[1.2.2] B9 Aerospace | Release 6.2.1 (Old Thread)

[K3-Chris]

Good catch, spotted the cause, the animations are linked to pushing the button, not the state of the action group itself, fixed it.

I take that back, applied the fix to AG rocker 1 and not to 2-9, applied 1-9, returned to KSC, closed KSP, re-started KSP, returned to the craft, 1-9 are applied.

Not sure why it doesn't work for you but after reading the documentation and looking at other examples of similar props (ASET ones) my .cfg was correct from the start. (well both methods work but my original one is less lines).

The state of the buttons are toggled by clicking the collider but they're also directly set by the pod persistence parameters, which is why if you apply a action group switch in one seat it's the same position in the other seat's switches.

Any ideas how to resolve?

Run 32bit with Active Texture Management installed.

[Guest]

Likely a bug with ASET/RPM. Can happen, too, I'd actually be surprised if this sort of thing was a config-side fix.

[Zatie12]

Run 32bit with Active Texture Management installed.

Works, thank you

[NocTempre]

This is what I was waiting for to come back to KSP. Some initial feedback:

Some of the parts are missing shielding, even if just cosmetically (haven't tried with DR yet, in no rush). I first noticed on the HL 6m body but I think I saw a few others.

With TT on strike, I think the MK.4 adapter is out of place. Can B9 bring back the series (possibly as an S4 to keep it distinct and respectful)? Otherwise I request dropping the part out of the pack, as it works with nothing else.

Heavy landing gear that attaches in-line would be a god-send. Perhaps as an HL side option, integrated into various series like the S2W, and a 1.25m version that could attach to the engine mount?

Thank you so much for this pack, particularly for making FAR support the focus. Thank goodness for mods, stock physics ruin it for me.

[Akira_R]

o/ just wanna say thank you for all the hard work you guys, just an absolutely incredible release, you guys seriously set the gold standard for part mod quality in my book.

One quick question, I had the Pre-Release R5 installed that I downloaded I think the day before the official release, now I know that I should obviously delete the B9 folder and replace it, but I did notice that almost all the dependencies (JSI, KineTech, MP_Nazari etc.), except Firespitter I think, that came with the official release were all older versions than those that came with the pre-release, should I use the ones that came with the official, keep the newer ones, or will it not really matter?

[Melfice]

Question:

How much am I affected by "issues" if I were to not use FAR or NEAR?

The opening post states the mod will work without, but I won't receive support if something were wrong? That seems to imply I will run into problems down the line if I don't use NEAR or FAR.

[bac9]

Melfice, you will have progressively more problems as you attempt to design bigger spacecraft as absurd stock drag model is based on mass. You won't be able to take off with certain heavy designs and so on.

Really though, there is absolutely zero reason to run this mod with stock aerodynamics, it's borderline masochistic to do that when the mod is mostly about very heavy aerospace parts.

[Melfice]

Alright, fair enough...

I just don't like the thought of needing one mod to effectively enjoy another. If it were something that works in the background, sure. But FAR/NEAR is quite an extensive overhaul.

Maybe it's better? I don't know. But it'll take time away from enjoying your mod if I need to learn another.

See what I mean?

But I'll consider it.

[bac9]

No, I'm afraid I don't really see the point you're making.

NEAR is not intrusive and adds no intricate systems you need to learn separately.

Arguing that playing B9 separately from proper aerodynamics is easier and better is like arguing that food is easier to prepare and nicer in taste when you prepare it using a flamethrower and a bucket of sewage water instead of a stove and a tap.

[Eddie Rod]

Melfice, you will have progressively more problems as you attempt to design bigger spacecraft as absurd stock drag model is based on mass. You won't be able to take off with certain heavy designs and so on.

Really though, there is absolutely zero reason to run this mod with stock aerodynamics, it's borderline masochistic to do that when the mod is mostly about very heavy aerospace parts.

I have to agree 100%! The new updated FAR in KSP .24 and B9 work AMAZING together and the difference is night and day for me! I actually love how good FAR treats the giant HX parts! I posted a pic few pages back of me launching a mothership and FAR treated her Perfectly! :-) Best job on a mod I've ever seen! Thanks B9 Team!

[Googol]

Amazing. Don't even know where to start..... Really want to build something with HX, no idea how to go about it.

[feriofukada]

I've noticed that the impact tolerance of the HX parts were way lower than, say, the S2 parts. Most of them are at a constant 15 when I checked their stats despite them looking so sturdy.

[Melfice]

No, I'm afraid I don't really see the point you're making.

NEAR is not intrusive and adds no intricate systems you need to learn separately.

Arguing that playing B9 separately from proper aerodynamics is easier and better is like arguing that food is easier to prepare and nicer in taste when you prepare it using a flamethrower and a bucket of sewage water instead of a stove and a tap.

I'd rather liken it to the following analogy:

A well-prepared steak is good on its own.

Don't force your customer to use sauce.

But hey. What do I know?

