Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by itsthatguy

  1. Serious question (I know that this has probably been discussed before, but bear with me) If this mod implements N-body Newtonian physics, does that mean that the precession of Mercury's orbit is incorrect when using RSS?
  2. @MagnusLL There's always the ol' reliable X-1 cockpit. It won't make for a convincing looking fighter, more of a high speed research plane of sorts. That being said, the Stuka cockpit is close enough to make some sleek looking high performance prop fighters, or early transonic jets. You can push a Stuka cockpit and a J-47/J-48 just over the sound barrier in level flight if you area rule well and find the right altitude. There are plenty of accounts of F-86 Sabre pilots pushing "factory new" planes just over Mach one in a slight dive at high altitude, and they weren't area ruled at all AFAIK. However, again, there's no need to rush it. There are other contracts you can complete until you unlock the J57. Rocket plane contracts are much simpler and easier to make happen early on. Also, the F-100 was introduced into service in September of '54 and the MiG-19 was introduced in '55 (really is a shame we don't have more soviet jet engines) so it wouldn't really make sense if you were able to build a supersonic jet right off of the bat. If you want a reference to a sound design, here is a picture of the "KF-1" which I'm currently building in my new save (October '44). It's the first non-rocket plane that I've bothered to build on this save. On older RP-1 builds it made sense to build early planes, but with the changes to science (specifically that you can't collect any when "Flying Low") there's basically no point to build non-rocket planes until you are ready to complete the jet-powered supersonic contracts. IMO this is a good change because the old way made early progression very slow and grindy, especially because plane design takes much longer than rocket design (at least it does for me).
  3. I find that it makes a lot more sense to just keep milking sounding rocket contracts than trying to strive for early orbit. You're going to end up wasting a lot of time and resources testing and stretching the capabilities of your early tech (especially if you're using TestLite, and I mean *ACTUALLY* using it, not just reverting every time you have an engine failure). Remember, first orbit wasn't achieved until 10/57 IRL. Really, I find that it's a mistake to strive for any big milestone before your technology level is really ready for it, but this is a good example.
  4. Another quick question.. All of the starting parts are either free or cost 1 dollar, except for the Veronique, which costs 10,000 (Half of your money if you start on moderate). Why?
  5. Hello! I've been absent from RP-1 for a while, and rather than picking up my old 1.7.3 install and continuing to play that I figured I'd start fresh. Followed the installation instructions (like always) and once I had everything set up the way I like (with a couple of extra mods that I like such as Warp Everywhere) I started my career playthrough. I noticed right off of the bat that there were some changes with Kerbalism science and I wanted to check and make sure that this was indented behavior. Basically, I can't collect any science from low atmosphere for any experiment (all worth 0.0) except for supersonic flight analysis (which I hadn't gotten around to trying yet). Also, planetary photography (which was a big science boost early for my older install, if I remember correctly) wouldn't run and was considered to be in an invalid situation. Was this a balance change, or do I have something set up incorrectly? EDIT: Also, I've noticed that KCT isn't differentiating between the SPH and VAB construction anymore (all craft go into the same build queue.) Is this intentional as well? Seems like that makes building aircraft in the early game entirely not worth it due to the huge construction time compared to sounding rockets.
  6. Coming back to this after having played RP-0 back in the day. First, I have to say that I am really impressed with how far this is come, hats off to the team. I seem to be having a problem keeping my Kerbals from retiring. The two that I actually kept on the roster (you don't really need 4 in the beginning IMO, waste of money) seem to be pretty much capped at retiring in late 1958. I know that they have to retire eventually, but that is just over a year past their original retire date. All I know about that system is that sending them on "interesting flights" will push their date back. For a while, I figured that the date wasn't moving back because regular flights weren't "interesting" for them anymore. I was a bit disappointed when I landed after my first crewed suborbital flight just to find that Jebediah's retirement date only pushed back by a few days again. The point here is that I don't really know what is going on here. The wiki is pretty vague about how this works, and I wonder if I'm missing something. Does anyone have a more in-depth explanation of how the calculation works? The actual equation would be even better.
