[1.02] KW Rocketry v2.7 Available - 1.02 Compatibility! - 16/05/2015

[Ty89m]

First off, this is my MUST have mod for KSP... Don't think I'd enjoy it nearly as much without KW! Anyway, I've nearly read this entire thread, and STILL can't figure out what's keeping the Titan V shroud from decoupling. It stays attached to the and only drops the stage below the engine, much like other users have reported. I've changed the setting in the cfg file to - isOmnidecouple = true, but when using the 5m decoupler with auto-shroud, it still won't disconnect from the top. All the other engines in KW act correctly, it's only the Titan V giving me troubles. Is this just a bug that needs fixing, or is there something else I could try in the mean time?

[Drew Kerman]

I gave up on the shrouds and created a MM config to allow the Procedural Fairings interstage adapter to decouple. Works great as a shroud.

@PART[KzInterstageAdapter2]
{
    fx_gasBurst_white = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, decouple
    sound_decoupler_fire = decouple

    @MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
    {
        @ejectionForce = 250
        @explosiveNodeID = top
        @isTweakable = True
    }
}

[andre0525]

so im getting this, they the same size parts but its showing gaps after I loaded up the game the next day pls help!

[Ty89m]

Thanks Gaiiden! Will give that a go shortly

[Drew Kerman]

Note I never tried decoupling the interstage adapter without also jettisoning the fairings. It should be possible to do this though, if you want that effect of the engine rising out of the shroud - just make sure to place the fairing decoupler stage events higher up in the stage list. Once the interstage decoupler is triggered those should remove themselves from the queue and the whole thing should just slip off behind. In theory

[GreyRaven75]

Regarding the problem of the 5m interstage not detaching, after a lengthy process of removing mods from my installation and relaunching the game to test it seems to be a problem with Module Manager (I'm running 2.3.5) removing the 'Jettison' ability of the Titan V engine. Unfortunately, I have zero expertise to be able to troubleshoot this, but I thought I'd share so more technically savvy people can check it out.

Edit: OK, after putting MM back in the jettison feature still seems to work. I don't know why it didn't work and then did. Sufficed to say it's clearly one mod not playing nice with KW. Or it's two mods in conjunction messing things up. Sigh.

Edited September 22, 2014 by GreyRaven75

[andre0525]

so i changed scale under model to 1, 1, 1 and i looks fine in orbit but its too big in VAB now could i get some help in rescaling this fuel tank ty

[endl]

would it be possible to create a new type of fairing for rover deployment. ideally the fairings should open up to form a ramp.

[Agricola]

When I used the KW SC3 - RCS 3.75 monopropellent fuel tank, it was replaced with image of another tank named SC-3 RCS.

I carried out a quick test which replicated the problem as shown in screen shots below.

[Kickasskyle]

When I used the KW SC3 - RCS 3.75 monopropellent fuel tank, it was replaced with image of another tank named SC-3 RCS.

I carried out a quick test which replicated the problem as shown in screen shots below.

Looks like you didn't delete the previous version before installing the new one, as those thinner RCS tanks don't exist in the latest version.

[Agricola]

SO thats what the problem is, I had to re-install the older version as I used a number of parts that could not be found and therefore the craft would not load, ended up with no space station.

I like those thinner tanks, I like the yellow band on them. I may also have problems with height limits on other builds, is there a work around in files I can change, I like the laRger of the two . I think we should have lots of colours and styles, makes things more interesting.

[jordanjay29]

Having a couple problems with KW:

The default alignment for the Griffon Century stabilizers/winglets are turned 90 degrees from the proper attachment node. They're so out of whack, in fact, that the Griffon Century will not accept them as attachments until they are turned.

The 3-2/2.5-1.25 conical adapter decouplers are not long enough for KW's own engines, such as the 2.5. Placing the decoupler over the engine results in the bottom of the decoupler hitting the bottom of the engine, and melting the two together. The only way I can get them to work is by placing the decoupler below the engine to create the auto-shroud, which is the opposite of the decoupler's purpose.

