NathanKell

In fact if you're making missiles, your best bet will be to slightly tweak the angle of the fins before you place them, so they're constantly applying a bit of roll. That will spin-stabilize your projectile.

If you use the public static bool like I was suggesting, since it's static, you can just do Classname.variablename from the other class. Static variables exist globally, not per class instance, so you don't have to get the instance.

Hey, that's almost enough to get to Europa and back! You can do a Mars and back trip though.

Oafman: you are correct. This should make you crash less.

And you felt that slam against a fine space-faring people was relevant to this thread...how?

Quiana, mind if I put that in DRE proper?

Try to send up tanks at least partially full; dry tanks are very light and will probably break your craft. This is due to the joint system: a light part between two heavy parts is liable to break the joints at both ends.

Structural/heat limits on the airframe prevent much beyond 2.3 IIRC. Check out the F-15C SAC here: http://alternatewars.com/SAC/

I'm not aware of any special problems it causes; while any kind of exception is bad news, it doesn't mean a mod doesn't work, just that there's at least one issue somewhere in the code. Final Frontier's exceptions are a problem because it happens once per update, which writes to the log once per update (many times per second) which slows things down a lot since disk IO is slow.

SpacedInvader: yeah, sorry... thefeeblespark: did you install a set of engine configs, as the install instructions mention? See the OP/readme for install instructions, and the second post of this thread for links to engine config packs.

As a fellow BT junkie, and fellow plane geek, I approve. jrandom: "top speed" doesn't mean all that much. There is a speed at which point you will have to decrease thrust or start melting the (compressor | intake | fan | nozzle, but probably the compressor), but if you do decrease thrust you can keep going. However, I have just finished reworking all the turbojets and afterburning turbofans in AJE to (a) be specific models thereof, ( have actually correct stats for those models, and © have descriptions that try to fulfill your desire. Since static wet thrust is shown by the engine module's info I only add static dry thrust to the description. SFC is given in Imperial because that's what's used by the Tester and by my references. "Temperature limit" means, at this point at least one station of your engine will hit Tmax. Examples: title = AJE Rolls Royce Avon RB.146 Mk.302 description = The Avon was Rolls Royce's first axial-flow turbojet, introduced in 1950. The RB.146, an early 1960s model, was the ultimate military Avon, an afterburning turbojet powering the English Electric Lightning F.6. 56.45kN dry. SFC 0.85/1.85 lb/lbf-hr static. Temperature limit Mach 2.4. title = AJE Pratt & Whitney J57-P-21 Turbojet description = Late 50s turbojet. The J57 was a workhorse, designed in the early 1950s and powering the B-52, most of the Century Series fighters, and even the U-2. This represents a later model, the -21, which powered the F-100C/D/F. 45.4kN dry. SFC 0.77/2.1 lb/lbf-hr static. Temperature limit Mach 1.9. As before, you can just download-zip the github repo.

Garek: here is the spreadsheet I use to generate RftS engines. It lists all RftSized rocket engines. RedAV8R will be the first to tell you that it's not recommended if you want realism. (And I agree! ) But if you want to use the RPL tech tree, or want more "options" than actually-produced engines provide you with (and note "produced", not just "designed") then you might want to use RftS. Interestingly, it's possible to use multiple-ignition engines as lander engines, assuming you bring a lot and they have many ignitions. Place, say, 12 engines on your lander. As you want to decrease thrust, shut them off in pairs. If you get down to two, use their multiple ignitions to toggle them on and off to balance your thrust. (Note, this is basically how a lot of reusable rockets with propulsive landing were planned to work, i.e. ROMBUS: it had 36 engines, of which 4 would be reignited a few seconds before impact to slow from terminal velocity to a gentle landing.) Mar's atmosphere is...not really relevant. You'll maybe lose 10-15 seconds of specific impulse, and 3-5% of your thrust.

The temperature one is problematic: it's unduly generous to parts in cold environments, which might actually make them brittle. I would suggest having some penalty for t < 20C, say, increasing rapidly as t approaches -273.15 (absolute 0). That said, I *really* like this. It's worth remembering that one reason arguing against making reusable rockets is that a single (or maybe 2) launch-length burns of an engine make it unsuitable for reuse in terms of (questionable) reliability. Daishi: KSP doesn't *have* a heat damage model. What it has is a crappy heat dissipation/addition model (each tick, some constant times the difference between the part's temperature and the environment is added to the part, or subtracted if hotter than the environment) and crappy heat transference model (if a part is connected to me and less than ~5m away, do the same thing as above replacing "environment" with "other part"), and then the part explodes if part.temp > part.maxTemp. That's it, aside from the few things (like engines) that "produce" temperature.

