• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

224 Excellent

About StahnAileron

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer
  1. Making money besides contracts

    As far as I know, if you have a 100% re-useable design, you can mine ore and then recover the craft for 100% cost + worth of ore (or fuel if you convert the ore). This is for pure stock. The same can be done if you use mods that add other mineable resources. The best bet might be Karbonite+. The Karborundrum(sp?) resource is worth quite a lot, though there's only 2 or 3 sources of it with the normal settings for that mod. (Low solar orbit, Eve, and Eeloo, if I recall...) Not sure about the mining rate for it since I have yet to really leave Kerbin's SoI. Otherwise, I usually crank up the fund (and science) rewards in a career game if I care more about just having contracts to give me goals to aim for. Career-mode gameplay is a half-assed after-thought.
  2. Not a problem. I know modding is a time-consuming hobby. It's why I don't do it myself (that and I lack artistic and/or programming talent/skills at this point). The patches is the main thing. Internals I can get around with a simple brute-force methodology. (Besides, does AoA even have a stock internal view? I thought all the IVA views were predicated/reliant on ASET/RPM?) Again, if I get around to doing real, proper MM patches, I'll let you guys know. Lastly: yes, I meant SpaceDock. I read up on the Star Control reboot by Stardock relatively recently and it stuck for some reason. (Despite the fact I had visited SpaceDock not too long before those posts...)
  3. @martinezfg11: I'm looking over the mod (v1.3.9.0 via Stardock) and giving it a once-over to suit my needs. I'm doing a more brute-force method (MM cfg that removes all BDA modules from any part), however, given my request, I may later on do a proper edit of the configs and pull out the BDA sections and place them into one (or more) separate patch file(s). Also, I notice some stats are still from the Beta-era (3400-degree MaxTemp, no SkinTemps), so I may decide to do a balance pass on that (I can't do mass and costs though; MaxTemps are simple for Atmo-only versus Space-capable parts, for the most part.) If I do any of the above (no promises...), I'll let you guys know and post the changes some place (or just send a pull request on github). Getting stuff up to par with stock 1.3.x configs is a chore...
  4. @Wolfair corp., @martinezfg11: Is there any chance of parts with BDA-functionality having those functions split off into a BDA MM patch? As it stands with the current configs, this mod implies BDA is a required dependency instead of an optional one. None of the BDA module calls have a NEEDS to even check for BDA first, so the mod assumes BDA in installed. I haven't touched BDA for a long time. (Considering the complexity of BDA compared to its utility for me, it's just a drag on my system with all the other mods I have installed.) There's no reason to mandate the BDA modules in the part configs without declaring BDA as a dependency. I would like to ask the same for RPM/ASET support (I don't bother with IVA mode at all), but that's directly integrated to the models as far as I know, so that's probably asking a bit much. (I've just deleted interiors from mods if they start affecting my install. I actually got performance boosts from deleting interiors because KSP doesn't have to render them in the Kerbal windows.) Besides, I realize the IVA views are half the reason people use this mod.
  5. [1.3.1Beta 2 ]Kerbal Aircraft Expansion _Continued v2.7.1beta

    Regarding a custom KAX resource: is there a chance of including/supporting an MM config that swaps out the KAX custom resources for more common ones from CRP for those of us that have extensive modded installs (and therefore likely to have the needed dependencies anyway)? I'd rather have a common pool of resources that the mods I use pull from (that make sense) than each one using their own set of custom resources, if possible.
  6. Two items: I don't recall if this supported Radiators as specific category. It currently doesn't (and I don't think it ever did, but again, not sure...) Radiators take EC to use for quite some time now, if I recall correctly. Any chance of adding them to the filter list? I recall Ratzap once telling me that certain categories in the filter for Fusebox are dependent on mod version-specific dlls being present when Fusebox is compiled to actually support that mod properly. This is because some mods reference EC usage with atypical methods that Fusebox has to specifically account and look for. SCANsat in particular seems to be notorious (well, to me) for breaking support in Fusebox each time they release an update. (Ratzap basically had to recompile each time certain optional supported mods updated, like SCANsat.) I'm on 1.3.0 currently and don't see SCANsat as part of the Fusebox filters. Any ideas about SCANsat support in FB-Continued? On a side-note: Kinda wished you called it Fusebox Rewired
  7. KSP Weekly: The Eridania Region

    There's a reason they called it: ... and not just "Gemini Service Module." It's kerbalized historical referencing. If you want something a bit more faithful, look at actual historical mods like @CobaltWolf's Bluedog Design Bureau.
  8. [1.2.2] Kerbal Aircraft Expansion (KAX) v2.6.4

