Galane

Had a bit of a misplaced - sign. 6 LV engines proved to be too wimpy so I kicked the nodes out a little and fit 8 in the ThunderMax diameter. Now I'm thinking 10 could fit on the Maximus version. PART { name = thunderInterstage module = Part author = Squad, Galane MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/MK1FuselageStructural/model position = 0, 1.15, 0 scale = 5, .5, 5 rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Parts/Command/probeCoreOcto/model000 // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/MK1FuselageStructural/model position = 0, 0, 0 scale = 2, 2, 2 rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Parts/Command/probeCoreOcto/model000 // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } rescaleFactor = 1.0 // --- node definitions --- // definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3 node_stack_bottom1 = 0, -1.5, 0, 0, 1, 0, 3 node_stack_bottom11 = 1.8, .78, 0, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom12 = 1.273, .78, 1.273, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom13 = 0, .78, 1.8, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom14 = -1.273, .78, 1.273, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom15 = -1.8, .78, 0, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom16 = -1.273, .78, -1.273, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom17 = 0, .78, -1.8, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom18 = 1.273, .78, -1.273, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_attach = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0, 0, 1 TechRequired = veryHeavyRocketry entryCost = 8800 cost = 3600 category = Structural subcategory = 0 title = ThunderMax Interstage Adapter manufacturer = AeroKerbin Thunder Division description = AeroKerbin wants you to go to space today, with a ThunderMax second stage. attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0 stackSymmetry = 7 mass = 4 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.3 angularDrag = 2 crashTolerance = 12 maxTemp = 2900 breakingForce = 1e37 breakingTorque = 1e37 } } That will lift a ThunderMax 64 tank with a small payload off the pad and nearly to orbit without a booster stage so given a kick up from a ThunderMax 128 with four mainsails and five LV it should carry on to orbit. Still the issue of having a fairing around it all. A possibility that came to mind is removing the center peg and requiring a Mainsail in the middle to attach the large decoupler, then requiring a bunch of struts zigzagged across the gap. Not an elegant solution and somewhat defeats the concept of reducing parts count via really large fuel tanks. As it is, it works with the stock Kerbodyne decoupler and is very solid in flight, but looks fugly. 4:48 AM so I should go to bed so I can get up in time for my 43rd birthday dinner today. ;-)

Here's what I have so far for an interstage adapter to fit between two ThunderMax tanks. I plan on an upsized Kerbodyne decoupler to go with it. Why? Because I want to use those giant tanks in second stages instead of bundling Rockomax or Kerbodyne tanks together. One tank, no struts, several fewer parts. Things to do yet and questions 1. Put 6 mounting nodes for LV size engines around it instead of 4. Doesn't look like room for 8, but probably will be on the ThunderMaximus version. Bolt circle calc with coordinates output. http://theoreticalmachinist.com/BoltCircleCalc node_stack_bottom11 = 1.7, .78, 0, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom12 = .85, .78, -1.472, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom13 = -.85, .78, 1.472, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom14 = -1.7, .78, 0, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom15 = -.85, .78, -1.472, 0, 1, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom16 = .85, .78, -1.472, 0, 1, 0, 2 2. How do I get the decoupler to make a fairing when attached to the center bottom node? Anything special about the bottom node on engines? Make this a kind of dummy engine? 3. Strength? Will this bend and break at the bottom node? I could push the engines out a bit farther and increase the "peg" diameter. 4. I'd thought I'd have to figure out how to block fuel flow on just the center bottom node but then I realized that decouplers don't have fuel crossfeed. Whew! Tricky problem averted - and some crazy people might stick another engine on the "peg" and use this as a first stage engine mount with asparagus boosters. PART { name = thunderInterstage module = Part author = Squad, Galane MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/MK1FuselageStructural/model position = 0, 1.15, 0 scale = 5, .5, 5 rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Parts/Command/probeCoreOcto/model000 // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/MK1FuselageStructural/model position = 0, 0, 0 scale = 2, 2, 2 rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Parts/Command/probeCoreOcto/model000 // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } rescaleFactor = 1.0 // --- node definitions --- // definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3 node_stack_bottom1 = 0.0, -1.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3 node_stack_bottom11 = 0, .78, 1.7, 0.0, 1.0, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom12 = 0, .78, -1.7, 0.0, 1.0, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom13 = 1.7, .78, 0, 0.0, 1.0, 0, 2 node_stack_bottom14 = -1.7, .78, 0, 0.0, 1.0, 0, 2 node_attach = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1 TechRequired = veryHeavyRocketry entryCost = 8800 cost = 3600 category = Structural subcategory = 0 title = ThunderMax Interstage Adapter manufacturer = AeroKerbin Thunder Division description = AeroKerbin wants you to go to space today, with a ThunderMax second stage. attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0 stackSymmetry = 3 mass = 4 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.3 angularDrag = 2 crashTolerance = 12 maxTemp = 2900 breakingForce = 1e37 breakingTorque = 1e37 } }

