[1.2 - 1.4] Modular Rocket Systems v1.13.2 (2018-03-12) - Stock-alike Parts Pack

[juanml82]

Hi, also probably related to HotRockets, I don't have any exhaust graphics on the quad nuke (I haven't tried the other ones, though). I had hotrockets and removed it, and then, no exhaust graphics.

Also another thing it happened while using the slim adapters: I've put the quad nukes beneath an MK3 fuel tank and the appropriate slim adapter between them. so what happens is that the quad nuke heats the adapter, but the adapter doesn't transmit heat fast enough to the big fuel tank on top, which should be able to soak a lot of heat if it receives it. So I wonder if they can be sort of more "thermal transparent", quickly transferring a lot of heat to the parts they are attached to (without radiating more) so they kind of feel as if they are a bezel of the part they are attached to

[NecroBones]

Hi, also probably related to HotRockets, I don't have any exhaust graphics on the quad nuke (I haven't tried the other ones, though). I had hotrockets and removed it, and then, no exhaust graphics.

Also another thing it happened while using the slim adapters: I've put the quad nukes beneath an MK3 fuel tank and the appropriate slim adapter between them. so what happens is that the quad nuke heats the adapter, but the adapter doesn't transmit heat fast enough to the big fuel tank on top, which should be able to soak a lot of heat if it receives it. So I wonder if they can be sort of more "thermal transparent", quickly transferring a lot of heat to the parts they are attached to (without radiating more) so they kind of feel as if they are a bezel of the part they are attached to

OK, that does make sense. I'll bump up the heat conductivity in the flat adapters, and we can try it out. I've increased the conductivity quite a bit for the next update, but I'm hesitant to push it any further without feedback first, since who know what consequences we'll run into.

For the engine effects, it sounds like HotRockets didn't get completely uninstalled, or another mod is tricking ModuleManager into thinking it's still there. The normal effects on the engine are some of the oldest, simplest effects settings that the game supports, and they only get removed if the MM config's "NEEDS[HotRockets]" test says that HotRockets is still there. It's possible another mod set up their config wrong. If another mod has a block that says "FOR[HotRockets]" instead of "NEEDS[HotRockets]", it effectively tells MM that the mod is there, instead of asking for it as a requirement. Also, if the "HotRockets" folder is still in GameData at all, MM will probably think the mod is still installed too.

[NecroBones]

1.6.5 is up, with mostly fixes and tweaks:

1.6.5 (2015-05-22) - Fixes & Tweaks
 - Corrected the HotRockets config for the 0.625m jet engines.
 - Explicitly defined fuelCrossFeed=False for radial decouplers.
 - Added "ModuleCrossFeed" to small radial fuel tank, for Crossfeed Enabler.
 - Increased heat conductivity of flat adapters (so they don't impede heat management).
 - Corrected an issue with normals on mini radial fuel tank.

[FancyMouse]

Just some quick thoughts, not sure whether they are intentional or not, and I'm not explicitly asking for change here (as people might hate me for that but whatever)

1. QuadNuke is still quad-ing the 0.90 engine - 2.5t*4 with gimbal. Now stock one is 3t w/o gimbal. I just wanted to know is it conscious decision to keep Quad still 10t with gimbal? (which means it won't be 4 LV-Ns in 1 any more but whatever)

2. Dock helpers lights but doesn't consume electricity - nice.

[NecroBones]

Just some quick thoughts, not sure whether they are intentional or not, and I'm not explicitly asking for change here (as people might hate me for that but whatever)

1. QuadNuke is still quad-ing the 0.90 engine - 2.5t*4 with gimbal. Now stock one is 3t w/o gimbal. I just wanted to know is it conscious decision to keep Quad still 10t with gimbal? (which means it won't be 4 LV-Ns in 1 any more but whatever)

2. Dock helpers lights but doesn't consume electricity - nice.

Actually I did increase the mass of the quad-nuke, just not far enough. It used to be 9 tons, since the stock LV-N was originally 2.25. Currently it's 10 tons. I'm bumping it up to 12 for the next update.

The docking helpers are set up to be illuminated all the time, not part of the lighting system. Since they don't emit light that lights anything else up, and aren't switchable, there's no power draw. That could probably be changed, but for now I just assume they run off their own batteries or RTGs or something.

[NecroBones]

In-progress shot. An inline drill, with integrated storage. It' using stock art assets for the drill itself, and the black tank surface texture. But by functioning as one part, you can have a single drill and not worry about asymmetrical mass.

[Red Iron Crown]

That looks brilliant, NecroBones, well done.

[NecroBones]

That looks brilliant, NecroBones, well done.

Thanks!

Just updated, and it's available to try out now:

1.6.6 (2015-05-28) - More balancing
 - Increased mass of Quad-Nuke to 12, to match 4x stock LV-N nuclear engine. 
 - Added "inline" (stackable) drill with internal storage.
 - Switched flag/agency images back to PNG format so they'll work again.