SpacedInvader: I actually just had this discussion about multiple-tanks-per-part on IRC. There's a *ton* of RF/MFT logic (and functionality) that depends on only one tank per part. Consider this: how should the two tanks interact in terms of setting basemass? Right now, it's simple: you just set the part's mass based on the basemass + base tank masses. But with two tanks (with varying basemass and base tank masses) it gets quite complex. I'm always open to pull requests, but this is not high on my list of stuff to do myself because it will require a lot of rewriting. Dragon01: If you read my above post (again, I guess, since you quoted it), you will see that I already answered this. Changing configuration for an engine does not mean just switching feed lines. It means "what would an engine of the same mass and efficiency have in the way of performance statistics with this fuel."

NoMrBond: DO IT. Seriously, it's probably the single best mod I have ever used. Padishar: awesome!

Also, I think I probably *have* figured out what the problem was: You didn't have RO. That meant that with Real Fuels, you carried approximately 1/5 of the mass of fuel that you would in normal KSP, leading to those even-smaller-than-stock-FASA numbers.

cipherpunks: I don't really understand your question. What does "10% lowest throttling" mean? But as to throttling in RealEngines, you'll note that every engine listed in the PDF you linked that is in RealEngines has its correct throttling. (The SSME in real life has a min throttle in the 60s; the one in that study was a research model.) Do note that the first PDF is a study of throttling engines--it doesn't list the vast majority of engines, which don't throttle at all. Ricovandijk: regarding the Case of the Missing Delta V: yeah, sounds like a seriously broken install. We need logs. Also, it's worth pointing out, which I think might have gotten lost, that your delta V estimates are off: you need 9.3km/sec or so to reach orbit, not 7-8. Also, regarding the Atlas, do remember to drop the boosters at 2 min 15 sec into the flight: Atlas has a particular method of staging where instead of the boosters being separate cores, the booster engines feed from the main tank. You need to drop them at 2m15s into the flight. Finally, glad to see things back on track (and great to see two smart knowledgeable people combining notes on the habs).

Dimonnomid: I did receive the message; I generally save replying to lengthy PMs for the evening, but, err, sometimes I fall asleep. :] I'll get back to you ASAP. jrandom: nope, scaled space models have nothing to do with PQS subdivisions. You're fine leaving them as they are. Starwaster: Also a performance hog: disk writes are *expensive* when done each tick.

You definitely can query bindings rather than keys. I forget offhand how (via GameSettings IIRC?) though. And yeah what I wrote was because I *didn't* see it as involved: you just do orientation *= Quaternion.AngleAxis(part.transform.(appropriateVector), degrees). Bang.

No, no it's not. Your bandwidth would get used up in a day and Dropbox would disable public linking. I got bit by this in RSS (when I first started shipping planet textures); that's why I moved releases to GitHub.

Um, couldn't you just, on each press, apply an AngleAxis quaternion around the part's local (X/Y/Z) axis in the specified amount? Obviously that will not change the Y/P/R values consistently, but it would allow simple per-keypress rotation without gimbal locking.

It's in the second post of this thread.

I guesstimated that hydrolox engines have 75% of the TWR of kerolox engines, which seems to fit decently. For this reason when changing engine configs, hydrolox configs have 75% of the thrust. But it's all an abstraction anyway; real engines, you can't just swap out a propellant mixture for a totally different one.* The LR-87 is pretty unique in that it has been run on all three major propellant types, but it had to be redesigned for each. *well, presumably switching between Aerozine and UD25 wouldn't take much, other than changing pump RPM ratios. But certainly going from storable to cryo is a heck of a change. The holding vdot constant leading to changing mdot *is* correct for the NTRs though; that's why, say, LCH4 has a higher thrust, and LANTR has higher yet.

Post a picture of the rocket (with stats per stage from KER or MJ2) then describe how you fly your ascent profile.

ZobrAA: cool. Although it's not my mod, it's camlost's! Hodo: I'll make the AJE one the -229A, which seems the most recent, efficient, and powerful. Here's a great reference btw: http://books.google.com/books?id=_5vA_5XK33sC&pg=PA584&lpg=PA584&dq=%22j57-p-20%22&source=bl&ots=oPRpSbDVr7&sig=-o3UmLH74DP1SwJ4O5eORtJ1Bfc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wQ69U8_zF9DgsASgyYCACw&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=snippet&q=f100&f=false