[0.22] B9 Aerospace Pack / R4.0c / New pods, IVAs, engines, fuselages & structures

[Subcidal]

Just to clarify, The problem with Module Manager and ExsurgentEngineering.dll is on Module Managers end right? Obviously would like to use the .dll but it makes Module Manager completely useless as it won't load anything past that. And well, I'd prefer Module manager over a few engines working.

[x5PUDx]

use the debug menu, it's my only advice...

Tried that route too, still won't attach. I've tried attaching them to several different parts, some will work and some won't. Not too sure whats happening here.

[ialdabaoth]

Just to clarify, The problem with Module Manager and ExsurgentEngineering.dll is on Module Managers end right? Obviously would like to use the .dll but it makes Module Manager completely useless as it won't load anything past that. And well, I'd prefer Module manager over a few engines working.

Actually, it's on ExsurgentEngineering's end (sort of). Actually, it's on Squad's end; but the TLDR is that there's a bug in how Squad handles adding new modules to a part, that only happens in certain unusual circumstances. ModuleManager happens to cause one of those circumstances, and because ExsurgentEngineering doesn't work around Squad's bug, ExsurgentEngineering causes ModuleManager to crash when ModuleManager tries to handle a SABRE.

I've talked with careo and we have a fix that should be released soon.

[Subcidal]

Actually, it's on ExsurgentEngineering's end (sort of). Actually, it's on Squad's end; but the TLDR is that there's a bug in how Squad handles adding new modules to a part, that only happens in certain unusual circumstances. ModuleManager happens to cause one of those circumstances, and because ExsurgentEngineering doesn't work around Squad's bug, ExsurgentEngineering causes ModuleManager to crash when ModuleManager tries to handle a SABRE.

I've talked with careo and we have a fix that should be released soon.

Good to hear, Thanks for the clearing it up for me.

[Firov]

well if you guys havent noticed it controls air flow automatically at higher atmosphere it starts to close it just takes the jet engines a bit longer to spool down so they still provide a little thrust but they only really work between 0-20k after that your plane just skips in the atmosphere cause 2 much lift something like that, the only reason you think its overpowered is because you cant control your airflow like the mod intake can

If you're referring to the ramp moving more towards a closed position at higher airspeeds, that's purely aesthetic, at least in game. Obviously, on real variable geometry turbojet intakes that serves to slow the speed of the intake air to subsonic speeds, but in game, it's just an animation. Furthermore, Taverius' shock cone has a similar animation at higher speeds, so I'd expect it to have comparable performance at high altitudes/speeds.

[ChronicSilence]

Amazing pack. What is the difference between the Avionics Control Unit (ACU) and the Automated Surface Avoidance System (ASAS)?

[ialdabaoth]

Amazing pack. What is the difference between the Avionics Control Unit (ACU) and the Automated Surface Avoidance System (ASAS)?

Short version: ACU is for planes, ASAS is for rockets.

Long version: Once you hit 'T', and ASAS module will remember your heading when you pressed the 'T', and try to point you back to that heading. If you attempt to steer while ASAS is engaged, the ASAS will fight your steering.

ACU will merely keep the plane pointed in its current direction. If you steer to a new direction, even with ACU engaged, the ACU will just try to keep you pointed in the NEW direction.

ASAS is to force a heading; ACU is to "smooth out" your controls.

[a.g.]

Personally I find that both actually make controlling big planes harder - they have enough inertia to be manually controllable with trim and careful key presses, while SAS constantly overcompensates and makes things shake horribly. Things like MechJeb or FAR stabilizers work much better than stock systems with their default coefficients.

[Mail_Manof_Doom]

Has anyone been able to make an SSTO with the wide S2 cargo bays? I've been trying but I haven't been able to get it off the ground.

[Mekan1k]

I love the B9 Pack. It is brilliant. However, there is one thing I would request:

I am a horrible pilot. I need mechjeb. However, the huge surface deflections make mechjeb rather.... Jittery. What I have done to fix this is I have decreased the maximum deflection angle to 5 degrees on all control surfaces.

It seems to smooth out the flight.

[9911MU51C]

I had to delete the pack after it crashed my game several times, even with the non-necessities deleted

also, the engine with a large vertical vectoring range seems to... spas when using any form of ASAS or Avionics

[randyrules711]

[KhaosCorp]

"to fast"

I don't buy it for a second...that entire 'too fast' jazz is just another myth spun by those silly conspiracy theorists

[BananaDealer]

C-Corp EX-9000 test flight went smoothly earlier today, with the plane just narrowly saving itself from becoming a submarine...

The EX-9000 "Gatsby" will now be added as Cabana Corp's main heavy lifter. Capable of orbital flight (though not recommended past 100km) and rather fast acceleration on takeoff, it's only drawback is the really, really long runway requirement (second takeoff after landing took me around twice the runway length). To remedy that, boosting with the rocket engines has been added to the flight-ops manual as a recommended procedure. That should be less of a problem when using payloads bringing the CoM of the aircraft more towards the back and the CoL.

Btw, if the devs like the designs, you can totally use them for advertisement shots...

[viperwolf]

Can someone help me with this, i posted it on post 1441. its either to dumb of a question for anyone to answer or it was missed. Or you guys just dont like me hehe.