@Neutrinovore What's real fun is when lag makes MJ slam one ship backwards with engines at full throttle into the one it's doing a rendezvous with, smashing away everything above the 2 man lander can. OK, minor setback, they can still abort mission and land because down to the next decoupler is still functional landing craft built for Eve, so Kerbin is easy. Orbits look good, wreckage of other ship is retrograde and higher, KSC we are go for high deorbit burn to KSC pad... and it it burns just at the point the two orbits intersect. Lots of debris on Kerbin escape trajectories, lots of parts destroyed - except the old tin can is still intact with two screaming Kerbals aboard on a one way ride down with a sudden smash at the bottom. The map view looked like the graphical representation of the aftermath of a supercollider test. Lesson learned, shift sideways a bit before attempting a landing after such an incident. When MJ does a spot on accurate job at a maneuver it can be exactly what you wanted, or it can be a bit of a disaster. One time I launched to rendezvous with another craft launched just before and it did a *perfect* rendezvous. Slid right into the exact same spacetime coordinates like a Krikkit warship with the Heart of Gold - then as soon as the engines shut off they both exploded.

The ThunderMax to ThunderMaximus is only a diameter increase. Length stayed the same. Since the 288 is 2x the length of the 144 it has 2x the capacity and mass, same as the ThunderMax 64 and 128. The 9 engine mount did get larger in all dimensions but I didn't want to go crazy on the mass. That part took some time fiddling with the node locations to get them right. The Kerbodyne and LV spots are set out a bit extra to align the edges of the engines with the edges of the mount. One thing that is a bit of a problem is thin parts tend to sink into the surface of the big tanks. More faces needed on the collision mesh? 'Course that would require a different part model. Sooo, enlarge the RCS blocks... What is nice to see is that these severely stretched parts hang together with no wibbly-wobbly without KJR. What I'd love to see is someone put together an IVA space for a Kerbodyne scale up of the 3 man pod. How many Kerbals would fit? More crazy thinking, ThunderMax and ThunderMaximus sized inline decouplers - but that would need a special engine mount with an extended center 'peg' with a node to connect to the decoupler, with a fairing to surround four engines tucked inside. Possibly with two scaled structural fuselage parts put together like I did with the ThunderMax to Kerbodyne adapter? Is it insane to want one of these massive tanks in a second stage? Edit: Yesssss. It IS insane but I'm going to try and do it anyway. I want these huge tanks in orbit without asparagus or radial mount engines. I may scrap the booster and transfer stages of my waiting to go to Eve mission since using these giant tanks will enable a major parts count reduction. Also, uploaded another update with the 5-way RCS block tech treed and a 2X larger, more powerful Mk2 version, and I updated the readme and license file with notes on the new/updated parts.

There's a plugin called Burn Together with which you can set one craft as leader and several others as followers that will copy every move the leader makes. Nice flying until the pilot starts scraping wingmen off on the landscape. Flying works better if you keep your planes "two mistakes high". Figure the distance your plane will drop from an oops to recovery, then stay at twice that altitude. When you goof, climb back to TMH before trying the stunt again.

