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

[Bomoo]

That % is the tweakable thrust %.

At 0% Tweakable thrust it's at the minimum thrust value, which is more or less 50% of the maximum thrust value.

eg.

http://puu.sh/anPYG/79b0c1d93c.png

Ahh, right you are. Didn't realize there was an absolute minimum thrust.

[nanowinner]

I wonder which files were removed because they were REDUNDANT?

[niceundtidy]

I am experiencing an odd bug that seem to happen only with KWR parts.

On reload of a craft, random KWR pieces will have shrunk by some amount, leaving the other parts flying seemingly in space, but still connected. The hitboxes and connections to other parts seem to be unaffected but it looks really dumb

Does anyone know of a fix for this issue? Ill go for anything, even savegame editing...

[BudgetHedgehog]

I am experiencing an odd bug that seem to happen only with KWR parts.

On reload of a craft, random KWR pieces will have shrunk by some amount, leaving the other parts flying seemingly in space, but still connected. The hitboxes and connections to other parts seem to be unaffected but it looks really dumb

Does anyone know of a fix for this issue? Ill go for anything, even savegame editing...

That was an issue due to things like fuel tanks being the root part of the vessel. The latest version, 2.6c, apparently "altered scaling system to cure scaling issues", so upgrade to that and try again.

EDIT: But I have just experienced a scale bug myself. 1.25m decoupler rescaled to slightly bigger upon vessel reload. Wasn't the root part, was fine up until then.

Edited July 24, 2014 by ObsessedWithKSP

[Bomoo]

Man, in case it hasn't been said already, thank you guys for making and updating this pack. I particularly can't praise those new 5m parts enough. *mega-drool*

[Pulsar]

I found a problem that your Titan-V 5 meters engine fairing didn't jettison.

So I look down in jettison module code and compare to Wildcat-XR. Which fairing jettison is working.

Titan-V

MODULE

{

name = ModuleJettison

jettisonName = 5mInterstage

bottomNodeName = bottom

isFairing = False

jettisonedObjectMass = 1.0

jettisonForce = 5

jettisonDirection = 0 -1 0

}

Wildcat-XR

MODULE

{

name = ModuleJettison

jettisonName = 3mWildcatShroud

bottomNodeName = bottom

isFairing = True

jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1

jettisonForce = 5

jettisonDirection = 0 0 1

}

The direction is incorrect I guess?

EDIT

I also check the LV-N faring jettison code as well. which faring are split after engine is fired.

MODULE

{

name = ModuleJettison

jettisonName = fairingL

bottomNodeName = bottom

isFairing = False

jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1

jettisonForce = 1

jettisonDirection = 1 0 0

}

MODULE

{

name = ModuleJettison

jettisonName = fairingR

bottomNodeName = bottom

isFairing = False

jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1

jettisonForce = 1

jettisonDirection = -1 0 0

}

Edit2 Nope, fixing direction doesn't help.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Pulsar

[B787_300]

just thought of something...

KW for HUGE rockets... i mean it has a bunch of 3m and 5m parts... where are the nice looking probe parts & engines?

[Jaxx]

just thought of something...

KW for HUGE rockets... i mean it has a bunch of 3m and 5m parts... where are the nice looking probe parts & engines?

We don't think small and puny here.

[Shad0wCatcher]

When you absolutely, positively, MUST launch many thousands of tons of material into Munar Orbit, accept no substitutes. Also, I'm completely in love with the new parts. Great job folks.

[Pulsar]

Update, I think I found problem.

1. the Titan-V have 2 top node on the same position.

// --- node definitions ---
node_stack_top = 0.0, 2.205, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 4
node_stack_top2 = 0.0, 2.205, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 4
node_stack_bottom = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 4

This might be reason why engine fairing doesn't work properly.

2.The interstage parts have 3 nodes. for example, 1.25 interstage.

// --- node definitions ---

// definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z

node_stack_bottom = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1

node_stack_bottom2 = 0.0, 0.1, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1

node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.525, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1

And I take a look at decoupler module.

MODULE
{
    name = ModuleDecouple
    ejectionForce = 250
	explosiveNodeID = top
}

This Means, the decoupler will decouple from top node. If nothing connect to that node. When you decouple. It doesn't work.

It need to have another explosiveNodeID on bottom2 node. Where the engine would normally stick to it.

[Streetwind]

just thought of something...

KW for HUGE rockets... i mean it has a bunch of 3m and 5m parts... where are the nice looking probe parts & engines?

RLA Stockalike has some great 0.625m tanks and engines of varying sizes and power levels.

Unfortunately it hasn't been updated in a long while because the author disappeared. So it's definitely not adjusted for funds and node sizes and stuff. You'd have to do that yourself.

[ZalgoWaits]

I'm not using Steam; I have a desktop shortcut directly to KSP-x64.exe. Also while I haven't repeated the whole battery of tests with the 32-bit, I did notice similar crashes earlier today with both versions.

