Pappystein

AH well that would be why the features I was expecting are not there. I think that clears up all my concerns at this juncture.

After the re install of PRC 11 for ProcWings, the weird super thick wing tips I was getting has disappeared. I still notice a distinct difference in ease of editing the Pwings depending if I attach to the LEFT or RIGHT fuselage side. I think one of my other mods is overwriting Pwings as I still do not have any editor adjustments in the Right click menus. Still trying to track down which mod it is.

My issue might be a borked install or a Mod conflict then. The only configurable options I have with the 11 test is fuel capacity and tank type. I am re-dling the test release after submitting this note. I do most of my profile editing from a rear quartering angle. I do not know if this will matter. I am also noticing if I place the wing on the RIGHT side I have less issues than if I place it on the LEFT side.

I have a Set of Atlas Engine CFGs that while stock like in performance are more real world like in Rocket flight profile. That is to say the Boosters are used to about 50% fuel load is consumed and the rocket runs out of fuel just after entering a circular orbit. The LR-89 Booster engines can lift the Atlas without the LR-105 running (So an Atlas A/B/C can be simulate as they were IRBM test articles that did not have the full intercontinental range.) They are just evolution of Frizzank's original CFGs, adjusted to fly like the real. For the later Atlas Space Launch Vehicles they had a different engine/lower housing assembly than the earlier Atlas's Frizzank modeled. All three engines were of nearly uniform performance. If you want Titan II/III/IV CFGs I have the entire E-1/LR-87/LR-91 family calculated out again following the principals outlined above. I am routinely launching Titan IVB with a Simulated SMRU (utilizing the UA-1207 Model Frizzank already created, it would be nicer if there was a real model to go with the CFGs .) The E-1, since it was never actually completely designed, is an estimation in performance and basically a Scaled down FASA F-1 engine (the F-1 was an evolutionary descendant of the E-1.) I have to agree with Frizzank's original statements when I chatted with him about the profuse number of Titan engine CFGs. A way to compile them in a user configurable single entry is almost a must. Place the model, Select the engine variant from a slider/push button.

Minor-ish Bug report on the .11 Test release. as I shrink my wingtips they get significantly Thicker... to the point I have a WALL for the air to climb over. The Root of the wings are ridiculously thin It is as if Roots and Tips got flopped around. Since my birds still fly and I am partial to the Republic F-91 Thunderceptor I am OK with this but it makes it hard to put wingtip ailerons on and have them work effectively. Also the wings break off at much lower speeds/G maneuvers with this release... I can't S-Turn to bleed off extra Orbital speed (Direct Approach from Mun for example.) This was on a Fresh install of 1.05 but with many other mods, I will submit the list of them if you need it later.

Since this part of your question has not been answered yet. Able was developed as a second stage for early Atlas test flights. It was used to test the Reentry Vehicle for the Early Nuclear warheads. In a nearly un-modified form it was added as a 2nd stage to Thor (Thor-Able) Ablestar is an Able with a larger diameter fuselage for more fuel tankage and added restart capability. The Particular AJ-10 engine used in the Able had more thrust than was needed and Ablestar was derived to take advantage of the higher than needed thrust. Remember Able was developed to POWER a warhead test device through a high speed decent to simulate a Full ICBM flight without the ICBM leaving the general Area of North America. It was later proposed to use Able to initiate FOBS (Fractional Orbital Bombardment System.) Per Wikipedia: Two versions were built; the Thor-Ablestar 1, with a DM-21 Thor, and an AJ-10-104 second stage engine, and the Thor-Ablestar 2, which had a DSV-2A Thor first stage, and an uprated AJ-10-104D engine on the second stage.[1] Thor-Ablestar 1 launches occurred from LC-17 at Cape Canaveral, and Thor-Ablestar 2 rockets were launched from LC-75-1 at Point Arguello, which has since become part of Vandenberg Air Force Base and is now designated SLC-2. I have not found much info on the Delineation between a DM-21 Thor and a DSV-2A Thor but by my experience DM-21 would be a Demonstration Model (following USAF/NASA practice in this timeframe) and DSV would be a Dedicated Satellite Vehicle. Again not certain on this last part it is purely speculation at this juncture.

I have this problem with the Stock capsules as well. It has to do partially with what you hang on your particular craft. I am working my way through some lower level part fixes before I get to the Big-G (for my internal mods) but If I figure something out on Big-G I will post it. are you running Stock aero or are you running something like FAR?

@SuicidalInsanity I love the Mk2 form factor even with all it's limitations. You have done an amazing job of expanding on the basic form factor. More options is always better than less. On the subject of Mk2 parts and options, any chance we could see a 2x2 engine adapter? I build long Mk2 Space-planes and a Single Jet engine with two 0.625m Rockets are rarely enough thrust to get my SSTOs into orbit. and I end up with too much useless weight when I add 2 1.25m sets of tanks in a trebble bubble layout with the Mk2 parts. As I envision it the 2x2 would have the 0.625m Vertical with the 1.25m nodes horizontal. this will cause a slight bump up and down on the basic Mk2 profile but that could be turned into a vertical Chine along the profile of the wing chines to allow placement of a Vertical Tail or Ventral fin. Of-course then we will just need a Retractable Ventral Fin set Thanks for considering such an endeavor!

