MDBenson

I have exactly the same issue. I've tried Chrome and Firefox and must hacve downloaded it about 20 ties and no dice. Still get an invalid archive (using Windows 7 ZIP archive support and 7Zip).

It's precisely because the new SAS logic doesn't lock the attitude of the craft that means it can't cope with ascent. Remember, the Shuttle is not a plane on ascent (for the large part), it's a rocket. The new SAS might work on the way down real well (*makes a mental note to try that*) but it does not work on the way up the way the TSAS or MechJeb do (by doing aggressive attitude holding by using the engine gimbal). The ascent profile of the Shuttle stack is computer controlled and maintained, it's not flown by hand, thus it's subjected to attitude holding by the flight computer, only the Shuttle flight computer makes small changes gently to keep it on course, whereas TSAS and the old ASAS aggressively adjust it constantly. The biggest issue I can see with the TSAS/old ASAS is it tends to over-adjust and ends up flapping at the problem and building up resonance, rather than making micro-adjustments to maintain attitude steadily.

I assume TSAS is complete replacement SAS system in a plugin module? If so then I guess it'll stick. I think if that's the case my theory about the new SAS not reacting fast enough to correct the thrust imbalance is about right. New SAS is great for straight-up-and-down rockets and stopping space stations wobbling to bits but sucks for more unusual stuff. Just out of curiosity, what ascent profile do you use in MechJeb? It looks a lot steeper than mine.

Are you using the HD or standard version, Chimer? The HD version is very large and the textures take up a LOT of RAM, that's why there's 2 versions of the mod. Also I've taken to breaking up my KSP game into multiple installs for different mod groups (One for Spaceplanes, one for Testing new stuff, one for my Duna landing projects, one for Mun Landing projects, one for orbiting space stations etc.) The game can't handle many parts in flight at once anyway so doing all those things at once would make LKO in one install crash the game anyway I'm pretty sure I *am* going to check the debug log while it's running as it isn't as quick on my system as I think it ought to.

The re-scale looks much better Cephus. I guess it's no quick-fix to convert this to the new SAS. I tried reconfiguring the TSAS Forward RCS to a Part with a ReactionWheel part and the crap hit the fan. The stack pitches over forwards even with SAS on. I'm guessing the engine balancer doohickmee relies on that TSAS module being there or does it interface (interfere??) with the old-style ASAS??

This is an awesome tool to have around. It's come in handy a few times when working on complicated stacks.

You can easily remove the MechJeb module by editing the .CFG files: Just delete this part from each: MODULE { name = MechJebCore }

Yup. I can totally see me using these as a basis for a deep space exploration vessel. They look awesome and the modular nature of them makes them super-useful and versatile. I hadn't used them for a while until I waited for the .21 update and the extra new parts (Kupola, Legacy Kuest Airlock and Kirks Docking port) make it a really good space station builder. Some things you could work on in addition are: Radiator Arrays (work like solar arrays but sit at 90-degrees to the sun) Station-size Solar Arrays (or at least some cool looking trusses to mount Gigantors on) A lighter, less bulky version of Fusty's K1 truss with some SAS (it was a pig to fly into orbit) Otherwise I'm loving it lots

Okay I tried this out and it's really cool, finally a solution to my space station module docking woes! 2 suggestions: Can you make the alignment 'clock' indicator bigger so it's a little more accurate to see the alignment. Also this would be the perfect tool if you added the translational cross-hairs to it like Romfarer's docking camera has.

The Falcon 9 is pretty much as good as it's RL counterpart. I've used it to shove about 13t to a 90km orbit so far. The limiting factor is the upper stage Delta-V and circularisation but you can re-slant that using a shallower ascent profile. I'm just using MechJeb and whatever it was set to so I'm underusing the lower stage and relying a lot on the upper. Looking at the numbers, the F9H should be able to push 30+ tonnes to LKO but I haven't managed to get it to hold together long enough to put up that kind of mass. I'm having (more) problems with the boosters detaching in the gravity turn.

Falcon Heavy is quoted on SpaceX's site(1) as capable of pushing 53 tonnes to LEO (that's double the payload of a Delta IV Heavy) Falcon 9's quoted payload push to LEO (2) is 13.15 tonnes. Darth: I think you are confusing Falcon Heavy with the Falcon X/ Falcon XX family which is the next (much larger) proposed phase up from Falcon 9 and uses a proposed new version of the Merlin engine.

LOL you released the new one while I was testing the previous new one! Looks great but Id really love to be able to turn that blue light off. It bugs the crap out of me because it's still illuminating the solar arrays, the trunk and anything close to it. I love how you even implemented a proper secondary payload system too, that's awesome Minor issue: If you re-enter at 4x acceleration and deploy the chute (in my case it was an emergency and the batteries were dead) the off-axis parachute system breaks off the capsule and your kerbals plummet to their doom.

