B9 5.0 pre-release (with download)

[Sevio]

Not sure if it's a bug or I'm dumb, but the SABREs, specifically the SABRE Ms, are burning oxidizer in air-breathing mode. I've got plenty of intake air, and I'm using stacked precoolers. Is this supposed to happen? I know it's pre-release and all, but I figure I'd treat it like a beta tester.

I had this problem too, the sabres were running both airbreathing and closed cycle modes at the same time, (and producing crazy thrust in the process). I tracked it down to Hotrockets, removing its B9 config file in MP_Nazari solved the problem for me.

[Taki117]

Question: Will these have Native Deadly Reentry Support?

[aramil]

Love it, i made this : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/29533-What-did-you-do-in-KSP-today?p=1373093&viewfull=1#post1373093

[JDCollie]

Holy kerbal on a cracker, how did I not know about this? o.O I must download now.

[Taverius]

I had this problem too, the sabres were running both airbreathing and closed cycle modes at the same time, (and producing crazy thrust in the process). I tracked it down to Hotrockets, removing its B9 config file in MP_Nazari solved the problem for me.

Oh yeah, anything which edits B9 (HotRockets, Modular Fuel Tanks, Real Fuels, Deadly Re-Entry, etc) will need updating and probably breaks the current build right now.

HotRockets especially, since we integrate the FX from it.

[Pörs]

I like it, especially the new effects on the landing gear!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Nsomnia]

I like it, especially the new effects on the landing gear!

The brake reverse motor effect is due to some other mod.

[K3-Chris]

The brake reverse motor effect is due to some other mod.

It's FireSpitter, which we bundle and use, yes technically correct. Though landing gear + FireSpitter doesn't mean you get those effects, you need to hook them up.

Edited August 25, 2014 by K3|Chris

[kubi]

I have a fresh KSP 0.24.2 install on Windows 7 with 8GB memory.

I've installed B9 R5, but it stops loading at Cockpit_HL/part/HL_Aero_Cockpit

Tried with all combination of "-force-opengl", active texture mgt basic and agressive, 32 and 64 bit KSP, but the result is the same.

Memory use varies on the use of opengl and ATM, but it is always below 1.9GB.

Log: http://pastebin.com/y5uGJefn

The last log entry repeated forever...

[K3-Chris]

You did include all the additional folders without moving them around right?

[jonrd463]

I had this problem too, the sabres were running both airbreathing and closed cycle modes at the same time, (and producing crazy thrust in the process). I tracked it down to Hotrockets, removing its B9 config file in MP_Nazari solved the problem for me.

Oh yeah, anything which edits B9 (HotRockets, Modular Fuel Tanks, Real Fuels, Deadly Re-Entry, etc) will need updating and probably breaks the current build right now.

HotRockets especially, since we integrate the FX from it.

Yep, that was it. It also explains why I was overheating at < half throttle, though now it's revealed that my SSTO is a bit underpowered. Ah well, back to the drawing board.

[kubi]

You did include all the additional folders without moving them around right?

Yes, except the source and ships.

[blowfish]

First I just want to say thank you guys so much for all your hard work . B9 is truly something special and you've all done amazing work to make it what it is. Unfortunate that this version had to be leaked the way it was, but perhaps it turned out okay anyway. That is, other than the constant stream of support requests and bug reports. Speaking of which, I found a couple of things in my playtesting:

• The HX2 and HX4 docking ports don't seem to have their attachment nodes set up quite right. The HX4 has a single centered node on the back but only one of the four front ports seems to have a node associated with it. The HX2 docking port only has a single centered node on the front.
  
• The HL Universal Tail doesn't carry any fuel. Maybe but this was intentional, but it seems like every other part with even a bit of internal space has room for fuel in this release, so it would make sense if this one did too.
  
• There seems to be some naming inconsistency between the subparts. For instance, the HL extension part says "Next texture" as opposed to "Next tank config" (and yes I'm aware that the texture is actually what's changing), and this seems to vary widely between the different parts. I'm not sure if this is easy to change but it would be nice if it were consistent.
  
