Jump to content

Flashblade

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    284

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Flashblade

  1. Flashblade
    Oh look at this, we now have a new official release. How cool is that. Finally the mod will be on the radar again the way it deserves it. These are indeed new WIP parts from bac9 which blowfish will now work on to include into the main mod. As soon as this happens the old MK2 profile will also become legacy parts. blowfish allready said it, but to give a more detailed explanation, the 1.0.5 version includes changes to the engines like the new afterburner function which were not present before 1.0.5, so no this release is not compatible but you can download the 5.3.0 pre-release from bitbucket instead. The MK2 parts of B9 predate the MK2 profile which was introduced by spaceplane plus and later stockified and thus they are not the same even if they have the same name. Those parts only work with other B9 MK2 parts. The first post needs another pass. There is alot of information that doesn't make sense anymore. For example the mod doesn't contain any example craft anymore and ATM is not needed at all since we have converted every relevant texture to dds.
  2. Flashblade
    Well done blowfish. While I am eager for KSP 1.1 lets hope 1.0.5 lasts a while, because I fear we will have a lot to update once that update hits.
  3. Flashblade
    I am sorry, but a lot of your arguments do not hold water here. B9 procedural wing are more versatile than any wing currently in existence. You can tweak basically anything about them. Complex shapes can be more easily attained because these wings are moldable. Your partcount argument I find really puzzling. The argument for procedural wings is exactly that you can get a big aircraft wing without having to build it form a multitude of smaller static wing parts. And for the last bit, when I use B9 pwings they are not anymore wobble-happy than static wings. If you have a problem with this I recommend you check-out Dynamic deflection and/or Atmospheric Piloting Aid by cryzyrndm. they help a ton on this front. I give you that you can't get round shapes with B9 easily but that is about it. Anyway neither I nor blowfish are the people you have to speak to here if you want support for the static wings continued. Bac9 made that decision to move the parts to legacy and only he can undo it. At the moment there is no problem here anyway because the static wings were updated to 1.0.4 and since nothing has really changed for wings with 1.0.5 they are perfectly usable. Knock yourself out.
  4. Flashblade
    I think there is some weirdness going on with the gimbal. In 1.0.4 the gimbal never used to work for me while nobody else was reporting a problem. Now in 1.0.5 I can confirm that it does work for me. So yeah blowfish it works.
  5. Flashblade
    [quote name='K.Yeon'] But again, ill add the other cockpits as extra downloads.[/QUOTE] Great to have you back K.Yeon. So that means the Phoenix cockpit gets properly finished right, because that one is absolutely awesome and needs to be finished.
  6. Flashblade
    I discovered a bit of a bummer. I took a stock Aeris 4a and under normal conditions you should just be able to floor the whiplash turbojets on a 30 degree ascent until they run out of air. With B9 they mercilessly explode between 8000 and 9000 meters even if you put them on zero thrust. This is caused by a totally outdated global module manager config called B9_Aerospace-Squad_Jet_Balance.cfg. For now remove or rename this config file or you can't use the whiplash as intended. blowfish I think we should simply delete this file since balancing Squads jets isn't at all necessary anymore just as ferram said when 1.0 hit the scene. P.S. This only affects FAR users.
  7. Flashblade
    [quote name='Shinji-The-Kerbonaut']Welp. KSP 1.0.5. dropped and I'm pretty sure the thermodynamics broke this mod. Now my spaceplanes are going to be sad. First B9, now this? Are there any other large spaceplane part mods that [I]don't[/I] stop updating quickly?[/QUOTE] B9 has basic compatibilty with 1.0.5, just go grab it from blowfishs repository. The link is in my signature.
  8. Flashblade
    So basic compatibility with 1.0.5 is in the repo, grab it while it is still hot :cool:
  9. Flashblade
    Since 1.05 was split off from 1.1 I think we do not have that long to wait. Meeting the Christmas release is doubtful I think, but January is likely. BTW blowfish there is a pull request from me.
  10. Flashblade
    I have synced up with your repository, meaning I feel like working on this again. Where are the science constraints mentioned? I'm unable to find that.
  11. Flashblade
