• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

156 Excellent
  1. This is a known issue and I believe an open issue in github (not able to check atm). I seem to remember that this started when a change from a few KSP versions ago was implemented that had a comment that mentioned waiting to warp until the attitude was more precise. I thought it was a little strange at the time because after the warp starts, things immediately drift from the maneuver marker, so why should there be tighter tolerances beforehand? But, as you mentioned, I was always able to give it a little kick by hitting the warp key, so I never really thought about it much. It would be interesting if someone remembers that change and looks at it to see if the issue is there.
  2. Unofficially, I would recommend the latest one. They fixed a lot of the landing and ascent issues that cropped up in 1.3.1 and is quite stable for my usage. Issues do remain, but it's by far the best 1.3.1 release.
  3. Sure, but I'm not sure it will match his config. Mine only has GPP. I believe he is also running GPP_Secondary and OPM, and I do not have those.
  4. Yes, I use it extensively. I don't have any issues with it. @OverlordMorgoth, I don't use GPP Secondary or the other mods, just GPP. but there are some gotchas First, there can only be one Sun, so all instances of Ciro need to be renamed in the bodies.ini file. I'm not sure how GPP_Secondary will affect the one sun rule. Next, I had some weirdness in some of my plots that were only fixed by deleting Grannus from the bodies file. You may wish to look into it.
  5. If you are running GPP, you will need to create a bodies.ini file and then load it. Hi, to be clear, this is the version that supports R2017b? If so, is that the preferred version for testing? Thanks.
  6. Hi, Is there a setting to always have the UT displayed in the upper left by default, not the MET? Thanks
  7. That was not a good assumption... As with everything else in MJ, it does things using a particular method, and you tailor that method to what you need. In the classic ascent profile, there is no mention of using a perfect gravity turn. It only refers to turn shapes. There is a gravity turn option, but the parameters need to be set correctly for your particular situation. I have never been able to use ascent guidance completely unattended, but that's OK. All of the variables needed to make a good ascent on every single rocket type in every planet cannot be accounted for every time. You create settings for each case to give the best auto control, but you still may need to have manual intervention.
  8. Cooling issues since 1.3.1

    There is a MM patch here to change the behavior of the mini ISRU to not overheat so easily. Take a look to see if it addresses your issue.
  9. Hi, Is there a scenario where Texture Replacer is still used? This section from the install instructions may need updating.
  10. [1.3] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

    Hi, if your looking for some ideas, I may have a few... With respect to base scaling, I think the best way to do that is to fix power consumption and heat generation, meaning that that do no get amplified with bonuses. The consequence is that manufacturing/production bonuses are capped at 200% (meaning double) the original specs, using a log function that gives more increase at the beginning and flattens towards the max. I could write a whole TL;DR section of you wish, but I thing it's a good balance of reward, realism, and gameplay consideration. I started using MKS just after the wear and Replacement Parts got removed, so I can't comment on how useful they were to me in the past, but I know I never felt the need for them after they are gone. As mentioned above, there are mod choices to implement that mechanic. When you think about the Machinery/Specialized Parts/Material Kits trinity, making RP a tier 4, with all of the code complexity you mention, doesn't seem to justify the effort. To model what you describe, you can extend the Hab/Home-like mechanic to bases/vessels: Things consume more Machinery as they get older. Factories will reduce output and parts can break, and can be fixed by Kerbals using MK/SP. Bad things like the above will happen slower/less frequent based on a certain mix of Kerbal population I think this can satisfy your objectives pretty nicely in a much simpler implementation. Thanks
  11. Hi, Got everything installed in my existing save, but was getting errors. If I went to a building and hit the arrow in the upper right to return to KSC, it froze. I deleted the renamer folder and all was well again. It is also fine if I start a new save (I see the new Kerbals). The logs that contained the errors are here!AigvIEvgjetqymocJqzan1F83Gbd Thanks
  12. Thanks from me also for #760. Two landings at target under 300mm difference and landing legs work again. It's awesome.
  13. Here is my Thalia orbiting station. Seven medium radiators, three small, six edge. At 100km orbit, it can last for about 40 min if I leave it active before things start blowing up. If it's not active, there are no problems. I have 2 medium and two small radiators on my tiny lander. It can barely survive 5 minutes.
  14. hmmm...not doing life support on this career save and totally forgot to put up my favorite station from the great and powerful @Rune. Only 1.4 million to launch.
  15. [1.3] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

    I seem to recall that the answer was no, not fully sure though. Maybe the GC forum has the answer.