• I know this was the case in the last release too, but it seems like there's no way to radially attach the HL fuselage parts to other parts. This would occasionally be useful in large constructions.
  
• Would it be possible to increase the particle density on the SABRE's exhaust effect? When viewed from straight on it looks okay but when viewed perpendicular the trail clearly separates into separate particles.
  

Since a lot of these are tweak requests as opposed to confirmed bugs, I'll wait to submit actual bug reports for the moment, but I understand how much easier those are to process.

Also, I've noticed a few additional parts in bac9's screenshots that don't seem to be in this release - HX extension to 1.25m adapters and various sized HPD1 engines. Any chance those will make it into this release or will they have to wait for the future?

[sralica]

I was just reading on wiki about "Intake Area". Is it possible to write the correct intake Area values in description of air intakes?

Also, are some intakes better at high speeds? We cold use a lot more written stuff about this kind of things. but after you release 5.0.

great work so far.

[bac9]

The HX2 and HX4 docking ports don't seem to have their attachment nodes set up quite right. The HX4 has a single centered node on the back but only one of the four front ports seems to have a node associated with it. The HX2 docking port only has a single centered node on the front.

Read the docking port description. If you want to dock single port spacecraft to a four-port array, you need to build that array from subtypes of the same docking port part. So single port part has three subtypes (normal, 1/2th of 2 port array, 1/4th of 4 port array), two port part has two subtypes (normal and 1/2th of the 4 port array) and four port docking part has no subtypes. It's a bit convoluted system, but there is no other way to ensure reliable docking, stock is not handling simultaneous docking of multiple ports properly so if you're connecting crafts of equal size, single node docking port part is always the best choice.

HX extension to 1.25m adapters

There was never such a part. Why would I make an adapter from 8 meter wide part to a 1.25m wide part?

various sized HPD1 engines. Any chance those will make it into this release or will they have to wait for the future?

We have scrapped double width HPD engine because stock can't properly handle multi-node attachment and because it served no unique role, being easily replaced with two HPD1 engines.

[K3-Chris]

• The HL Universal Tail doesn't carry any fuel. Maybe but this was intentional, but it seems like every other part with even a bit of internal space has room for fuel in this release, so it would make sense if this one did too.
  

Reason it doesn't is the very large number of tail variants, adding fuel variants on top of that makes for a daunting number of configurations, and their changing volume complicates matters even further.

• There seems to be some naming inconsistency between the subparts. For instance, the HL extension part says "Next texture" as opposed to "Next tank config" (and yes I'm aware that the texture is actually what's changing), and this seems to vary widely
  

Yeah noticed that myself, there seems to be "next part variant" "next tank setup" "next texture", variant seems linked to parts that can change shape, or has different fuel + texture choices, "next tank" is for parts that don't change texture when you change fuel contents (adapters mostly). And I recall seeing "next texture" somewhere but I can't recall where.

At some point in the future i think it would be easier if we could separate shape and fuel type options into 2 tweakables (pick between shape of tail, pick between fuel type in tail) but it's up to Tav and how much manual entry of .cfg files he's willing to stand, he's gone loopy from it before.

• I know this was the case in the last release too, but it seems like there's no way to radially attach the HL fuselage parts to other parts. This would occasionally be useful in large constructions.
  

Tav is already looking into that.

[blowfish]

Read the docking port description. If you want to dock single port spacecraft to a four-port array, you need to build that array from subtypes of the same docking port part. So single port part has three subtypes (normal, 1/2th of 2 port array, 1/4th of 4 port array), two port part has two subtypes (normal and 1/2th of the 4 port array) and four port docking part has no subtypes. It's a bit convoluted system, but there is no other way to ensure reliable docking, stock is not handling simultaneous docking of multiple ports properly so if you're connecting crafts of equal size, single node docking port part is always the best choice.

Makes sense, but then why is the HX4's node in one corner while the HX2's is in the middle?

There was never such a part. Why would I make an adapter from 8 meter wide part to a 1.25m wide part?

I said HX extension. As in the triangular corner pieces. The part I'm talking about is visible in this picture where the HL extension converts to an HX extension via two adapters. Could be that it's in this release and I just haven't been able to find it, but I've looked multiple times.

