Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


175 Excellent

Profile Information

  • About me
    Spacecraft Engineer
  • Location
    San Frankerbal
  • Interests
    Outside of KSP (and XCOM!)? Cycling, traveling, reading, and planning my takeover of the universe.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,705 profile views
  1. I was referring to what you said to @Average joe thats not joe, and I was agreeing with you.
  2. Hi! As @reducingnoted, your current system just meets the minimum system requirements for running KSP without any mods. Actually, taking into account that your onboard graphic uses shared memory, and is (per your log) taking up about 2GB of memory, you don't meet the memory requirements for running stock KSP. But you've also got nearly 100 mods loaded. This is why it takes roughly 16 minutes (according to your game log) to load KSP. Your question is "why does it take longer to do something in game than it does to reload the entire game?" That's because that having the game loaded is pushing your system to its limits as it is. Adding more computations (like recovering a craft) is further taxing a system with nothing left to give. You say that this only started happening recently, but I can't address that. I can only suggest that you remove all of your mods and stick to playing stock. There's absolutely nothing wrong with stock KSP, and while mods to enhance the experience, only you can decide whether the cost (in time) is worth playing with mods installed.
  3. Hi @bqvkhag! I saw in your other thread you are a new player. Welcome to KSP! There are a lot of people here that might be able to help you, but you probably need to give more information. Since you are posting in the KPBS mod thread, I assume you are trying to use a part from this mod. First, it's always good to check that you've installed the mod and all its dependencies. Second, you need to be more descriptive as to what exactly you are trying to do, where you are trying to do it (as in, are you doing something in the VAB/SPH, or prior to launch at the KSC, or in flight), and what happens when you try to do it. Usually, the more detailed / descriptive you are, the better. Screenshots can help too, if they illustrate the problem. Since it sounds like you're having problems using the mod and not trying to report a bug, you probably don't need to include your logs, but you should know how to post a link to them for the future. Refer here: You will find that KSP is a lot of fun and sometimes very challenging. You will also find that the community is amazing and is more than willing to help you. Provide more information and be patient, and you will get the answers you need.
  4. Welcome back! You've been missed, but we all know real life takes priority. Truer words have never been said... I might adopt this quote for my signature.
  5. So, you blast the mod dev for making changes to a mod that they made and share with the community for free, and then after your disrespectful "thanks... not", you expect the modder to make changes for you? If you want to do something helpful, you could make and share an alternative version of the mod (the license allows it, with restrictions). Or you could make your own personal version. Or you could thank the modder for what has likely been hundreds (if not more) of hours creating and debugging these mods and then ask about the change. I don't normally respond like this, but your post from out of the blue is an affront to the hard work Angel-125 has done and merits being called out. KSP wouldn't be as good as it is without modding and modders, and if you've played for years, you know that.
  6. Hi. Welcome to the boards. To get help, usually you need logs. Please read this: Remember, as stated in the post I just linked, do not try to post your log into the forum and don't just post a snippet of your log. Follow the instructions and you will likely find there are a lot of people here who are happy to help you figure out your problem. (Also: make sure you have the dependencies for the mod downloaded and installed as well!)
  7. Sorry for the momentary derail, but I just have to call this out. The discussion you two just had (and by association, the two of you) are indicative of what is so great about our community. @Cochisebrought up a frustration and explained why it was frustrating. @Lisiasacknowledged the point that Cochise was making, explained why it had been done, and even offered to go the extra mile to provide a remedy. Cochise acknowledged and declined the offer and thanked Lisias for continuing to maintain a mod that is very widely used. I want to thank you both for being whatever the opposite of toxic is. I "Liked" both of your final comments, but what I am really trying to say is that, when so many other spaces are seemingly full of poisonous trolls spewing venom and showing absolutely no appreciation for anything other than their point of view, you both epitomize intelligent and civil conversation, and this deserves to be noted and commended.