ThunderMaximus parts now available and they're even flight ready. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80209-0-23-5-ReStock-Reloaded-for-Kerbodyne-parts

Download now includes the Z-5K battery pointing to the correct model plus the two new ThunderMaximus fuel tanks, 9 engine mount and Kerbodyne adapter. Since the scale of the adapter had to be 1.25 greater than the ThunderMax to Rockomax adapter, that's roughly how much I scaled up the fuel capacity, mass and torque. Adding four LV and one Rockomax engine with four Kerbodynes may be a bit superfluous but it sure looks neat. ThunderMaximus by g_alan_e, on Flickr Pre-Production assembly mockup with the short tank. ThunderMaximusBigTank by g_alan_e, on Flickr All the ThunderMaximus parts together for their first official flight test. This showed that more RCS thrusters were needed so the next flight doubled up from 16 to 32 5-way blocks which made it turn quite nimbly in orbit on the second test flight. The enlarged capacity of the monopropellant tank was more than adequate. Both times a 71KM orbit was achieved with just a bit of fuel left. In the second test the Mainsail and LV engines were shut down after liftoff. The dead weight resulted in reduced efficiency. It is recommended that unless a launch vehicle need the extra thrust in the boost stage that only four Kerbodyne engines be fitted.

The older, less detailed tank and the older radialDrill have been deprecated. The smallDrill is a completely different design and mounts completely externally and has a shorter reach. There's no reason to keep the older small tank but I kept the textures for the old drill and still use it. To see it normally in the inventory a small edit has to be made to its cfg file. The model file is still included with the mod so KSP won't delete crafts with it.

Long time GUI programming convention to have the most commonly used dialog box button pre-selected so that hitting Enter or Return triggers it. Also just as long time a convention on Windows (and possibly other OSes) to have the Enter trigger movable with Tab - and on Macintosh to NOT have it movable. See also radio buttons (round, only one per group selectable) and checkboxes (square, any or all in a group selectable). Just some of those "It's always been done that way." things which many people, especially ones who have used computers with GUIs for years, fuss about when some software doesn't follow convention.

The Kerbodyne parts are in Very Heavy Rocketry. The ReStock ThunderMax parts are even bigger, but I put them into VHR too. But now there's this... ThunderMaximus by g_alan_e, on Flickr After the attempts at a one piece ThunderMax to Kerbodyne adapter using resized stock parts failed, I just couldn't stop thinking about making things fit together. That's a non-flying* mockup. The actual tank capacity hasn't been increased, nor has the mass. Same for the 9 engine mount or the other enlarged ThunderMax tank or the enlarged adapter. I considered deleting 5 of the bottom nodes so it would only mount four Kerbodyne engines but this is KSP so moar boosters. It'd look a little bare without the Mainsail in the middle and the four LV-30s in between. They fit much better than on the smaller version. The ThunderMax 64 tank has a scale of 2, 4, 2 and 11520 liquid fuel, 14080 oxidizer. Mass = 17. The 128 tank is twice as tall with mass and capacities double the 64. Both are based on the stock fuelTank2-2. The even bigger versions have a diameter scale of 3.25. How much should I increase the mass and capacity? In real tanks the increase in the bulkheads wouldn't be as much as in the walls. To keep things somewhat sane, I'll use the same % increase on the 9 engine mount and on the adapter. I have no plans for enlarging other components like monoprop tanks, batteries, decouplers etc. to ThunderMax size or to this even larger size. Components this size should only be used for disposable boosters. Should this super duper size be called ThunderMaximer or ThunderMaximus? *Of course I launched it anyway, and it flew great, no mods. Will see what happens with mass increases!

And the right altitude. Once you have the poles fileld in, lean the orbit over to about 80 degrees and you'll get most of what the polar orbit missed. Scanning every hex (and the pentagons) isn't required. I've yet to see any single hex Kethane deposits.

Download now includes a Z-5K battery, my RockoOKTOClampo combo decoupler, probe core, clampotron and the two-way and three-way docking ports from somewhere on the forum, updated with tech tree info. Click the signature link or other links in this thread.

