Johould
-
Posts
125 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Johould
-
-
It seems to work in 1.7. The flight envelope only gets stuck at 100% if the craft can't lift off with the active first-stage engines.
-
On 5/26/2019 at 6:54 PM, Paadwyn said:
Thanks! Awesome...
Basically, I'm just trying to design a miner that uses two strip miners, each bay configured to each of the resources.
From there, have storage for each resource, so I can have just one mining craft file, be able to build it and it mine any resource without needing a change in setup.
Looks like I will need to bring out the calculator to get an efficient setup.
Could you reconfigure storage in the field? Reconfiguring ("repaint") the ISM storage parts is free (IIRC you may even be able to do it with any kind of crew).
-
I don't know why. Tourists should recover with resources, and always recover when back on Kerbin.
It has happened to me before. If a Kerbal in the Astronaut Center is still a tourist I edited the save file to fix their job.
For a Kerbal on Kerbin:
In the "STATUS_DATA" record with the right "name" field, change "IsGrouchy" to "IsGrouchy = False" and "LastMeal","LastEC","LastAtHome" all equal to the current time. In the "KERBAL" record with the right "name" field, change "trait" to the right job (which may be recorded in the "STATUS_DATA" at "OldTrait").
-
It works in 1.7. I tested the smallest rings. It should work the same in 1.6.
In the VAB it will always show the habitation time. In flight the ring needs to be expanded and the habitat started to get a lot of habitation time.
-
On 10/28/2018 at 12:17 PM, Wyzard said:
This was mentioned over in the Fuel Tanks Plus thread, but there's an issue with CCC (version 2.0.1) in KSP 1.5: at least for the 1.25m tanks, the attachment nodes are some distance away from the top and bottom of the tank, which creates gaps between the parts. It can be seen by starting a sandbox game and loading the stock AeroEquus rocket in the VAB.
(I figured I should mention it here since it turned out to be caused by CCC, not FTP. I've tested in KSP 1.5.1 with no mods except CCC 2.0.1 and ModuleManager 3.1.0.)
Has anyone found a workaround?
-
Yes. This file makes some station parts useful for life support: StationPartsExpansionRedux/Patches/SSPXR-USILS.cfg
Without that patch, USILS would not be broken but none of the SSPXR parts would help give lift support.
What is your good language?
-
36 minutes ago, Terwin said:
The documentation was written before the default per-seat value was adjusted to 0.25 months.
If you change the default per-seat value to 1 month, the documentation will be correct.
I do not think the help files can be dynamically updated based on a setting however.
If you would like to update the help files to reflect the default, I hear RoverDude accepts Pull Requests...
The part that's a code bug counting a crew seat as 1 kerbal-month in the detailed part info in the VAB part list, regardless of your per-seat setting.
Having 1 base month (and maybe no crew capacity) seems reasonable, I think the part ought to have some base time to compensate for only having a 0.5 multiplier compared to the Observation Cupola's 0.7 multiplier.
-
I think the stock ISRU and USI catch-up processing just uses your current EC production, so you need to go to bases when the sun is shining on them, but don't need enormous batteries.
-
The Observation Cupola is a pure 0.7 multiplier. The Viewing Cupola has an 0.5 multiplier, 1 crew seat, and text *claiming* it adds 1 month time, but it actually has 0 base months of time, so you only get the crew capacity, defaulting to 0.25 months / 7.5 days. @RoverDude there's a bug in the "Habitation Option" information shown in the VAB where the displayed months have +1 for each crew capacity on the part, rather than respecting your settings for how much time you have per seat (or just not counting crew capacity separately at all, because you get time from that whether or not you have the habitat running).
-
On 5/11/2019 at 10:47 PM, LadyAthena said:
I'm wondering if there is a way to remove the "habitation" requirements, or adjust them at all, as even flying 2 kerbals to Minmus requires a monster spaceship just to deal with the habitation alone. a 2man pod + 4 man living quarters for just 2 kerbals, which should allow them to live comfortably for a good time. Yet they get "home sick" before the mission ends, and that's just touching down for less than an hour on minmus, so its almost a complete non stop flight, which seems just ridiculous to me. I've lived in cramped quarters for months before out at sea, which ultimately is the same thing this system is trying to simulate. Yes its uncomfortable, yes it isn't very pleasant, but to think I'd just up and "stop working" especially when that work brings me back home, is paying the bills, and is what I signed up for is ludicrous to a retarded level..