  8. With that workaround, what happens if you are playing with Missing Crews Respawn set to "Off"? I presume that means your pilot is killed, not missing. If I am right, with this work around, a contract failure results in the pilot's execution. The beatings will continue until morale improves.
  9. I can confirm that, with a stock install + CC, spawnpassenger does not remove the Kerbals it spawns on contract failures. My steps: Installed the Kerbin Side Remastered GAP pack on a Stock install with CC Accepted Flight 1000 contract. Three tourists were immediately spawned and present in the Astronaut complex, as expected. Loaded passengers on the runway, per contract. Failed contract by taking off and then crashing without killing passengers. Contract failure noted both in message system and in contract archives. Tourists were still present in Astronaut complex. Accepted same contract again. Three new tourists spawned. There are now six tourists in my Astronaut complex. Went to runway. New passengers were loaded. I ran through a few permutations of this. In all cases that I attempted, if the contract was failed but the tourists were still alive, the old tourists were left in the Astronaut complex and new ones were spawned. @nightingale, I don't believe this is intended behavior. If not, @Caerfinon, I suggest you open an issue on Github. This does seem to be a genuine bug and not related to any other mods. If you want me to test anything else, ping me. Sorry I couldn't come up with more, but I'm a cat of very little brain.... Log is here: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoyHZiRU1jT-zpgzESd-KmLow0LKJw?e=9IYzxQ (Link should be good until January 2nd, 2021)
  10. Thanks for checking! I use it in a couple of contracts and I haven't noted any issues, but I can test it today. Do you have a particular contract you'd like me to test, or just anything with spawnpassenger?
  11. Got it, I think. So the modified code you just posted holds thrust to 1% for the first 10% of the burn (i.e., 90% of fuel remaining), then goes to 100% thrust for the remainder of the burn, correct? What do the 3rd and 4th columns do (the -10 in row 3, column 4)? And thank you. Update: With what you just provided me, I changed the "fuse" portion (i.e., the third key) to .001 , which then makes this work pretty well as advertised (although .01 works as well). If this thread is ever updated, it would probably be a good idea to update Enceos original code with your modification. Thank you again!
  12. Not a bad idea. First, as you pointed out, I was incorrect in my assumption as to what it does. What it does is hold the thrust to 1% for the first 5% of the total burn. This effectively makes the sepratron burn for roughly 7 seconds instead of 5 (at it's default fuel and thrust). After testing further, I found that 1% is the minimum thrust; setting the value to anything lower (including 0, but I didn't test negative values) does nothing. As soon as it is staged, however, thrust begins. My plan was to use this to deorbit docked and unmanned parts: stage the delayed fuse, undock, watch it fly off a few seconds later. Ah, well. I would suggest a modification of the description as its not necessarily accurate to refer to its firing as delayed. Progressive thrust sepratron, maybe? @Enceos, I think you're taking a break right now, but do you have any thoughts on this? Thank for the suggestion!
  13. Hey all, I don't know if anyone pays much attention to the old patches in this thread, but if so, I could use some assistance. Two of the tweaks in the OP don't seem to function for me. Note: I am not getting any errors, it just doesn't seem as if they are doing what they should be. Swap crew report and EVA report biome-dependence in space low. // Swap Crew report and EVA report biome-dependence in space low // Author: pwhk @EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[crewReport]]:FINAL { @biomeMask = 23 } @EXPERIMENT_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#id[evaReport]]:FINAL { @biomeMask = 7 } I suspect the problem here has to do with biome masks, but at least in munar orbit, I have EVA science to do in every biome, and only Crew report once. Delayed Action Sepratron // Add a delayed action sepatron // Author: Enceos +PART[sepMotor1]:Final { @name = delayedRetro @title = Sepratron I-D @description = Same as the Sepratron I but with a delayed fuse. @MODULE[ModuleEngine*] { %useThrustCurve = true %thrustCurve { key = 0.00 0.01 key = 0.05 1.00 0 0 key = 0.93 1.00 0 0 key = 0.98 0.10 0 0 key = 1.00 0.10 } } } The part certainly exists. I assume that it is supposed to work by holding the thrust curve to 0.01 for 5 seconds and then accelerating, but if so, it seems to accelerate directly to 100% thrust. Nearly any suggestions would be welcome.
  • Create New...