  7. A few suggestions for the future of this mod: I would LOVE to integrate this mod into my Realism Overhaul experience. I am always up for a little bit of added realism in games, and this seems like the ultimate realism upgrade for KSP. After using it a short amount of time I can say that I love everything about this mod. Unfortunately, I will not be using this mod. Here's why: My issue is not the mod itself or anything about it. My issue is one of the side-effects that is produced by the mod: constantly changing orbits. Now, I don't have a problem with this outright. It has always frustrated me that in KSP orbits are set in stone and never decay or change unless the user wants to change them. However, because of this there is no built in system in the game to actually HANDLE more realistic constantly changing orbits. Once again, I enjoy the added realism here. The problem is the MASSIVE amount of micromanagement crap that this produces. For example: If I want to create a network of communication satellites in geostationary orbit, it is pretty simple in the vanilla physics model. Put them there and forget about them. However, when you introduce a more realistic model, the gravitational influence of the Moon and Sun create constant changes in the orbits of ALL of these satellites, meaning that if you want them to actually stay in their orbits, you have to constantly make small correction burns for EACH one of these satellites. What could be done to help alleviate all of this micromanagement? I propose that if this project teamed up with the creators of the Time Control and Remote Tech mods, we would have a solution. You see, Remote Tech has this very useful feature called the flight computer. This allows you to command your probe to do certain actions including performing maneuver nodes ahead of time so that, for example, if you lose connection for whatever reason your probe will still perform that action without you having to control it directly. What I am saying here is that you guys could team up to create an option in the flight computer that essentially says "hold this orbit" or something like that. Of course, because of the way that KSP handles time warp, you would have to make sure that this would work in conjunction with the Time Control mod, which, among other things, allows you to have REALLY high physics warp for performing REALLY long burns. This way, even when using time warp, the flight computer would still be able to perform those small correction burns. When you put all of this together you have a solution that essentially solves the issue at hand by eliminating the need for the player to constantly do manual orbit corrections.
  8. Awesome! Re-installed RO and there they were. Thanks!
  9. I seem to have accidentally deleted the part files for the better heat shields while cleaning out some of the redundant parts from the part packs I have installed. I have NO idea where they could have been, I've already checked the mods that I suspect could have contained them. Can anyone help me out as to what mod the heat shields are from, so that I can re-install that particular mod?
  10. BUG REPORT: There is a bug which occurs when using certain engines that have an upper "shroud" (basically a pretty engine housing on the mounting point) such as the RD-58 (which I think is from KW but I'm not sure). Even when you turn off this shroud, fairings still act as though it is there and will expand to fit around it. Occurs when using procedural fairings. They are the only fairings that I use, so I do not know if the problem occurs with stock fairings or fairings from other mods.
  11. I'm just getting back into RO after a few years of absence. I enjoy playing in career mode, and I'm currently designing my first lunar flyby probe of my save. I decided that I wanted to recover the probe so that I could maximize the science gain. There is one small problem: all of the heat shields I have unlocked are "rated for LEO reentry". I can't seem to find any additional heat shields anywhere in the tech tree. Am I blind, or is there something afoot here?
  12. Yea everything works as intended now. It was a memory issue b/c of the 32 bit version I was using.
  13. Quick question: How do I simulate a vessel? I used this mod a long while ago and when clicking the launch button I was given the option simulating or just adding it to the build list. Now, it just automatically adds it to the build list. I can't find any options relating to simulation functionality either. Can anyone help?
  14. Never really had a reason to until now i guess. It is sort of just a habit. Most people recommended not running 64-bit back when i still played a lot and I guess it sort of stuck. I can try it though.
  15. Y'know what, that link was actually really helpful. I didn't even think about the 32-bit memory limit; I'm currently running about 5gb of memory w/ my current setup. I'm going to install dynamic texture loader and see what happens. I'll update in a few hours once it has done its thing.
