• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1470 Excellent

1 Follower

About KerikBalm

  • Rank
    Capsule Communicator
  1. I don't see any comm device on that probe. No comm 16 or comm 16s. The internal antenna on probes is really really really weak You also haven't shown the relay that you want to connect to, or specified your tracking station level. If its halfway between the probe and kerbin, then if the transmitter had the same power as a kerbin ground station, then the signal would be 4x stronger. If the kerbin ground station network is lvl 3/ 250 G, then a relay halfway between the probe an kerbin will only help if the relay power is greater than 250/4 = 62.5. -> Does the relay have an RA-100 on it? an RA-15 won't cut it in this case - neither will 2 or 3 of them. As far as I can tell, your problem is that you forgot an antenna on your probe
  2. Yesterday I had started construction of my Rald surface base in a 3x rescale game, the long train of tug+base module chain achieved orbit, and I took down the ISRU unit to refuel the shuttle. The base location was wide flat floodplains near a crater lake with water and ore accessible via drill... but the shuttle was big ( >300 tons fully fueled), the KPBSdrills have a much slower output, and I calculated it would take 100 days/600 hours to refuel the shuttle without an engineer. 3 more modules needed to come down... this operation could take nearly a year... I had a 5 kerbals at my base on duna, 1 of which was an engineer, The Duna shuttle was meant to get 40 tons from duna orbit, to the surface, and back to orbit with some margin. I loaded up the craft file in a different save and confirmed that it could reach orbit from the surface of Rald if it started fully fueled and wasn't carrying a payload, so I sent it up with a crew of 3 (1x pilot/scientist/engineer), transfered it to low rald orbit, picked up the hub module, and sent it to rald. dV margin to get there were thin, and I nearly ran out of fuel taxing to the base location Picking up the module and approach to the LZ: Arrival of the 2nd shuttle at the base: 3 kerbals in the hub module wasn't so good, I didn't check the life support before sending them, it only produced enough food for 1 (I knew this) but the reserves would only last 5 days.... just barely enough time to fuel a shuttle, but I had fully stocked both shuttles with supplies, so it made it an easy decision to again inelegantly attach the entire base to the shuttle to fuel it. The rald shuttle was off 5 days later to go retrieve another module, the lifesupport/greenhouse module, it also partially served as a fuel tanked, transfering excess LFO to the tug, which detached from the remaining 2 modules: Then, of course, it was time to land it again: Adding the module: The base as it currently is on Rald, still needs the Hab-Lab module to come down, and a 2nd ISRU module. Anyway, in its current state it produces excess food/O2/water, and can refuel the shuttles in a matter of 4-6 days I'm also going to have to get that Duna shuttle fueled up and back to duna to pick up the only 2 kerbals left on Duna, holding down the fort at the old base.
  3. Well, for the time being its not Proton-Proton fusion Its not CNO cycle fusion. The fusion we do is more comparable to what occurs in a brown dwarf. I also don't see our equipment as part of the planet we're on, given that we can send equipment to other planets. Sending a thermonuclear weapon to Mars doesn't make Mars a star because it had fusion/ is capable of fusion. The mechanism by which the fusion is achieved is important, despite cratercraker's disrespectful comment.
  4. but that fusion is not caused by gravitational compression
  5. it sort of has dried lake beds, and it does have a few eroded craters. If you have such a problem landing on it (1 of 9) is it really boring? shameless plug for a modded version of Duna that you may find less boring:
  6. The sun appears way too big, and even if you scale it proportionately (so Kerbin:Kerbol size/distance ratio is about equal to that ratio for Earth:Sun) because of some gigantic flare texture that I'd like to get rid of. Examples: Here the middle of the sun is just out of the field of view... but as soon as it comes into the field of view: Same here from Mun: How can I get rid of this?