EDIT: Found it. Never mind.

Edited August 26, 2014 by blowfish

[Taverius]

• The HL Universal Tail doesn't carry any fuel. Maybe but this was intentional, but it seems like every other part with even a bit of internal space has room for fuel in this release, so it would make sense if this one did too.

If I added fuel tanks I would either have to magically handwave the fact that one version masses (and costs) 20% more than the others, or have 15 variants.
So far, I'm keeping it as-is, though that might change.

• There seems to be some naming inconsistency between the subparts. For instance, the HL extension part says "Next texture" as opposed to "Next tank config" (and yes I'm aware that the texture is actually what's changing), and this seems to vary widely between the different parts. I'm not sure if this is easy to change but it would be nice if it were consistent.

I fixed the HL Extension today.

As for the others, I'll be going through and making sure they all follow a standard, ie 'next/prev' tank if the basic mesh shape doesnt change (Mk2, S2), 'next/prev' variant or something for things with multiple distinct mesh geometries (tails, HL).

B9 has higher part count than stock KSP, so it might take a while.

• I know this was the case in the last release too, but it seems like there's no way to radially attach the HL fuselage parts to other parts. This would occasionally be useful in large constructions.

Fixed today.

• Would it be possible to increase the particle density on the SABRE's exhaust effect? When viewed from straight on it looks okay but when viewed perpendicular the trail clearly separates into separate particles.
  

See the open issue in the tracker about the SABRE FX.

HX extension to 1.25m adapters

What you're seeing there is the old panel-to-2.5m adapter, which can be used in interesting ways.

I was just reading on wiki about "Intake Area". Is it possible to write the correct intake Area values in description of air intakes?

Sure, that's not a bad idea. I'll make a note.

Also, are some intakes better at high speeds?

No. I'd love to do that, but ModuleResourceIntake doesn't support that.

[88theturbo]

Whenever I try to start ksp with this mod (steam) it crashes before main menu when loading.

Any help?

(FIXED) I just had to remove kw rocketry.

Edited August 25, 2014 by 88theturbo

[Murph]

Whenever I try to start ksp with this mod (steam) it crashes before main menu when loading.

Any help?

Since you've not provided any details, I'd say it's 99.7395% likely that you're running a 32-bit version of KSP with lots of mods, and B9 is simply the (fairly large) straw that broke the camel's back. 32-bit KSP (the default on Windows and OSX, regardless of your OS version/bittiness) can't cope with more than 4GB of memory (regardless of how much memory your machine has).

Try setting textures to "half res", and/or using the active texture management mod, to free up enough memory to load B9.

(The above assumes that you installed it correctly)

[blowfish]

If I added fuel tanks I would either have to magically handwave the fact that one version masses (and costs) 20% more than the others, or have 15 variants.

So far, I'm keeping it as-is, though that might change.

Understandable. I'd imagine that the configs can get quite messy when you have that many variants .

Thanks for the replies. I'll keep playtesting and see if I find anything else.

[stephm]

hi !

Using previous version of b9 in 24.2 (just some part like b9 gear, for front gear)

this is the cfg file I use and he work great !

may be I'm wrong but setting for gear need some adjustment !

(Old B9_Utility_Landing_Gear_HDG1A revised)

MODULE

{

name = FSwheel

wheelColliderName = wheelCollider

boundsCollider = Bounds

wheelMeshName = Wheel

suspensionParentName = suspensionParent

animationName = landing_gear_hdg3_retract

disableColliderWhenRetracted = true

disableColliderWhenRetracting = true

disableColliderAtAnimTime = 0.825

hasMotor = false

motorEnabled = false

overrideModelFrictionValues = true // needed otherwise unity defaut setup used (or disabled by plugin if I remember the firespittter doc)

overrideModelSpringValues = true // needed

overrideSuspensionDistance = true // needed

forwardsStiffness = 0.2 // (0 and 1 value)

forwardsExtremumSlip = 1.0

forwardsExtremumValue = 5000.0 //(value to high are not good)

forwardsAsymptoteSlip = 2.0

forwardsAsymptoteValue = 2000.0

sidewaysStiffness = 0.2 //for tire friction (range between 0 and 1)

