Sampa Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Yeah, I looked at the PF, found that the way they looked, well, they just looked weird. I think the KW ones look much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smjjames Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I haven't tried the KW rocketry ones yet, but I find the PF ones versatile.Everybody has their own opinion on it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrous Oxide Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) So what you're saying, is since PF exists, KW fairings should be deleted. Sorry, but I dislike PF for that very reason, having to build around the fairings is more fun than having the fairings instantly adapt to what you build, but that is my preference, and you have yours. But there is no way you should try to force your preference onto others.a) I'm not trying to force my preference onto others, but you sure are. I said KW fairings are bad.c) I said "plz remove" as a completely non-serious joke. Obviously anyone can already remove their own parts from a pack, such as I've already done with my own fairings in KW.d) You've never used PF if you think they just automatically adapt to your payload and that's that. You have so much more control with the fairings in PF than 6 attach nodes floating in midair (seriously, this is what makes me laugh).e) Go fly a kite. It's cool that people can complain about KW fairings but I'm not allowed because my comment is taken immediately so far out of goddamn context. It was a joke. Goddamn. Edited February 5, 2015 by Nitrous Oxide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itsdavyjones Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 a) I'm not trying to force my preference onto others, but you sure are. I said KW fairings are bad.c) I said "plz remove" as a completely non-serious joke. Obviously anyone can already remove their own parts from a pack, such as I've already done with my own fairings in KW.d) You've never used PF if you think they just automatically adapt to your payload and that's that. You have so much more control with the fairings in PF than 6 attach nodes floating in midair (seriously, this is what makes me laugh).e) Go fly a kite. It's cool that people can complain about KW fairings but I'm not allowed because my comment is taken immediately so far out of goddamn context. It was a joke. Goddamn.Jokes usually go over my head, I tend to lack humor and take things literally (I also hate comedies). As for not using PF, I have, and I know you can adjust it manually. I was also not saying that KW Fairings >PF as a whole, but to I find it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitrous Oxide Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Jokes usually go over my head, I tend to lack humor and take things literally (I also hate comedies). As for not using PF, I have, and I know you can adjust it manually. I was also not saying that KW Fairings >PF as a whole, but to I find it that way.Bah, I was just being silly, so of course it'll go over someone's head. Poe's law after all... But honestly, I used KW fairings back in the day, and I just feel they're a bit low-tech compared to the work done on PF. And so, I just flat-out remove them now in place of the procedural versions. ¯\(°_o)/¯ Edited February 5, 2015 by Nitrous Oxide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmatt1203 Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 For all those having problems with the connection nodes not lining up with the base of the fuel tanks I found the cause. (At least for me) On all the engine parts for some reason when installing the "InstantPowerResponseConfigs" on every engine the scale of the engine was reduced by 20%. i.e. supposed to read Scale= 1, 1, 1 now its 0.8, 0.8, 0.8. If you change them back to 1 it fixes the nodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undercoveryankee Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 For all those having problems with the connection nodes not lining up with the base of the fuel tanks I found the cause. (At least for me) On all the engine parts for some reason when installing the "InstantPowerResponseConfigs" on every engine the scale of the engine was reduced by 20%. i.e. supposed to read Scale= 1, 1, 1 now its 0.8, 0.8, 0.8. If you change them back to 1 it fixes the nodes.There was a bug in KSP versions before 0.25 where you had to set those scale factors to the reciprocal of the part's rescaleFactor to get it to actually come out the intended size. It looks like the instant-power configs didn't get the scaling update applied when the main configs were updated for 0.25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudgetHedgehog Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 It looks like the instant-power configs didn't get the scaling update applied when the main configs were updated