Pappystein

The original Centaur Engine plate was re-made...ish. It now has built in RCS?!... It supports 2x engine mounting and is similar shape/size to the Centaur V engine plate.

Personally I don't see the point... that is unless they actually modify how boil-off works for BDB? Or if you need it to make the stage look better.

Agreed, Also depending on if you are using a re-scaled system or stock system will affect this. In my 2.5x Galileo play-through I am currently playing through, I don't auto-stage but wait until my Apollo capsule has slowed to ~220m/s and below 8000m and above 3300m. Further, are you using a Pilot on the Capsule? Remote control can be setup to have plasma blackout... If so the chutes may not deploy if no pilot/crew is present. IF you are doing all the above as we suggest and still having problems...

There is a lot of neat stuff in the Extras folder (My stuff is in there so I *AM* biased ) I just don't like the Saturn or Titan Rescales (The Saturn MB config alters some Titan parts.) Makes the parts not Kerbal anymore (you can't use them as easily with other parts.)

Actually if you copied the BDB Extras folder into your GameData folder blind you DID re-scale them. There is a sub-folder in BDB extra for Saturn Re-scaling. From the sounds of what you are describing... you have that folder installed, hence JSO's question. And cant answer your CKAN question because I won't use it anymore (too many problems with it.)

Forgot to ask earlier. Any chance of a 4 or 5 way version of this for Transtage derived tugs? I really don't like putting directional parts on upside down... it just looks weird to me

Ohh! Shiny! *EDITED* And then I see someone ELSE posted a Meme from Firefly saying the same thing!

Or alternatively click on the words "OhioBob replied to a topic" It is a bit bigger than that little blue arrow I didn't even know about the Blue arrow until a few weeks ago... Been clicking on the "...replied to a topic" since joining the forums in 2013/14.

AJ-3s flew with Hand applied batting similar to the picture of an Early F-1 engine that JSO sent you. They never flew with the "dipped" batting look like the later Titans. Literally they were Squares of material about 18" square that were glued on one at a time with the corners overlapping. Early on the AJ-5s were the same way (although I think the batting was replaced during servicing for the Military Titans as they rotated them through maintenance cycles (remember over 200 were made and only 50 deployed at a time.) So it is up to you. If you want them to be "dipped" then go for it..... You are the one doing the work after-all Weird thought here. Maybe make a "plate" under the ACS that is part of the ACS and not on the tank... Two textures 1 for Titan 23G and a different one for Transtage/other uses? Removes the need to adjust the parts texture. Gives the 23G the patched look (which is exactly what it is...) and gives you an excuse to put a Mono tank right on the ACS instead of having Mono in either the Titan 2 upper stage tank or on the Transtage? Just a thought(s) The AJ-11s used to launch Titan III Agenas That is the difference between the AJ-11 and the AJ-11A. AJ-11A has a longer bell for Vaccum performance and the AJ-11 has the same bell as the AJ-9/7/5 And sorry for making more work. I can shut up... It is easy just tell me too

I think (and I want to emphasize that word) that the LR-87-AJ-7 Gemini Titan 2's changes included the Turbopump exhaust. They appear to be wider than the Military AJ-5 version. In theory the wider exhaust pipes would reduce turbopump back-pressure at a lost of thrust velocity (and their-for total thrust.) AJ-5s are typically listed with a slightly higher thrust than the NASA man rated AJ-7s. Saying that I would guess that making 2 models for what are basically identical engines would be counter-productive to my mind... unless the same textures could be stretched on both without requiring extra work. Also did you notice that the AJ-11As of Titan IVs have exhaust bells/cones on the turbopump exhaust (I don't know if the Ground Lit AJ-11s have them.)

From my looks at the various Titan Pictures I have seen. It looks like the AZ-50 tank and the NTO tanks were made basically identical and then stacked one ontop of the other. This would be why the outer skin looks both repetitive and weird. The Stringer is the load transmission / Ground attachment point. It is where the 4 legged "Launchpad Decoupler" would attach to the bottom of the rocket. I THINK either Alphamense or Damonvv were working on that part. You can see a spare one of those in the GLV picture you posted (the Grey Ring and triangle thingie between the camera and the launchpad.) NASA had several of those on hand to speed up the Gemini program (They would replace it with every launch and refurbish used ones for future launches.) So does that mean the Titan II tank texture is going to have 4 square Tan areas so we know where to put ACS for the 23G version? Texture switching? It is too bad both those photos were taken after launch cause the cameras images are a bit distorted/blurred. That being said looking at some pictures I have seen of the Titan at WPAFM, I think the stringers and ribs you see in the drawings can dissapear due to the lighting. Thus think those should be diffuse/softened a bit in your model but not eliminated. One thing is for sure, they make a great place to see a dent or scratch etc... I don't know if you have seen these relitively new pictures of Titan rockets at WPAFB/USAFM but: https://historicspacecraft.com/Rockets_Titan.html Some nice closeups on the SRMU Awe Man! Sad panda! Seriously though, have you given thought to alternate colors to denote fuel types? (Silver Kerolox, White AJ-5/7/9 Hypergolic, Redbrown AJ-11a/b Hypergolic and something else for Hydrolox?)

