NathanKell

e of pi, a hearty welcome! Lack: neat! Reddragon, I think you're right. So what I'm going to ask is that everyone who is not only interested in the mod but interested in helping *make* the mod post that they are (I know many already have...) and include *about how much of a commitment they can make (many of us have other projects) *what their skill areas are, and perchance previous work they've done *what sort of things they are interested in doing, both in terms of the skill area (modeling, texturing, plugin coding, Unity work, stats, etc.) and in terms of the kind of part or thing (pods, engines, IVAs, repurposing other parts, making/coding a human EVA model/animation, whatever). Then I'll make a big google drive spreadsheet and we can try parting out the workload. This will also involve trying to figure out what assets we already have available that can be repurposed, and asking permission of the various mod authors.

Awesome!

What's wrong with GitHub releases?

camlost, you might want to use my textures as well for those engines. You can do !mesh and then insert the whole MODEL node from the engine definition (changing the texture path to wherever you want to stick the textures). B9 is SA so that's fine, as long as attribution is to B9 for the original textures and me for the hackjob repaints. All here: https://github.com/NathanKell/ReachingfortheStars/tree/master/RftS/Parts/Jets And once you do that, then I no longer have to ship anything but the VULCAN with RftS. Also, wingnuts of the non-political kind might appreciate my newly remade F-100C Super Sabre / Hun. Now with actual more-or-less trapezoidal fuselage!

Ah, I mentioned because the first shot with data shows you burning LH2. Was that an upper stage then? Yeah, well, early spacecraft were *all* automatic.

Oh. Um. <blush> Nonono, the life time you have is fine I think; I'm just saying that in the grand scheme of things (compared to a jet engine, say) your average liquid fuel rocket engine has a mayfly's life, even in KSP where you can restart them in orbit etc. Frankly I would expect something more like 10 hours for real life (booster) engines.

Uh, I've hit 3.2 at sea level. Just gotta be careful. Here's something at 2.4.

Nice! What are you using for lower stage engine? Not many hydrolox lower stages...

They are replacements for the J-2s: you can mount, say, 3 M-1s instead.

Ippo: yikes! Hope I've not been running around scolding people...certainly not been trying to, although lately my patience with installation issues isn't what it once was. :] As I said on your dev thread, I'm following this most keenly! I love random failures (I'm a realism bolshevik, that kinda goes without saying...) As to engines--it's kinda complex, since really not many rocket engines at all are throttleable. In fact, only a few lower-stage engines and some engines designed for landers are. (The RL-10 was originally designed for the USAF lunar base mission and was thus designed to be throttleable). Throttling an engine is *hard* since it usually decreases Isp (*especially* at sea level; throttling can be done by lowering chamber pressure, but that drastically reduces sea level Isp). The SSME has a range of about 67% to 109%. The "109%" is just because later engines had a higher max thrust and rather than redo the avionics and gauges they just left 100% at where it originally was. It's run at 109% at liftoff, then throttled down when it no longer needs so high a chamber pressure, and to lower G load for the crew. Higher chamber pressure is generally bad, but running your turbopump etc. at lower than rated RPM is also, IIRC, bad. So a U-shaped curve is probably best. It's also worth considering whether you want 100% thrust in KSP to be "maximum thrust" or, as it were, "overthrust"--something beyond what the engine is reliably rated for, but something achievable by boosting the turbopumps, say. Then again even in KSP where you can restart them the lifetime of engines is quite short...

Well now. That's looking quite wonderful!

Just heard back from nixonshead: he too is very excited to see this stuff in KSP. While he's busy enough he doesn't have a chance to work on low-poly models himself, he's fine with us using his work to make low-poly stuff from. We'll get them hosted and then you fine folks (more skilled than I at partmaking, that's for sure!) can work direct from source, and use source for baking.

No, they have at least two. But all but the bottom node are *inside* the interstage.

That Centaur / RL-10 is amazing. Does Not Disappoint indeed!

1. You probably want to create an Engine wrapper. You can use the very nice one in swamp_ig's KSPAPIExtensions, for example, or model off the barebones one I have in Real Fuels. 2. For many engines, being throttled down is actually rougher on the components than being at maximum throttle, IIRC--throttling rocket engines is hard stuff.

Midanthrope, SpacedInvader: yeah, when I first released 6.2 I had the SSBump line commented out for Kerbin, since EVE Overhaul replaces the scaled space shaders and doesn't support normal maps, so there was no point loading a giant texture that wouldn't be used. However, I then realized that not everyone uses EVE Overhaul (many still use EVE 7.3, or not at all), and EVE will hopefully soon again support normal maps, and therefore put the line back in. CNAyaka: For some reason. (Give me no information and I can give you no helps. Please at least describe the problem!) thutmose: as I mentioned on IRC, NovaSilisko also ran into this problem with Alternis, and it never really got solved IIRC. It has to do with Kerbin not being in the sun's SOI. And no, it's not because vessels are loaded first; RSS runs on the main menu, before you can even click things to start loading saved games. Try a minimal RSS config where the only thing changed is moving Kerbin to Jool's SOI. If the issue recurs, that's definitely what's causing it.

Tweakables has gotten some love, in the form of swamp_ig's KSPAPIExtensions.

Reddragon: cool! I would request, though (and maybe you're planning this anyway) making separate parts rather than an all-in-one SM+engine... Green Skull: yeah, on the Art link in the OP is all the imagery. Although all suits have thus far been very close to real life, so you can just use real life reference pics... That said, for this to really work right we need a human, not a kerbal, mesh. Anyone interested in taking that project on?

Very nice!

BombastixderTeutone: First, it's not really safe to set a part's mass to 0. Set it to something like 0.0001. Also, recall that solid fuel is itself heavy, and 843 units of it are going to mass about 1.5 tons. If you want your fuel to actually provide thrust, it's gonna need mass. You could of course give your engine an insanely high Isp, and then decrease the amount of SolidFuel contained, I guess... However, you generally *want* an unstable configuration for your escape tower, since you want not just to be lifted *up*, but *away* from the stack, since otherwise (if in flight) it may hit you, or (if from the pad) you want to land outside the radius of the explosion and fire and toxicity. As for the scaling: check the original part's cfg. It may not already have a rescaleFactor. If it doesn't, then (a) you need to insert rather than splice (so no @) and ( you might need a value other than 4.16 (since if rescaleFactor defaults to 1.25, then changing it to 4.16 will not lead to a part that's 4.16x as large, but one that's 3.3x as large). Vigelus: as RedAV8R says, start fresh, install just the base dependencies of RO, and then start adding extra mods one by one. As soon as something breaks, post log.

Yep, and every 2.2 units of oxidizer, 1.8 units of LF, and any other multiple you'd like to use.

If you have an engine attached to your vessel, tanks with a connection to that engine will have the option to be autoconfigured for that engine's mixture. These button(s) [1 per mixture, with a tooltip showing which engines use that mixture] will appear at the bottom of hte list of resources when there is available volume in the tank.

Still don't see how it counts as "nerfing" when you're upping the specific impulse by 35% though. Hydrolox is *higher* performance than kerolox. Also, you might be interested in this, somewhere around the goldilocks point you're looking for.

Ah, I see. Gotcha.

Put another way, 55% Oxidizer, 45% LiquidFuel.