for 0.25.From the OP:Updated to 2.6d2-Fixes the instant reaction configs and clamp override sounds.I'm guessing vmatt doesn't have 2.6d2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vmatt1203 Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 From the OP:Updated to 2.6d2-Fixes the instant reaction configs and clamp override sounds.I'm guessing vmatt doesn't have 2.6d2?I do... Even checked and re-downloaded it twice (both times from curse forge). Both the parent folder and the download source say it is v2.6d2 and it was a fresh install of kerbal with no previous versions of the mod installed. In both, the instant power replacer for the engine configs all say scale is 0.8, except the 5m engines, they were at the correct 1 scale. I had to manually enter in the correct scales on all the other engines. Unless they uploaded a correct version between when I originally posted yesterday to now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelLestat Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 in my case I dont use any tank, any faring or almost nothing of KW.Just some engines and 2 other parts.If someone wants a fixed size with farings, they can save as subassemblies a fixed PF size and thats it.But is matter of tastes, I do it for 2 main reasons, I hate to have many parts in my menu selection (I lose a lot of time finding the right part) and I save memory (very important if you want to use other mods).So I give a good welcome to any mod who add parts in a procedural way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobotsAndSpaceships Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 Sooner or later, we shall end up with a 20m monstrosity that will will inspire the question:"WHY NOT BIGGER?"Meanwhile in the land of realism overhaul... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobotsAndSpaceships Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 I gotta say, out of all the mods for KSP this one will always hold a special place in my heart. It allows all sorts of designs, and includes an awesome variety of parts. Keep up the good work guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prismatech Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 (edited) have problem withe the fairings off the engies Vesta vr -1 and wildcat -v .The Fairings when 1.25 m decoupler (stock) is to small think is the 0.6xx version think that kw must be updatet.use the last version of kw Edited February 18, 2015 by Prismatech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostFool Posted February 19, 2015 Share Posted February 19, 2015 There's a bug in my house! Or on my rocket ship I should say.Trying to use a KW Rocketry ST-25 fuel.Any parachutes I put on it fall off when I detach the fuel tanks via side mounted decouplers. I am using RealChute and FRMS, trying to make the stages recoverable. Parachutes don't come detached from anything else that I have noticed yet. Just the ST-25 is giving me issues Appreciate your work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WuphonsReach Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Current balance issues:KW Rocketry Vesta VR-9D: This engine needs to be competitive with the Rockomax "Skipper".Skipper - 650 thrust, 3.0 mass, 320 Isp(ASL), 370 Isp(Vac)Vesta VR-9D - 600 thrust, 5.0 mass, 310 Isp(ASL), 380 Isp(Vac)Thrust should be boosted to 900, mass should be cut to 4.1t. At which point it works well as a heavier skipper with a roughly equivalent performance envelope. It gives something with 38% more thrust then the Skipper and fills in the hole in the 2.5m stock engine list.KW Rocketry Maverick-V: Mainsail is the competition.Mainsail - 1500 thrust, 6.0 mass, 320 Isp(ASL), 360 Isp(Vac)Maverick-V - 1400 thrust, 6.0 mass, 285 Isp(ASL), 335 Isp(Vac)Thrust should be boosted to 2000 with a 6.5t mass. That would make it a better choice then the Mainsail for lifting heavy loads. Sea level Isp should probably also be raised up to 310 Isp(ASL) to better match the Mainsail.Alternately, make it a lighter version of the Mainsail at only 5.0t and with a thrust of 1200 and a 310 Isp(ASL). But I'd prefer the 2000 thrust variant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartGonzo Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Why does the KerbalStuff page say this mod doesn't work with the latest version of KSP?What's the issue?and are there any 3rd party fixes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudgetHedgehog Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Why does the KerbalStuff page say this mod doesn't work with the latest version of KSP?What's the issue?and are there any 3rd party fixes?That's the standard boilerplate text you get when you don't specifically say that a mod is working on the current version of KSP. For the record, it works absolutely fine, but the struts still use the old strut coding so may not work as intended (I haven't