[tkw]

10/10 best mod

[NecroBones]

10/10 best mod

Thanks!!

[woot]

I'm having a really hard time with the payload bays. Anything capable of surface attachment (e.g., docking ports, procedural fuel tanks) will only try to do so, with seemingly no way to get them to attach to the nodes. Is this expected behavior? If so, what's the workaround?

[Drake1500]

Actually I did increase the mass of the quad-nuke, just not far enough. It used to be 9 tons, since the stock LV-N was originally 2.25. Currently it's 10 tons. I'm bumping it up to 12 for the next update.

The docking helpers are set up to be illuminated all the time, not part of the lighting system. Since they don't emit light that lights anything else up, and aren't switchable, there's no power draw. That could probably be changed, but for now I just assume they run off their own batteries or RTGs or something.

If you really want to explain yourself, you can say they're LED lights, with one of those little watch-batteries built-in. Those will run for forever (although with not as much light output, as you've said). I think it makes sense; since they don't have enough light to illuminate anything, how much power would they really draw? Insignificant amounts, that's how much.

I'm having a really hard time with the payload bays. Anything capable of surface attachment (e.g., docking ports, procedural fuel tanks) will only try to do so, with seemingly no way to get them to attach to the nodes. Is this expected behavior? If so, what's the workaround?

I've had this issue with parts from other modpacks and stock parts as well. I think it might have something to do with the stock method of dealing with both node-attach and surface-attach things. What I do is create the whole assembly somewhere else, then move it to where I want it. Unless you're talking about the part trying to surface-attach onto the node when you want it to node-attach to the node, in which case you need to rotate your camera until you're looking at the part side-on. It's pretty finnicky, and this happens with every other part as well. If there's another way of doing these things, though, I would LOVE to hear it!

[Red Iron Crown]

I'm having a really hard time with the payload bays. Anything capable of surface attachment (e.g., docking ports, procedural fuel tanks) will only try to do so, with seemingly no way to get them to attach to the nodes. Is this expected behavior? If so, what's the workaround?

I've had this issue with parts from other modpacks and stock parts as well. I think it might have something to do with the stock method of dealing with both node-attach and surface-attach things. What I do is create the whole assembly somewhere else, then move it to where I want it. Unless you're talking about the part trying to surface-attach onto the node when you want it to node-attach to the node, in which case you need to rotate your camera until you're looking at the part side-on. It's pretty finnicky, and this happens with every other part as well. If there's another way of doing these things, though, I would LOVE to hear it!

Hold the modifier key (Alt on Windows) to disable radial attachment, it will snap to the nodes then.

[NecroBones]

If you really want to explain yourself, you can say they're LED lights, with one of those little watch-batteries built-in. Those will run for forever (although with not as much light output, as you've said). I think it makes sense; since they don't have enough light to illuminate anything, how much power would they really draw? Insignificant amounts, that's how much.

Yup, let's go with that. LEDs with Lithium batteries.

Hold the modifier key (Alt on Windows) to disable radial attachment, it will snap to the nodes then.

Yeah, I was about to mention that. Unfortunately KSP has a lot of "tribal knowledge"... features that you only find out about by reading the patch notes, or from other members of the community, rather than in-game. I'm really glad they added this feature in any case.

[woot]

Holding alt helps the parts to not freak out but they very often still won't attach to the proper node. It's definitely a stock issue, but one that might go away if there were a way to make the payload bays node-attach only, or if it were possible to just add them in around the actual payload after construction is done. I can never get them to attach to anything unless they were there from the beginning. I ended up just going with the usual procedural fairings instead.

I suppose turning on part clipping might let me attach the bay at the end, but nothing is actually clipping and turning that on seems like cheating for most purposes.

Edited May 31, 2015 by woot

[Shad0wCatcher]

@Woot regarding nodes and payload bays; I've found the best way for me is to get say a clamp-o-tron in the S2 bay attached; then remove the payload bay entirely from the craft; attach the payload to the docking port; then re-attach the payload bay. It's clunky; but works fairly flawlessly for me anyway.

[NecroBones]

Unfortunately there's no perfect solution.

Something that contribute to the difficulties with cargo bays is that right now stock KSP has what I consider to be a bug with this-- It tries to snap the part to the last attachment node (in the part's CFG file) that is within snap range, even if it's pointing the wrong way and can't attach. This wasn't a problem when KSP wasn't enforcing node direction, but now it it does, and parts often try to snap to the node that's facing the wrong way, and then won't attach.

I did replicate the node order from the stock bays, so that it at least would be consistent.

EDIT: Theoretically as long as the cargo bay is already installed (at both ends), and you're putting the contents in last (after building the rocket), it should be a lot easier.

