[1.1.x] Space Shuttle Engines (2016-07-03)

[DomDiaemus]

A simple request for action trigger "altitude"... could the option "ascension" be added to the All/descent? Because all not just triggers on up/down where as the new option would only trigger on going up and not down Cheers

[Railgunner2160]

Just a small request, next time you make an update could you please go through your tanks and double check that the names are right, there are many, many errors. Nosecone tanks labeled as middle tanks, tanks with the wrong sizes listed. Along with various other misnamings it can sometime make putting together a EFT a bit annoying, besides the actual size difference in the parts if your just looking at the little pic in the tooltip or the names you can often find that the part you thought was the correct size is actually the next size up or down......

[falken]

Wasn't a fan of the SSME rescale and new effects, so I went and threw the old config over it.

Dtobi, is there any chance you could make a regular gimbal version of your SSME for space launch system builds?

Oh, and I took your engines and a couple other mods to make this:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

(The fueltank in the cargo hold was a dummy cargo, not used in the ascent)

Edited May 13, 2014 by falken

[montyben101]

Please can I see all the new effects just to check if I like them after hearing all the bad feedback? (no offence Dtobi, this mod is probably my favourite)

[dlrk]

Anyone have a real fuels config for the new engines?

[Socke]

Wasn't a fan of the SSME rescale and new effects, so I went and threw the old config over it.

Dtobi, is there any chance you could make a regular gimbal version of your SSME for space launch system builds?

Oh, and I took your engines and a couple other mods to make this:

http://imgur.com/a/FR8qj

(The fueltank in the cargo hold was a dummy cargo, not used in the ascent)

Where are those wings from? They're not in the B9 pack, right?

[falken]

Socke, they're Procedural Wings.

[NathanKell]

dtobi: two issues with this (1 per PM).

1. KM_Gimbal (and presumably your other assemblies) are compiled against .NET 4.0. However, KSP is written for (and ships with) 3.5, and any 4.0+ features will fail. (I did more research; I misremembered it as 3.0; it is in fact 3.5). Could you recompile for 3.5?

2. KM_Gimbal force-activates engines, which messes with staging. You note earlier in the thread that you'd fixed the issue, but I still saw it occur quite regularly. THIS is the line that causes it; if I disable that whole check, things seem to work normally, and I confirmed that the gimbal still activates correctly when an engine is activated by action groups rather than staging. Therefore I suggest removing that whole method.

[bludclot]

@dtobi I made a shuttle powered by these engines and I now have a request. Fire and smoke. Trying make a Buran/Energia type thing here and I think the engines should smoke a whole lote more in the atmosphere. It would be awesome to have some of these boosters and the engines on the main fuel tank (which I didn't make on mine): http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Energia_buran.jpg

Edited May 29, 2014 by bludclot

[mar117117]

hey, i am using KM_Gimbal in Real Engines for RO. could anyone plz tell me how am i supposed to use it. because my rocket just spin out of control anytime i try to turn them.

[Orange_Ignition]

is there a tweakscale patch floating around anywhere for this?

[cvod]

Does anyone else have a problem with the linear aerospike having two max thrust values in the VAB? This really confuses KER and MecJeb with TWRs.

[shynung]

I think I found a bug.

Why is the smoke not aligned with the flame?

[Garek]

Why is the smoke not aligned with the flame?

Because the flame aligns to the direction of thrust, while the smoke aligns with the direction of airflow (aka the opposite of the direction of flight aka retrograde). They only align if you thrust prograde, while the difference is most obvious when using rockets to brake inside an atmosphere.

[shynung]

Because the flame aligns to the direction of thrust, while the smoke aligns with the direction of airflow (aka the opposite of the direction of flight aka retrograde). They only align if you thrust prograde, while the difference is most obvious when using rockets to brake inside an atmosphere.

I'm going straight up in that shot. Notice the navball readouts. Also, smoke from the NASA SRBs should at least go the same direction with the XS-25 if I actually am flying to the side rather than upwards.

[Whirligig Girl]

Can you make an SSME that perfectly matches the KS-25 engine from the Kerbodyne 4x cluster?

[TeeGee]

Anyone have a real fuels config for the new engines?

Yeah I second this comment!

Also, the linear aerospike engine... is it realistic in performance? That engine is incredible if it is.