For some reason, living space needs to be "turned on" with the "Start Habitat" option in the context menu. A Mk 2 lander and a Hitchhiker will give 2 kerbals 337 days of hab time if that habitat is running, and only 22 days if it's turned off (including the default 15 day grace period).
Also note that the Viewing Cupola claims to give 1 kerbal-month of base time in the editor but doesn't actually add any base time at all! Otherwise it would be a nice little part for Minmus missions.
-
In MKS 1.1.0.0 the Flex-O-Tube is titled "MKS Kerbitrail(tm) FlexOTube". What version of MKS do you have?
-
On 4/30/2019 at 7:42 AM, dxeh said:
trying to run this in 1.7 but Flight Envelope remains at:
"Calcualting... (100.0%)"
Any idea's? AoA Curves etc seem to work normal, the graph just wont generate
That happens for me when the craft can't take off with the engines that are enabled in the first stage.
Speaking of engine switching, @Booots, it would be even nicer if the optimal ascent calculation also let you pick the starting conditions, for planning the flight of spaceplanes after switching engines or engine modes.
Also, should the new axis settings work to calculate the flight envelope over a wider range of conditions? I'd really like to be able to plot spaceplane performance all the way up to the top of the atmosphere and orbital speed.
-
@allista Trying to install 2.3.1 from your spacedock link above, I notice that the AT_Utils it includes has a .version file identical to the github release of AT_Utils 1.6.3 from the github release, but other files differ. I install mods manually and try to check that any common dependencies are either identical or one mod includes a newer version, so this was pretty confusing.
I got Ground_Construction-2.3.1.zip (md5sum 902aa00ff18f7b373071c0ee424858be) from https://spacedock.info/mod/1123/Ground Construction/download/2.3.1
and AT_Utils-1.6.3.0.zip (md5sum bb0a52a56ef42998e6ea60b5e0b37ada) from https://github.com/allista/AT_Utils/releases/download/v1.6.3/AT_Utils-1.6.3.0.zip
diff says
Binary files gc2.3.1/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/000_AT_Utils.dll and at.1.6.3.0/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/000_AT_Utils.dll differ Binary files gc2.3.1/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/001_AnisotropicPartResizer.dll and at.1.6.3.0/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/001_AnisotropicPartResizer.dll differ Binary files gc2.3.1/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/002_MultiAnimators.dll and at.1.6.3.0/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/002_MultiAnimators.dll differ Binary files gc2.3.1/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/ConfigurableContainers.dll and at.1.6.3.0/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/ConfigurableContainers.dll differ Only in at.1.6.3.0/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins/PluginData/000_AT_Utils: config.xml Only in at.1.6.3.0/GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins: SubmodelResizer.dll Only in gc2.3.1/GameData/: GroundConstruction
The 000_AT_Utils.version files in particular are identical.
Spoiler{ "NAME":"000_AT_Utils", "URL":"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/allista/AT_Utils/master/GameData/000_AT_Utils/000_AT_Utils.version", "DOWNLOAD":"https://github.com/allista/AT_Utils/releases", "CHANGE_LOG_URL":"", "VERSION": { "MAJOR":1, "MINOR":6, "PATCH":3, "BUILD":0 }, "KSP_VERSION_MIN": { "MAJOR":1, "MINOR":7, "PATCH":0 }, "KSP_VERSION_MAX": { "MAJOR":1, "MINOR":7, "PATCH":0 } }Here are MD5 checksums of the DLLS in case that's of any use
Spoilermd5sum *.dll in GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins from AT_Utils-1.6.3.0.zip: 60f6993823a0df4c8ea83c9296cf54fc 000_AT_Utils.dll cd4d1e954e538bdd41eac90df103ed26 001_AnisotropicPartResizer.dll d15803cd341efa610e0e7de87c6d06ec 002_MultiAnimators.dll 489c73b8a311b2f8b823e8e49309a8d5 ConfigurableContainers.dll 913e7ee334608190c78058a824997280 SubmodelResizer.dll These files are all dated April 28, 13:06 md5sum *.dll in GameData/000_AT_Utils/Plugins from Ground_Construction-2.3.1.zip: 4ca36f72a2b0cafe0d039eaddd6f548c 000_AT_Utils.dll 8227837cf5b869b3f17027d3e3b2912d 001_AnisotropicPartResizer.dll 46f8d82a9b04125be54140c4004e3f77 002_MultiAnimators.dll d04b71fdf459b1a1820945a8e93b4f80 ConfigurableContainers.dll These files are all dated May 9, 18:45
With identical version numbers and the extra SubmodelResizer.dll I assumed the AT_Utils.1.6.3.0.zip was better, and have been playing with it with no problems so far.