    @keptin Given what you just said, for future reference: My understanding is that KAX is just a parts pack with a plugin-dependency in the form of FireSpitter. I'm guessing KAX will work for the foreseeable future assuming: The FireSpitter plugin is updated to support future KSP versions (and players actually update it properly...) and KSP's codebase doesn't change (once again) in how it handles models (like how I think 1.0.5 switched to convex-only colliders or something or 1.1 handled wheels/legs.) Anything else should be maintainable by the player-base if you ever drop KAX completely, no? (Like config changes.) If you do actually abandon KAX, have you considered changing the license so another modder or the KSP community can adopt it for at least maintenance and distribution, if not further development?
  9. [1.3.1] SpaceTux Industries Recycled Parts

    @Skalou, @linuxgurugamer First, a grateful thanks for the work on Atomic Age. I don't use much from it, but I abuse the crap out of the KANDL for small probes and commsats. That said, something I want to ask @Skalou regarding the KANDL: Have you looked at the shroud set-up for it? Most other engine fairings/shrouds I've seen in KSP either stick with the decoupler/separator or split and eject sideways. The KANDL's seems to be a single separate physical entity that kinda gets flung off due to collision on staging. I bring this up because in prior versions, it would get explosively ejected when staged. I wound up always having to disable the shroud. (Otherwise I'd risk damaging my vessel or shifting the orbit a bit. I've lost solar panels to this a couple of times, at least.) I just checked this version with KSP 1.3.0 and the same issue seems to persist. Though I admit, it doesn't seem as bad as before. This was tested with zero ejection force on the decoupler (to rule that out). No shroud = safe and gentle (no shifting), as expected. With shroud = forceful ejection, causing a spin and orbital shifting. This was a very small test vessel with low mass. Something about the size and mass you'd expect for use with the KANDL, if not a little lighter. This mostly a minor thing with a workaround I know about (I think I defaulted the config file to disable/hide the shroud), so it's not something I expect to be addressed quickly. Just something you might want to be aware of. (The lack of a shroud kinda kills the immersion when I go for practicality over aesthetics.)
  10. Generally speaking, I sorta like having my power switch separate from my mode selector. I'm more likely to power cycle than mode cycle. I also think it's a little more obvious in terms of seeing what controls/options you have.
  11. KSP Challenge: The Atari Challenge!

    I was KINDA close, in a broad sense
  12. KSP Challenge: The Atari Challenge!

    Part II: If you collected them in Kerbin orbit, de-orbit them; attempt to hit them with a direct rocket launch from the surface. The lower to the ground and higher the (combined?) impact speed, the higher the score. Anyway, back about this challenge: Yeah. I read "Atari Challenge" and I thought it was designing and launching a vessel that looked like an Atari console. Or, now that I think about it more, Atari-era classic characters.
  13. Ram Air Turbine (RATs)

    No offense, but are RATs really needed in a game that gives you an even better option: RTGs? Yes, it's not realistic, but realism was shown the door long ago. (Playability trumps realism in many cases... Or else we'd only bother playing Real Life(tm).) Granted, it's not as pretty as a RAT for aircraft design if you don't intend on using a hollow part of some sort (e.g. cargo bay) or just clipping the sucker, but it's constant power without the dependency on forward movement in an atmosphere. (And there's also the bane to many a designer: drag...) Honestly, I can't see the benefits of RATs in KSP when it has better implementations for power generation in aircraft. The only thing I can see going for this is cost (that's just one line of code in a *.cfg file) and for the sake of realism. I think it's too much effort for not enough pay-off, generally speaking. For sim enthusiasts it'd be nice, but I can't see that demographic making up a large enough portion of the player-base to warrant/justify an implementation of RATs that works (well) without some hacks. (Unless implementing them is easy; I doubt it given KSP's development history...) WARNING: The following addresses a point (Career Mode), but contains a mild rant:
  14. KSP Weekly: Taking a ride to the Moon!

    Is the mobile launch pad the first step into a stock feature of off-site/-world construction using ISRU? Like the EPL mod? That would make KSP far more playable for me in the long run. I've yet to really do anything outside the Kerbin SOI. (The one thing was an attempt at a DMagic survey contract around the Sun. That game was in 1.0.5...) Exploration of the Kerbin solar system doesn't have much incentive for me without some in-game reward (other than science, of which I have disagreements with concerning how research works...)
  15. KSP Challenge: The Mun Arch Speed Challenge!

    Probably clichéd as hell, but any thoughts on the Top Gun theme as an intro leading into Danger Zone? First thing that came to mind. There may be something else more appropriate, though...