Most people agree that 2.5 is about the biggest size for ease of play yet still providing a challenge. Personally when I do run a rescaled system I use Sigma Dimension as a base and either do my own configs or use RESCALE by Galileo https://github.com/Sigma88/Sigma-Dimensions/releases Oh and for follow up. Without using Rescale Galileo has his Planet Pack which requires quite a bit of skill to navigate... Without using a rescale.

It depends on WHERE you launch from. KSP in Stock is at the equator so 0 = 0, 90 = 90. The other launch sites are above and below the equator and Mechjeb does not appear to take angular launch into motion. If it does *I* haven't figured it out either Other planet packs (Real Solar System (any version), Galileo, etc) that do not preserve the original launch positions or outright replace Kerbin, will have more of this issue. Good to hear you are feeling better. Right as I am suffering from Fatigue/Sinus infection. Did you transmit your sickness to me through the internet? RE LR-91 is the issue the "chunky" bell vs the tiny pipes? I ask because too me, it feels out of balance looking at the pictures you have posted and while the artwork is amazing looking I almost like the shape of the old LR-91 for its higher level of symmetry top to bottom. Would maybe stripping the Blanket off the bell and texturing in the coolant loop pipes help with that? (it would thin it down and add more detail, adding detail and reducing the gross change in model thickness.) Yes I am trying to get the batting removed!

Interesting Delta Monster Komodo! It even handles asymmetrical thrust and or Asymmetrical mass somewhat good too! I had a Saturn MLV where my fuel transfer from above the AJ-260 broke on one side only.. I forgot to auto-strut the AJ-260s ) Meant I had about 300kg of fuel on one side of the rocket at about 9m off center. Mechjeb handled it like a trooper Now if only Mechjeb could handle this with an all solid rocket.

Cobalt, Thanks for the update. RE LR-87 Upper stage, you are going to have a completely new engine bell below the combustion chamber (white area of the engine on the left) And the Turbopump exhaust would likely still be there for Roll Control like the LR-91 (just writ larger) Maybe scale up the Turbopump/Vernier and drop the LR87 combustion chamber with a new 40:1 bell (or whatever the Vac Optimized LR-87 was supposed to have.) Re the Blankets, I have said off channel my distaste for them (It hides so much of the texture work you do so well.) but I understand the need for them IRL. Could I make a suggestion? Add a 3rd set of colors for Hydrolox engine variants (Zinc Chromate green or bright cobalt blue or something not normally associated with the LR-87/LR-91 families?) ALSO LR-91-AJ-3 would have had silver metallic blankets IRL.... And they would be UGLY (not the nice smooth shapes like above.) Oh and most importantly GET WELL!

But it didn't break any of your crafts. They are all there and able to fly. Rather the settings are back to default / default settings were altered for a reason that you may not be experiencing yet. it is always the case when ever you upgrade (game version, mod version etc) that you should carefully check over each and every part before you launch a ship. Do you think NASA is igniting RS-25 (SSME) engines for the fun of it right now? No they made changes to some of the software of the engine for it's new use and are starting from scratch in the testing of them. Be Thankful KSP does not have a mechanic built in that you have to re-qualify every part every time you make a new rocket like NASA does. That being said... Ultimately it is your choice, upgrade or stay stagnant. I prefer to upgrade and evolve my game play so I don't understand your viewpoint.

Given what you said it sounds like just your staging is out of whack. I would go through and re-verify things like the Petal Adapter are set correctly and that your staging is correct. A LOT less work than building a new aircraft and you get access to the newer parts and better paint/models! Further there are a lot of craft flies available for the new release (including Saturn V if I don't miss my guess.)

ZEro Length Launch. IE no rolling take off. Hrm never had an issue previously with that but I will do so in the future. Did you notice I had the controls reversed (authority slid to -100 instead of +100?) As I stated they work fine for me... If I invert the controls.

Craft files in the Hidden text below SRM version is set to perform a ZELL and get airborne to a good flying altitude quickly.

Wilco later tonight

it also seems to work in 1.6.1 aswell

I don't know if this is due to something I did or not but I built the Winged Recovery vehicle (OTAV) and in atmo it appears to Roll in the opposite direction of control input. I had to put the Wing/ailerons into full -100 Deflection to have reasonable control. I put the port wing on the left side (command module facing up) and the Stb wing on the Right side so I don't think I made a major mistake.

Been there, done that got the wardrobe my friend. Get well and keep flyin

???? He was specifically looking for something LIKE the Titan Sep motor but much smaller for the GEM and Castor <=0.625m rockets. That was why I pointed out the Mercury Retro motor as a GREAT alternative already done and works great!

Actually the little Tiny Red Mercury Retro motor (you put 4 of them on the De-orbit motor to power separation from Redstone/Atlas) works perfectly already for everything upto GEM-46. GEM/AJ60+ need 2 of em (one at the decoupler and a second 5 degrees OFFCENTER at the nose. If you center the nose one you still get collisions. Since I use StagedRecovery/FRMS/Recoverycontroler I need them not to crash into each other. 1 or Both motors point at the main stage you are separating from. I have not tried these with the Agols!