[1.1.2]Aerojet Kerbodyne 3.0 (4/29/16 Better FX, still good for 1.1.2)

[blackheart612]

Why not just make one for RSS?

I work kinda slow too so not really

[m00f]

Ok, here are some upcoming features for FX

Notice the emissives on HG-10B. Also there will be new Powerflames and smoke. Done on LAS and HG-10B. Others Soon^tm

^{This will be packed with balancing.}

^{https://i.imgur.com/EDi9oHh.png}

^{https://i.imgur.com/eNFVFRI.png}

^{Wow! Those look awesome! I was secretly hoping for some new effects on the HG-10B.}

[Captain Sierra]

With the 3.75m MM rescale coming, perhaps you could include some 2.5m and 3.75m dual and quad nozzle engines. In a 3.75m configuration (with a nice flatter adapter than we have currently), this would make the perfect Block II upper stage.

[blackheart612]

Well, I think I might make one for the taurus. so... yeah. Maybe

[DasBananenbrot]

With the 3.75m MM rescale coming, perhaps you could include some 2.5m and 3.75m dual and quad nozzle engines. In a 3.75m configuration (with a nice flatter adapter than we have currently), this would make the perfect Block II upper stage.

Well, I think the KR-2L works good as a J2-X but it's stupid mounting plate will make dual use for block II quite hard without clipping. So that is a good idea

Edited April 21, 2014 by DasBananenbrot

[Captain Sierra]

Well, I think the KR-2L works good as a J2-X but it's stupid mounting plate won't make dual use for block II quite hard without clipping. So that is a good idea

Not to mention that I think the engine bell is a bit too big for that and it would be massively overpowered if using two of them.

[blackheart612]

Hmmm, is posting a pic possible? I'll do my best to make it look like it but stockalike

[DasBananenbrot]

Hmmm, is posting a pic possible? I'll do my best to make it look like it but stockalike

I'll do as quick as possible. We are still speaking of a pic of the J2-X right?

Edit: I have some pics for you . Both are artist concepts though as everything is still in development As seen in the second image the upper stage with the 2 J2-X will probably be as wide as the main stage. There are some sources still stating that the Earth Departure Stage will have 3 J2-X engines but newest informations from NASA only depict the upper stage with the 2 J2-X engines. So if noone else has newer informations ,we best stick with the 2 J2-X version. So best would be to make it 3.75 for those stock size users and then I can rescale it so it fits my larger main stage rescale

Edit Edit : There are some real-life pics of J2-X during testing though without the lower part of the nozzle as seen in the concept image

[spoiler=]

Edited April 21, 2014 by DasBananenbrot

[blackheart612]

Alright, I think I'm really into making my own service Module specifically for the Taurus HCV and I'll be grabbing DaBananenBrot for resizing it to 2.5m lol

[blackheart612]

Here's a 3m decoupler with fairing. Not sure if I should separate the fairing as a decoupler. It's might be hard to attach if I separate them though. Posting this on their thread so they know lol.

[DasBananenbrot]

Alright, I think I'm really into making my own service Module specifically for the Taurus HCV and I'll be grabbing DaBananenBrot for resizing it to 2.5m lol

Haha well good to see. Do you make it Orion like? Because I can ditch my SDHI service module resize then

[blackheart612]

Yeah it will. Not like I'll be able to finish it anytime soon

[blackheart612]

Okay, Here's the new bigger LAS, an aerocap, a heatshield, and a decoupler.

FX are place holders because.... you really wouldn't see anything after you jettison the aerocap.

(The top part now produces FX too)

[DasBananenbrot]

Nice if I'm not able to fix the problems with the rocket I will put out my rescale of your parts anyway. One has to find a way for himself to get it in orbit then though. I also wanted to ship it with a ARM resize to about six meters but the SRB produces weird FAR drag valúes even with nose cap. Don't know if this is a problem of the rescale or a general problem of the SRB with FAR

[bsquiklehausen]

Ooh! I really like that aerocap! The LES seems a but unneeded because of the capsule's, though - what about a smaller one to just clear the cap away, or even a radially decoupled cap?

[blackheart612]

Well, I have not many ideas about far

Ooh! I really like that aerocap! The LES seems a but unneeded because of the capsule's, though - what about a smaller one to just clear the cap away, or even a radially decoupled cap?

Well, I can make an aerocap that's a nose cone with built in boosters for it. I heard you have upcoming optional no LES parts also, this Huge LAS is... Huge. It's Orion-like and that's my main goal, I always get off track because I get distracted so yep, I might be making the aerocap with built in boosters.

Edited April 22, 2014 by blackheart612

[DasBananenbrot]

Well, I have not many ideas about far

Well, I can make an aerocap that's a nose cone with built in boosters for it. I heard you have upcoming optional no LES parts also, this Huge LAS is... Huge. It's Orion-like and that's my main goal, I always get off track because I get distracted so yep, I might be making the aerocap with built in boosters.

Well I definitely want that LES

[MaverickSawyer]

Agreed. My motto for aborts is, "In thrust we trust", so there's no such thing as TOO many motors during an abort.

[Captain Sierra]

I for one won't even need this. Though I do have to say: "Now that's some FIIIIIAAAAAARRR!!"

I think I'm gonna go with the capsule abort only and hope that's enough. If it ain't, sux to be me!

[Railgunner2160]

Just my 2 cents but because some of us have experienced bugs with the Tarus's LES (possibly due to ExtrapanetaryLaunchpads) I use the no LES config for the pod, So an LES would be nice!!

[mdapol]

Or have an LES and modify the capsule's engines to be more for deorbiting or minor orbital corrections (or even landing in low gravity). Kind of like the Dragon capsule.

[blackheart612]

Or have an LES and modify the capsule's engines to be more for deorbiting or minor orbital corrections (or even landing in low gravity). Kind of like the Dragon capsule.

lol I think that would go round and round though, the pod's CoM is offset, it will get you messed up. That was actually not the case on the earlier LAS though, the LAS had the offset and Mk1-2 has dead center so no problems would occur if ever you want to land straight up with solid engines are something.

[Captain Sierra]

lol I think that would go round and round though, the pod's CoM is offset, it will get you messed up. That was actually not the case on the earlier LAS though, the LAS had the offset and Mk1-2 has dead center so no problems would occur if ever you want to land straight up with solid engines are something.

The CoM is offset to make the integrated LES work. If anything, you'd need to talk to the pod author and get that taken out so you could properly build a service module and tower for it.

[blackheart612]

The CoM is offset to make the integrated LES work. If anything, you'd need to talk to the pod author and get that taken out so you could properly build a service module and tower for it.

Yeah, Maybe I could talk to them so I can give out a config that turns off the config if you want the CoM offset to be gone and be on the LAS instead.

[Captain Sierra]

Personally, I don't like my LES towers to be offset. I sometimes have other 'uses' for them other than just escape. This is why the KSPX tower is my fav. It even has the power to pull that bahemoth of a pod off a racing rocket.