The Dry Mass of the Dragon cargo capsule is 4.2 tonnes (source). Add seats and extra internals, additional life and crew support and avionics into that and 5 tonnes doesn't seem far off to me. I think some people grossly underestimate the capability of the Dragon Rider capsule's projected abilities, also. The real SuperDraco's generate 67kN *each*. Even scaled to 64% for KSP a set of 8 makes 320kN approx. That's pretty fierce. The limnitation on the Dragon is really the fuel capacity above anything else IMHO.

Each SuperDraco generates 67,000N (67 kN) of thrust. Even scaled to 64% for KSP that's still 42kN. There are 8 SuperDraco engines on a Dragon Rider. That gives you approx. 340kN of thrust. That's a LOT for such a small craft, but if you figure it has to slow the capsule down from post re-entry speed (about 800m/s) to practically zero on landing, as well as being able to rapidly accelerate the capsule away from the rocket in the event of abort, then it kinda needs it. The Delta-V issue might just be an over-calculation of the fuel provided. I suspect it needs fine-tuning to provide a little less. The capsule shouldn't be able to achieve orbit on Kerbin but should on Duna (after landing, which itself uses a decent amount of fuel) so it's a delicate balance. Also, certainly for a mission that involves landing and launch on a foreign body, it's entirely possible that the capsule's fuel and engine config would indeed be able to make a decent shot at orbit from Kerbin, as the fuel it contained would be spent landing and taking off from, say Duna, but the rocket itself is needed to actually GET there with all that fuel unused.

Read the Fine Manual, please (It's in the OP)

I thought it probably was as cBBp's Dragon was that was too. In which case, bonus points for accuracy

No, I mean like the radial covers on the SpaceX Dragon solar arrays on the truck section. Something you can stick to the outside of a tank or service module, or even a piece of procedural fuselage, to cover something non-aerodynamic. You;d have to size it by hand as I'm pretty sure sizing it dynamically would be near-on impossible, but it'd be handy

Oh. My. Days. This is MEGA! No more ugly lumpy service modules with RCS and batteries all over them! My only question is can I surface-attach items to the outside? A suggestion for a possible further goal is a procedural side-shell to radially attach over existing parts (to cover solar arrays, aerials, RCS/engine ports etc. until out of the atmosphere). Will be tricky, perhaps.

I've had a couple of ships break up on me since upgrading to in 0.21.1 (BobCat's Ares V and Laz's new Falcon 9 heavy). It seems to be to do with the strength of the radial decouplers in 0.21.x and is something that never happened in 0.20.x. The reason I posted it here is it seems to happen a great deal more if I use 'Limit to Terminal Velocity' and I *suspect* (don't know for certain, needs more testing) that the decoupler flex is causing the craft to oscillate and the throttle to 'bounce' which is making it worse and breaking the ship. Is that potentially possible? Might using 'Smooth Throttle' help? I'm using Dev build 72, FWIW.

Another question: Is the Trunk section deliberately skewed off from 90-degrees? Not an issue, and if it's deliberate I learned something new, but I'd like to know either way. It's bugging my OCD

Ooohhh... ouch. I tried to launch the F9H/RedDragon using MechJeb 2.0.9 and baaaad things happened as it swung into the gravity turn. One side booster broke away and the whole thing few itself apart. We;'ve had a similar issue with he SRBs on BobCat's Ares V too, it seems something aboutt he dynamics of decouplers or boosters has changed in 0.21.x that's made the connections weak. EDIT: I think I isolated this (again, as it was in BobCat's) to the 'Limit to Terminal Velocity' option. It seems to cause undue stress between the main stage and booster stages. Porbably due to it boincung the throtle too viloently? I dunno, anyway I turned it off and life is sweet again. My only possible gripe is people on lesser computers might find the 27 thrust transforms on the F9H slow their computer almost to a stop. Mine's pretty meaty and even it choked on them a bit. Great job all round Laz. Get the 0.2x folder structure set-up right and we'll be cooking on gas, or er, monoprolellant, or something that burns. EDIT2: Can you tone down the blue light inside the capsule? It's shining on stuff outside the module and it looks weird. It even creates a blue patch under the F9 on the launchpad!

Wouldn't it be better if they pooled resources and worked together? Duplicating the work twice over is pointless. You just end up with 2 identical add-ons with bugs and some missing features in onet and other missing features in the other and a lot of frustration. I know I'm a hopeless optimist, but seriously, it'd be nice to see co-operation on a big SpaceX project. You both have excellent components of a larger puzzle here.

That looks awesome. Lots of work but it looks much better and hopefully has ironed a lot of the niggles out Looking at your screenshots you could maybe use a wee bit more fairing separation force, they look a little close to the main-stage for comfort

IIRC The ASAS in the 0.19 version actually optionally used MechJeb for landing guidance so I'd say yeah I think it ought to work okay. As Laz already integrates MechJeb (and I'm sure he said he'd upgrade that to 2.0.x in the new version) I'm guessing he;s testing using MechJeb anyway? This in 2.5m + Procedural Fairings and really you may as well sell your soul to Elon

Sooooo... now you can remove the Dragon Brain ASAS part... can you make the top flat so we can fit different docking ports? Include the existing one as a separate part by all means, but I'd like tobe able to swap em out depending where I'm docking. Pretty please? Sugar on top?