Ok I have already posted my suggested engine performance for Kerbalscale "Stockalike" for the Saturn F-1 Engines... I however did transpose some scaling numbers. Actual Scaling numbers I am using: F-1 Scales well compared to the much more memory intensive FASA F-1 engine MODEL { model = RealScaleBoosters/Parts/Engines/RSBengineF1 scale = 0.60, 0.78, 0.60 } F-1B Also scales well with the FASA F-1 engine. MODEL { model = RealScaleBoosters/Parts/Engines/RSBengineF1B scale = 0.60, 0.70, 0.60 } Please note, Design differences between how Frizzank and NecroBones chose to make their respective mods is the main reason the Y axis is not just 0.60, 0.60, 0.60 on each of these engines. My S-1C stage now uses less memory! YAY! On to J-2 engine family.

Just a heads up, you would use these same stats for the RSB F-1 engine after a rescale. I am still trying to fiddle with the scales to match the Kerbin scale rockets. It took several attempts to get the scale for the F-1B "nice" The Stock F-1 is taking even longer. For anyone who thought making a Mod is easy (or heck just editing CFG files!) Proof in the Times listed above. Thank your Mod Creators! I know I do!

Rescale Report: Rocketdyne F-1B. Scale Factor used: scale = 0.66, 0.66, 0.8 This scale factor gave me an almost identical size difference between the re-scalled F-1B engine and the FASA F-1 engine (using the below image to verify scale.) I consider FASA to be the baseline of Kerbal scale at this size and above. On the below image, the Turbopump Exhaust INLET is the same size. Thus the F-1B bell is physically smaller than the F-1 or F-1A engines of history. Please note the SLS launch platform with two Twin Engined Pyrios boosters in the background Below is a simple Chart of Mass, Thrust, ISP of the FASA F-1 engine. My altered F-1 and F-1A Cfgs using the FASA model and basic CFG, and my Rescale F-1B from this mod. Engine Name Source of CFG/Model Engine Thrust Engine Mass Engine ISP (SL) Engine ISP (VAC) F-1 FASA 1550 8.75 280 320 F-1 FASA CFG mod by me 1550 6.5 280 320 F-1A FASA CFG mod by me 1780 6.75* 263 290 F-1B RSB CFG mod by me 1840 5.4 270 308 F-1B Full Thrust** RSB CFG mod by me 2000 5.5 260 300 * I have found no reliable source for weight/mass of the F-1A engine in FLIGHT condition. Mass is estimated. ** F-1B Full thrust is my name for the proposed uprated F-1B for later production (allowing a further 20 tons of lift into Low Earth Orbit on SLS. No Official name exists for this engine that I have found. Lightly Related: It should be noted that the bottom of the Pyrios booster already SORT-OF exsists in KSP as a 2.5m part (it should be a 3.75m/Size 3 part at Kerbal Scale)

RSRM is any Shuttle SRB post 25th flight. (Per Links posted already by Felbourn) Sorry for the poor "SRM family tree" below but this is the evolution of the "SRM" as I understand it. United Technologies UA-12xx Series and UA-156 series | | | Thiokol SRM Series 1 for Space Shuttle | Thiokol SRM Series 2 for Space Shuttle (used in most of the first 25 STS missions) | Challeger Explosion | Thiokol RSRM (Structurally Beefed up SRM series 2 with new O-Ring design (please note that atleast part of one of the Final RSRMs to fly the shuttle had parts from the ORIGIONAL SRM-1 from STS-01 (Columbia's first flight) | / | | / | Hercules SRMU (Replacement for the UA-1207 SRB on Titan IV) Newest US made Large Scale SRB (Technology and Design wise.) | ATK-Thiokol/Orbital-ATK RSRM of various Segment count (Basically same RSRM as Space Shuttle, not a New Design and not new technology.)

That is probably the Titan IVB SRMU. ATK Purchased Hercules Aerospace in 1995 half way through he SRMU production run. And no, I have not seen a SRMU model yet for KSP (I am currently re-using FASA's UA-1207 "Titan White SRB" model for the SRMU in my personal configs.) Crap tons more fuel than the UA-12xx series, Much lower overall weight (Carbon Fiber instead of metal.)

<Sorry> Couldn't type below the quote the first time I tried this today... Gack where is my 20lb sledge? I too have done some crazy builds that way. A Tinker toy in space build with 3 2.5m Nuke engines on long stacks with no less than 7 various Gemini capsule combinations and a crew of 10... The Kraken ate that one before I could get the money shot with screen capture. Since I am currently focusing on my personal CFG changes to various mod parts I use, I am not going to have a Tinker Toy ship again for a while. My Original concept was for multiple landers with pilots and science officers to land in the Various Biomes, collect science, and return, All from one or 3 orbits of the Mother-ship. Krakened every time (too many mods... GRR 32bit version!

