Wedgenet

No Deadly Re-entry. I don't think that any of the mods installed alter heat, but like many players, I've gone a little hog-wild with the mods. Here is a list of the mods from ckan: In addition I have one mod manually installed: B9 Procedural Wings "Heat Control" I believe is just a parts pack, installed as a Dependency/Recommendation of KSPI-E.

TLDR: This is a PEBCAK issue. I ran some tests, and it seems that I just need a lot more radiator area than I thought I would. I didn't notice any perceptible difference between zero radiators and when I added a single stock edge radiator, but clearly it was just not enough to notice. This is in a sandbox game. Test 1: EBR-100 heat Exchanger, Two Graphite Radiator Edge Long attached to the heat exchanger exploded from overheating at 6:37 Test 2: EBR-100 heat Exchanger, 4 graphite radiator edge long attached to the heat exchanger engine exploded from overheating at 8:17 Test 3: EBR-100 heat Exchanger, 8 graphite radiator edge long attached to the heat exchanger engine exploded from overheating at 20:33 Test 4: EBR-100 heat Exchanger, 24 graphite radiator edge long attached to the heat exchanger engine temperature stable.

Yes, I do mean engine temperate and not wasteheat. I have tried the heat exchanger too. However, it seems that the heat exchanger isn't tweakscale-configured? At least in my game, I have two different exchangers. A 1.25m and a 2.5m version. It doesn't seem very effective on the massive Kerbstein. I tested it by running two Kerbsteins, one with a heat exchanger and one radiators and one alone. There was a very very small difference in temperature, but only enough to give me another couple seconds of engine time. Maybe the exchanger would be more effective if I let it scale up by modifying the part config. Thanks.

How should we go about cooling Kerbstein engines? The engines themselves overheat during long burns, and given what kind of engine the Kerbstein is, that's pretty much all of them. No amount of radiators, no matter where they're placed seem to make a difference. Is this expected behavior, or should I start looking to see if I may have a mod conflict? I can work around it by time-warping during the burn, which "works" only because the engine isn't actually considered to be running by the heating mechanics at that time. It's not a game-killer, but it is a bit sad to see those big beautiful engines explode 8 minutes into a burn if I choose not to timewarp.

@Mallikas I just wanted to post a thank you. I've been enjoying using these cockpits in a lot of jet recreations I've been doing recently. These parts have really helped me out making better recreations. Thanks!

@Ilya I experience this bug now and I am still running the previous version of FAR: v0.15.6.5 "Knudsen", so I don't believe that it is new to Küchemann, or even necessarily related to FAR.

Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/3mdyewdgbi3097o/Manta%20S%20stock.craft?dl=0

An ISS-like station orbiting earth. (RSS+RO)

As the Overhaul releases have been deprecated, what build do you recommend I use for Real Solar System? I've been using Overhaul-9-2 with x64 RSS mostly successfully. Just a few glitches here and there.

I would also like to know what you are replicating that has a 2nd stage with a TWR of 0.12. I guess that if you have a low thrust upper stage, you want to have a steeper ascent profile for your first stage than you normally would, because you will the extra time for your underpowered second stage to get up to orbital velocity. Just a hunch though, and not something I've tested or done math for.

Choose a different engine? I find myself trying to install every engine pack under the sun supported by RealEngines or RftS in order to not end up in that situation. What engines do you have available? Are you using RealEngines or RftS?

That's okay. The center of mass doesn't need to be in the center of the rocket. As others have said, what you really need are some fins in the back of the rocket. Think about how a dart flies through the air when you throw it at a dart board. The fins in the back of the dart stabilize it as it flies through the air. Rockets have fins so they don't flip. Here is a picture of a German V2. Your rocket needs some fins. http://www.warhistoryonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/4609-050-33F555A7.jpg

I get it now, thank you. I'm torn between loving and hating the breathing engine changes in FAR 0.14.1. I don't want to remove the nerf entirely since the stock thrust is pretty absurd, so I might just play with the curve to find a flavor I like. Thanks for the explanation. Edit: or, why don't I just use AJE in my non RSS/RO game?.. derp. p.s. Ferram, I want to have your Kerbal babies.

