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

[wasmic]

Hey, I'm new to installing mods and all, but this looks awesome. I seem to be having issues with it though.

All the parts show up, can be selected, and are rendered fine. However, I seem to be having an issue where the engines burn and consume fuel but won't move any rocket, no matter how small, at all.

I've tried uninstalling and reinstalling. The KWRocketry folder is in the GameData folder. I haven't had any major issues with any of the other few mods I've installed, so I really think I did that properly.

I haven't seen anyone else mention having this problem, so I have no idea what is happening...

Thanks for any help you can give.

Are you using launch clamps? I haven't had any trouble with KW myself, but the launch pad has a tendency to be sticky. Could you try making a rocket-powered plane, just to make sure they don't produce any thrust? Screenshots would also be nice.

[zsanderson3]

Are you using launch clamps? I haven't had any trouble with KW myself, but the launch pad has a tendency to be sticky. Could you try making a rocket-powered plane, just to make sure they don't produce any thrust? Screenshots would also be nice.

Thanks for the reply!

Here is an album of screenshots to show what's happening

The launch clamps didn't seem to help. The rocket just fell to the ground while the engine was burning.

The fuel tanks do seem to work though because I was able to make a stock engine fly with a KW fuel tank.

I am using the Modular Fuel, Real Fuels mod. Might that be an issue?

Edit: ok, it seems that the "real fuels" part of Modular Fuels breaks the engines.... I don't know why or how to fix it though....

Edit again: I think I worked it out. Installed a different version of modular fuels and it seems to function now.

Edited November 27, 2013 by zsanderson3

[bkusnetz]

I love the mod (my first mod; just downloaded it) but I'm having trouble with it. It seems like most of the parts aren't installing properly. The files are in the correct location and everything, but they don't show up in the selection menu, except for RCS and some fuel tanks. Can anyone help me out with this?

[nadseh]

A quick feature request:

I think the selection of SRBs in KW Rocketry is great, they suit almost all purposes. For example, I use the X-2 a lot as a first stage on 1.25m rockets - it works brilliantly in this role.

My question is would it be possible to have a 2.5m SRB with an attachment node on top? It would let us create rockets similar to the Ares I. Thrust similar to the Thor SRB would suffice I think!

Thanks

[NathanKell]

A different SRB-related request. Could you release just the nosecones from the Globe Thor and Globe V? That way any SRB or LB can have those neat asymmetric nose cones.

[wasmic]

I love the mod (my first mod; just downloaded it) but I'm having trouble with it. It seems like most of the parts aren't installing properly. The files are in the correct location and everything, but they don't show up in the selection menu, except for RCS and some fuel tanks. Can anyone help me out with this?

Career or sandbox?

Oh, and @nadseh, I second your request for an inline Thor.

[Romby]

Is there a way to add fairings without the tip? Wanted to use sides to cover up the middel of my rocket. (know i can download procedual fairings but wanted to stick with one mod.

[MainSailor]

My question is would it be possible to have a 2.5m SRB with an attachment node on top? It would let us create rockets similar to the Ares I. Thrust similar to the Thor SRB would suffice I think!

A different SRB-related request. Could you release just the nosecones from the Globe Thor and Globe V? That way any SRB or LB can have those neat asymmetric nose cones.

I second both of these requests. FASA has a 2.5m booster that works well as a first stage solid, but I really like the skin of the KW Thor booster. And the asymmetrical cone would be a great addition too!

[wasmic]

Is there a way to add fairings without the tip? Wanted to use sides to cover up the middel of my rocket. (know i can download procedual fairings but wanted to stick with one mod.

Nope, that's not possible. NovaPunch has firings that allows you to do that, but they're also terribly inconvenient. I'd just go with Procedural Fairings if I were you.

[Motokid600]

A quick feature request:

I think the selection of SRBs in KW Rocketry is great, they suit almost all purposes. For example, I use the X-2 a lot as a first stage on 1.25m rockets - it works brilliantly in this role.

My question is would it be possible to have a 2.5m SRB with an attachment node on top? It would let us create rockets similar to the Ares I. Thrust similar to the Thor SRB would suffice I think!

Thanks

You could always pluck THE Ares I booster ( or the entire rocket ) from the American Pack. Just make sure your payload is heavy. The SRB is scary powerful.

[M5000]

I'd have to echo with the requests for a few new SRBs.

I'd love a huge Space Shuttle Booster type one, with insane power and thrust but being very awkward to incorporate into a design that isn't totally massive.

Also, a shorter SRB that could be repeatedly stacked, yet is able to still have some lifting power, such as the Minotaur V's design would be pretty cool.

[Dexadrinne]

Yeah i have a problem with the REALLY long full tank with Kerbal states on the side and the Stock 240 engine.. It breaks off on the launch pad

[wasmic]

I'd have to echo with the requests for a few new SRBs.

I'd love a huge Space Shuttle Booster type one, with insane power and thrust but being very awkward to incorporate into a design that isn't totally massive.

Also, a shorter SRB that could be repeatedly stacked, yet is able to still have some lifting power, such as the Minotaur V's design would be pretty cool.

I know that TiberDyne Shuttle Booster System has such a booster. It IS hard to use on normal rockets. It's also got quite a nice paintjob.

