance (reducing the ascent profile to 10-20% works great) to get them to orbit with the same settings in 0.21 as I had in 0.20

In 0.20 I could get pretty much any SSTO plane I build into orbit with relative ease. I knew the engine to intake ratio's and when to switch to rockets. But now, in 0.21, I've got a nearly identical copy (only minor adjustments to compensate for KSPX integration, the new SAS and some CoG/CoL balancing) of one of my 0.20 planes that could reach LKO with ease can't break atmo. Pure jet engine designs that previously reached a 280x40 km suborbital flight struggle to reach anything past 40 km. Edit: Source of the problem has been found. The issue is not with the stock atmosphere rather with the B9 intakes.

Why not simply a towel rack (with towel of course) in the hitchhiker pod?

The Docking Strut sumghai linked survived several patches and still functioned exactly as it should. I can't imagine it would not have survived the current patch. Just keep in mind it is a legacy mod and should be installed in the parts folder instead of gamedata.

All 'glider' challenges are inherently flawed! This statement may sound harsh but as long as the 'infiniglide' bug isn't fixed it is the truth. In the past I personally made an 100% stock, un-powered glider (about 10 parts) that could literally stay airborne for hours. Even without any key input.

Did you also include sound in this version?

I haven't studied your ship all that much or read the suggestion thus far. I assume they are all pretty good and accurate but none have mentioned one issue you most DEFINITELY WILL encounter once you get your staging correct. The moment you stage to your 4 nuclear engines the shrouds will be ejected. In your current layout you'll will rip at least two or more engines clean off. Guaranteed!

The source code isn't only intellectual property as was correctly stated by Cranium. What if for some unpredictable 'act of god' the source code gets lost. And don't complain "you've paid for it" because you didn't. You paid for the product you currently have, not for any future releases. If SQUAD wanted to they could charge you for each and every update. They'd loose an unimaginable amount of goodwill but in theory it is within their rights.

And you expect people to download a zip file without any info or images???

Posting an image without a visible number is so cheap. Come on people, you know you can do better.

This is one of THE mods I have been waiting for If you can make it look more like the USAF 'Meatball' it would be awsome. The 'Meatball' is not controlled by anyone. The position of the marker in the center is completely autonomous and dependent on viewing angle. The only 'active' part is a few degrees of tilt to compensate for deck movement.

You're in opposite orbits and you expect you'll be able to kill relative velocity? Jumping from one car to another while driving on the freeway is hard enough when the cars are driving side by side. What you're trying to do is jump between cars that are driving towards each other. 1: Launch your ship into a similar orbit. 2: Match planes 3: Increase/decrease Pe/Ap in such a way you get close to your target 4: Switch to target mode and burn at the retro marker when you get close. If your relative V is a few hundred m/s you might not be able to slow down in time.

No the most powerful but by far the easiest jet engine would be a pulse jet. They can run white-hot and make one hell off a noise.