OK i have a easy question for you guys. I noticed when using the prebuilt planes, ( using the A & D Keys )the ailerons,elevators work with the rudders. How are they doing this? I searched in the control area .And is there way to keep the Ailerons,rudders,elevators and flaps from going spastic with ASAS on? thanks for your help

(((((( Palihog ))))))))

[Kerbal01]

It how its supposed to work

ASA'S uses control surfaces to control flight

[BananaDealer]

Can someone help me with this, i posted it on post 1441. its either to dumb of a question for anyone to answer or it was missed. Or you guys just dont like me hehe.

OK i have a easy question for you guys. I noticed when using the prebuilt planes, ( using the A & D Keys )the ailerons,elevators work with the rudders. How are they doing this? I searched in the control area .And is there way to keep the Ailerons,rudders,elevators and flaps from going spastic with ASAS on? thanks for your help

(((((( Palihog ))))))))

It's... There's no way around it (that I know of)... ASAS will try and set your craft "straight" even if it's 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000001* off target... It's the downside of having a computer do correctional steering- damn OCDs... You can try and use Avionics instead of full-out ASAS... That seems to give more leeway in figityness... If you're using MechJeb... Yeah, sorry... That's practically A-ASAS...

[viperwolf]

It's... There's no way around it (that I know of)... ASAS will try and set your craft "straight" even if it's 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000001* off target... It's the downside of having a computer do correctional steering- damn OCDs... You can try and use Avionics instead of full-out ASAS... That seems to give more leeway in figityness... If you're using MechJeb... Yeah, sorry... That's practically A-ASAS...

Ah ok , i understand that, its the same with rockets when wings are attached. Do you know how they are making the Rudder work with ailerons. what i mean is, when you fly a prebuilt- when you turn left, the rudder works with a left aileron( by only pressing the A key). They separated the flaps to become an actual working aileron. I bet that made no sense...sorry

[jfull]

I've been having a bit of an issue and I'm not sure what to pin it on.

I installed B9 and before that I've been using an updated version of KSPX and the Tri-Hexagonal struts pack.

I ended up removing quite a few B9 parts (including those belonging to every fuselage form factor other than S2 and S2 wide) because A) stability issues, and because thats a whole lot more parts than I'll ever use

Anyway, after that, everything seemed to run fine, until I brought my Super Heavy Lander in close to the Mun. Now, whenever I try to fly that one particular ship, or any craft close to it, the game crashes. I'm only having this issue when the B9 parts are installed.

Admittedly though, its somewhat of a high part count craft, but I don't think thats the issue

Reposting

also, it did work for a short time while I had B9 installed, it only became an issue while I was descending toward the Mun

[jahnj13]

First let me say, I love this mod pack. Does anyone out there know if there are any conflicts between B9 and other mods? I have a few mods installed and whenever I drop B9 into my game and then try to fly one of my creations, the game crashes. When I remove B9 and Firespitter, everything else works again. Not sure what the problem is, so I am putting it out there.

[Kerbal01]

Not really ive gotten to 1.5 km/s in a ravenspear Mk4 with the engines replaced with turbojets

[Climberfx]

Hey Bac9, i have this bug on this latest 3.0c version that i already report here. But this time if more info, look for the pics, it describes a part that cold have 2 meter, but use the 6 meters 3d shape with 2 meters attachment.

Is it only here?

I found the error, was in the Structural.cfg part, that was in the model part described as pre .20.

I fix the part here, this is the parts...

this:

// --- asset parameters ---

mesh = model.mu

scale = 1.0

rescaleFactor = 1

to this (my change, based on your others cfg parts)

// --- asset parameters ---

MODEL

{

model = B9_Aerospace/Parts/Cockpit_S2_Body/model

texture = model000, B9_Aerospace/Parts/Cockpit_S2_Body/model000

}

scale = 1.0

rescaleFactor = 1

Edited June 4, 2013 by Climberfx

[Naf5000]

I'm having an issue with the supersonic cockpit. Two, actually. First, It's attempting to display the default mk1 cockpit's IVA instead of one that actually fits the model. Second, I can't get it to do the cool retracting-window-gimmick-thing when I have it sitting on the launchpad. Pretty minor, but still a bit of a letdown.

[Huelander]

If you're referring to the ramp moving more towards a closed position at higher airspeeds, that's purely aesthetic, at least in game. Obviously, on real variable geometry turbojet intakes that serves to slow the speed of the intake air to subsonic speeds, but in game, it's just an animation. Furthermore, Taverius' shock cone has a similar animation at higher speeds, so I'd expect it to have comparable performance at high altitudes/speeds.

Changing the default area in the cfg file from "area = 0.00025" to "area = 0.000025" seems to bring the amount of air to a similar, albeit a bit lower, level of others intakes, but the part still generates a huge drag with FAR, huge as in a small plane will fly like a brick amount. The CF34 (this engine is so beautiful) and TFE731 have the same huge airflow, and a huge drag on any plane they are in.

[rifter]

I'm having an issue with the supersonic cockpit. Two, actually. First, It's attempting to display the default mk1 cockpit's IVA instead of one that actually fits the model.

That's because it currently has no unique IVA, and the MK1 IVA is being used as a stand-in.

Second, I can't get it to do the cool retracting-window-gimmick-thing when I have it sitting on the launchpad. Pretty minor, but still a bit of a letdown.

As noted here and here , due to a ksp engine limitation, only one animation is available to a GameObject, so it now lights up rather than retracts.

Edited June 5, 2013 by rifter