My question was about the difference between the thrust in the part.cfg and what I observed in-game, not a question of why this was done. I'll let you get back to arguing with Renegrade about real jet engines. Thanks, bud.

Having reread the last few pages a couple times, I didn't find it, sorry. Could you throw me a bone and at least give me the page it's on?

RAPIERS have a max thrust of 60kN now, but I never see more than 40kN on the runway. Can someone please explain the curve to me? Is there anything I can do design wise to compensate for this?

No. This is a new craft on the launchpad for testing.

I'm having the "Incorrectly mounted" problem. I have applied the Module Manager config. It looks correct visually, but the processor is mounted incorrectly, and thus cannot be serviced. KSP.log: [LOG 14:08:03.337] [KAS] ContextMenuStore - Add node transform if not exist... [LOG 14:08:03.337] [KAS] AddTransformToAttachNode - Node : bottom already have a nodeTransform, only update [LOG 14:08:03.338] [KAS] ContextMenuStore - Move part... [LOG 14:08:03.338] [KAS] ContextMenuStore - Couple part with bay... [WRN 14:08:03.339] [PartJoint]: None of the provided nodes was valid! This is the config I added. It changed the visuals for the part, so I know that it has been loaded. @PART[tele_mount]{ @node_stack_top = 0.0, -0.3, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 0 } @PART[tele_processor_*]{ @MODULE[KASModuleGrab]{ @evaPartDir = (0,-1,0) } }

Could anyone tell me which of these statements is currently true? I think I prefer the flavor of RftS, but also the flavor of FASA... From this thread: From the RedAV8R Realism Packs for RSS

Thanks. If this isn't the expected behavior, maybe I should just re-install KW?

I'm trying to track down the cause of a visual problem I've been having while running RSS+RO using RftSEngines.cfg. The KW Rocketry Engines always draws the shroud, even when there is no part attached to the bottom of the engine. Like so I can deal with it by removing the shrouds from the part entirely by commenting out the shroud model lines from each KW engine in RftsEngines.cfg, but that means no shrouds ever. I can live with that, but it's not as pretty. Is there a way I can wrangle this to not draw the shrouds unless there is a part attached to the engine bottom? I'm puzzled by this, since I've never seen this behavior before, and I can't pin down if it's a modulemanager, KW, RftS, or PEBKAC issue. Any theories would be appreciated. modulemanager v 2.1.0 rfts v2 KSP.log

After a short KSP hiatus, I upgraded to the latest KSP Interstellar and decided to try out the new larger fusion reactors as a powerplant for a microwave power network. I have a pair of 3.75m fusion Tokamak reactors in D/T mode attached to the large generations in direct conversion mode. I'm getting the power I expect, but when I switch on the transmitter, my power demand exceeds my theoretical supply and the transmitter seems to think that it's beaming more power than the generators can create. As the mod tells me, I lose my plasma heating and cannot sustain the fusion reaction for long. Is this: 1. a poor choice of reactor for this task? 2. a poor choice of generator for this task? 3. a bug? 4. Related to Fractal_UK's Post #6474 in this thread? 5. ?

Thanks. I will install RftS from here and use that instead. Is that what you meant, or should I only be using the RftSEngines.cfg from that pack? Also, does that mean that I should not be using the SFJB Realengines configs at all?

I noticed that the Stratus II radial RCS tanks do give that information, but the Stratus V's do not. Always test on the ground. This feature has actually led me to mostly avoid the radially mounted RCS tanks. Given that we're using RealFuels, I just allocate a small portion of a main tank for Hydrazine or MonoPropellant, or whatever my RCS system requires. It saves parts, time, and is prettier.

I did that, and the engines no longer have fuel stability, ignition requirements etc. Should I have moved them somewhere else instead? Did I not get some other cfgs I should have? Or is that the intended way for the Realism Overhaul to function, and the Ignitor mod does something more subtle? Thanks to all for the work & support for this. I'm having great time with a big Kerbin and all the new challenges to consider.