  7. Yea.... Eve... after this thread I saw in my main (3x) save game that an Eve window was coming, so I decided to test and then send eve exploration planes. I had modded myself some ramrockets/turborockets/electric fans for use on Eve/Duna, and designed a large crewed ram/turborocket plane with life support and ISRU: Even scatterer doesn't save it... mon dieu its so purple: Of course, with the EVE cloud mod and scatterer, its hard to see where you're going to land (I can't even see the ore overlay through the clouds ) and that thing has to come in nearly empty to survive entry into Eve's atmosphere, so it needs to land where there is ore. A water landing turns it into a stationary floating base... so I made electric scout drones, which are also technically interplanetary space planes I don't think that there's anything too ridiculous about this except for the purple-ness of eve (and that solar seems to work fine under all those clouds... I thought they had done something so that thick atmospheres could significantly weaken solar output... Also note that the mk3 spaceplane pictured, doesn't reach space again after reaching eve... it tops out at about 1km/sec with air augmentation: and orbital velocity in this modded version is about 5km/sec. These ramrockets do have a vacuum mode and can function like normal rockets for space operation... but this think is not going to get to space again once it lands on Eve. At best it can do the transfer under its own power after refueling in orbit of kerbin. Rapier powered spaceplanes barely make orbit with a 3x resize, so these ramrockets certainly won't (1440 atmospheric Isp relative to 3200 for rapiers. 295 vacuum Isp compared to 305. A worse TWR, and the 1440 Isp air augmented mode doesn't even work below mach 0.3, so it needs to accelerate under normal rocket mode, or using other engines like the turborocket engine I modded based on the panther)
  8. There's nothing wrong with interplanetary spaceplanes. Surely you're making the common mistake on this forum of equating spaceplanes with SSTOs. One doesn't need to go to 10x /RSS scale, even at 3x scale the idea of a spaceplane that can fly from kerbin to the surface of laythe, and back without refueling goes right out of the window. For me, here's what I don't like about various planets/moons: * Eve: too purple, even Nova says this. I also don't like its high surface gravity. I've modded it to be closer to a venus analogue by increasing the atmospheric pressure to 10 atmospheres (still far less than Venus) and decreasing the surface g to 1.2. I'm thinking about trying to mod the purple away too. *Minmus... just what the heck is it supposed to be? what are those flats? it makes no sense (but I see the gameplay value) *Dres: its too big to be a "dwarf planet" as mentioned. Its basically a proper planet. In my 3x rescale it doesn't get scaled up (and its gravity is reduced), and 2 other asteroid like bodies of smaller size are added with similar orbits to form an asteroid "belt" (of just 3 objects, which proportionately sized would be over 40% the mass of the asteroid belt)) Jool: surface gravity is too low to be a Jupiter analogue... making it more like a saturn analogue in terms of proportional mass. - Tylo and Laythe: Proportionately way too big. Tylo is 80% the mass of kerbin and is the moon of a planet that seems to be intended as a Jupiter analogue (but 1/3 the mass). Compare this to the largest moons of Jupiter or Saturn at 2.5% and 2.25% the mass of earth.... waaayyyyy too big... much bigger than Duna (vall is also too big). In my personal mod settings, these massive moons get reduced in size to 2x the proportional radius of their analogue). Laythe becomes more like a titan analogue, but still quite different. Tylo: 0.296 G and 496km radius (then 3x scaled along with almost everything else in the system). Laythe: 0.366 g (just as the smaller Io has a higher surface G than Ganymede), 343 km - even with the 3x rescale, this still leaves jets OP'd on laythe, so I scaled down the atmosphere to maintain a 3:4 Atmosphere:G ratio (original Laythe is 0.6 Atms : 0.8 Gs) * Pol - same question as minmus - its topography makes no sense, but now it lacks a gameplay purpose
  9. Why would that matter? CO2 is pretty inert, much like N2. It shouldn't interfere with combustion between O2 and Hydrogen or hydrocarbons.
