MDBenson

Suggestion noted, I'll spin em around 45, but again, your craft file had your versions at the 'correct' angle and I was still having issues. You're the second person to sugggest the sepratron thing. I'm using your craft file, so yes the aft skirt sep motors are there, and they fire. I verified that as soon as I had a problem. I'll run a check flight and see what's up.

Oh! Sorry, yes I've been using that. It was about the only way I could get a decent orbital ascent path. Incidentally, I think I solved the exploding ET by using Bluedog's Prometheus-III seperation nose cones tweakscaled to match the SRB diameter. They are facing directly at the ET and don't cause it to explode. I suspect the reDRIECT SRB nose cones might need tweaking to reduce the heating factor or something (I've never modded engine dynamics in KSP so I dunno how it works). I get no issues using them on the pad in a test but at altitude after they burn out (and the shuttle stack hasd been subjected to quite a lot of friction, mayber heating the ET a bit?) they will 80% of the time cause the ET to explode.

Would you be able to explain for a dork like me who has no idea what PVG is?

Thanks for the tip, I'd already sussed out Kopernicus and Sigma dimensions, but the ReScale config probably tweaks a few values I didn't delve into. I'm now on a 2.5x scale system and I like it tbh, it looks a lot more realistic without being too hard xD I'm still battling ascenbt profiles. I decided to try MechJeb ascent guidance. It's better than trying to fly it by hand. To a point. The problem I have is that the profile flies perfectly until I drop the SRBs (which are still smassing into the ET sometimes :\) then the orbiter/ET stack doesn't seem to be able to stick to the ascent curve, which I'd like to flaten out at altitude. The result is it goes high and hit's Apoapsis altitude (250km in this case) way to early before it's exhausted the ET and tehn burns all the OMS fuel circularising, and the OMS circularisation burn is very difficult as it's too long (and the OMS has low TWR).

As the provided craft file uses all the right parts, I think it is using the right config, LH2/Ox in the ET and the RS-25B? Stock scale. I have admit using things like Tantares and the lkike make orbital launches rather *too* easy on stock scale, you are correct. I suppose I could run something 2.5x for a better challenge. I have built a rather nice station in orbit in this playthrough but haven't crewed it as yet, this was the first docking flight, so I guess I could re-build it in the new save and then boot it up there using Hyperedit Any recomendations for a 2.5x pack that works with 1.7.x? Yes, it's odd, I have the full tech tree unlocked (I'm in a Science game but only so I can actually do stuff when I get to places and use science instruments) and I'm using Jeb who usually has access to everything. Again, I am usig the craft file from the Orbiter pack, so the aft skirt seps are there too. I am starting to thing it's partly an issue with the atmospheric forces actring on the stack at the altitude i am doing the booster sep. I think it's causing some kind of weird interaction. Is it better to separate the boosters before the flame out or leave them to stop? I don't see options for that on the hinges but I'll give it another prod once I've got the stack to work.

This pack is really great, as are your other packs (HabTech2 and reDIRECT) however I am really struggling to fly this thing effectively (what's new, Shuttles are always a pain!). Thanks for putting in the time and effort, benjee! The first problem is I am trying to roll the stack to the right heading for my target orbit (a 45-degree inclined orbit) and rolling the stack using the roll controls sends stuff haywire. The stack tends to nose-down (relative to the flight deck) when rolling, and also sways sideways sometimes. Is this caused by the flight surfaces or the SRBs being right out to the sides or something? Secondly I am really struggling to get a good gravity turn working for it and always hit my target apoapsis way before the ET has emptied. I have succeded partially by running a longer flatter trajectory but this causes a lot of heating in the atmosphere. Thridly, is there any reason why, even using Jeb as a pilot, I don't get access to any SAS funtions aside from Pro/Retrograde? Fourthly The SRBs have exploded the ET a couple of times. This is reDIRECT parts rather than this pack, I guess, but is there any reason this could be happening? It looks like the nose cone sep SRBs are cooking the part in between them. Also is there anything that can be done to stop the robotic arm waving around in the breeze? XD I should add I'm using the craft file provided with the mod (Stock robitics version)

