katateochi

Members
  • Content count

    2678
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2412 Excellent

About katateochi

  • Rank
    KerbalX.com dev

Contact Methods

  • Website URL http://KerbalX.com

Profile Information

  • Location Orbiting Something
  • Interests Things, I'm interested in things.

Recent Profile Visitors

6756 profile views
  1. The mod is definitely active, but I (still) haven't gotten around to putting it on CKAN, something I really need to do! Just grab it from here https://kerbalx.com/mod and unpack the zip into your GameData folder. (The thing on CKAN is the KerbalX PartMapper tool, which someone else put onto CKAN and now there's a name conflict which I need to sort out).
  2. Would adding an Orion capsule cause some scale issues? Looking at pictures of Orion and Ares, the command pod fit's with the orange tank of the upper stage of the Ares-I and IV (it's flush or even slightly more narrow than the tank). Our current Mk1-2 pod (which is more of an Apollo analogy) fits flush with our current orange tanks, but an Orion capsule would be wider than the Mk1-2 so then it wouldn't fit with our current tanks. So would we also need a new set of tanks to go with it? tbh I'm happy building Orion style craft out of the current stock parts, in fact I'd rather not have a set of "pre-made" Orion parts which you just clip together and ta-da: Orion. I'd far rather they added a generic stock hinge (in a few sizes) and some more generic structural parts so we could make our own landing legs and make them how we like. Actually, I'm kinda opposed to having too many specific parts which mimic the RL space programs. I think that would make KSP more like an airfix kit, where players can just select the indented parts and clip them together as "instructed". I think that takes away from the challenge and creativity of using non-specific parts to construct a replica; trying to balance appearance with functionality. I also think that the specific parts have less potential to be used in new and interesting ways; a Falcon-9 landing leg would be great but it's just a landing leg, whereas a hinge and a bunch more structural parts would open up so many more possibilities for designs. I think structural parts is one of the areas where the stock game is lacking; we need more basic shapes, ie a triangular structural panel, a curved panel, a bulkhead type part (with multiple nodes), more girder like parts (only less like I-beams, maybe just simple simple rod shapes).....etc. And we really need a stock hinge! I'd far rather see development time go into those sort of things than making parts to match RL space program parts.
  3. ah well, as it happens craft sharing is kinda my thing () click the KerbalX link in my sig. I can't promise a quick fix, but I will do my best!
  4. @BlackSun There are some issues with this and I've not had time to figure it out. It's something to do with the logic for working out which parts are on which side of the docking ports, works in some craft designs, but not in others. Bear with me and I'll try to get it fixed. If you could post the test setup craft you've got that doesn't work that would help me.
  5. I'm not a fan of using lots of control surfaces on rockets (or things vaguely resembling rockets), I prefer using rockets with more gimbal. As others have said, keep TWR lower and don't deviate away from prograde too much. With this ring I followed a fairly standard gravity turn, asparagus staging, no control surfaces, 4 large SAS modules.
  6. As @mrmcp1 says, check out the Dakar entries, lot's of great designs with a focus on durability. I don't recommend RTG's, you need loads to keep lots of wheels powered (and doubling up on wheels is a good idea, but adds more power drain) and then you're Kerbals will end up green...wait..well, it adds too much weight anyway. I suggest using fuel cells. Jet engines for speed boosters work nicely (and are fuel efficient) and you can use "boost flaps" to quickly activate/disable them (without waiting for engine spoolup/down). Landing gears make for a very strong rollcage, if you don't mind it looking a bit odd.
  7. I wouldn't admit this to anyone else, but I've had some weekends where I've done almost nothing else but play KSP (with a small break to sleep). But those are rare, a typical good KSP session is 4-5 hours, less than an hour doesn't seem worth it. The times KSP has caused me to get a headache is when doing a lot with very high part counts and spending a lot of time with low frame rates.
  8. @EVA_Reentry the site crashed, but it's back up now. Sorry about that! @Mycroft Thanks for the typo info, I'll sort those.
  9. haha, yeah sure! In the vid that bit happens at around 06:20
  10. So I got side tracked by other KSP things, but I've now put my two craft up for download https://kerbalx.com/katateochi/Project-6 | https://kerbalx.com/katateochi/Rambler I've also uploaded a couple vids showing the full runs with each rover. Rambler: Project 6: tbh they're not that interesting to watch, the project-6 run is more interesting as it's faster (although watching it again, I made a total hash of stage 2, terrible work!, stage 5 is quite good viewing though!). With project-6 in stage one I clipped a bit of odd terrain and it flipped the rover, against all odds it was a perfect barrel roll right back onto it's wheels. V lucky as I was running with the rollcage down so that would have been instant explody doom.
  11. Very nice trucks (and great vid too). I've also always had a like of trucks and trailers (I grew up on a farm, so part of life I guess). It's great that they work as expected in KSP, although one issue I've always had (which it looks like you've overcome) is when loading other wheeled vehicles onto trailers made out of structural panels the vehicle on the trailer starts jumping around (some kinda feedback between the panels and it's suspension). I'll have to download yours and have a look at how you've made them. Great Job Sir!
  12. As @eloquentJane says Mechjeb is working fine in 1.2.2. For EVE, have a look at SVE
  13. The current action groups assumes the stock action group setup. Won't be quite as simple to change that, but I'll have a think about it.
  14. I've increased the upload size limit to 6MB. It's kept as low as possible to prevent spamming the site with large files that will hog the bandwidth.
  15. as Snark says, do contracts, and to get the biggest profit take several contracts that you can do all together as a single mission. I find tourist contracts to be pretty lucrative if you can get a whole bunch who want to go to the same place and have a craft that can take them all (and reusable craft make your profits even better). If you find you don't enjoy the stock contracts there's also some mod contract packs to check out The Tourism Plus contract pack will have you rolling in funds!