Jump to content

Notepad

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Notepad

  • Rank
    Curious George
  1. I'm using Restock+, and where I'm at in the tech tree, unpressurised pods are all I've got, so "just don't" is not an ideal solution. I can get how I wouldn't be able to transfer between them or what have you, but I was under the assumption that that was already the case and moving kerbals between them via EVA... Given that those pods are currently my only method if transport to and from the station I feel it's reasonable that there needs to be a way to keep them around... Will a docking port attached to a non-pressurised part of the station work?
  2. Ok, so back to the original question, how do I stop that from happening? Can I disable crossfeed?
  3. It was. I suppose that would explain it. I guess I was confused because I had pretty much the exact same situation on an earlier station and it didn't occur. So how might I dock & undock that pod without depressurising the rest of the station?
  4. Is there something that needs to be done before undocking two pressurised parts? Do I need to disable crossfeed first? It would seem disconnecting a pod from a station causes the station to depressurise, draining the entire station of nitrogen in a matter of minutes and killing everyone onboard... Which took me completely off guard and I'm a little miffed about it.
  5. I don't know if this is a stock setting or not but is it possible to not have it yank me out of timewarp whenever I lose signal or battery and the likes?
  6. Hey! Not that anyone cares but I discovered why my pods kept sinking! I have Kerbal Construction Time, which is disabled in Sandbox and overrides the launch button... I'd remove the shielding in the VAB, and then, when I launched it, I would click the "Fill Tanks and Launch" button, which maxes out every resource, including shielding, and I would be none the wiser. So that's that mystery solved.
  7. Yeah, that does definitely add on the kilos... Weirdly, upon further testing this only happens in Career mode. In Sandbox the thing floats even loaded down with resources, shielding, and an ablator. Are things heavier in Career?
  8. I've reinstalled everything twice at this point. Strangely, when I test in Sandbox, everything is fine, but as soon as I move to Career mode it all goes wrong, as if things are somehow heavier there.
  9. It's the Mk 1, with a parachute on the logical top bit, a thermometer, a barometer, and the mystery goo strapped to the sides. There's rarely a more simple craft out there. As has been discovered, I am using the Kerbalism mod, which adds weight to the craft. However the weight that it adds is like 0.85 t instead of 0.8 t, which I feel should not be enough to cause the craft to plummet to the bottom of the ocean. (Also, if it is, then that mod is absolutly unplayable in career and I'm sure someone would've brought it up by now) I even scaled up the buoyancy to 1.5 and it changed absol
  10. I'm still on 1.6 so not using the beta. The removing all the resources from the command pod is a difference of barely a kilo, and there's no way to get rid of the ECLSS, so if that's enough to push it over then how am I supposed to make a craft that floats?
  11. Is there a way to figure out whether something will float in the VAB? Or for that matter any way to tell at all?
  12. It's been quite some time since I've played this game, but I generally would expect that a Mk. 1 pod with nothing more than a parachute and two tiny science gizmos would float... And yet, it does not. Is this expected behaviour that I now have to work around or is something wrong with my game?
  13. Hi, does this mod alter part buoyancy at all? Then again maybe it's just been so long since I've played KSP that a mk1 pod with a parachute and two science gizmos is expected to sink...
  14. Man, having a great time with the classic "Error while initializing dbghelp.dll" going on. Certainly makes the game easy to play when it crashes every time I click on the VAB. Seriously, has nobody payed any attention to this at all? I've been searching around and it doesn't seem like a potential correction for this has even been considered.
×
×
  • Create New...