-
On 10/11/2018 at 6:50 PM, goldenpsp said:
But IIRC the academy "trains" other Kerbals by passing along XP from things they had done, aside from flag planting. So in the case of a rescued Kerbal she is 5 star Kerbal but her XP history is blank. So it seems she would not have any XP items to "pass" along to the trainees.
If you peek in the save file there's one event giving all the XP (I thought it showed up in-game as "rescued at level 5"). I think the Akademy passes along the XP from an entire flight at once as long as the student is under level 3 (I don't remember anything about skipping flags). My plan for breaking the level limit with a bit more effort is get the teachers to level 5 on their first flight.
-
On 9/15/2018 at 7:24 PM, Baladain said:
I'm wondering if this is related to my issue, I have 2 industrial refineries. The first has 2 bays for metals, 1 bay chemical the second has 2 bays polymers, 1 bay chemicals.
Chemicals are producing at a much higher rate than metals or polymers, and minerals are being consumed at twice the rate of metallic ore or substrate.
No efficiency parts are involved.
Yeah, that's the same thing. Drills switched to ModuleSwappableConverterNew and should work fine, but with any other configurable part it will be a waste to have multiple bays on the same setting until this bug is fixed.
16 hours ago, RoverDude said:Yes... the USI Tools Repo
The 0.12.0.0 release from https://github.com/UmbraSpaceIndustries/UmbraSpaceIndustries has the bug with multiple converters. Multiple bays stopped helping on parts using ModuleSwappableConverter when commit 800d15d deleted the SetEfficiencyBonus("SwapBay",...) call along with ModuleSwapConverterUpdate.cs, and didn't move the calculation elsewhere.
-
On 9/12/2018 at 2:34 PM, El Tardos said:
Hello, I'm playing ksp 1.4.3 and I have encountered a strange thing while testing some MKS bases recently with only MKS installed. The MaterialKits production is becoming strange while a 3.75 assembly line or a 2.5 workshop is paired with a converter set to "Worshop".
When you have only one converter set to worshop everything is fine, it boosts correctly the MK production according to the maths but when I had another converter set to "Workshop" , it starts to become odd :
It's a bug. I have some earlier posts about it.
Basically, RoverDude had to rework the code for multiple converters to work with 1.4, and also added a second nicer way to define parts with multiple converters (but it doesn't work if bays can become efficiency parts or recyclers). Along the way the bit of code was lost that added a multiplier for number of running bays to parts in the old style.
(In the old style the part has a full converter module definition and the bay settings change which of those are running, and are supposed to add a multipler when multiple bays are on the same setting. So, KSP always sees like 8 converters or whatever, most of which are disabled. In the new style there are only as many converter modules as there are bays, and bay switching actually changes the recipe of the converter, so KSP only sees as many converters as there are bays).
-
22 hours ago, DStaal said:
Yep, and this can be gamed - if it would run out of EC during the night, you can avoid ever switching to it during the night and it will never run out of EC.
Cool, that's what I thought. For long transfers the worry would be "anti-gaming" it, if the ship has been on a nice sunny transfer orbit for months but happened to be in the shade when you switched to it for a capture burn.
23 hours ago, Loskene said:So is it safe to just let the timer run out then, my kerbals won't actually die if I don't check up on them for a long period of time?
I assume your "die" is accurate, but if so I'm curious how you like that difficulty setting. I went with the "Normal" career default of Kerbals just getting "grumpy" because I wanted to leave things easy for myself, but I think it has also made life support failures or poor planning more interesting, by leaving living tourists that need a rescue mission (maybe losing parts to "mutiny" would make things even more interesting).
