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

[The Destroyer]

Isn't working for me, I've researched a lot of stuff, but all the parts say "requires a purchase in the R&D center". Do I need a new career mode save? If so that sucks D:

[wiviking]

Did you go and click on the parts in the tech tree? When you add new parts you have to manually unlock each one for techs you have already researched by clicking on the part in the tech details on the right of the screen. I think that in the final version we will have to research the tech, then pay for each part before we can use it.

[The Destroyer]

I will try that tommorow, thanks!

[smunisto]

Or, you just copied the KW Rocketry with it's GameData root folder in your GameData, like I had:

KSP\GameData\KWRocketry - this is correct

KSP\GameData\GameData\KWRocketry - this messes up researching

[ola]

Now, this might very well have come up for discussion already, so please bear with me: I sincerely -want- to like KW. It has several ingredients for success, good engines, nice textures and so forth. I used to use KW until I discovered NP and AIES. They, too, have problems of their own, but I'll stick to the point.

My problem with KW is that even the simpler - say a SC-2 with a Wildcat-XR and a SC-4 with a Titan-T1 - 3.75 metre rocket stage configurations tend to sway to the point that they're unusable without a painful amount of struts. Either I'm using the interstages and decouplers wrong, or this is WAD.

Please tell me I'm wrong (I really want to be wrong on this occasion), and explain how I should go about making stable rockets...

[Kickasskyle]

Now, this might very well have come up for discussion already, so please bear with me: I sincerely -want- to like KW. It has several ingredients for success, good engines, nice textures and so forth. I used to use KW until I discovered NP and AIES. They, too, have problems of their own, but I'll stick to the point.

My problem with KW is that even the simpler - say a SC-2 with a Wildcat-XR and a SC-4 with a Titan-T1 - 3.75 metre rocket stage configurations tend to sway to the point that they're unusable without a painful amount of struts. Either I'm using the interstages and decouplers wrong, or this is WAD.

Please tell me I'm wrong (I really want to be wrong on this occasion), and explain how I should go about making stable rockets...

Without an example of your problem/rockets I can't really come up with a solution.

But to give you an example of what you can accomplish if you put stuff together properly:

That said I'd hardly call this a stable example as it's literally as tall as the inside of the VAB and was slightly precarious. I did however easily manage to circularize what basically looked like a entire launchable rocket which I thought was amusing.

[The Destroyer]

Or, you just copied the KW Rocketry with it's GameData root folder in your GameData, like I had:

KSP\GameData\KWRocketry - this is correct

KSP\GameData\GameData\KWRocketry - this messes up researching

Naw, I've been installing mods since 0.14, and I do know what I'm doing.

Gonna try clicking today.

[B787_300]

Kyle

1. How many nozzles does that have on the first stage that fire on lift off?

2. is there a photo of what you got into orbit?

[nismobg]

Kyle

1. How many nozzles does that have on the first stage that fire on lift off?

2. is there a photo of what you got into orbit?

I would guess 96 engines on the 1st stage !!!

Edited October 20, 2013 by nismobg

[KhaosCorp]

Now, this might very well have come up for discussion already, so please bear with me: I sincerely -want- to like KW. It has several ingredients for success, good engines, nice textures and so forth. I used to use KW until I discovered NP and AIES. They, too, have problems of their own, but I'll stick to the point.

My problem with KW is that even the simpler - say a SC-2 with a Wildcat-XR and a SC-4 with a Titan-T1 - 3.75 metre rocket stage configurations tend to sway to the point that they're unusable without a painful amount of struts. Either I'm using the interstages and decouplers wrong, or this is WAD.

Please tell me I'm wrong (I really want to be wrong on this occasion), and explain how I should go about making stable rockets...

Strut your rockets internaly....I have an all KW launch vehicle thats capable of putting 185ish tons into LKO...Its a bit wobbly i wont lie, but it only has a handful of visable struts. And even though its shakie as long as the payload is balanced even MJ2 can put it up.

[Kickasskyle]

Kyle

1. How many nozzles does that have on the first stage that fire on lift off?

2. is there a photo of what you got into orbit?

1.) Off the top of my head i'd say around 20 GriffonXX's.

2.) This is what I circularized at about 150km. The current stage was at about 1/8th fuel left so it's mostly spent.

The upper final stage was a touch worbly at launch mostly due to the fact that ASAS was being controlled from up top and as a result it was trying to stabilize it badly.

[czokletmuss]

No kill like overkill, huh?

