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

[Kerbal01]

Huh? When I unzip the download all I have is a folder named 'uploads_2013_06_B9-Aerospace-Pack-R3c'

Open that then read the README file

It tells you how to install

[Tripod27]

Awesome mod guys! Really love the cockpits. Any chance of adding g-force to the flight data submenu? would help me rip the craft apart less pulling high gs with ferram (higher gs) plus deadly reentry (high gs break stuff)

[Harvoification]

Open that then read the README file

It tells you how to install

I have read it, I'm just far to simple to understand what it's actually trying to tell me...

[Teobug]

I hate it when time travellers come into the past to ask questions about future versions. Don't they realize that pollutes the timeline?

I pressed the wrong button

[Spanier]

Could you please add some bigger landing gear, that still is very flat in its setup or mostly lies inside the hosting part?

[bac9]

Do the plugins work on the stock parts? aka the thrust vectoring module.

No.

Huh? When I unzip the download all I have is a folder named 'uploads_2013_06_B9-Aerospace-Pack-R3c'

Pardon my ignorance, but where am I meant to place everything?

For n-th time, find GameData and Ships folders that are already existing in your root KSP folder and overwrite them with Gamedata and Ships folders from the archive. I don't understand how it's possible to do something wrong there.

[mrrpamplemousse]

Nothing about the wierd 2-D vectoring engine?

(One or two page ago)

[BananaDealer]

Nothing about the wierd 2-D vectoring engine?

(One or two page ago)

Due to the way KSP handles gimballing, there doesn't appear to be a way to make a single-axis gimbals. Not that I know of at least...

I could be wrong though...

[Castun]

Due to the way KSP handles gimballing, there doesn't appear to be a way to make a single-axis gimbals. Not that I know of at least...

I could be wrong though...

I think the gimbal of the F119 vectored thrust engines do exactly that though. Problem is, mounting them sideways will still cause them to vector thrust on the same axis even though they're now on their side.

[bac9]

F119 engines aren't using stock gimbal module, hence the ability to move differently. I'll ask about the rotation bug.

Edited June 6, 2013 by bac9

[jfx]

I think the gimbal of the F119 vectored thrust engines do exactly that though. Problem is, mounting them sideways will still cause them to vector thrust on the same axis even though they're now on their side.

Wow thanks for pointing that out, switching them back to normal orientation has fixed the weird handling on this design:

http://i.imgur.com/gACHhvrh.jpg

[Tex_NL]

kk, also a bit of a question about the sabres, I've accidentally left MJ in surf mode 90, 40, 0 and come back and the plane has run out of air and is spinning, but my AP is 80+, while if I do my regular routine of leveling off at 30~ and trying to build up speed the engine's thrust rapidly decreases even if I still got air, my speed is higher if I level out though and my Pe can get pretty close to 0 before I need to switch to rocket mode, any idea which is more efficient? I feel tempted to do the straight ascent and then bank on the ISP of my NERVA, though I guess the ISP of SABREs in atmo is even better?

Also some of my recent creations:

B9 S3 Semi-Blended Wing SSTO: http://imgur.com/a/s8ojF#0 (proud of the look of this one)

B9 MK2 SSTO: http://imgur.com/a/wCFXv#0 (first successful landing on runway after getting to space for me)

B9 S2 Wide Body Cargo SSTO: http://imgur.com/a/a0sP2#0 (carries 4x 1m ISA + Kethane Sats)

Question: Why do you have rocket engines on any of them? The B9 engines you're using can toggle between air breathing jet engine and liquid/oxidizer rocket engine. Yes, a nuclear engine is more efficient but you're hauling a lot of extra weight.

[WedgeJAntilles]

Yes, a nuclear engine is more efficient but you're hauling a lot of extra weight.

The LV-NB weighs, what, 3 tons? That's probably less than 5% of the weight of those craft. And it has more than double the Isp of the SABRE engines, so for a small increase in weight you get twice as much Delta-v once you're in orbit.

[rhoark]

Is there any visual indicator of throttle in the Mk 2 cockpit?

[Guest]

The LV-NB weighs, what, 3 tons? That's probably less than 5% of the weight of those craft. And it has more than double the Isp of the SABRE engines, so for a small increase in weight you get twice as much Delta-v once you're in orbit.

The big difference is, you don't need to haul an atmospheric engine to orbit. Also, SABRE is pretty strong, so it can replace multiple atmo engines. Weight gain starts getting significant here.

[DreidenKisada]

One LV-NB's weight of fuel would give you about 250m/s of delta-v using SABRE engines. So basically if you ever plan on doing anything in space besides going in circles, it pays to bring an LV-NB. Unless your total mass is below 20 tons once it's in orbit. If 3 tons is 10% of your total mass, then one engine's mass of fuel gives you 161m/s delta-v.

[DeathlessTitan54]

So I believe I have installed the mod correctly, I downloaded it off of KerbalSpacePort because the mediafire link doesn't work but I am missing the cargo bays when I build Space Planes and Rockets. The way I installed it (btw I am on mac) is by going into the folder KSP_osx-1 (that is where KSP and all its data is) In that folder is GameData where I then go. In GameData is one folder called Squad, I do not, repeat, DO NOT go into that folder and simply place the folders next to said Squad folders. When I go into KSP I have all the command pods, most of the structural stuff and all the engines (I believe) but when I look in Structural for the cargo bays there are none. Have I done something wrong??

[Tex_NL]

Granted. An LV is a more fuel efficient rocket engine.

Then let me reverse my question (with exactly the same result): Why have relatively heavy SABRE's if you're not going to use them to the max? Multiple regular jet engines are just as strong but weigh a lot less.

[PringleMan]

Granted. An LV is a more fuel efficient rocket engine.

Then let me reverse my question (with exactly the same result): Why have relatively heavy SABRE's if you're not going to use them to the max? Multiple regular jet engines are just as strong but weigh a lot less.

You are not limited to just one engine, and one engine does not necessarily work as well in all scenarios. Getting into orbit, He is going to be burning those SABRE engines. Even at high altitude the LV-NB is not going to get him up there. He HAS to have that high power, short impulse engine to get to orbit.

However once in orbit it is a different story. The fuel efficiency for the LV-NB is SO much higher than the SABRE that if he wants to do something like go to the moon or perform extended orbital maneuvers he will need something long impulse. Trying to use the SABRE engines for that is just plain wasted fuel. Much much much more wasted fuel than he loses lifting that extra 3 tons into space.

[cesarcurado]

Nice pack, I made 3 amazing and functional planes with it and some shuttles too.

It expands both VAB and SPH building to a whole new, higher level, the parts have nice textures and look good too.

I just don't know how to get kerbals out of the 6m S2 crew tank

If anyone does please quote me with answer, thanks

EDIT: Nvm, I didn't notice you had to hover over the hatch to show up the crew hatch popup

Edited June 6, 2013 by cesarcurado

[Aroc532]

Hey dude when i downloaded it, and installed it, for some reason the stock crafts dont work cuz it says its missing parts, but clear has it.

[The Destroyer]

Hey dude when i downloaded it, and installed it, for some reason the stock crafts dont work cuz it says its missing parts, but clear has it.

Clear has it?

Also, did you install it correctly.

[MR4Y]

Maybe scramjet engines will come next?

[Huelander]

MR4Y there is a ramjet engine within Taveriu's mod that can do the scramjet role. A true Scramjet don't makes much sense in KSP since the planet is so small with a low atmosphere that the orbital velocity is still in the range of what a scramjet could do. A single jet engine only to orbit wold be possible with one, with don't makes much sense too.

[senoiurkabls]

parts not from the update don't show