Jump to content

Thatguywholikesionengines

Members
  • Posts

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Thatguywholikesionengines

  1. Screenshot tax, featuring BDB (plus a few Tantares) parts, Tweakscale, and my friend Techo/Mrpasta44's stock planet revamp.

    bQTHeqF.pngtNnINtY.pngriOnkju.png

    That upper stage has its own probe core, and is decked out with science gear, having gone from a planned flyby to an elliptical orbit - The Surveyor-with-a-fat-antenna on top separated and successfully landed on the very rocky/icy ringed world. Love the Surveyor parts, the overpowered-but-non-tracking Agena solar panels, and how well everything TweakScales. :D

  2. There's no non-SAF version of the 3.125 -> 3.5m fairing base for Herakles/LDC. Love that fairing base and the included fairings, but some designs just need more complexity there. The Atlas V 5XX 2.5m to 3.5m adapter's fairing works just fine, so it's not a diameter issue. Hoping a customizable/non-SAF version of the big LDC fairing base gets added soon. :D

     

    https://imgur.com/a/rkToNDC

  3. 36 minutes ago, Mrpasta44 said:

    Kerbol has been shrunk down to a more reasonable size yes

    Better Kerbol is next on the chopping block for my install once this comes out! I've been exploring with this revamp, and it's given me a whole new love for the stock system.

  4. On 7/26/2023 at 9:31 AM, ExMachina said:

    Hey! I don't know if it's a bug, but when I am on the standard fly-by-wire mode and I fire missiles from BDA, the plane nose dives quite violently and I cannot regain control nor input control. But when I turn off the autopilot and go back to SAS, the plane flies fine. Any idea why this happens and how could I resolve it? Thanks!

    Weird nose dives can happen when the 'Moderation' feature of the fly-by-wire gets a bit confused. Try turning it off while firing missiles, if you have it on!

  5. Does Snacks always use a flat 6-hour day? It's a bit difficult to schedule for trips in a rescaled stock system, as I don't know whether the mod follows the clock (which still sits at 6 hours a day, 425 days, inducing a lot of jet lag for my poor kerbals) or the rotation of Kerbin. Also, the duration calculator gets stuck at 1 year, 209 days, and doesn't pass that. Would setting it to use days (whether they be 6 hours or kerbin's rotation) help that?

  6. On 6/23/2023 at 4:43 AM, benjee10 said:

    You are the first person to have been caught by this so I haven't really considered it an issue until now. I can put a warning in the part description for the type II port that it cannot self-dock. It would certainly be more elegant if the ports were able to dock with each other, but there are a limited number of ways to do this given the constraints of the game and the intended use case - believe me when I say I looked into a lot of different options and the current one seemed to be the least problematic.

    That'd be a nice way of addressing it! It would be a non-issue, and indeed have never come up, if I wasn't so looks-oriented for ports that end up getting covered nearly instantly. XP (The ports work just swell once I got the types right, too!)

  7. image.png

     

    CBM's not docking. Both are active type II, for looks. Extending the cover petals doesn't help, nor does changing rotation. For a 1.0 release, this feels silly - It's a common berthing mechanism, not a probe-drogue! Make 'em look realistic, but keep gameplay (and dumb players like me :P) in mind. It'd be nice to be able to remove the petals/fins in-flight, or have passive/active types being part variants, et cetera. At the very least, document this sort of thing! Haven't seen a single mention of this on the whole forum, or in the github/readme.

  8. Havin' a bug - I'm using a docking port attached to a robotic piece on an SSTO for space reasons. I leave it extended while i go do other things with other craft for clearance issues. I come back, undock, and try to retract the robotic bit - But it's reset to zero extension. Extending the robotic piece just makes it stick out unnaturally far. It's like it got offset in the VAB. Dunno if screenshots would be needed (i object-throwered the offending parts already) but I can provide more info. The attachment order is - dockingport | structural panel (caps off the truss piece) | truss piece | robotic extendy/retracty hydraulic piston.

  9. 4 hours ago, Jacke said:

    I think the previous poster is confusing the desire with rocket engines with heated high-temperature exhaust to have the lightest average atomic particle mass.  @mikegarrison, you are quite right that engines with electro-magnetic acceleration of the fuel want the highest average atomic particle mass.

    The magnetoplasmadynamic lithium-powered engines + the VASIMRs were what I meant to mention - My bad. I've got a custom config working anyway that seems to do the trick!

×
×
  • Create New...