MDBenson

Probably working on the mod, Mr Impatient

I hope low-res textures are available but really I'd run a separate install for this right now. It looks awesome.

Yeah I had that too. Only a minor niggle though. This mod just gets better and better. Totally loving it

Bravo! C'est manifique I do have a niggle though. On the Ariane 5 the second stage (that tiny little thing with little spherical tanks) has about 4000 or more m/s Delta-V when it's attached to ATV, according to MechJeb. Now, the calculation might be a little off or it might be that you made a mistake entering the fuel quantity??

I have managed to avert the Ares V SRB problem: - Lock the gimbal on the SRBs (the gimbal torque seems to make things way worse) - Use SAS only until the SRBs burn out (you'll have to start the gravity turn and stage the SRBs by hand if you use MechJeb. - DISABLE "Limit to Terminal Velocity" in MechJeb, this seems to agravate the issue (bigger thrust difference between SRBs and main stage?) and is ON even if the ascent autopilot is OFF if it is selected ANYWHERE (i.e. the check box in Ascent or in Utilities, which are linked together). UPDATE: Yep something in MechJeb specifically is screwing up the SRBs. They work just dandy if you use SAS and fly by hand. MechJeb is, as of 0.21, a piece of crap compared to the new SAS. SAS is smooth, works well and causes little wobble unless the craft is actually poorly designed, MechJeb has the craft waving all over the place in comparison. I think for now just don't use MechJeb or the options during the low altitude phases and turn it on once the SRBs have separated. ALSO: Be very careful in your gravity turn. If you are too aggressive you can cause the decoupler failure.

The issue, I think, is this line in the .cfg file: MODULE { name = ModuleParachute invertCanopy = true autoCutSpeed = 50 capName = cap2 canopyName = canopy2 semiDeployedAnimation = semi1 fullyDeployedAnimation = full1 stowedDrag = 0.22 semiDeployedDrag = 0.05 fullyDeployedDrag = 4 minAirPressureToOpen = 0.1 deployAltitude = 8000 deploymentSpeed = 1.5 semiDeploymentSpeed = 1.5 } That's the config for the brake chutes. the problem is they *don't* auto-cut at that speed. I just tried it and they went through 50m/s slowing down and didn't cut off. I had to do it manually using my configured action group key. ALSO: the Ares V SRB thing definitely isn't a strutting issue. I fitted mine with ALL THE STRUTS and they still exploded. Sometimes they just come adrift just after launch, other times they explode as I push into the gravity turn. Locking the Gimbal on them seems to make it happen at high altitude rather than low but generally it happens one way or the other. The failure of the SRB is the decoupler-to-SRB attachment breaking. I don't know if the new model SRB is causing it (doubtful), or the game has something different in 0.21. Currently comparing things to see if something changed. AND: I've tried downloading the Soviet Pack from the spaceport about 6 or 7 times and it's come down corrupt every time now. Other stuff downloads fine for me so I'm not sure of the issue, but if you could look at it or mirror it elsewhere it'd be handy

Something that's becoming a little frustrating for me with some of the excellent mods around that needs attention IMHO. Where a part has multiple actions that use the default modules (e.g. parachutes, activation animations etc.) there seems to be no way to provide a custom label for each action. The example I just tripped up on was on BobCat's Orion capsule (in the American Pack). His parachute system accurately simulates the Orion parachutes, i.e. braking chutes that deploy at high altitude, then these are cut and 3 main parachutes deploy at lower altitude. To make this system work right in some cases (low altitude aborts) you have to cut the braking chutes manually. The issue at hand is there are 2 sets of chutes using the standard parachute module. Both have a 'Deploy' and a 'Cut Chute' action in the Action Groups menu. It's *complete* guess-work trying to figure out which is which because there's nothing differentiating between them. Is this mod developers not understanding the workings of the system fair enough. Point me to the info to solve it and I'll pass it on. If, however, this is a shortcoming with Squad's system it would be better id there was a way to label the module you are activating so for e.g.: in the .cfg: MODULE { name = ModuleParachute actionLabel = "Main" MODULE { name = ModuleParachute actionLabel = "Brake" in the Action Group menu for the part: Deploy (Main) Cut Chute (Main) Deploy (Brake) Cut Chute (Brake) Although this isn't a perfect example, the point is fairly valid I think. I've seen several mods where there's a lot of confusion as to what action does what or what an action group actually does at all. It might be nice if any Action Group action could be labelled via the .cfg file to have a human-friendly name to differentiate it or describe it better. I HAVE seen some mods (cBBp's Dragon Rider for one) that have custom descriptions but these are for animations not things like parachutes, so don't use the standard modules. Just a thought...