Took 1.6 through a couple of launches and it's okay as long as you don't try and roll into heads-down. I'm getting quite severe slewing to the side on roll. Might just be my awful piloting skills, tough. The robotic arm is currently very unstable and messes around a lot with launch and landing stability due to it flapping about in payload bay. The braking parachute is probably a bit too strong in the drag department. It is causing the Orbiter to roll and pitch on deploy in my stock game. Other big issue I found is the RCS jets on the nose cone are not working well. I don't know if this is to balance the RCS or just an error, but I found the vertical jets are not firing fro mthe correct place, and there is no 'reverse' translation jets? Aside from that it looks sharp, EDIT: Oh, also I tested this on stock 1.0.4 Linux x86_64 and it seems to be okay, although it's laggy at low altitude, but it might just be my graphics settings as above a certain altitude it's suddenly fine.

It's worst after the 4 boosters are ejected and it is long and thin. I have had other issues with the stock aero too, what initially seemed to be a great improvement to the stock game is proving to be a total PITA, especially for mod parts I threw my teddy out and decided to try it with the new FAR version, we'll see Oh, also I'm getting launch exhaust under the pad before the engines fire on the ALV and Tavio, I haven't tried others. It might be a mod conflict but I thought I'd mention it!

Hmm... I've been playing a lot with Tantares the last few days in career mode and found that the Soyuz (Tavio) is mighty unstable in the atmosphere on ascent. Flying to about 6km it tends to flip or twist over. The core stage minus it's boosters is much worse too. Fitting lots of large fins to the bottom helps a good bit but looks silly I initially thought it was me nudging it over a few degrees, that wasn't the case. I thne swapped the PFairings for stock ones, still didn't help. It seems to fly fine with the Soyuz-esque spacecraft on the top, which is mildly confusing, so I'm a bit stumped. Anyone else find this? Also the pre-deployment parachutes on some craft (TK crew module and the Soyuz crew capsule) don't offer enough braking in atmosphere IMHO. If I deploy the chute at 250m/s the capsule is still doing 150+m/s when the chute deploys fully causing spine-crushing levels of G-shock to the poor Kerbals

Looks like we have a scaling/attachement glitch on the KT command/control module EDIT: This seems to be intermittent, I reloaded the scene (Space Center => Tracking Station => Select Craft => Fly) and it was okay again :\

Is there a central place to report repository issues that doesn't require a separate login (i.e. not on Github, as a lot of people love to whine about not having accounts there)? If no then it might be a good thing to do, then anyone who's in the wrong department can get a 'go report it here, plz' and a link to report the issue. On that subject, I can't get the OuterPlanets mod to update. It doesn't seem to be remobving or downloading the new package. I just get: About to remove: Done! and the progress bar at the top goes back and forth forever. Clicking Cancel stops the operation but clearly it hasn't updated the mod. EDIT: Can confirm I removed OuterPlanets and can't reinstall it. I have MM installed (it's only dep) and no conflicts.

The KW Rocketry package is not installing the ModuleAnimatedEmissive directory to GameData that is required by the emissive on the engines. The manifest needs adjusting to include this directory.

Hi, Love these parts! They look great and I really wanted to play with using Energia as a vertical stack launcher I have a few bugs to report, however. In 1.0.2 (Linux 64-bit fwiw) I am having alot of nodes not attachable (usual 1.0.x incorrect orientation issues). If I flip things upside down they work okay. I tried a bunch of parts and pretty much none of them work the right way up. Maybe you have your top and bottom nodes flipped around? Or maybe there's a conflict in my mods? Tested against the stock 1.0.2 game. same issues.

I *wondered* whyt everyone had been lagging on static fairings. As if they broke that, how stupid D: Can you not slum it and balance it using PFairing fairings for now? I know it'll probably look horrid but at least we can get MOST of the rocket back in the game and balanced?

You are quitre correct, it was missing, I installed through CKAN so someone needs to bug the person controlling the repo entry to alter the file manifest to include that directory :3

There's something a little wonky with your emissives setup I think. All the engines glow in the VAB! Shots of a couple: I haven't tried them all but that's 4 now that all do the same :3

I didn't know about the above, so no I didn't, but I'll remove them and see whether it improves I also got a 64-bit Linux PC build up and running today, so I'll try it in there too.