Edited May 31, 2015 by NecroBones

[jrandom]

Just a note: with Advanced Jet Engines installed (I'm running the latest dev build), the air intakes in this part pack have intake areas orders of magnitude too small.

[NecroBones]

Just a note: with Advanced Jet Engines installed (I'm running the latest dev build), the air intakes in this part pack have intake areas orders of magnitude too small.

Do you mean this?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/70008

I wasn't even aware of it. Heh. I'll take a look at it. If there are some MM configs that can help, I'll see about adding them.

- - - Updated - - -

Taking a look, it has a lot of variables for the custom AJE module, that aren't self explanatory. I could try to guess at something. But since AJE has configs for several mods, it would be great if they configured something the way they need it. I can still look into adding something, but I'll have to fudge and guess the settings.

EDIT: I've made a note of it to circle back on this. I can't promise a timeframe yet.

Edited June 7, 2015 by NecroBones

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

Hey NecroBones, just like how I got Zero Point Fairings to work with ModuleAnimatedDecoupler, I've got a patch that does the same for the LAS shroud (and again, you may want to move the entire ModuleCargoBay out into the patch itself, since it won't do any good without ModuleAnimatedDecoupler):

@PART[NBLASshroud]:NEEDS[AnimatedDecouplers]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
    {
        @name = ModuleAnimatedDecoupler
    }

    @MODULE[ModuleCargoBay]
    {
        @lookupCenter = 0,-1.4,0
        @lookupRadius = 1.6
        -nodeOuterForeID = irrelevant
        -nodeInnerForeID = irrelevant
    }
}

[NecroBones]

Hey NecroBones, just like how I got Zero Point Fairings to work with ModuleAnimatedDecoupler, I've got a patch that does the same for the LAS shroud (and again, you may want to move the entire ModuleCargoBay out into the patch itself, since it won't do any good without ModuleAnimatedDecoupler):

@PART[NBLASshroud]:NEEDS[AnimatedDecouplers]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
    {
        @name = ModuleAnimatedDecoupler
    }

    @MODULE[ModuleCargoBay]
    {
        @lookupCenter = 0,-1.4,0
        @lookupRadius = 1.6
        -nodeOuterForeID = irrelevant
        -nodeInnerForeID = irrelevant
    }
}

Awesome, I'll add that. Thanks! I'll push out the update soon, since I'm sitting on a few other minor tweaks. Originally I wanted to hold it back until I could rework the cargo bay doors, but that might take some time. We'll see.

[NecroBones]

Alright, update posted. This one mostly centered around the cargo bays. The doors needed an overhaul, to make them more compact and get in the way a lot less.

1.7 (2015-06-11) - Cargo-Bay overhaul + Tweaks and fixes
 - Updated Deadly Reentry config with more current data.
 - Tweaked some settings on cargo bays.
 - Added VAB/SPH transparency to cargo bays.
 - Added "Animated Decouplers" support for LAS Shroud (to make it shield properly in stock aero, AD needs to be installed).
 - Overhauled the cargobay doors, so they don't get in the way as much.

[Blacks]

hello

Some minor tune & sugestion:

GameData\ModRocketSys\Parts\Utility\NBdecouplerLowProfile2m\

decoupler2m2Specular.dds is 1024 texture what for a Decouplers is to big, 512 rez it will better with dx1 version aka from 1.398 mb it will goo to 175 KBb what is a proper texture for a Decouplers

same in part.cfg u have:

// --- asset parameters ---

mesh = model.mu

rescaleFactor = 1

me i add this line

scale = 2.5

because other way in combination with TweakableEverything + TweakScale animation bug it strike, making that item to not be possible to be use

p.s. i not use or have AnimatedDecouplers, soo my be that cause animation bug to strike, a direct link to that mod on page description it will good to be add

thx for great work & cya around

[NecroBones]

Ah yes, that's a good catch on the texture resolution. A few parts back then started with hi-res textures while I was working on them, and I reduced them later, but missed that one. I've reduced it to 512x512 for the next update.

I can't change the scale though, because it was designed for "scale = 1". I've added that explicitly to the config, but setting it to 2.5 won't work correctly in the stock game, as it'll make the decoupler 2.5x larger than it should be.

[FancyMouse]

Is this a bug? I got my adapter fuel tank having ridiculously high convective heat upon a fast reentry back Kerbin, causing it to explode soooo easily. Pic below.

Some observations:

1. All parts around that don't have this problem (all 1e3~5e3 conv flux) but this one is ridiculous >1e5.

2. I've tried mess up with the 0.2/-0.2 fullconvectionareamin value in physics.cfg but problem still exists. Originally spotted on 1.6.6 but 1.7 still reproes.

3. Below picture is almost immediately right after it starts to get the ridiculous convective flux. Not sure whether the altitude/velocity/other information would be useful or not.

Let me know what additional info you want and I'm happy to provide.