tried them). But otherwise, there's no problem with KWR on 0.90 at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undercoveryankee Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Why does the KerbalStuff page say this mod doesn't work with the latest version of KSP?What's the issue?and are there any 3rd party fixes?KW parts use stock modules only (no third-party plugins) so all of the parts still work in 0.90. Since the configs were written on older versions, we're relying on the automatic process of assigning "propulsion" parts to the "engine" and "fuel tank" categories. Some parts may land in counterintuitive places.That wasn't enough of a change to be worth packaging a new version, so nobody has updated KerbalStuff. Go ahead and run the current version on 0.90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartGonzo Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 That's the standard boilerplate text you get when you don't specifically say that a mod is working on the current version of KSP. For the record, it works absolutely fine, but the struts still use the old strut coding so may not work as intended (I haven't tried them). But otherwise, there's no problem with KWR on 0.90 at all.I see, not a problem on the struts as I found the stock ones to be fine anywayThanks ObsessedWithKSP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowfish Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Struts using the old module still seem to work, though using KJR mostly eliminates the need for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
undercoveryankee Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Current balance issues:KW Rocketry Vesta VR-9D: This engine needs to be competitive with the Rockomax "Skipper".Skipper - 650 thrust, 3.0 mass, 320 Isp(ASL), 370 Isp(Vac)Vesta VR-9D - 600 thrust, 5.0 mass, 310 Isp(ASL), 380 Isp(Vac)Thrust should be boosted to 900, mass should be cut to 4.1t. At which point it works well as a heavier skipper with a roughly equivalent performance envelope. It gives something with 38% more thrust then the Skipper and fills in the hole in the 2.5m stock engine list.KW Rocketry Maverick-V: Mainsail is the competition.Mainsail - 1500 thrust, 6.0 mass, 320 Isp(ASL), 360 Isp(Vac)Maverick-V - 1400 thrust, 6.0 mass, 285 Isp(ASL), 335 Isp(Vac)Thrust should be boosted to 2000 with a 6.5t mass. That would make it a better choice then the Mainsail for lifting heavy loads. Sea level Isp should probably also be raised up to 310 Isp(ASL) to better match the Mainsail.Alternately, make it a lighter version of the Mainsail at only 5.0t and with a thrust of 1200 and a 310 Isp(ASL). But I'd prefer the 2000 thrust variant.I agree that the 2.5m engines are balanced against the pre-0.24 Mainsail and Skipper and could use a bump similar to what the Squad engines got, but since I play stock-size Kerbin with FAR and fly more small rockets than huge ones, I decided to tweak mass and Isp instead of straight thrust increases. I'll find my spreadsheet and ModuleManager patch next time I'm at my KSP computer.I have the VR-9D set up as an intermediate between the Poodle and the Skipper instead of directly competing with the Skipper, similar to how the Vesta VR-1 fits between the 909 "Terrier" and the LV-T45. That also made the VR-9D similar to a cluster of four VR-1s, much like the Poodle currently resembles a cluster of four Terriers. I think I have vac Isp around 370 or 380 with a mass around 2 tons and thrust at 400 kN.The Maverick-V I put between the Mainsail and the Skipper. Thrust I either kept at 1400 kN or dropped to 1200 or 1250, with mass and Isp changes to fit. Just a little more powerful than where you're using the VR-9D (sort of a Mainsail-light).Your 2000-kN Maverick-V is likely to be less useful because it's in a similar space to the stock LFB-KR1x2 and KW Griffon G8D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 i would like to see the fuelswitch added to the next version... otherwise, this is an amazing mod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobotsAndSpaceships Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 i would like to see the fuelswitch added to the next version... otherwise, this is an amazing modWhat do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrkadoodle Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I have downloaded the mod and there is 2 of every part but non of the parts will attach to the other nodes from the stock parts or modded parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeper Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Im updating to .9 tonight and this mod is so delicious i'm taking it with me. Brilliant mod. Thanks, and why no .9 update? Im hoping because it will work as perfect.... I'll be testing those struts fo sho, & cant be going without those big beefy engines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts