KaptnKiwi

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

1 Follower

About KaptnKiwi

  • Rank
    Most assuredly not from New Zealand

Profile Information

  • Location Array
  • Interests Array

Recent Profile Visitors

810 profile views
  1. I wasn't able to find this in the roadmap. Are there any plans to include RO configs? I'd love to take your gorgeous modules for a spin round earth.
  2. He probably has ven's stock revamp installed. That would cause issues as both mods "@overide" the standard docking port. Incidentally could you cook up an RO config that makes a separate version of your parachute equiped docking port and a duplicate of the stock capsule? It would be neat if we could use both mods ad the same time.
  3. Huzzah! Any chance of throwing this on CKAN? That'd be the icing on the cake!
  4. Ok, great! Thanks for clearing that up! I'm not proficient in C# and currently way too busy with java certification but perhaps I have some time to pick up C# and work on this.
  5. I wonder if this is at all related to the multiport docking issue. Might stem from the same issue. Might be an out of scope issue or something. Is there an official bug report on the tracker yet?
  6. Made an issue on the git hub to ask if the licence can be lifted expanded so that someone can pick up this mod and expand/work with it. There's allready too many mods out there that have community patches and its turning into a giant mess like this. Hopefully they will respond to the github issue. Edit: There seems to be some differences in licence among github repositories but if we follow the licence posted in the FP anyone is allowed to fork the repo and modify it to make it compatible again, the only issue might be with assuming controll of the mod on CKAN, I have no idea what their policy is.
  7. I don't know if this's been asked before but I'd love the pack to be split into two separate packs. One for airplane parts and one for rocket parts. I also still have a hard time navigating the directory structure and file names if I want to delete the airplane parts for my RO install. Perhaps the release of 1.1 would be a good point to overhaul the directory structure and pack contents? Edit: Never mind, I'm an idiot. You have minipacks. Would you mind throwing these on CKAN? I'd love to have a pack for the RCS parts, probes and generic engines too.
  8. Bolshoe spasibo! TKS progres looks amazing really really well done. *bows*
  9. @officialmugi: Now that @NathanKell is on the official KSP dev team I expect the 1.1 compatible release to have a bit of a head start (also some of the module changes in the base game seem very specifically geared to stuff RO might implement in the future). This doesn't alleviate the problem of 1.1 incompatible dependencies though. A month might be right but there's also a big overhaul planned for realism overhaul (which was put on hold to not have to do everything over after 1.1) that's happening in the near future. I have no idea whether they'll overhaul and then release that as the first 1.1 release or whether there'll be an interim 1.1 compatible RO release. Keep checking the thread, the IRC and the GitHub for more info!
  10. @MajorLeaugeRocketScience There really is no need for a separate angara pack considering how easy it is to make an angara 1, 3, or 5 using bobcat's soviet engine pack,procedural tanks, procedural fairings for interstages and the engine skirts. You can use @raidernick's fregat or @InsaneDruid's Briz-M for the third stage. It's pretty straight forward and they tend to fly well.
  11. You don't you install RLA stockalike and use their incarnation of the sputnik. Saves you from the ugly base aswell. I guess it could be neat tot practice spin stabilized all solid boosters for the added challenge but there's really no point tbh.
  12. Add pentaborane as an option for a nice green toxic exhaust plume
  13. @raidernick Quick question about the RO config for the fregat upper stage. What's the unit for thrusterpower in the RCS module? The normal engines have their min and maxthrust in KN but the value of 0.3 confused me somewhat. I've been digging into Soyuz and Proton technical manuals as provided by the launch service providers and found a value of 50 N for thruster power for the fregat's orientation thrusters. Assuming the thrusterpower flag for RCS is also in KN the value should then be 0.050 I guess. Or is this a specific choice because putting lowering the thrusterpower that much would render the RCS units useless? Source: March 2012 Soyuz Users Manual as provided by arianespace. Edit: I figured this would be more appropriate here as opposed to posting it as a general issue in the RO github. If you'd like me to submit this as an issue there please tell me and I will do that.