[1.0.5] FASA 5.44

[frizzank]

I noticed that they stay attached to what ever stage you have them on. So with the umbilical when you put them on a higher stage, or the last one. They stick around every 6km.

Since the stock clamps are typically only on the fist stage the don't hang around as often.

Its also intermittent. Sometimes the Atlas clamps do it, and sometimes its the Apollo ones.

A workaround is to put a decoupler on and then attach the tower to the decoupler and detach both at the same time...

[ctbram]

I noticed that they stay attached to what ever stage you have them on. So with the umbilical when you put them on a higher stage, or the last one. They stick around every 6km.

Since the stock clamps are typically only on the fist stage the don't hang around as often.

Its also intermittent. Sometimes the Atlas clamps do it, and sometimes its the Apollo ones.

A workaround is to put a decoupler on and then attach the tower to the decoupler and detach both at the same time...

Thanks. I just posted in the FASA launch clamp thread about this very issue. The umbilical and launch tower randomly kept spawning as my ship was climbing until eventually they would hit the ship and cause a catastrophic failure. Not sure I want to add decouplers all over the place so I guys I will just hope for a squad fix to this issue and stick with stock clamps until then.

[Pappystein]

Thanks. I just posted in the FASA launch clamp thread about this very issue. The umbilical and launch tower randomly kept spawning as my ship was climbing until eventually they would hit the ship and cause a catastrophic failure. Not sure I want to add decouplers all over the place so I guys I will just hope for a squad fix to this issue and stick with stock clamps until then.

I can't speak for others but the under engine 1.25 and 2.5m clamps do not seem to have this issue for me. It is only the radial clamps. I have just finished editing all the FASA craft flies to replace the radial attached supports with under engine supports. 2 1.25 on atlas, 1 2.5 on Titan, 3 2.5 on Titan with SRBs etc.

[Rhedd]

I noticed that they stay attached to what ever stage you have them on. So with the umbilical when you put them on a higher stage, or the last one. They stick around every 6km.

Since the stock clamps are typically only on the fist stage the don't hang around as often.

Its also intermittent. Sometimes the Atlas clamps do it, and sometimes its the Apollo ones.

A workaround is to put a decoupler on and then attach the tower to the decoupler and detach both at the same time...

I had to go back to v5.32 launch clamps, because if I connected a 5.34 umibilical tower to my rocket the whole thing would just fall loosely to the ground as soon as the simulation started. Tested with no other mods and it persisted. Started a brand new game and the problem went away... once, then it was right back to falling apart on the launchpad. Very weird.

Also, I don't see that attaching the tower to radial decouplers helps. I would expect it to, but it doesn't. The decoupler unlocks with the tower (and explodes!! ), but the tower still appears out of nowhere every time. Sadly, it's not intermittent with me. The umbilical tower and Atlas launch clamp reappear 100% of the time, while everything else works 100% of the time.

This is such a stubborn annoying problem! >_<

[frizzank]

I would bug squad about it as it does happen to their clamps as well.

Edited May 17, 2015 by frizzank

[David H]

The launch clamps sometimes don't retract on staging. The clamps also follow me to space. Each one falls off about every 20k. You don't see them going up. Then all of the sudden you see them flying by. I decided to pull off the umbilical cords and just use the bottom clamps.

The sepatron engines in stage 3? Don't stop after a few seconds like they used to.

What is the launch profile of apollo.

The real apollo at full throttle had a low twr on pad and as it went up it increased. They didn't go from 0-200 in a 1000m. Yours seems a bit over powered.

It goes to fast on full throttle. I have no control on low throttle. I fight it trying to tip up to 15-20k. As I continue the turn around 30 I have to fight to keep straight.

It was easier before .95 release. Although it took me 3-4 launches to get it right and have enough fuel to be correct with nasa.

Edited May 18, 2015 by David H

[frizzank]

I had most of the craft feeling like their historical counterparts pretty well before 1.0, but then Squad completely changed the way engine thrust/ISP works as well as the aerodynamic system.

I'm having a hard time with the latest update making the engines fit within the stock game and feel like the actual launches. Please be patient and as always I am open to suggestions as well...

[chrisl]

The "Gemini Titan Solid Rocket Boosters" seem a little weak assuming I should still fire them at launch but wait to fire the LR-87 main engine until the SRBs burn out like the real Titan 3C worked. Without the LR-87 engines igniting at lift off, my rocket only had 0.82 SLT. I'm using the Titan IIIC subassembly that comes with FASA, along with the normal Titan 2nd stage (Gemini Medium Silver Liquid Fuel Tank plus LR-91 engine), the "Gemini Transtage" as a third stage, and an 8.8t probe. Altogether this rocket is 164.4t.

[NathanKell]

Well, part of the issue is time: Kerbin ascents are so much faster that there really isn't time for a three stage Titan IIIC ascent. So they probably do need to be combined with the engine to make a 2.5 stage ascent.

[Pappystein]

Well, part of the issue is time: Kerbin ascents are so much faster that there really isn't time for a three stage Titan IIIC ascent. So they probably do need to be combined with the engine to make a 2.5 stage ascent.