  16. Here's my most recent crash report. Crash occurred when leaving SPH back to KSC.
  17. @Bornholio I have in fact been removing a lot of parts from Ven's , SXT, and Squad. (Mainly various tanks, I tend to only use procedural tanks anyway). I can't stand the MASSIVE amount of clutter that you end up w/ after having so many part packs. Again, I mainly only use them for the engines that they provide. I've just deleted semi-sat wheels, connected living space, ship manifest, and deploy-able engines (I was using cryogenic engines but I deleted it and forgot to remove this earlier). Still getting crashes, particularly when leaving the VAB and SPH.
  18. I used to play RO a few years back and I'm just getting back into it again. I've been experiencing VERY frequent crashes, especially when loading things. I was wondering if anyone could provide some insight, since I've been out of the circuit for so long. I've installed near all of the recommended mods, and just a few of the suggested mods (mostly just for engines) and RP-0. Here's my full list: I'd like to delete some of them, but there are quite a few that are dependencies of other mods. RP-0 has a LOT of dependencies that I don't really care for, but I really enjoy the career aspect of this game so I have to keep them. Are there any known issues w/ my mod list? I could really use some help. (Also yes i am running 1.2.2)
  19. I have no problem with most of the parts because of the ridiculous high max temps, but because heat gets distributed so much for some reason the control surfaces at the BACK overheat and I can't control it in order to land.
  20. OK: So now that we have re entry heating, re-entry with space planes is super annoying from LKO, and from higher speeds near impossible without taking multiple approaches to slow yourself down over a longer period of time. I've been developing a Kerbal Shuttle (Kerbal version of space shuttle, but I'm sure you guessed that.) Re-entry with it takes an insanely long time, or else I lose control surfaces to the heat and can't land. My larger goal of using SSTOs to ferry things and Kerbals around the solar system, land on planets, return, etc. is now basically ruined because re-entry from deep space without heat shielding would be a MASSIVE pain in the arse. In my opinion there needs to be either: A: A way to procedurally produce a heat shield for the bottom of space plane parts (control surfaces, wings, fuselages, etc.) like the real Space Shuttle B. Have space plane parts that already have heat shielding on the bottom. Just a suggestion, and anyway if anyone has a solution to this problem that is already implemented in the game, please let me know Thanks!
  21. I know this is a LOOOT... but I think it may be a good idea for the later future. (If it's even possible of course.) SOOOO... when you start career mode, you start off with a single launch site. (How you choose it may vary) You can only communicate with THAT launch site. (If you have remote tech, that is.) To use other launch sites, you can either: 1. Pay for a single launch of a pre designed vehicle. You are taken straight to the Launch Pad/Runway. 2. Buy the launch site, you can use all facilities just like the normal KSC. You can also communicate with it. However, this will cost a pretty penny. Let's be real here, being able to launch from a multitude of different places around the globe for free is not realistic, and it's overpowered. Making a comm - sat system is extremely easy considering there are red dots littering the globe, and getting into a specific orbit is easy by just changing your launch site.
  22. Thanks, I just started my first career with RO and had never dealt with pressure fed engines till now. (I wanted to wait until the official release of RP-0 came out for .90)
  23. quick question, how do you get a pressure fed engine to start? The fuel flow always says unpressurized and so it wont start and I don't know how to change that
  24. Ok, so the RSS config of remote tech is super useful in career mode, but it is really annoying having the entire planet covered in red dots. I'm waiting for rp-0 to update to .90 and I haven't installed the RSS config yet, but it would be super cool if someone could make an option to hide the red dots. An even better idea (in my opinion) is to make it so that you can only make a connection to the launch site that you are using, so there is always 1 red dot on screen, but it will move with you as you change launch sites. Let's be honest, being able to make a connection pretty much anywhere on the planet is a LITTLE too easy. While thinking about this I've just had a WONDERFUL idea. What if, at the beginning of career mode, you choose a launch site that is yours. Then, if you want to use other launch sites, you can: a. Purchase it (for quite a bit of money) and use it whenever you like. There is always a red dot on it and you can connect whenever you want. b. Pay a fee to make a single launch. You will either go straight to the VAB/SPH, or straight the the Launchpad/Runway and select a vehicle to launch. You get no other benefits. (NO red dot)
  • Create New...