Oh yes. This guy is a Pro. I'll be surprised if it hasn't got a DJ deck and a disco ball to go with it

Understood on the SRBs. I see, I understand how the chutes work on Orion, but the main chute is opening (on it's own) or at least the *animation* is activating so I have both sets open, but doesn't seem to have an effect. I kind of assumed it was working but I see it's not. Do I NEED to cut the braking chute before the main chutes take over? There are 2 right-click options both labelled 'Cut Chute' and I can't tell which is which chute, and I'm BOUND to pick the wrong one! EDIT: I went back and figured it out. It's confusing but I'm pretty sure that's SQUAD's fault not BobCat's as they don't allow you to label each action, it just uses a pre-written description i.e. 'Deploy', 'Cut Chute' 'toggle' etc. for action group actions. I may drop a suggestion in the correct forum to allow numbering or extra labelling of action group actions as I've seen multiple mods where this problem causes confusion with multiple action groups. What's even MORe confusing is if you run the actions for 'Cut Chute' and 'Deploy' twice it cuts the OTHER chute as well and you end up with non at all (Ouch...)! Anyway, I have run Pad Abort and High-Altitude Abort tests I've got it sussed. I can't remember which pair is the right pair of 'Cut Chute' and 'Deploy' actions but a couple of Pad Abort tests ought to see you right, although I recommend using MechJeb to run the pod unmanned as Kerbels *will* perish if you screw it up

Oh... AWSOME! Cant's wait to see this Laz, your modding skills are excellent

I have the same issue with the SRBs snapping off at random times on Ares V and also an unexplained random disintegration of the stack. Wasn't an issue in 0.20.x. I flew Ares V probably over 20 times. Now it breaks. Struts on the SRBs, also used Bobcat's build from the .craft files. I also have an issue I forgot to mention in the previous version that's still a problem. The Orion capsule parachutes don't generate nearly enough drag. The capsule hits the ground/sea at about 40m/s and explodes for me. I can verify it's still an issue as I had to do a couple of launch aborts on 0.21.1 goofing about with flying Orion on Ares V in SLS style (using the frankly incredibly awesome Procedural Fairings mod).

When you make the low profile interstage fairing bases can you add fuel crossflow? Right now I have to attach little stubby fuel lines on the upper interstage fairing to get the engines to work. It's no real huge issue tio overcome to use such a BLOODY AWESOME mod but it's a little detail that could do with tweaking out. I just realised I can fix it for now in the .cfg file but I'm a lemon and forgot

... and now Bjorklund has pulled the plug on KerbX these are the only surviving Falcon mods. He won't release any of his original materials for others to carry on his work so Laz is our only hope. (Cue Princess Leia scene)

Don't feed the Trolls, please

Or if you want to do it properly so it actually looks like it's supposed too, add: scale = 1 rescaleFactor = 1 below the 'model =' line for each part and scales it perfectly to fit the KerbX Falcon 9. Nothing's changed regards the size or model or textures since the previous version as far as I can see, but I'm glad the bug fixes have happened and it's in 0.20.x format now If you want to you can actually use the KerbX Trunk, nosecone, solar arrays, solar array covers and trunk adapter on it, hey fit perfectly I prefer the KerbX trunk because it has the Dragon logos on the solar array covers.