I had a quick play with the dev version from Github in 1.0.2 yesterday and I gotta say I LOVE the way they look now The MIP Blanket textures particularly look amazing. Also, the configs seem pretty spot-on. Didn't you have some ISS-esque tin can style textures at one point too? They'd be really nice to see. There's a but (there's always a but), however, those super detailed textures (yes, I read the instructions on the docking doors) are amazing BUT they take up metric craploads of RAM I'd have left it in my game had I not had other mods I was already using. It was just blowing my RAM out of the window and right now I'm stuck on 32-bit KSP in Windows (I'm desparately scrabbling to get a Linux volume on the PC to play 64-bit KSP in Linux). I don't know what the magic solution is, whether another format of textures will save RAM or wether you should offer us a low res version to save us some RAM. Etiher way it's the only thing stopping me using the dev version right now.

Ah yes, this is true. I confused them with the later B-57 type, I thought All US models were like that Well apart from the WB-57F which looks like Jeb put 2 fuel barrels on as air intakes Ah, right. I'm too used to the original RAF version (we invented it, you know! ). ANYWAY this is rapidly drifting off-topic. Beale I'm having trouble finding the Capella + Ariane parts in a science/career game? Are they all in the science tree? I can only find the Capella engine block :\ EDIT: I Should add I unlocked the entire science tree, but no parts :\

I did a quick check and 3 long stock 3.75m tanks (the NASAmission ones) holds *more* than my main tank on my Delta IV CBC tank (also 3.75m) of the same length, so I don't think it's PP's fault, I am sure PP assumes almost the same volumes as the stock tanks to keep it balanced with the stock game. I wouldn't say you were miles off, just maybe a little off. EDIT/UPDATE: With a little more research I realised the Delta IV CBC is not a solid tank, it has a large gap inbetween the LH2 and LOX tanks. Once I accounted for this in my replica the fuel quantity actually balances out pretty well, I'm sorry to bother you with my lack of research

Needs bigger engines, and also you need to rotate the Canberra's cockpit bubble slightly off-centre (unless the Martin version didn't have that 'feature', I don't remember)

Honestly, I think the poor number on the last version had a lot to do with timing and very little to do with your mod not being worthwhile. The last release you made fell awkwardly from my perspective, I wanted to try it but by the time I found out about it 0.90 was out and it's listed for 0.25, so I gave it a miss after trying it and the engine values being off in stock KSP. I've always liked KOSMOS and I'm sad it's not being updated. I'd use it (with an alternative Soyuz and Proton, if they come along) instead of Tantares in a heartbeat if it was up-to-date, and maybe used a shade less RAM, as it's more accurate and realistic and has URM (which is a great system). My suggestion would be if you have little or no time to work on it then turn it over to the community and let someone else help or carry it on. Many others have done the same with their mods and have kept popular add-ons going. I realise you put a lot of work into it, but would you rather see all that work sink into the past or carried forward? I know what my answer would be Hell, I'd help, but similarly to you the time and ability to actually work on these things (plus I know very little to nothing about a lot of aspects of KSP modding) eludes me. But I for one would love to see it carry on. GO KOCMOC! Edit: I just realised you updated it again after I tried it for 0.90. Doh Still, What I said above still stands!

Basemass of the tanks are halved, because of balancing reasons. Some feedback, this packs too much fuel in the tanks IMHO. Using it with Procedural Parts and MFT, I built an approximate scale 5m Delta IV M+ 5,4 and flew a 14.1 tonne payload to LKO with a lot of slack dV to spare. I'd back it off a bit for balance if it were me but it's up to you.

A suggestion perhaps for June when you have time to work on more complex parts: Some more MIR/Soyuz-like RCS clusters would be good. Russian RCS is always quite different, using only 2 blocks at each end with more jets, compared to the stock types. On Zarya ISS module On Soyuz (I think these are only fitted to the upper part, the lower are integrated in to the service module?) In both they fire: - Either up or down (effectively the part is rotatable though) - outwards - left and right This means you only need a pair at the top and a pair at the bottom, rather than 4 at each end (on large modules) and thus reduces part count Also some little mono-propellant engines for the MIR Core type modules that surface mount in the lower end, and a fold out comms dish ala Zvezda would be cool. Just some 'would be nice' suggestions.

Done