RyanRising

Generating atmospheres in-game sounds like a huge improvement for people who want to tinker with it! I for sure am looking forward to playing around with that, especially since I've been discouraged from messing with the current ingame menu.

Obviously I’m not Knight of st John, but I believe the reason was so people who do use ReStock and WaterfallRestock can have Waterfall effects on the engines that aren’t replaced by ReStock, such as the Thud, Aerospike, and jet engines, as well as the Making History Titan engines.

There has been some testing on SRB effects from @Al2Me6, I believe: Looks great, right? But particles are still a much better system for the smoke trail, those can much more easily have physics applied to them and linger on for much longer. You can combine the two so that each is doing what it does best, and get some spectacular results, as seen above, but when you try to move it it becomes apparent you’re applying physics, or just a different reference frame, to the particles and not the mesh: So there’s still some work to be done on how it properly combine the two. All hope may not be lost, but it’s still a work in progress. I would very much like to see what you have in store for the other ones, though! Also, FWIW, SRBs are chemical rockets: they use chemical energy stored in the propellant to create the propulsive force.

The engine exhaust effects will.

Yes! You can do exactly that by deleting the Rapier.cfg file in StockWaterfallEffects/Engine Configurations.

Screenshots and logs would likely let people better understand the problem you're having.

And if they do fail out in their final orbit, I think it’s about 500km, and the satellites are very draggy cause of that solar panel, so probably around 2-3 years to deorbit naturally? Maybe up to 5? NASA says satellites around 500km could take a decade to deorbit, but I imagine the typical ones they had in mind were a little more dense.

I’d imagine it’s Photon/the kick stage that provides that accuracy, rather than Electron itself. Kerolox is not known for its ability to consistently provide very small amounts of impulse, as far as I’m aware.

Fair enough, I suppose. I don’t know what it was supposed to be, but given it worked fine* before that patch I’ll just set them all to 1. *ish. Still haven’t figured out what the deal is with the light and flare fading out too high when in space.

Yeah, it’s been an issue (?) for a while. Specifically, since the release of Scatterer 0.0722. It includes this line in the patch notes: EVE clouds + Sunlight extinction respect extinction thickness which explains why before that release the clouds and lighting were effected despite the extinctionThickness = 0 in the configs. Presumably, the configuration was made when that setting was being ignored, so the creator saw the coloured lighting happening anyway and didn’t see a need to set it to something else. Now, there is a reason. You’re probably looking at the colours of the atmosphere during sunrise and sunset, not the lighting and clouds. The atmosphere is fine, but those two features add a lot more to the visuals.

Hurrah! A new release! However, is it intentional that the extinctionThickness in scatterer configurations is set to 0? This means there are no sunset colours in the lighting or clouds.

I think these people count as the crew. “Crewed spaceflight” doesn’t mean “spaceflight with people vital to its function on board,” it means “spaceflight with people on board.”

Wait, what? Why not? They’ll have flown both in space and in orbit by any reasonable definition of those terms.

While it's true that Waterfall could in theory achieve something like that, it wouldn't conform at all to the shape of the vessel. Reentry effects are highly dependent on the shape of the body reentering, and I do think stock shows that pretty well in a way that this isn't set up to do. I don't really agree that stock implies it's friction that heats up a vessel, and it's also not entirely correct to say radiative heating is responsible for most of the reentry heating - that does become true at high-than-LEO velocities AFAIK, but it's not the case for "everyday" reentries, where it's the compression of the atmosphere in a shock wave that provides most of the heat. That said, I'm no aerothermodynamicist, so I'd love to be corrected on that. At any rate, I think this would be better discussed in the Waterfall thread - it's an application of the plugin outside of what this attempts to do.

Which isn’t to say the spaceplane parts are perfect - some are inconsistent with normal maps, for example - but they’re much closer to a coherent style than the rest of the game is.

Should be fine, yup.

That one in particular is cause you have ReStock installed - the RAPIER model is one of the ones changed. That's done with the Waterfall configuration editor, though I think you need to enable the button to access it in Waterfall's own configuration.

I do, as well as short freezes when zooming into atmospheric bodies - I believe this is Scatterer loading and unloading the atmospheres of the moons, but I'm not sure.

That was a sight to see. I thought for sure the flight would fail immediately, props for getting as far as they did. Seems like engine trouble on the launch? Low TWR and tilting, but it was able to recover.

By the way, this artstyle was based off the fantastic Daylight, who has done a similar piece before: and here are those respective images in full:

So he’s contradicting himself here?

Hmm, pitching Mk1 Illuminators. "Hey, I've seen this one before! It's a classic!" All joking aside, good to have some insight into how this is being handled. Looks like lights don't cast shadows here, based on the illumination of the launchpad, which... eh, whatever you need to do to get performance steady i guess. I'd like to echo Poodmund's desire to see that documentation publicized at some point. Better documentation leads to better mods, leads to a better game for simple players like me.

The repository is what you see on GitHub. Not the releases page, but the CH-4 main one (Code). There’s a bar over that which shows the lates commit, which was 15 days ago.

Thanks for the update! BTW, the link to Dashman's alternate docking sounds in the first post appears to be broken - leads to a Dropbox page that says "file deleted."

Maybe I was a bit presumptuous in assuming the problems with BE-4 followed the pattern we’ve seen with other BO stuff. But I’m not aware of any currently outstanding BE-4 engineering issues. My memory’s fuzzy on this, but I believe there were said to be issues with the turbines overheating and with the igniter, both of which were also solved a while ago. If you know about any current issues, or if I'm wrong about those, I’d like to hear - I’m not too great at fishing this sort of stuff out.