But couldn't we just use the Fuel per second based on thrust/ISP formula to calculate a reduced fuel burn for lower altitude launch? Then the Rocket would fly realistically yet compressed to KSP standards flight profile. I have been using the formula to futz with my personal UA-1205/1206/1207 (The Titan SRBs for those not in the know) configs for my take on Saturn II using FASA parts. Instead of the normal (RW) ~2.5 minute UA-1207 burn time I am working it out to be roughly 66-75 seconds long with a lower thrust profile to match the more rapid drop in air pressure. IE I am using the formula below to put me in the ballpark of how I feel the engine should work, A MASWAG (Math Applied Scientific Wild A(Donkey) Guess)

For those in need the Formula is:

Fthrust [N]

Isp

mdot [kg/s] (this is what you need to find: the rate at which fuel is burnt)

g=9.81 [m/s2], Earth's (or Kerbin's) standard acceleration

mdot=Fthrust/(Isp*g)

I have "corrected" Corax's posted formula, they made the assumption that everyone would know you have to multiply ISP by Gravity before dividing the Thrust.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/18805-Can-someone-give-me-the-formula-for-burn-time-in-seconds-based-on-fuel-units-ISP?p=252635&viewfull=1#post252635

Edited May 20, 2015 by Pappystein

[frizzank]

The formula I like to use is.

Engine + boosters + More Boosters = Orbit

[Voidryder]

The formula I like to use is.

Engine + boosters + More Boosters = Orbit

A winning formula if I ever flew one before.

[NathanKell]

Pappystein, sure, you could 'compress' each stage. But that means you're having a staging event a drop to a very low TWR only a km or two above the pad, so you're getting some funky aero forces just when you have the least gimballed control authority. If it works out (with, say, 45 second burn times for the SRMs), then cool. But the core has to reach orbit on its own (with Gemini), so there's that too.

[Pappystein]

Pappystein, sure, you could 'compress' each stage. But that means you're having a staging event a drop to a very low TWR only a km or two above the pad, so you're getting some funky aero forces just when you have the least gimballed control authority. If it works out (with, say, 45 second burn times for the SRMs), then cool. But the core has to reach orbit on its own (with Gemini), so there's that too.

Very true, and like Frizzank has already stated, it takes a lot of balancing. I am trying to set the SRMs to drop off at the 18-20Km height with a full Titan IIIB/C/D Titan IV loads for UA-1205 and UA-1207 respectfully. IE almost to the point that gimbaling is effective but not quite. Add to the point that I have to keep total craft acceleration down so that I don't break 300m/s below 5K.... FUN

It is pointless at the moment for me as RL is interfering with my work but it is a fun math process to crunch on my work breaks.

[gc1ceo]

Anybody else having trouble with the Gemini docking port nose cone? It's not appearing in the stage list correctly and right as I'm about to hit space it suddenly starting to rapidly overheat, although nothing else does and the non-docking port version works just fine.

[frizzank]

Are you using any mods that might effect docking ports or other parts?

[frizzank]

New SRB fire!

[Mecripp]

Them look nice

[JPL1980]

The launch clamps sometimes don't retract on staging. The clamps also follow me to space. Each one falls off about every 20k. You don't see them going up. Then all of the sudden you see them flying by. I decided to pull off the umbilical cords and just use the bottom clamps.

So thats what those things that kept flying off my rocket were. Is there a fix for this bug coming?

[JohnWildman]

Anybody else having trouble with the Gemini docking port nose cone? It's not appearing in the stage list correctly and right as I'm about to hit space it suddenly starting to rapidly overheat, although nothing else does and the non-docking port version works just fine.

I have exactly the same issue. Although I don't know about the heating problem because I did not use the part since the issue occured. I am using alot of mods (155 regarding to CKAN). One of the mods is the "Adaptive Docking Node". I don't think that this is the reason because I haven't have that issue prior to the last update.

[frizzank]

So thats what those things that kept flying off my rocket were. Is there a fix for this bug coming?

Unfortunately it looks like its a squad bug. We are going to have to wait for a fix from them.

I added the airbrake module to the winged Gemini control surfaces. Now they operate like proper slats.

Edited May 22, 2015 by frizzank

[gc1ceo]

I tracked down the problem to TweakableEverything.

[JohnWildman]

After a couple of hours I found out that the Gemini Dockingnosecone is not working together with the mod "Tweakable Everything". As soon as both mods are installed the nosecone decoupler is flashing in the VAB and is not entering the stage sequence after attaching it to the Gemini Pod.

I am sure it worked before and do not know what may cause the issue now.

Sorry for my bad english. I hope you still know what I mean.

- - - Updated - - -

I tracked down the problem to TweakableEverything.

Seriously????

You were 2 minutes faster after I have looked for hours!

[Eddie Rod]

Any plans on correcting the Saturn V F-1 engine mount? The nodes are incorrectly placed and I always have to use cubic octagonal strut to put nodes where I need them. The way it is now the F-1 Engine fairing doesn't line up with the paint job like the real Saturn V does.

[DennyTX]

Gentlemen.

Anybody else having trouble with the Gemini docking port nose cone? It' always suddenly starting to rapidly overheat (on altitudes about 40-55 km and still on nonorbital speed), despite all other parts are ok ....

yes, i'm using Re-entry heating rebalance (made harder), but it ok with other FASA parts and other mods.

any solution?

Edited May 24, 2015 by DennyTX