  10. I'll be uploading a new version for scatterer soon, I also fixed some problems with the ground color. Pics (taken with a 3x resize mod as well)
  11. Most of this was outside of KSP, but after updating scatterer to 1.3, I decided to update my mod planets as well. So scatterer oceans are back to rald: I may want to make the water more choppy, but for now its nice And then I removed that mod and went back to my "Dying Duna" mod which thicken's Duna's atmosphere, adds O2, and ocean, and signs of life: And some earlier shots when the ocean was a bit bluer: *Edit* All pics from a 3x resize mode (Sigma's - he also helped me solve problems in these mods). I recommend playing such a resize mod particularly if you want to give Duna some O2... otherwise you'll find airbreathers very OP on duna
  12. Hey, I was wondering if you could help with a problem I'm having adding scatterer oceans to some of my modded planets So for a new planet I added, when I added the scatterer ocean, it seemed to co-exist with the old flat stock ocean when I had the ocean configured like so: But then when I changed the config to this: It appeared and functioned just fine with scatterer... so whatever, not a big deal But then I tried to apply a scatterer ocean to a duna-with-oceans mod I've mad, and the results were weird. Viewing from under the water seems fine: But from above the water, the ocean is nearly invisible: And it was just a copy of the kerbin ocean.cfg with the name changed from Kerbin to Duna. Any ideas? *edit* solved it, the duna atmo config had a line about the ocean, and changing a 0 to a 1 fixed it:
  13. some people use mech jeb.... I don't. I used to dock without RCS... just small stuff, but then I started wanting to load cargobays in orbit with cargo that doesn't have propulsion. Initially I used some sort of tug to grab the cargo and guide it in, like so: but since then, I've just been using the RCS on the cargo vessel to just align with the cargo and envelope it. Docking this with that drifting module was a bit annoying, but only because that module was right at the width limits of the cargobay. Anyway, keep working at it, and using RCS translation makes it a lot easier
  14. Interesting... I didn't know that it doesn't need O2 on Laythe. Does it detect Oxygen= true automatically? (I've got another modded planet that I'm about to send kerbals too, which has an O2 atmosphere). I hope it doesn't because O2 containing doesn't = breathable by default. anyway, if you're not against modding a mod: GameData>PlanetaryBaseInc>ModSupport>Parts>LifeSupport> Container_Elektron or Container_CarbonExtractor Simply change that to true. You could also make water drills produce waste water instead of pure water, so that they have to go through a purifier, and then waste is produced (and again change dump excess to true) For my part, I modded this mod so that algae farms can also convert ore into waste, and they don't need ore to make fertilizer - I also tweaked some other values so that closed cycle life support is possible with just greenhouses, algae farms, and water purifiers. (If they produce food fast enough for 1 kerbal, they should also produce O2 fast enough for 1 kerbal). Greenhouse mass was increased a bit, but surface bases are still desirable to produce excess food/water/O2. In my game all I need to produce excess is water and ore, and nothing is needed to maintain kerbal nearly indefnitiely (with losses due to rounding errors, but easily making supplies last 1000x longer) with just 1 container greenhouse per kerbal, 1 algae farm per 3 greenhouses, and water filters.
  15. I must say... I was initially expecting the post to be a joke, and I'm still not 100% sure its serious, since its a rather big claim that you are making. However, you do not seem to know the details of Intellectual Property, and your case is rather weak if you wanted to cause trouble. - You cannot copyright concepts. You can copyright and trademark specific names (like Kerbal), but generally speaking, there is no legal protection for concepts. You can patent specific technical solutions to problems. You can copyright specific combinations of letters and words (ie text/code), but you've got no legal recourse for a concept being stolen (with some wiggle room for "business models" which they do let you patent in the US, but not Europe). So did you help your brother come up with the term "kerbal" or the name "kerbal space program"? (or any of the names such as Jeb/Bob/Bill/Kerman). I do see the text "Kerbal Space Program" in that image, this was not registered as a trademark at that time though, an I don't think any court would find a 3 word combination as copyright worthy. I'm guessing none of your code was used when it was decided to do it in a 3d engine, and not 2D flash. Also its my understanding that HarvestR was working for Squad, and that he developed KSP as part of his work for squad. This would make anything he developed the property of squad. If you and him developed this a bit before he went to squad, that could be a bit of a problem if harvester gave them some of your code without permission... but it really comes down to the question of whether any of your code survives in any form in the current game. If not, you've got no legal recourse... but if all you are asking for is a mention in the credits, and HarvestR backs up your story, then by all means your name should be added to the credits.