Is there any chance you could provide scaled versions of the larger clusters (say 6 and larger) to fit 3.75m and 5m tanks? These are a really cool idea but I rarely use 2.5m tanks these days!

Firstly, thanks for fixing the mod up for 0.20.0, it's a capsule I use a LOT. Is there any chance you could remove the docking port and just give us a flat surface (maybe above the ASAS ring) to mount our own port? I know some might not fit under the nose cone but still, it'd be nice to have a choice.

Thought of this the other night while building a space station - would it be possible to implement a 'Station-keeping' function to trim your relative speed using the RCS while near another rendezvous craft? Set the craft then set the station-keeping distance and let it sit. It'd have to be quite sparing with the RCS perhaps. In other news I went from build 66 to build 69 and it's a definite improvement.

Honestly, if you want something like this the set of FusTek Expansion station parts is awesome, well designed and covers pretty-much all this mod did. Also most of the ISS Modules are available on the ISS Community mod.

I actually mentioned this a couple of days ago as a possible feature for NovaPunch. Awesome stuff, thanks EDIT: Okay I tried these on a quick test craft and they work okay but for one snag. They flipped around and bumped the outside of the craft and broke off 2 f the 4 landing legs. I think they need to have a little less violent separation force!

I'd just like to say this pack has once again become one of my favourite rocket-building packs. I have some suggestions, some you might have already seen if so I apologise in advance: - Some flatter fuel tanks for each size, half the height of the current smallest ones. - More and better engines (I know, you're working on revamps) for each diameter. - A return of the Saturn V-style 5m 5-nozzle flared engine cluster, and possibly a scaled 3.75m version too. Another more complex idea struck me that might be kinda trick and useful visa-vis your fairing system. I regularly come across situations where a fairing wall is just too long or just too short. I usually overlap the two parts (I often stack payloads using multiple bulkheads or one project I have uses the fairings as an aero-shell around a lander that it sheds after entering the atmosphere). Now, looking at the 'PWing' add-on, it seems someone has worked out how to dynamically scale a part and the stats it has on the fly in the Editor. What would be UBER cool is if you could provide a procedural variable-length fairing wall for each diameter so we can attach it and set the length dynamically.

I think I may just have fallen in love

Cross-feed yields better at-launch thrust combined with a longer burn time but reduced lift capacity past at the Stage0/Stage 1 phase (I experimented using it and not using it myself in KSP). The advantage is the middle stage still have about 95+% of propellant when the outer stages separate meaning it can burn longer on a big booster. The disadvantage is the centre stage also has lost very little weight and suddenly has 1/3rd of the thrust. The TWR drops significantly which makes it unsuitable for heavier payloads. However, cross-feed can be relatively easily removed to and a conventional system can be adopted to adapt to heavier payloads if required, combined with the Delta IV-H central booster throttle-down.

I think there's a bug in the game associated with the physics and changing craft with the '[' and ']' keys. It suspends the physics then reactivates them in some cases I think (at least that's what BobCat mentioned) and can cause issues with craft exploding. I don't think it's wholly related to the Romfarer plugin actually (it might aggravate it, or you may be thinking of a different issue that Romfarer tried to 'fix' with the launch towers?) as it's happened to me without that installed, in fact it's happened to me with a stock game before now (although it was 0.20.0) so I think it's a bug in KSP. I have found it doesn't happen if you use the map screen to switch or go back to the Tracking Station and switch that way (although the latter will unload some things like KAS winch lines and stuff so it's no ideal). It may also be worth trying turning off the ASAS on any craft in the scene before switching. It may be related to ASAS wobble.

If you change the 'scale=' variable it will mess up the nodes but if you use 'rescaleFactor=' they stay in the right places and scale with the part... I think.