[Spatzimaus]

Love this mod, and I use it a lot for all of my large-ship needs; with the addition of stock 3.75m parts, I've found myself heavily relying on the KW 5m fuel tanks and SAS parts. The main problem I'm having with KW Rocketry is simply one of balance; the stock engines' stats were tweaked in 0.24, and now the KW engines are just substantially inferior. Compare the heavy 2.5m engines:

Mainsail: Thrust 1500, ISP 320-360

Griffon G8D: Thrust 1900, ISP 280-325

Maverick-V: Thrust 1400, ISP 285-335

In 0.23, the Mainsail's ISP was only 280-330, which made the three comparable in practice. Because of its new, much higher ISP, a Mainsail lifter can easily get an extra 1000m/s of delta-V compared to the KW engines. (I'll ignore the lighter 2.5m engines for this discussion since my main concern is in heavy-lift first stages, and the differences aren't nearly as large there.)

The same sort of thing happens with the 3.75m engines, where the stock Kerbodyne engines have much higher ISPs than their KW counterparts without sacrificing thrust. This also leads to a big imbalance with the 5m engines, where you're better off just using four linked Mainsails instead of the Titan V, or four of the stock 3.75m engines instead of a Griffon Century. Besides bloating the part counts, this causes all sorts of stability issues.

So, are the stats of the KW engines (especially the ISPs) going to be improved soon to be comparable to stock engines, or will this only happen after 0.25 or later?

[MadMoe]

KSP's engines have a balance that's waaay on the easy side of things, the TWR and iSP numbers make it much easier to launch rockets. KW engines try to be more on the 'realistic' side with engines designed for specific roles like real rocket engines are.

[Akira_R]

Hey so for all of you that use or used to use HotRockets I have just posted an updated cfg that adds all the cool HotRockets FX back on to the KW engines (with out making them freak out and do weird stuff) and adds them to the new engines as well, oh and it also makes the exhaust expand as atmospheric pressure drops

If you want to check it out see this post in the HotRockets thread.

Cheers

[Green Baron]

Yes ... what am i doing wrong ? Allready installed KW new ...

Edit: Oops, forgot the quote:

SRBs don't respond to Thrust Limiter ....

[Harry Rhodan]

SRBs don't respond to Thrust Limiter ....

They do, but they can only be limited to 50% of the thrust (at 0% thrust on the tweakable and all tools that only read the tweakable value).

[Hevak]

So I just started with this mod, and I used the instant power response, but now no engines will shroud with decouplers. Is that intended? The way I read the install is it shouldn't stop them from auto shrouding just change the power response.

nevermind.. Guess I have to use kW fairings too. Removed them since I use procedural fairings.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Hevak

[Ultimadark]

When I launch a rocket with KW engines, the engines are partly transparent. Has anyone else experienced this? They are not transparent at all in the VAB.

[BlitzkriegNein]

What can we expect for 0.25, huh?

[smunisto]

When I launch a rocket with KW engines, the engines are partly transparent. Has anyone else experienced this? They are not transparent at all in the VAB.

It's a bug with Kronal Vessel Viewer, use his respective thread to report it. So far he doesn't seem to have taken action to fix it.

[jordanjay29]

What can we expect for 0.25, huh?

My guess is compatibility.

[undercoveryankee]

My guess is compatibility.

Now that parts' R&D entry costs are actually charged at higher difficulties, it'll be worthwhile for mods that have parts to go take a balance pass over entry costs as well as part costs.

[Sirplentifus]

The interstage decouplers are not working if the top node of the decoupler is not attached. I have worked around this on my install simply by changing the eplosiveNodeId in the cfg files to be isOmniDecoupler=true for all the interstage parts so that they act like the stack separators and eject from both top and bottom.

How do you do that? Where's the file that I need to edit, and what's its name? And where in that file do I stick that "isOmniDecoupler=true" command?

Thank you for helping!

[Forte]

Can someone tell me how to normally install this in layman's terms? I have no clue what unpacking or merging means, and I don't have time to sift through 173 pages to see if someone else answered this question. Please go over the whole normal install as if I'm five (macintosh!). Thanks in advance.

-Fawtay