[Sokar408]

I have this nasty problem of having my 3.75 tanks, and engines acting very weirdly. For example the engine will just randomly fall off the craft, even with strutted, and the same goes for tanks. Also I have noticed that no matter how you look at it, KW engines are just better then standard engines, pretty much making all the old engines, and indeed tanks, obsolete. I'd like to know why this is, and if there is a way to completely getting rid of the old parts, as the amount of stuff can be annoying to look through (Or if there is a new, working part sorting problem, that would be a lovely recommendation

[Jim DiGriz]

I have this nasty problem of having my 3.75 tanks, and engines acting very weirdly. For example the engine will just randomly fall off the craft, even with strutted, and the same goes for tanks. Also I have noticed that no matter how you look at it, KW engines are just better then standard engines, pretty much making all the old engines, and indeed tanks, obsolete. I'd like to know why this is, and if there is a way to completely getting rid of the old parts, as the amount of stuff can be annoying to look through (Or if there is a new, working part sorting problem, that would be a lovely recommendation

try using kerbal joint reinforcement? you can probably get rid of most of your strut stitching if you do.

also, lock your gimbals on your outside engines if you're building a big lifter.

[Sokar408]

try using kerbal joint reinforcement? you can probably get rid of most of your strut stitching if you do.

also, lock your gimbals on your outside engines if you're building a big lifter.

The problem is kerbal joint reinforcement has some pretty serious problems with Infernal Robotics atm, and would render my fuel trucks and build deployers useless. Thus far i have simply removed any and all parts from all mods that I use that is better then 2.5 meters, but I'd really like not to be restricted, as that tends to leave empty science nods.

[wasmic]

I have this nasty problem of having my 3.75 tanks, and engines acting very weirdly. For example the engine will just randomly fall off the craft, even with strutted, and the same goes for tanks. Also I have noticed that no matter how you look at it, KW engines are just better then standard engines, pretty much making all the old engines, and indeed tanks, obsolete. I'd like to know why this is, and if there is a way to completely getting rid of the old parts, as the amount of stuff can be annoying to look through (Or if there is a new, working part sorting problem, that would be a lovely recommendation

I don't really see how the KW engines are always better than the stock. The 2.5 m´maverick has only marginally different stats from the Mainsail, and it's a bit longer. I often use both engines on the same craft, actually. The 2.5m two-nozzle engine is also very close to the skipper, so sometimes I use one and sometimes the other. I can't see how KW is OP compared to stock. Anyway, you might want to try the PartCatalog mod. It adds mod-based sorting, and subgroups for fuel tanks, command pods, engines etc.

[M5000]

I don't really see how the KW engines are always better than the stock. The 2.5 m´maverick has only marginally different stats from the Mainsail, and it's a bit longer. I often use both engines on the same craft, actually. The 2.5m two-nozzle engine is also very close to the skipper, so sometimes I use one and sometimes the other. I can't see how KW is OP compared to stock. Anyway, you might want to try the PartCatalog mod. It adds mod-based sorting, and subgroups for fuel tanks, command pods, engines etc.

Would have to agree that all stock engines are absolutely NOT antiquated by KW's implementation of efficiency and high thrust. There is still a great margin for the Mainsail and the Skipper alike, as well as the T-45 and T-30, you'd just have to use something like Mechjeb's in-editor stats, or Kerbal Engineer to see which engine will give you the TWR you want, while maximizing the delta-V. There ARE occasions, albeit I find these less common than they used to be, that the Mainsail or Skipper is the best engine for the job. They're simply not replaceable quite yet.

[SuperWeegee4000]

How strange. I placed the Parts folder in GameData and got maybe 10% of the parts in the mod. I'll try just putting in the KWRockertry folder.

EDIT: That worked.

Edited December 4, 2013 by SuperWeegee4000

[NicoH]

Most of the parts have paths in the configfile which start with "KWRocketry\Parts", so if you only copy the part folder or rename the folder "KWRocketry" these parts don't work anymore.

[SuperWeegee4000]

Most of the parts have paths in the configfile which start with "KWRocketry\Parts", so if you only copy the part folder or rename the folder "KWRocketry" these parts don't work anymore.

It's just that the instructions said to move only the parts folder.

[Tyrador]

Hello,

Does anybody know Kickasskyle's e-mail, he doesn't seem to respond to my messages.

I'm apologise for inappropriate question.

Thank you for your help!

[Kickasskyle]

Hello,

Does anybody know Kickasskyle's e-mail, he doesn't seem to respond to my messages.

I'm apologise for inappropriate question.

Thank you for your help!

Sorry, I've been somewhat busy and also ill over the last few weeks. I've sent you a reply though.

Generally the quickest way to get a response it yell at me on steam, my name is the same so it shouldn't be hard to find.

[coolcat007]

Nice mod! There is a small problem though. SA-1 and SB-2 LFT's have two different sized parts. They could and maybe should be named SA-0 and SB-0, according to their size. If that is the case, the SC-3 should also be called SC-0. I see what the logic behind the naming of these parts was , but those names already exist.

Otherwise, good job! I like the fairings and decouplers and stuff and the new engines and tanks also come in handy. Keep it up!

[BC000001]

One question; I have this mod installed with deadly reentry and when I was testing the fairings, the things inside the fairings would get heated as if the fairings were'nt there. Why?