I too had this problem. I created an Action Group to Toggle the RCS on the Command Module itself. Mechjeb does not understand RCS the way it is set up on the CM's cone, so shutting the RCS off on the Command Module fixes the issue (but it dose slow down pitch/yaw/roll acceleration.) I now have no issues using the CM/CSM stack. Although I still prefer to run Gemini or BigG.

You have non FASA parts on the Sargent stack (Looks like a Roverdude US Probe pack probe,) The rockets are balanced for the FASA Explorer probe. .To make certain other probes are similarly balanced would require a lot of back and forth from one Mod to the next.

Thanks for Adding The F-1B. J-2T is a Torodial Aerospike of either 200 or 250Klbs thrust (890kN or 1.1mN) It later evolved into the Linear Aerospike RS-2200 for use on the X-33 J-2T uses basic J-2 Pumps and attachments, RS-2200 uses updated J-2S pumps and attachments. Assuming since the J-2T is a Toorodial, that stearing of the thrust would be by external gimbals (IE gimbal the same way the Bell does on the J-2 Conventional engine.) http://www.astronautix.com/engines/j2t250k.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospike_engine

IF there is any part of the rocket in the swing path of the arms, yes bad things can happen. When I use the Apollo Towers, I also have some base clamps(FASA 1.25m Redstone or Gemini clamps) and I stage in this order: All Apollo Towers If wobble on staging Apollo towers, wait for stability Engage Engines at max thrust and pop the remaining clamps. Oh and it is VERY helpful if you are using the latest release of Feram's Kerbal Joint reinforcement as suggested in the OP by Frizzank.

Given J-2X is already been listed, Any chance of seeing either the J-2T or F-1B engines so we can up-rate our Saturn rockets? I prefer New school engines on my Old School rockets rather than stupid administratively castrated Rockets (Constellation/SLS) TIA

1st I am glad you edited in the comment about posting in the wrong forum. While this is not the right forum for Remote Tech it however is the right forum for where the parts go. I can not speak for Frizzank or Nathan Kell but there are people here that might have input into your question that might not use/read the remote Tech forums. 2nd I was under the impression based on the history books I have on Spaceflight and the Wikipedia articles about the Pioneer program that all the Earth centric Pioneer Probes and the Lunar Centric Probes were gravatically steered so as to point their antenna toward Earth, or had multiple antennas to cover all sides that would possibly be pointed at earth. That implies that the antenna in question is at best mildly non directional (greater coverage than a straight line, less coverage than hemispheric)

Agreed, and some think it is too restrictive in the Science tree, Hence, Landing Guidance is now at the start in my games.

Ok, I realize I probably borked this up. I origionally only wanted the Kosmos engines (they are some of the most AWESOME engines available in game for shear LOOK if nothing else,) So I copied just the engine parts and then updated all the CFGs. Now I have added the whole mod over top of the engines (not overwriting what was already there.) None of the tanks or other parts appear in the VAB (they show up just fine on the Science nodes in the R&D buildings.) Any idea what I have borked up? I have tried a wipe and re-copy of the pertinant CFGs to no avail. While I do have a crapton of mods (B9,FASA,Kosmos, to name the bigguns) I have not reached my memory limits (game still runs fine.) Just no tanks. TIA <EDIT> If I do a by Sort by Science Tech Level search, I can find the parts.

So downloaded this mod. The A-4 engine is not compatible with the existing tanks (requires LOX and Alcohol, tanks are setup as LFO. If there are additional mod dependence please post them on your release site (Kerbalstuff) and OP. TIA

So I have not used (or at least rarely used) the Apollo CSM due to how it's bottom node almost completely depends on the SIVB LEM adaptor. Most of my Saturn manned rockets either have a Gemini variant (Gemini, BigG, WingedG, Gemini II etc,) or the Stock 3 person capsule. Does anyone have knowledge of a Different adapter/fairing that will work with the node setup in the FASA Apollo CM/CSM and it's AJ-10 engine? i have played with Procedural fairings but they require a top node device. Due to the way theh AJ-10's engine colliders and nodes are setup, using Procedural Fairings results in a lot of explodie Bitz! Dose anyone have other ideas? I am trying to make a Saturn II that uses the Apollo CSM/CM to build a modular space station in the short term, the long goal is to carry a Large habitat/lander to Duna later in the game on a NERVA equipped Saturn Nova rocket. TIA!

I wouldn't call anything in KSP as "Limited Usefulness" I am still routinely launching Rockets with the Redstone (A-10?) engine from the FASA mod and I am established with an orbital station and routine flights to the mun and minims in my current campaign. I am sure this engine could also find uses later on in the game, even if it is just to run some new science experiment when a new science part is unlocked.