And yes, there isn't an output log. I have about 28394952 output logs that all say the same thing: KSP_x64.exe caused an Access Violation.

Anyway, my investigation has continued and I've (I think) narrowed it down further: Something is up with the Wildcat XR and Titan I 3-meter engines. KW seems to work fine, even alongside NASAMission, without these two, but crashes when they are present, especially when I try to spawn one of them.

More data (the investigation is ongoing):

- All KW except engines:

okay

- All KW except 5m engines:

CRASH (delayed, on attempt to spawn stock parts after spawning KW parts)

- All KW except 3m engines:

okay

- All KW except Griffon XX:

CRASH (delayed, after spawning stock parts after spawning KW parts)

- All KW except Titan I:

CRASH (on attempt to spawn stock parts after spawning KW parts)

- All KW except Wildcat XR:

CRASH (you get the idea here)

- Griffon XX alone: okay

- Titan I alone: CRASH immediately on spawning Titan I

- Wildcat XR alone: CRASH on attempt to spawn a second Wildcat XR

EDIT:

I've caught it! The bug is in the .mu files for both the Titan I and Wildcat XR 3-meter engines. KSP was stable (cough) when I replaced these models with some copied from other engines, but crashed when I used either of the original models, even if I replaced or removed the .mbm and other texture files.

I'm going to try using Blender and PartTools to recompile the models and see if I can fix it.

Edit again: nope, I couldn't fix it. Unity got all fussy about animations and despite my best efforts KSP still crashed when I used the intended model. You guys at KW must be wizards.

Have not experienced one bit of this, care to actually share your logs? If the .mu was THAT bugged, then EVERYBODY would be having this problem.

I'm having the same problem with those same engines, so it's more than just him. My error logs with engines installed are earlier in the thread.

[lodestar]

I just noticed the 3.75m fairings are very complicated to attach now, with the new VAB orientation. I actually have to rotate the whole ship back to the previous rotation, attach the fairings, and rotate back.

[zakkpaz]

has anyone ever made a replacer for the squad parts with KW?

[smunisto]

Something is going on with the Globe VI SRB, I didn't touch TweakScale for it, I even deleted all of TS' cfgs to avoid the SRB being modifiable.

However each time I go to the VAB and load that assembly it comes up with slightly spaced Globe VI's with Null reference errors on their load and the game crashes immediately when trying to launch the rocket like this.

If I pick them up and reattach them - it launches just fine, even though it throws a bunch of Null reference errors.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nr6c2nzbfba61gz/Screenshot%202014-07-24%2022.00.38.png

Here's the output log:https://www.dropbox.com/s/k5twb9o2ijvqihd/output_log%20%286%29.txt

[Creat]

I spent a good deal of time looking at these numbers and trying to fathom what Squad are up to, and what I can do try and bring KW in line with their 'balance'.

I think they've finally taken it to a point where I don't want to follow what they've done, they just seem to be homogenising the ISP's across all the engines

[...]

I hope this clears something up at least.

Thanks for the reply and having a look. Yea I've noticed they've gone a bit bonkers with the numbers. Though I'm sure their goal was to make the Mainsail and Skipper somewhat competitive with especially the NASA parts. The problem is just that it makes them all so boring. While it's usually still better to take a poodle compared to a skipper or even mainsail, if you don't want to burn for long times just take the mainsail and the Delta-V isn't much worse. And yes, it makes most things even easier. With the exception of specialty engines like the radially attached ones or the LV-1 with super-low-thrust, everything is in the 370-390 range now, swiftly followed by 360 for the high-power 4x engine cluster (which shares the ASL ISP of 320 with most other engines) and 350 for the best 'small' engine, the 48-7s.

As I said, I very much understand disconnecting KW from the balance of squad parts at this point. And I'll probably continue playing without using stock parts (except for lander engines, as we don't have any of those in KW yet). As I'm sure that not everyone will be happy about this, maybe you could provide an 'extra' config (similar to the autoshroud and clamp sound folders) that uses values similar to corresponding stock engines, as nonsensical as that may be?

[Creat]

I just noticed the 3.75m fairings are very complicated to attach now, with the new VAB orientation. I actually have to rotate the whole ship back to the previous rotation, attach the fairings, and rotate back.

You really don't. you can just rotate the fairings and attach them just like always. Changing the default orientation would be nice though, not that pressing "Q" twice (I think) is a big deal

[problemecium]

I decided to keep my mouth shut for a couple days after I realized this, to avoid sounding any stupider than I feel, but: I tried 32-bit again to double-check, and all those Access Violations I was complaining about went poof, along with several other bugs. Alas, I've been forced to accept the reality that x64 just isn't quite ripe (at least on my setup).

So as far as that goes consider yourselves off the hook, although I won't stop you if you want to look into it.

