Jump to content

AVaughan

Members
  • Content Count

    522
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

335 Excellent

1 Follower

About AVaughan

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Around 3-4 months ago there was a similar repeatable KSP crash or freeze reported on the RO discord during someone's Moon landing. From memory that was traced to KER's landing prediction. Disabling that allowed the de-orbit and landing burns to proceed. Edit: Found the conversation. It wasn't the Moon, it was Vesta. https://discord.com/channels/319857228905447436/331813459417235457/822357256292794388
  2. Why mention megaton? Starship would enable 100+ tons of conventional explosives. (Or cluster bombing using 100 tons of conventional bombs). Even a tanker version of Starship is potentially 100+ tons of fuel air bomb. (Although it probably wouldn't get good dispersion for an effective fuel air explosion).
  3. From memory of the news reports I saw months ago, the story with the 737 crashes from the last few years was that Boeing told the FAA that they had taken certain precautions to ensure that single angle of attack sensors wouldn't cause problems even if the sensors failed, and the FAA took Boeing at its word. However during the investigation into those crashes FAA discovered that Boeing hadn't taken done that. Hence the fuss about the FAA under-regulating the industry. (Note that is from memory of news reports, so I've probably got some details wrong, but hopefully the gist is right). N
  4. @Koram94 Are scrubbers and fuel cells actually researched and bought in R & D? You might get a better/faster response in the kerbalism channel of the RO discord https://discord.gg/hbPcKDbUgm .
  5. @Koram94 Which configs do you have installed? For RO you should have the ROKerbalism configs installed. (Also note the latest version of Kerbalism version now depends on HarmonyKSP https://github.com/KSPModdingLibs/HarmonyKSP ).
  6. Well the fix for those experiencing what looks like the same issue on 1.8.1 was rolling back to an earlier version (it was described as an august version, so I'm guessing one of the 0.06xx versions, but that was for 1.8.1. No idea what version you need for 1.11.1. (RO/RP-1 are only officially supported on 1.8.1 atm. You might get better/faster support on the RO discord https://discord.gg/BCTBzyJqP3 ).
  7. Are you clicking "Fill" or "Add"? "Fill" will automatically select the first kerbal, whilst "Add" will let you select the kerbal.
  8. Those images look similar to what people using 1.8.1 report when they have the wrong version of scatterer. For 1.8.1 I think someone said it should be the august release of scatterer. No idea what the right version would be for 1.11.1. (I don't use scatterer).
  9. I have played with a i7-860 desktop with HD 5770 graphics (so both 10+ years old) with 12 GB of ram. I have seen other people who get RO to load on systems with 8GB of ram, but with very long load times, probably caused by windows paging.
  10. Real fuels and procedural parts should work together. Proc parts will let you configure tank diameter + length in the VAB/SPH
  11. From memory, Mechjeb -> settings, toggle 'module disabling does not kill throttle'. If I recall correctly, after you have enabled that, disabling ascent manager will leave the throttle in whatever state it was before you engaged the autopilot. So make sure you throttle up before launch (or set ksp to always throttle to 100%). There are also some settings in utilities you might want to toggle. (Prevent unstable ignition, rcs to ullage). Also you probably want to be using mechjeb PVG, and might also want the mechjeb dev version.
  12. I've never seen it myself, but it has been reported occasionally for years in RO/RP-1 threads (and I think I've also seen reports in other planet pack threads). From memory the normal suggested workarounds are things like entering the tracking station, or doing a save/load cycle.
  13. I think an 1.11.2 is unlikely. 1.12.0 is due is roughly 7-8 weeks, so I doubt they will do a 1.11.2. Indeed at the time they announced the quarterly updates they were hoping that with the new process they would be able to reduce the number of updates below 6 per year. See https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/178756-ksp-weekly-the-moon-race/&do=findComment&comment=3463071 . My personal opinion is that the only way we will get new updates without new bugs is if they switch to an open beta style of release. They apparently don't have enough automated test c
  14. A week or two ago I read something on social media (not sure where, maybe in this thread), that suggested that SpaceX had loaded more fuel in SN8 than they were authorised to. Maybe that is what the FAA was upset about. Personally I'm worried about the downcomers and header tanks. Especially that long downcomer from the nose. Fluid mechanics is complicated. With a fluid that is already close to its boiling point, it might only take a small (potentially localised) pressure drop to cause some of that fluid to potentially boil and create gas bubbles. Turbulent flow in the do
  15. Everyone on a boat, and go watch the launch from 5 miles away. (Or whatever distance is considered safe). That will do for the initial testing phase. Long term they probably want a better solution, but for Superheavy's initial test phase, 1 hour or so to evacuate everyone is simpler than trying to design something that would allow the crew on the rig to survive a worst case launch failure.
×
×
  • Create New...