[Sovek]

I can tell you right now whats causing the wobbling in your rocket, its that Titan. Never EVER put a titan in middle of a stack, for some odd reason it makes it wobbly as heck and will not stop. Even with four cubic struts+struts holding the stack together (see my rocket in link for an example), it WILL wobble like crazy. Think it has to do with the gimble range.

[PhysicsMasterMind]

Has anyone had a problem with the latest KW Rocketry crashing the game, either just before completing loading or when you try and enter the VAB after the start up? Oddly I'm having the same problems with the new NovaPunch as well.

[Creat]

Has anyone had a problem with the latest KW Rocketry crashing the game, either just before completing loading or when you try and enter the VAB after the start up? Oddly I'm having the same problems with the new NovaPunch as well.

This is likely a memory limitation. I'm guessing you're either using a 32 bit system or a LOT of mods. This is basically a limitation of windows (or the cumputer architecture it uses, to be more precise) and not something that can be fixed by the KSP devs, let alone by mod devs.

[Taverius]

This is likely a memory limitation. I'm guessing you're either using a 32 bit system or a LOT of mods. This is basically a limitation of windows (or the cumputer architecture it uses, to be more precise) and not something that can be fixed by the KSP devs, let alone by mod devs.

Its a limitation of 32-bit applications, and in now way specific to windows. If linux only had a 32-bit version it would have the same issues.

Unfortunately Squad has not given us a 64-bit windows executable.

@Winston/KickAssStyle: I've yet to see the Vesta V9-RD display a heat animation, but I do see an emissive texture in the part's folder, so either the HeatAnimationEmissive is pointing at the wrong animation, or its not making enough heat to ever really heat up.

Edited October 21, 2013 by Taverius

[Kickasskyle]

Its a limitation of 32-bit applications, and in now way specific to windows. If linux only had a 32-bit version it would have the same issues.

Unfortunately Squad has not given us a 64-bit windows executable.

@Winston/KickAssStyle: I've yet to see the Vesta V9-RD display a heat animation, but I do see an emissive texture in the part's folder, so either the HeatAnimationEmissive is pointing at the wrong animation, or its not making enough heat to ever really heat up.

It's probably the latter, I'll have a looksie at the heat values at some point

[Taverius]

Cool. Its easy to miss things like that, I only realized for B9 4.0 that the large SABREs were not making enough heat either.

By the way, the stock ASAS seems a lot better at dealing with large gimbal values. I was able to increase the value to 3 degrees for the SABREs in B9 4.0 and SAS/MJ2 deal with it fine, so it might be time to increase the gimbal values on KW engine to at least stock values.

Finally, I haven't really been playing KSP since 0.19, and I'm really enjoying the parts you've added to the pack since then. The wrap-round reaction wheels are genius, I wish I could do something like that for the B9 fuselages

[KhaosCorp]

The wrap-round reaction wheels are genius, I wish I could do something like that for the B9 fuselages

Why not? They would have to be hull specific since your part are a shape all there own. But split the aircraft down the middle longways so to speak, make it collar onto hull port/star. At worst ya may have to clip wings into em sometimes ya.

And also have to say I am inlove with them sas collars myself...its one of the things i forget most on lower stages...and I internaly strut everything...kinda a pain to go back and add sas on 300+ part rockets like that.

[PhysicsMasterMind]

Ooooooh, okay. Thanks for clearing that up. I was convinced I was doing something wrong but I guess not. And yes, I am using a 32 bit system. Time to change that I guess.

[Shtirliz72]

Thanks for work, guys! Amazing mod!

But there is question: why some SRB(like, for example, Globe V) doesn't have included separators?

[Guest]

Thanks for work, guys! Amazing mod!

But there is question: why some SRB(like, for example, Globe V) doesn't have included separators?

None of them do, not even stock ones. It would screw up their staging and limit your options for attaching them.

[Chestburster]

Looks like the no shroud config is missing the techRequired entry.

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

I consider these parts stock now. Just wanted to say thanks Your work is appreciated.

[Kickasskyle]

Looks like the no shroud config is missing the techRequired entry.

Yeah I had a look at all the configs and fixed the problems, but it won't be included until next KW version, so in light of that here's the fixed non auto-shroud configs.

http://www./download/k70tf3ge513i9i5/v2.5.4_No_AutoShroud_Configs.zip

I added them to the OP under the main download if anyone's interested.

Edited October 22, 2013 by Kickasskyle