    Hello blowfish, my advice on this matter is to postpone working on most of what you mentioned and just push out a functionality update. This update is suppossed to have a very short lifespan. Squad is aiming for a Christmas release of 1.1. Whether they can make that or not remains to be seen and they have been casting doubt on this possibilty as well, but if they miss it it is probably going to be early or mid January at the most. So this update is so short lived that most of the things you mentioned are simply not worth delaying an update for. Work on it after the functionality update. If you can still include it down the line, great. If you can't just include the stuff when we reach 1.1 and a major rework is probably inevitible. In the meantime everybody will still be able to use B9 in 1.05, which should be the primary goal here I think. As for the varying ISP at mach, if stock isn't doing it neither should B9 by default. This sounds like an optional feature for people who want it. Are deployment limits for B9 cargo bays even workable? After all B9 cargo bays are older than the stock method and don't work the same way. Just my thoughts on the matter.
  12. Flashblade
    Yeah maybe you should inform yourself better. B9 has been updated to 1.04. There hasn't been an official release of this because Bac9 isn't around, but it has been maintained nontheless.
  13. Flashblade
    Great to see this done blowfish, hopefully 1.05 only creates the need to recompile the plugins.
  14. Flashblade
    Hmm agreed it would be a good idea to get this high up on the first post, maybe even do a change to the thread title to include the dev version. We need an admin or a moderator for this though.
  15. Flashblade
    Yes they are still being worked on but you can download those seperately for testing purposes and provide feedback for development. The dev version won't include those since Bac9 has to finish those first.
  16. Flashblade
    I'll be damned, I was wrong, looked in the SPH on the parts myself and yeah 4x4 delta wing should have roughly half the lift coeff the square 4x4 has, maybe a tad bit more since the trailing edge is a small rectangle. I could have sworn I checked this before I applied my changes, but as it turns out I worked from the assumption that the 4x2 describes the actual wing area and not it's length measurements. Now I feel a tad bit stupid.
  17. Flashblade
    Hey blowfish sorry it has been a while since I reared my head here. I have been a bit miffed with 1.04 and Squads unwillingness to hotfix the heat system bug and furthermore there wasn't really anything left for me to contribute at that point besides changing the prices of the parts and to be quite honest I don't see that as a necessary change at all because 1 nobody ever complained about the prices not being balanced with stock values and 2 it does not impede functionality. You do know I worked on the wings and I never told you that I found that Porkjets formular was wrong on the only example where it was easy to check for this, the delta shuttle wing where it exactly gives you the wing area and the lift coefficient. If you apply Porkjets formular you won't get the lift coefficient as a result that the delta shuttle wing actually has. So I opted for another approach to the changes on B9 wings lift coeffs. Instead all the lift coeffs I applied are proportionally to the lift coeff of the delta shuttle wing and therefor should be equivalent to how Squad has done it or at least very very close. Sorry but this is completely wrong, the 4x2m Delta Wing has the exact same wing area than the 4x2m Square Wing, both have a wing area of 8 m². If the 4x2m Delta Wing was a Square Wing its area would be 16 m². bac9 opted to always have the name show the actual wing area and not necessarily it's exact measurements. Wrong, see what I wrote to blowfish above.
  18. Flashblade
    Overheating issues have nothing to do with B9. It is a stock bug with the new heating system.
  19. Flashblade
    Err of course it has? *sigh* Why would you even expect the 0.90 version to work after the massive changes 1.0 introduced? Do yourself a favor and download the b9 dev version from the link in my signature or blowfishs. You will get something that works in all critical areas, promise.
  20. Flashblade
    From the creator of the mod This wasn't the last time we heard from him but this might still apply but don't worry he is around and our work has been officially sanctioned, so if you feel like it download the dev version and give us feedback for the final push to make it release worthy, thanks.
  21. Flashblade
    Yes, the cause for this is without a doubt the B9_Techtree_Add.cfg which I created since the node needs to be there for HX parts without Community Tech Tree as well.
  22. Flashblade
    No I have noticed the problem with the airbrakes before as well, but it is not a B9 problem. It is a problem with the entirety of the FSairbrake module so that needs to be fixed on Firespitter's side.
  23. Flashblade
    No need to worry about this. The actual download will only be about 72 to 73 MB when everything is zipped up which it will be.
  24. Flashblade
    This problem doesn't arise from B9 but from FAR itself. The new heating system doesn't play nice with FAR as of yet, Ferram confirmed the problem and is most likely working on it.
  25. Flashblade
    @ikarus Try the Sabre engines in FAR you will see that they are beastly powerful. So powerful that 2 engines can already be hard to control. That is the problem with the new velCurve - atmCurve system. If you can't reach the threshold, which for a Sabre S is around Mach 1.45, it will never pick up speed and atmCurve will kill the output with increasing altitude even further. @blowfish I'd suggest that we keep the existing curve for FAR and create a new one for stock.
×
×
  • Create New...