Edited May 31, 2014 by TeeGee

[cvod]

No one replied to my first post but I've found what's making the linear aerospike have two max thrust values in the VAB. There's two instances in the config file of this module. The only difference appears to be that one has "powerflamer" and "exhaustr" while the other has "powerflamel" and "exhaustl." I deleted one of them just to see what changed, and the VAB displayed the max thrust correctly, but the engine definitely was messed up when I put it on the launchpad. Since both modules need to be there, is there any way this can be fixed so that TWR displays correctly with MechJeb and Engineer?

MODULE
    {
    name = ModuleEnginesFX
    //engineID = rocketengine
    runningEffectName = powersmoker
    directThrottleEffectName = powerflamer
    thrustVectorTransformName = exhaustr
    exhaustDamage = True
    ignitionThreshold = 0.1
    minThrust = 0
    maxThrust = 775
    heatProduction = 275
    fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.0
    PROPELLANT
    {
        name = LiquidFuel
           ratio = 0.9
        DrawGauge = True
    }
    PROPELLANT
    {
        name = Oxidizer
        ratio = 1.1
    }
    atmosphereCurve
     {
        key = 0 390
       key = 1 385
     }

}

[dtobi]

No one replied to my first post but I've found what's making the linear aerospike have two max thrust values in the VAB. There's two instances in the config file of this module. The only difference appears to be that one has "powerflamer" and "exhaustr" while the other has "powerflamel" and "exhaustl." I deleted one of them just to see what changed, and the VAB displayed the max thrust correctly, but the engine definitely was messed up when I put it on the launchpad. Since both modules need to be there, is there any way this can be fixed so that TWR displays correctly with MechJeb and Engineer?

MODULE
    {
    name = ModuleEnginesFX
    //engineID = rocketengine
    runningEffectName = powersmoker
    directThrottleEffectName = powerflamer
    thrustVectorTransformName = exhaustr
    exhaustDamage = True
    ignitionThreshold = 0.1
    minThrust = 0
    maxThrust = 775
    heatProduction = 275
    fxOffset = 0, 0, 0.0
    PROPELLANT
    {
        name = LiquidFuel
           ratio = 0.9
        DrawGauge = True
    }
    PROPELLANT
    {
        name = Oxidizer
        ratio = 1.1
    }
    atmosphereCurve
     {
        key = 0 390
       key = 1 385
     }

}

I made it to be two engines. That might mess things up. I'll consider to unite the two transforms in the future.

[dtobi]

A minor update is out. I think people will like it still. It improves the performance of the orange tank system. I reworked all collision meshes. This should be more friendly to the CPU.

[RedAV8R]

A minor update is out. I think people will like it still. It improves the performance of the orange tank system. I reworked all collision meshes. This should be more friendly to the CPU.

Good to hear from you. Have you seen and/or implemented NathanKell's requests? He's got some good ones in there, and would help out with several things and improve compatibility with others.

[dtobi]

I just replied to him. You refer to the .net version request?

[dtobi]

dtobi: two issues with this (1 per PM).

1. KM_Gimbal (and presumably your other assemblies) are compiled against .NET 4.0. However, KSP is written for (and ships with) 3.5, and any 4.0+ features will fail. (I did more research; I misremembered it as 3.0; it is in fact 3.5). Could you recompile for 3.5?

2. KM_Gimbal force-activates engines, which messes with staging. You note earlier in the thread that you'd fixed the issue, but I still saw it occur quite regularly. THIS is the line that causes it; if I disable that whole check, things seem to work normally, and I confirmed that the gimbal still activates correctly when an engine is activated by action groups rather than staging. Therefore I suggest removing that whole method.

I'll look into it. Sorry for the late reply. I have been quite busy these days.

[RedAV8R]

dtobi: two issues with this (1 per PM).

1. KM_Gimbal (and presumably your other assemblies) are compiled against .NET 4.0. However, KSP is written for (and ships with) 3.5, and any 4.0+ features will fail. (I did more research; I misremembered it as 3.0; it is in fact 3.5). Could you recompile for 3.5?

2. KM_Gimbal force-activates engines, which messes with staging. You note earlier in the thread that you'd fixed the issue, but I still saw it occur quite regularly. THIS is the line that causes it; if I disable that whole check, things seem to work normally, and I confirmed that the gimbal still activates correctly when an engine is activated by action groups rather than staging. Therefore I suggest removing that whole method.

Yep this is it. Nathan and I are cooperating with the FASA and other RO releases and the compatibility with MJ has prevented complete integration of KM_Gimbal with our work.

[dtobi]

Yep this is it. Nathan and I are cooperating with the FASA and other RO releases and the compatibility with MJ has prevented complete integration of KM_Gimbal with our work.

I see. I'll try to get it working with 3.5.