[Voculus]

Melfice, I used the stock aerodynamics for nearly 1300 hours of gameplay, and installed FAR just for this incredible mod. I can only say I should have done it a long time ago! Trying to wrestle 70+ ton ships into orbit with stock aero was becoming unenjoyable. With FAR installed, and of course, the proper application of flight fundamentals, they became practical, and a whole lot of fun.

[johnqevil]

I'd rather liken it to the following analogy:

A well-prepared steak is good on its own.

Don't force your customer to use sauce.

But hey. What do I know?

So just install NEAR. There's nothing more too it, just drop it in the folder and ignore it after that. What's the problem?

[sdj64]

Alright, fair enough...

I just don't like the thought of needing one mod to effectively enjoy another. If it were something that works in the background, sure. But FAR/NEAR is quite an extensive overhaul.

Maybe it's better? I don't know. But it'll take time away from enjoying your mod if I need to learn another.

See what I mean?

But I'll consider it.

There is Stock Drag Fix if you're looking for something almost completely stock. But you still won't have lifting bodies. Not sure how well your craft will work without them, but at worst you can just panel the hull in wings. SP+ parts have a stock workaround for that (the fuselage parts have a lift value as if they were wings) but B9 parts do not.

Playing separately from FAR/NEAR is easier for some people who don't know much about aerodynamics or who learned Kerbal with the current model and don't want to lose all of their knowledge and working designs so far. It requires a completely different design philosophy and some people don't think it's the "kerbal way" and all that.

Regarding the food prep analogy, FAR is like buying all the ingredients and preparing food from scratch, where Stock is like buying boxed/canned food and warming it up. Yes you can get better tasting food with FAR, but stock is less effort and some people like that.

[BubbaWilkins]

No? Not sure what you're referring to, but we didn't remove any cockpits or probes.

Take off everything but B9 and the stuff it provides, add mods back in one at a time until the problem presents itself

Odd. Now I'm going to have to find what mod it was that did it. Thought the only thing I deleted was tweakscale once I found it didn't work here.

[MarkyJ279]

Excellent job guys. The pack looks and plays incedibly. My only suggestion is that as Taverious has manged to incorporate different parts into one via part switching, would it reduce some of the argument over wheel strength vs grip if you made switchable versions of the wheels with different sidewaysstiffness values? Or would you rather find a complete fix for all cases rather than different parts for different preferrences?

I'd rather liken it to the following analogy:

A well-prepared steak is good on its own.

Don't force your customer to use sauce.

But hey. What do I know?

To continue your own analogy, I see it more as;

B9 with FAR is like a steak with an excellent peppercorn sauce garnish. Maybe not your favourite but for some people improves the taste.

B9 with NEAR is like a steak with no sauce. The basic package that should still be perfectly fine and suits nearly everyone.

B9 with stock model is like a steak with mystery sauce...that's actually congealed fatty gunk the chef found oozing out from under the fryers and slapped on your steak because he didn't have time to sort anything better. One or two people might like it but it's generally considered to be horrid.

Credit where credit is due, KSP is an excellent game for such a small team, but it's obvious the programmers at squad aren't professional aerospace engineers because they really phoned the stock aerodynamics model in. The B9 team could balance around it but they'd make so many compromises that it would be simpler to throw it and leave it to the players whether they want to try stock.

[Eddie Rod]

I proudly present to you... The Aurora XXIII Interstellar Freighter! Flying with hacked gravity, for now, and with FAR! Biggest ship possible?? Dropped my FPS from 60 to 15fps! This is in 64 bit of course on heavily modded sandbox.

ALBUM HERE: http://imgur.com/gallery/BSNB0/new

[Donziboy2]

64 bit

I hate you.....

Nice ship btw.

[Eddie Rod]

I hate you.....

Nice ship btw.

Thanks man! :-) I'm going to record it but I don't know if I'm allowed to put link to my channel here. Would that be allowed? You can easily just search my name on google though and you will see it easy.

[Deathsoul097]

Thanks man! :-) I'm going to record it but I don't know if I'm allowed to put link to my channel here. Would that be allowed? You can easily just search my name on google though and you will see it easy.

Just drop the link in your sig. Thats what most do.

[ayana]

I have to admit, I can't begin to imagine what to use the HX parts for.

[joebopie]

For nearlyevery parts mainly all the big new parts the textures are going crazy flickering and flashing (with and without activetexturemanagement) and it doesnt seem like the large cargo bays are working at all. and the parts that say they have variable configurations have no way of changing them, right click does nothing. the pistures look fantastic altho i do think most of the new parts are WAAAY too big but i cant even use it anyway. it would seem to me that all the new parts belong in a diffrent pack as the B9 is about planes but the new bits are for crazy massive spaceships (ive got no problem with this it just seems out of place in the pack). i havent had it crash when testing but its unusable anyway. complaining aside...

keep up the hard work love the look of the new parts just wish i could use them.

[Nirvash]

Is there anyway to combine this with the parts from R4?