Have a ship in orbit around Laythe then in the Kethane cfg file add the line Debug = True Now when you fly a ship you'll have the Debug window for Kethane - maybe. Sometimes it doesn't display correctly so you have to switch back and forth from space center or sometimes quit and restart KSP. When it does display right, switch to your Laythe orbiting ship and reset the Kethane until you get deposits where you want them. You'll also need to use the function to reveal all the deposits. You can also alter the seed value in the persistent file... If you get a Kethane distribution you like, save the seed value(s) to use in new games.

Update! Kerbodyne and ThunderMax sized parts added to Very Heavy Rocketry, Rockomax sized parts added to same nodes as those parts. Masses ticked up a bit on the up-sized parts. Also added Kerbodyne sized RCS tank, RGU control pod and Inline Reaction Wheel parts. So now, except for a manned pod, this pack contains everything one needs for an all Kerbodyne diameter rocket, without needing any other parts packs or plugins. I test flew the new parts in a vanilla KSP setup to make sure they'd hang together without needing KJR. Download here. Due to the imminent demise of Spaceport, I've included all the ReStock CFG files I haven't done anything with so this is the only download you need for ReStock Reloaded. (Just click link in my signature.) Should be pretty well set for new parts, unless you really really want the ThunderMaximer size. Depends on if the TMax tanks will scale nicely to fit the size the bottom of the TMax to RMax adapter increases to when its top is scaled to Kerbodyne size. That would be a limited kit of parts, the two tanks, a ThunderMaximer to Kerbodyne adapter and that massive 9 engine mount, which I don't know if I could upsize it. It's a complex assembly. Anyone want to take on adding tech tree info to the rest of the files?

Quick check. When you send the rocket to the launch pad, is the navball all blue? If there's any brown showing you don't have control from here set to a part aimed straight up and MechJeb will do its best to align the flight vector to the part that is set to control.

How do I get ascent guidance to launch to the south? 0 launches east, 90 launches north, 180 launches west. Add another 90 degrees to 270 to advance another 1/4 around and it launches... north.

Anything special needed to get the wheels mod to work in .23.5?

Try making that structural part with KSP on the side heavier and see what happens. Make a copy of its cfg and change the part names in it so it doesn't interfere with the original. I did a test last night with a Skipper sandwiched between two Kerbodyne tanks, using two of the Kerbodyne to Rockomax adapters and one Rockomax decoupler. Worked perfectly without any bridging struts. Need to do the same test with Tri and Duo adapters then edit the descriptions to give hints about what configurations to not try. *I'm making a note, here. Use the Beastlier ReStock parts with extreme caution. Now on to expandifying batteries, RGU, reaction wheels and monoprop tanks to Kerbodyne diameter. Will do math to them to come up with reasonable numbers for increased mass/torque/charge. Should work just scaling up according to volume increase...

Zyglrox, at least post a picture of the rocket, on the pad and while it's failing. I've been working (slowly) on updating PolecatEZ's old ReStock config file parts pack to have sizes that work with the Kerbodyne parts and in testing ran into a similar situation where if I flipped the Kerbodyne to Rockomax adapter upside down, put a Skipper under that, then a Rockomax decoupler and another adapter, with the upsized Bigger Beastlier Quad Coupler with four short Kerbodyne tanks and four of the quad chamber engines under it... The result is a violent sort of circular sideways shaking until parts start bending every which way while the rocket goes out of control and usually eventually overcomes KJRs strengthening and breaks apart. I tried bridging across the Skipper engine with some quantum struts but that had no effect. If I simply put one of the large Kerbodyne engines in the middle, no problem!

First post, where it says get the latest dev builds here.

