Jump to content

Friedrich Nietzsche

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    101

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Friedrich Nietzsche

    [WIP][1.9.x-1.12.x] Scatterer-atmospheric scattering (0.0838 - 14/08/2022) Scattering improvements, in-game atmo generation and multi-sun support

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted · Edited by Friedrich Nietzsche

    Hello,

    after the release of realism overhaul on CKAN I've built myself a new Realism Overhaul installation. So far everything works good. But I have two issues, which seem to be scatterer related. I'm using RSSVE updated for 1.3.1 but unfortunately the thread there is closed :/

     

    When launchin a rocked, the landscape gets covered by a blueish nebula. This disapprears when getting higher up. And after reaching a height of > 140km, scatterer seems to not be active at all. Also this disappears when reaching a certain height. 

    https://imgur.com/a/E6mLD

     

    Someone has an idea how to fix this?

    CKAN (The Comprehensive Kerbal Archive Network); v1.28.0 - Dyson

    in KSP1 Mod Releases

    Posted

    1 hour ago, HebaruSan said:

    Yes:  https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/wiki/User-guide#logging

    Agreed, that's how it should work. We addressed one case of this recently (to be included in a future release). It may or may not fix your issue depending on the exact error you're getting:

    Funny, I noticed this as well recently. As it happens, .NET's WebClient.CancelAsync function does... well, nothing.

    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/48187976/webclient-cancelasync-file-still-downloading

    I've looked into some ways to solve this, but they're fairly high risk, so I'm planning to hold off till after the next release in the hope that it'll be less buggy than the current one.

    Thanks for your fast reply!

    CKAN (The Comprehensive Kerbal Archive Network); v1.28.0 - Dyson

    in KSP1 Mod Releases

    Posted · Edited by Friedrich Nietzsche

    Is there a way to produce more debug output? 

    I currently try to install around 100 mods using a CKAN file on Ubuntu. Unfortunately currently a single not downloadable file seems to be able to block the whole downloading and installation process. CKAN creates the files in /tmp, downloads almost all of the mods and then gets stuck. There seems to be simultaneous downloading, but even the successful downloads get blocked by the faulty ones. Why not just move at least the successful downloaded mods into the cache for the next try??? 

    Then at least it would be possible to narrow down the list for the not downloadable mods with a few tries. Currently you just have a bunch of randomly named files in /tmp where you not even can tell which file belongs to which mod.

     

    Edit: Canceling doesn't seem to cancel the downloads. If your installation gets blocked by an unavailable file you can cancel and the gui reacts accordingly. But when you check the files in /tmp after doing this, you can see that the downloads suddenly continue.

    [1.12] KSP-RO - Realism Overhaul [16 May 2022]

    in KSP1 Mod Releases

    Posted

    18 hours ago, Ricovandijk said:

    Place the fins under an angle so the rocket spins around. This gives it gyroscopic stability. 

    Hello,

     

    thats not the problem. The problem is that the rockets are not pointing straight up as in the VAB when I roll them out on the launchpad. In the VAB they point perfectly straight upwards, on the launchpad they are (including the launchclamps) 3 to 5 degrees offcenter. If it is still not clear I can come up with screenshots later today.

    Realism Overhaul Discussion Thread

    in KSP1 Mods Discussions

    Posted

    On 20.2.2017 at 2:46 PM, Warp11 said:

    I need some advice for Venus entrys. I tried one with a 90km periapse, a pretty light craft and a 2m lunar heat shield. It just burned up instantly.

    So I have some questions:

    1. Is a Venus entry possible with a lunar rated heat shield? And if not with what is it possible?

    2. Do I need to go in more gradually, maybe with multiple aerobraking passes?

    3. Will a Kevlar-Parachute survive?

    4. Someone told me that the reentry corridor is 90-105 km periapse. What's you opinion on that?

    Thanks a lot for any help!

    1. As far as I remember, I too did my Venus landing with a lunar rated heat shield.

    2. I took a deep dive with a periapis of around 60 km while beeing on a flyby trajectory. The heat shield survived.

    3. Yes. Due to the air friction you only will need a small one.

    4. My above mentioned reentry too steep and some of the instruments got destroyed due to the high g-forces. I wold try it with something  around 80 to 90 km. If you are in a orbit, you can tip into the atmosphere very gently, since you don't miss anything, if you have to do several passes to get suorbital.

    Realism Overhaul Discussion Thread

    in KSP1 Mods Discussions

    Posted

    18 hours ago, Sol Invictus said:

    I wonder if Kerbals in Realism Overhaul should have EVA thrusters enabled at all. Couple of reasons against them off the top of my head:

    That would brake the game in its current stage. How would you perform an EVA? Cluttering your ship with ladders, which have to clip though everywhere, just to provide ways to reach every neccessary point? And how would you safe a kerbal, which gets blown into space by awesome KSP physics? 

    [1.11.x] AmpYear Main & Reserve Power Manager (v1.5.9.0) 22nd Feb 2021

    in KSP1 Mod Releases

    Posted

    57 minutes ago, JPLRepo said:

    Not going to happen sorry.  Besides, what exactly do you consider stripped down??
    Don't want to use Reserve Power? - don't put reserve power batteries on your vessels. In fact delete the Parts folder. AmpYear will still give you want you want.
    Don't want to use the Emergency Shutdown function? - don't turn it on.
    I've tried to make AmpYear as flexible as possible and I don't see why you can't use it as it is.

     

    If you want my humble opinion: I believe, that most users use Ampyear only to get an overview of the power consumption and don't care much about the other features. At least I use it that way and I don't even tried the other stuff so far. Compared to that, Ampyear does quite alot changes to the save file (at least I've read so, didn't try it so far), making the removal of the mod difficult. It provides also alot unneeded complexity in GUI and usage - against the motto "one job, one tool".

    Don't get me wrong: Your mod is the best for its job I know this far, I am grateful to you providing it, and you have every right to make this mod as you like. But I think, this thread is also here to provide feedback for you. And my feedback is, that a simple window showing the power consumption/production, maybe also the dark times of orbit, and doing nothing else, would be sufficient to me and most of the users. It could also be, that I am totally wrong and that the additional features are used by most of the people. In that case: forget what I've said.

×
×
  • Create New...