• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,609 Excellent


About Norcalplanner

  • Rank
    Cheap & Cheerful Rocket Architect

Recent Profile Visitors

5,832 profile views
  1. What's the significance of the different borders around missions?
  2. Re: the skybox, I just crank up the percentage a bit in DOE so I can appreciate it more.
  3. My most impressive lifter got 832 tons to orbit. Around Earth in RSS/RO. Two words - Nova Heavy.
  4. Using a lifting reentry as opposed to an actual skip glide is frequently done in RSS/RO. Many reentry capsules in RO have a descent mode which shifts the CoM slightly to make this kind of reentry easier to achieve.
  5. In my experience, auto struts causes more problems than it solves. Using KJR and turning auto struts off, combined with having one control wheel on the station right next to the root part, means that I haven't had any station wobble issues for quite some time.
  6. It helps if you have an altered tech tree or a mod like BDB installed which gives you access to probe cores at the start. Something like Career Evolution, PBC, or UKS can all work to make unmanned exploration precede manned missions.
  7. So I'm thinking about upgrading my system, and I think it's time for a new CPU and mobo. I think just about everything else can be reused. Current system specs are: i5-6600K w/mild OC (4.2) on a Z170 mobo 32 GB DDR4 3000 Evo 970 512 GB SSD (M.2, but SATA interface) GTX 1660 Ti (still gaming at 1080p, but may upgrade to 1440p at some point) Corsair 650W power supply 2TB data drive Case, DVD drive, monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc. Ryzen seems to be the new hotness, so I was considering something along the lines of a Ryzen 7 3700X. Is this a good choice not only for KSP, but for other games as well? Is the 3000 speed memory good enough for the Ryzen? Any advice on mobo? I'm thinking a new CPU, mobo, and NVME drive for the OS and KSP would be the way to go, with reusing everything else. Any thoughts are appreciated. And fwiw, I tend to play heavily modded installs (RP-1, JNSQ with GEP and lots of mods, etc.)
  8. Yep, and the configs worked pretty darn well. It's just a geometry issue where comparatively flatter terrain on a larger planet alters the relationships between geographic features. Or to put it another way, more of the universe in an upscaled system can be easily accessed via rover because the slopes aren't quite as steep.
  9. Problems is probably the wrong word. Achieving an aesthetically pleasing vista without having to worry about smacking into a mountain during reentry is probably a more apt description. The mod itself works great, no complaint intended - just an inherent issue with an upscaled planet. Edit: This was a more significant issue in 6.4x and 10.625x, where the choice was either a planet of rolling hills, or a planet where many mountain tops stick up through the clouds.
  10. I enjoy JNSQ very much. I also enjoyed GPP a great deal, but found it not quite as challenging as I would have liked, so I nearly always played it at 3x or 3.2x scale. However, there were problems with using Sigma Dimensions and GPP as it relates to terrain height, atmosphere depth, and the location of anomalies. JNSQ at native 2.7x solves these issues and allows fine tuning of terrain slopes, atmosphere height, and anomalies for a better integrated gameplay experience. GPP and JNSQ are both designed for advanced players who want a greater challenge. If the challenge is too much for a player, that player should simply go back to the stock system rather than complain that the challenge should be made less challenging. One of the great thing about KSP is its modability, so each player can find a balance that is enjoyable.
  11. @Mircea The Young I agree that this mod is vital and important. It's right up there with Module Manager and B9 Partswitch. I for one am very grateful for the 1.8.1 release. Kudos to the mod devs. P.S. Please put down the shovel and stop digging. Consider hitting the tip jar instead.
  12. @OhioBob I'm putting together a new JNSQ 1.8.1 install, and was pleased to see that GEP is available as an add-on for late game exploration. Can this be added to a career in progress, or is it best to add it to the universe from the get-go? I'm only a few hours in, so starting over is still a viable option. The other reason I'm asking is that one of my major goals this career is having as little lag as possible, so many mods are being cut or pruned to reduce the computational load. Keeping GEP off the CPU's plate until it's time to start exploring Grannus would appear to be one way to help in this regard. However, if the CPU impact is small and adding GEP later will create problems, then I'd rather have it installed from the start. Any advice you can provide would be appreciated.
  13. Career Evolution has always been one of my favorite mods. It's nice to see that this mod looks to pick up the torch and keep things going.
  14. I don't think there's a tutorial, but the most important thing is to launch into the same plane as your docking target, as is done irl. This can be done fairly easily using MechJeb's PVG mode. After your rocket is on the pad, switch to map view and choose your target in LEO. Then select the "launch into same plane as target" button at the bottom of the MJ ascent guidance window, and engage the ascent guidance. Once you're in a coplanar orbit with your target, it's just a matter of phasing orbits followed by a hohman transfer as in standard KSP.
  15. There was a nifty chart for older versions of KSP which would plug in various types of engines for a given payload mass, min twr, and delta V required to let you know what is the most efficient. Pretty outdated at this point, though...