sidewaysExtremumSlip = 1.0

sidewaysExtremumValue = 5000.0 // (value to high are not good)

sidewaysAsymptoteSlip = 2.0

sidewaysAsymptoteValue = 2000.0

wheelColliderMass = 0.025

wheelColliderRadius = 0.115

wheelColliderSuspensionDistance = 0.2

suspensionSpring = 20

suspensionDamper = 0.2 (value 0 and 1 no need to put higher value)

suspensionTargetPosition = -0.005

rotationAdjustment = 3.5

deployedDrag = 0.5

brakeEmissiveObjectName = base_door_front1_mesh

onEmissiveColor = 1, 0.3, 0

offEmissiveColor = 0, 0, 0

deployingEmissiveColor = 0.1, 0.55, 1.0

disabledEmissiveColor = 0, 0, 0

}

looking in the new lovely B9 pack, and you have almost the same config than old!

Just tested one gear and rolling between 80 100 m/s give the same result like previous b9 pack.

and it not working perfect, all parameter are needed, if you don't specify the rest of parameter the UNITY defaut parameter are used and they are not good at all in KSP (based on my test)

For stiffness according unity manual base is 1 so you need decrease this value for better result !!

I know I have a to much little experience to give some useful advice but the cfg parameter setup (over) work better than original parameter !, but probably I'm wrong too !!

steph

Edited August 25, 2014 by stephm

[Murph]

hi !

Using previous version of b9 in 24.2 (just some part like b9 gear, for front gear)

this is the cfg file I use and he work great !

may be I'm wrong but setting for gear need some adjustment !

(Old B9_Utility_Landing_Gear_HDG1A)

looking in the new lovely B9 pack, and you have almost the same config than old!

Just tested one gear and rolling between 80 100 m/s give the same result like previous b9 pack.

and it not working perfect, all parameter are needed, if you don't specify the rest of parameter the UNITY defaut parameter are used and they are not good at all in KSP (based on my test)

For stiffness according unity manual base is 1 so you need decrease this value for better result !!

I know I have a to much little experience to give some useful advice but the cfg parameter setup (over) work better than original parameter !, but probably I'm wrong too !!

steph

Yeah, I really like the HDG gear, but I've always had problems with it giving chronic wobble on takeoff runs of heavy craft. By heavy, I mean 200-400t planes, which is probably pushing it a bit. Strutting the gear does help sometimes, as does adding lots of wheels, but I've never been 100% happy with it. I acknowledge and accept that wheels in Unity have some fundamental limitations.

It's giving me the same issues in 5.0, and my gut tells me that there must be some sort of fix or improvement to make it more robustly linked to the craft or something, but I've never figured it out properly. In the past, I've often given up and resorted to vertical (rocket) takeoff, horizontal landing instead, i.e. NASA Shuttle style but with powered descent and landing instead of gliding.

[Alshain]

Yeah, I really like the HDG gear, but I've always had problems with it giving chronic wobble on takeoff runs of heavy craft. By heavy, I mean 200-400t planes, which is probably pushing it a bit. Strutting the gear does help sometimes, as does adding lots of wheels, but I've never been 100% happy with it. I acknowledge and accept that wheels in Unity have some fundamental limitations. It's giving me the same issues in 5.0, and my gut tells me that there must be some sort of fix or improvement to make it more robustly linked to the craft or something, but I've never figured it out properly. In the past, I've often given up and resorted to vertical (rocket) takeoff, horizontal landing instead, i.e. NASA Shuttle style but with powered descent and landing instead of gliding.

I'm having this issue on a 65 tonne plane, I'm positive my wheels are aligned and I don't think it's a weight issue but it wobbles off course on take off, and when I do get off it veers away on landing too. And even the slightest tap on the steering control rolls the plane. P.S. I'd like to renew my request for the FSwheelAlignment module to be added to the wheels by default. I didn't get a reply before so I'm not sure if it got seen at the bottom of the page. Edited August 25, 2014 by Alshain

[Arron Rift]

Oh Bless you! Just when I thought B9 was dead!