• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,679 Excellent

About OhioBob

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Contact Methods

  • Website URL Array

Recent Profile Visitors

13,259 profile views
  1. What you call badgering I call trying to be helpful. Pointing out a simple helpful tip on how to measure the efficiency of one's ascent trajectory (minimizing circularization delta-v) is not "needless".
  2. Sure, you can do all that. The developers, however, have no plans to write the configs for it. You'll have to do it yourself. You just have to install EVE along with JNSQ. https://github.com/WazWaz/EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements/releases/tag/EVE-1.4.2-2
  3. That's not really a very efficient ascent. If your circularization burn requires 1000 m/s, then you're lofting the rocket into too steep an arc. You should try to flatten out the trajectory. I try to limit my circularization burn to about 100 m/s. Exactly how much you need is how much you need for the entire mission less how much the upper stages can deliver.
  4. You should design the rocket as whole as required to complete the mission objectives. The first stage will end up with whatever it needs. Don't worry about trying to make it equal some specific number.
  5. Yeah, you're right. There are Kopernicus backports for 1.6.1 and 1.5.1, but not 1.6.0. Neither the 1.6.1 or 1.5.1 versions will work with KSP 1.6.0. There is a 1.6.0-1 version of Kopernicus that will work with your KSP, but it's not a backport. Unfortunately JNSQ will not work with the 1.6.0-1 version. The current JNSQ requires features introduced in later versions of Kopernicus (1.7.1+) that are only available in the backports.
  6. JNSQ v0.5 and later won't work with versions of Kopernicus older than 1.7.1. You have to either update to a newer version of KSP, or use a backport version of Kopernicus. JNSQ won't work with Kopernicus 1.6.1-2, but should with 1.6.1-9.
  7. I can't say for sure, but I also have my doubts that GEP could be the problem. GEP isn't constructed any differently than any other planet pack.
  8. It has been years since I last played RSS, but yes, it should have the same issue. Technically the moon is still tidally locked in that it completes one rotation per revolution. There just happens to be great deal of latitudinal libration due to the inclination between the moon's rotational axis and the normal to the plane of its orbit. Minmus in JNSQ has no ocean. I have no idea why you're getting that contract. You should probably decline it as there may be no way to fulfil the requirements.
  9. @madindehead, regrettably I know nothing about either Contract Configurator or Field Research, nor how they interact with GEP. I haven't the slightest idea how to solve the problem.
  10. No, this mod is strictly for the stock solar system. RSS, however, doesn't need it. The RSS atmospheres are already made to be realistic (I did them).
  11. That's what I thought he might mean. @kerbnub, if that's what you're referring to, there's nothing that can be done about it. To have one face of a moon locked to the planet so that the planet has no (or little) north-south drift, then the moon must have no (or little) axial tilt relative to the axis of its orbit. In KSP we can incline the orbits, but we can't tilt the axes. So if we incline a moon's orbit X amount, it follows that the moon's spin axis will be inclined X amount relative to the orbital axis. There's just no way to get around it with the current KSP.
  12. I don't understand, how is it not tidally locked anymore? I see nothing in the config that should cause Mun to be no longer tidally locked to Kerbin.
  13. Below are the coordinates that Cartographer gives for Kerbin's highest point. I initially presumed it is the same mountain that @Snark is referring to, but this one is no where near Woomerang (Woomerang is at +45 latitude, not -45). Could we actually have two 14 km peaks? I was only aware of the one at the coordinates below. Highest Point LAT = -43.9625 LON = 103.9785 ALT = 14249.0251745675 EDIT I just extracted a Kerbin height map and checked it for the tallest mountain peaks. There is only one white pixel on the entire map, which is centered on approximately -44.033 latitude, +103.975 longitude. This is undoubtedly the peak located by Cartographer. There is another tall peak, though apparently not quite as tall, located at approximately +42.803 latitude, +140.449 longitude (near Woomerang). I think the second might be Snark's mountain (maybe he got the longitude wrong?). The coordinates above are limited by the pixel resolution of a 4k height map. The actually highest points will be nearby, but not precisely at the coordinates indicated.