Now for some right-brain feedback: I too am loving those 5m engines and that totally #BADA55 startup noise on the Century. It's a shame it has to play the full blastoff clip every time I reactivate the engine even on 0% throttle, but that's my fault for abusing it xP

POWER UP THE GRIFFON CENTURY BASS CANNON! Bzheeoooowww....vvwwwrrrrooooBASHOOOFMMMMMBGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!1!!!!!!!

[RedAV8R]

Parameciumkid, out of curiosity...where is your main KSP folder located at?

[Kickasskyle]

I decided to keep my mouth shut for a couple days after I realized this, to avoid sounding any stupider than I feel, but: I tried 32-bit again to double-check, and all those Access Violations I was complaining about went poof, along with several other bugs. Alas, I've been forced to accept the reality that x64 just isn't quite ripe (at least on my setup).

So as far as that goes consider yourselves off the hook, although I won't stop you if you want to look into it.

Now for some right-brain feedback: I too am loving those 5m engines and that totally #BADA55 startup noise on the Century. It's a shame it has to play the full blastoff clip every time I reactivate the engine even on 0% throttle, but that's my fault for abusing it xP

POWER UP THE GRIFFON CENTURY BASS CANNON! Bzheeoooowww....vvwwwrrrrooooBASHOOOFMMMMMBGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!1!!!!!!!

Ideally it'd be a one time start engine, but stock modules aren't really great for that sort of customisation, and I don't want to really open the can of worms that is making modules and plugins.

[Shad0wCatcher]

@RedAV8R for comparison's sake mine is located outside Program Files(x86)...Steam is installed in the base storage hard drive (E:\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program)

[Docterchese]

Recently updated the mod, the new 5m parts are AWESOME. I have to say, the thing that stands out for me with the mod is the sounds, especially on the new Griffon Century. The new lag in engine response is interesting too, and adds a nice amount of realism. Great work from Winston & Kickass, fantastic update to a fantastic mod

[problemecium]

Parameciumkid, out of curiosity...where is your main KSP folder located at?

I don't use Steam, so I stuck it inside the "Saved Games" folder that comes with Win7 in the user directory, next to all my other games. I've never had issues related to stuff saved in this location before, though. Where would you suggest I have it?

[smartdummies]

2.The interstage parts have 3 nodes. for example, 1.25 interstage.

And I take a look at decoupler module.

MODULE
{
    name = ModuleDecouple
    ejectionForce = 250
    explosiveNodeID = top
}

This Means, the decoupler will decouple from top node. If nothing connect to that node. When you decouple. It doesn't work.

It need to have another explosiveNodeID on bottom2 node. Where the engine would normally stick to it.

I removing the explosiveNodeID and setting isOmniDecoupler=true as using just the top or bottom2 nodes did not work correctly in my various tests and I prefer having only one Decouple option in the dialog instead of two for having both nodes hooked to the ModuleDecouple. Now I can create my RCS powered Mun lander and have it shielded it so FAR won't decide to reduce my structural integrity.

Just a thought, a 2.5 to 3.75 petal adapter would seem to be useful for a Mk 1 lander vehicle for early exploration.

[Temeter]

Thanks for the reply and having a look. Yea I've noticed they've gone a bit bonkers with the numbers. Though I'm sure their goal was to make the Mainsail and Skipper somewhat competitive with especially the NASA parts. The problem is just that it makes them all so boring. While it's usually still better to take a poodle compared to a skipper or even mainsail, if you don't want to burn for long times just take the mainsail and the Delta-V isn't much worse. And yes, it makes most things even easier. With the exception of specialty engines like the radially attached ones or the LV-1 with super-low-thrust, everything is in the 370-390 range now, swiftly followed by 360 for the high-power 4x engine cluster (which shares the ASL ISP of 320 with most other engines) and 350 for the best 'small' engine, the 48-7s.

As I said, I very much understand disconnecting KW from the balance of squad parts at this point. And I'll probably continue playing without using stock parts (except for lander engines, as we don't have any of those in KW yet). As I'm sure that not everyone will be happy about this, maybe you could provide an 'extra' config (similar to the autoshroud and clamp sound folders) that uses values similar to corresponding stock engines, as nonsensical as that may be?

I think the KW Rocketry Engines work quite fine for reasonable (sub 100 ton freight) rockets, as long as you don't want fully recoverable one stage-rockets. The Nasa engines are extremly expensive, and the KW stuff tends to be a bit cheaper than skipper/mainsail and co. So your launcher might be 40+ tons heaver, but still cost the same or less.

The Soyuz style (ST-25/37) fuel tanks are also really cheap. I like to use them like liquid fuel boosters, low-priced but extremly impractical and therefor usually only used in the first stage. To bad the 3.5m variant got nerfed into line with the stageable tanks.

@Kickasskyle: That said, can we make the ST 37 a bit cheaper? :3

It's really not as practical as the the 40 ton fuel tanks, takes more place, can't be used alone, fits rarely into upper stages and needs a central tank or fuselage. Does that make sense? I could ofc edit the file to make tank cheaper, but that wouldn't be fun/cheating.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Temeter