-
12 hours ago, allista said:
Hmm... that's an interesting scenario, I haven't thought about it. When ships are docked (or otherwise changed with respect to their part content) the active TCA instance is re-elected as the simply the instance of the first part in vessel.Parts list that has TCA installed. This unfortunately means that not only you can "switch" from the more advanced instance to less advanced, but, because the configuration is synchronized among TCA instances of the same vessel, the former may become "reprogrammed" by the latter. What we need is 1) a proper election mechanism that selects the "best" TCA available and 2) a way to retain configuration between docking/undocking.
Hmm, I hadn't thought that much about the difficulties. Now that you mention it, both parts have further complications. "best" might not be clear if different parts were have different subsets of the TCA modules installed. "retain configurations" would be especially tricky if that could include settings for engines across the docking port from the TCA part, maybe a ship is leaving a station and never coming back, or maybe it's an apollo-style lander+command module with the only TCA part in the lander and lots of settings meant for the combined ship.
It's hardly a complete answer, but maybe it would make it easier for us players to understand if some settings respected the new stock mechanism for preserving vessel names across docking.
-
1 minute ago, Loskene said:
Ah, I see, thank you. So is it safe to just let the timer run out then, my kerbals won't actually die if I don't check up on them for a long period of time? Dropping out of timewarp and switching back and forth 30 times during a Duna transfer would do my head in lol
If a ship relies on solar panels, would we need to make sure to switch to it when it is in sun to avoid running out of EC? - In particular, if the Supply supply relies on greenhouses, what does it take to make sure they won't run out of EC during catch-up processing?
-
Is it possible to give a big ship more TCA modules in flight by launching a ship with more modules enabled and physically attaching it to the other ship by docking or with KAS? It didn't seem to work.
4 hours ago, allista said:It's enough for 2D, but is unstable in 3D without additional torque providers for other axis.
So to have a stable VTOL craft you need at least three engine parts to have two axis (pitch and roll) controlled by thrust differential.
Wouldn't it also work with two engines throttled to control pitch and enough reaction wheel torque to control roll? I've seen both axes controlled by thrust or both controlled by wheels, but I don't know if I've mixed it up like that.
-
On 8/29/2018 at 1:18 AM, Trigant said:
This helped! Now it's working ( I think ) But it seems to not being able to control the ship and keep it stable. When I press for example 100m in the upper left corner at alt(m), then it pushes the ship with 100% thrust rotating aorund its own axis in the ground. I am pretty sure, it's the pilot's fault not the modder's, but maybe you can help?
Here a screenshot
BTW if the GitHub version could've been the issue, you could've easliy prevented this with a little text like "Newest version only in SpaceDock" or something like that
What parts on there are even engines? I only see a downward pointing engine on the tail. TCA can't help if there's no way to adjust throttle to balance the engines. Show the TCA panel with the engine settings, in a VAB view with the thrust and CoM markers.
-
On 8/29/2018 at 9:58 PM, Requia said:
just not as fast as with three drills.
Letting multiple separators overheat is only like 25% faster than one separator at optimum temperature.
-
7 hours ago, sordidPhoenix said:
Quick random question. Is the distance from a part at which the "disassemble part" option appears on the right click menu, configurable?
There isn't an in-game setting or explicit settings file. I think adding an "EVARange" field to the USI_ModuleRecycleablePart will override the default instance. That menu option is added to all parts by the MM patch MKS/Patches/ScrapParts.cfg, you could edit that or have a second patch run later.
Without editing files, the only option for easier disassembly is to bring along the "Demolition Charge", which can destroy just the part it's attached to, or the whole vessel (can be added with KAS/KIS). Using the demolition charge should also give you a choice to "Recycle" the affected parts for MKTs in the same amount as the "disassemble part" option, or "Demolish" for a larger mass of Recyclables.
-
On 8/27/2018 at 8:17 PM, Victor3 said:
Making a biome scan of Kerbin now. Is there a way to make the "big map" auto-refresh?
I don't think so, just the manual refresh button.
[1.12.3] Kerbal Wind Tunnel 1.3.1.1
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
I'm not using FAR, so I would love an update of this whether or not it has FAR support.