I also made the RockoOKTOClampo Rockomax Brand Decoupler with the reaction wheels, control and battery of an OKTO2 probe core plus a standard clampotron docking port. I put that together to have a way to dock a lander back to the same spot it decoupled from, and to have built in control on any stage with it for deorbiting (provided it has a bit of fuel and power left). Then there are the 3-in-1 and 2-in-1 docking ports I made from cfgs posted somewhere on the forum before KSP got career mode. I think those would be good additions to ReStock. In looking through these cfg files, my olde BASIC programming bubbled up and whispered to me that it would be a good thing to tidy them up where some have rescaleFactor = 1 and some have 1.0, delete the comments to reduce size, some have a space between the last two } lines and some don't. Some have the scale line above rescaleFactor, some below. Choose one way and stick to it... Looks like a structured language, with a rather flexible structure where several ways of doing a thing will work, and just as many that won't. It's been since before the turn of the century since I've done any programming, but it did help me figure out algebra since that's an actual use for it. There's a zero cost way to teach kids computer programming, use some of the free emulators of 1980's micro computers. An easy one to setup is Win99/4A with TI Extended BASIC and a wide variety of other programming languages for it, including assembly language.

OK, made those changes to that cockpit. I inserted a credit line in the comments for your fix. Checking others for non-1 values for rescaleFactor... mk2DualAdapter.cfg is the only other one.

If you don't have KSP installed in a protected location yet still have to specifically run it as an administrator even with a user account with administrator rights, try Permissions Time Machine. If you've upgraded from XP to Vista, 7 or 8 and kept old files and folders, the new version can get stuck with an extreme case of obeying old file and folder permissions. I had XP installed on two separate drives and installed 7 by deleting Windows, Program Files, Documents and Settings etc from the second drive then booting the 7 install. After 7 was in I changed the boot order in BIOS and deleted the other XP install. I tried many different things that were supposed to do mass permissions changes and ownership changes but all that would work were things that could only do one file at a time. Run PMT as an administrator, select the partition or folder path then hit the Default button and wait. When it's done you'll have ownership and full read/write/create/execute rights from the top level you've selected on down. How do you know if you have permissions problems in your KSP folder tree? If you get access denied when trying to save changes to a cfg file but can save as a copy then delete the old file, rename the new file to the old name and from then on have no problems with the new/copy. If you right click and on the New option only have a choice of New Folder or nothing at all - you have screwed up permissions or are logged in with an account that has restricted rights. P.S. Despite Avast leaping out of the shadows and declaring the main PMT exe file a "threat" and tossing it into the chest, it is not. Avast just detects its ability to alter Registry and other settings. (Avast also periodically declares various audiovisual demo programs to be "threats" and deletes them, despite how many times I report them as false positives.) If you temporarily disable your AV scanning, the permissions changing will go faster.

I didn't change rescale factor, just the scale line above that (which adjusted the node positions) and the 3 scale numbers in the model section. The one needed the most work was the ThunderMax to Kerbodyne adapter. [box] <-suggestion box for tech tree info, mass/drag changes etc to add. I wouldn't think the mass should go up too much on the Kerbodyne 1-to-2/3/4 adapters since they'd be mainly empty shells.

I haven't done much with planes but I have done some recent experiments with gliders built around single large SRBs. Putting on wings and things to enable it to get off the runway then pop them off soon to adjust the center of lift soon enough to prevent flipping over backwards but not so soon as to have it nose over and crash. Managed a few successful deadstick landings under MJ control, but only one straight and center on the runway. The old large SRB was easier to make into a glider than the longer one in .23.5, could get the shorter one off the runway without throwaway devices to pry it loose from the surface. Just hit T, launch and once it was wheels up hit G and turn it over to MJ's ascent guidance. http://pastebin.com/pGBkuXUi short one http://pastebin.com/j20AEFUG long one I'm sure others can do better at making solid rocket gliders to do deadstick landings back at KSC or the island. KSP aerodynamics appears to work much better with canard designs. With these I see it pushing all control surface UP behind the COL, which keeps the long one glued to the runway. Many failed launches, many times losing the booster. I put wheels on the booster but all that did was end up with all control surfaces flipped up and using the rearmost wheels as a fulcrum to pin the plane down even harder. On real aircraft with a rear horizontal stabilizer the wing flaps go DOWN to boost lift instead of going up in an attempt to rotate the aircraft around the COL. The stabilizer pushes down to keep the nose up, less efficient than a canard where all surfaces always lift up. On the short SRB I did try a canard design but it was less successful at both getting airborne and in flight.