Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1,005 Excellent


Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Sorry to see that no-one has recognized the problem yet. Telling us the version of KSP and operating system (Linux, MacOS, etc) might help someone here recognize it. There is a text file "KSP.log" written in the directory where KSP.exe is, and that file might show an error message at the end that. The bug-reporting guide has instructions on where to find another copy of that log file, that sometimes has a few more lines in it : https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/83213-stock-support-bug-reporting-guide/
  2. The settings screen does show an apostrophe, with the default settings for an English-language keyboard, but that is a lie. The default key to reset the focus in map mode, is actually ` back quote at the upper left of the keyboard.
  3. There is a suspicious, and very difficult-to-parse, entry in the changelog: * Fix Ap and Pe markers appearing in future patches in space not aligned to current patch rendering when in career games that have yet to have patched conics available. I remember that I depended on switching to map view to see the apoapsis, in order to learn how to get into orbit in KSP. Just to let the OP know, many players here recommend that new players start in "Sandbox" "Science" mode. "Career" mode makes the early game difficult -- and difficult in a not-fun way, when you are still learning the game.
  4. That makes sense to me. The flats could easily be salt flats, left behind from an evaporated ocean. Maybe instead of sodium chloride, the 'salt' could be menthol to fit with some of the EVA reports referencing mint ice cream (or some in-game text; I cannot remember exactly where mint ice-cream was mentioned). There are a few reasonable possibilities, though. The people developing the follow-on game, KSP2, talked about Minmus having been hotter, and the flats being molten and then solidified rock. We talked about the possibilities here (thread link) The one thing that doesn't seem to make sense is simple water ice in the flats, because water-ice evaporates, and Minmus' gravity is to weak to trap the evaporated vapour, so ice flats would not last very long.
  5. Between version 1.8.0 and 1.8.1, KSP stopped protecting separate craft in fairings and cargo bays. Kerbals seated in a command seat inside a cargo bay are protected (as seated Kerbals are not independent craft) and that can be a lightweight solution, if your challenge allows command seats.
  6. KSP1 has the capability for option 3 in the top post, thrust profiles. No stock SRBs use them, but players have written configuration files to do so (link link). The interact in the simplest possible way with the fuel-fraction and thrust-limiter sliders in KSP1. The thrust-limiter reduces thrust by the requested fraction across the whole burn. The fuel-fraction acts as if the booster was loaded with fuel in the same pattern as it has when fuel has burned to that level. The interface is a bit awkward because it works in terms of fuel remaining, so you type the curve in reverse order. I like this profile, similar to picture '3' in the top post, for limiting the g-forces late in the booster phase: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngine*]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[SolidFuel]]] { @MODULE[ModuleEngine*] { %useThrustCurve = true %flameoutBar = 0 %thrustCurve { key = 0.00 0.4 0.0 1.2 key = 0.60 1.0 0.0 0.0 key = 0.98 1.0 0.0 0.0 key = 1.00 0.5 -40 0.0 } } }
  7. RemoteTech (with the delay option enabled) implements signal delay between probes and KSC or the nearest manned "Command Station". RemoteTech does allow the player to control Kerbals in the Command Station or elsewhere, as if by instant telepathic communication. If KSP2 has probes automatically execute maneuver nodes, maybe that could enable signal delay to work with a reasonably simple user interface. We could set/cancel maneuver nodes only a signal-delay or further in the probe's future. But then probes could only land by parachute/aero/lithobraking unless there is a system for programming them. Has anyone used KSP1 RemoteTech's signal-delay option, or seen posts from players who have explained how they get things done using it?
  8. There is a natural place in that gap that KSP2 might have chosen: let the planets and moons feel gravity of the single parent body only, in Kepler orbits 'on rails', but let our craft feel gravity of all nearby(*) celestial bodies. That would seem to let players do the interesting things, like park craft near Lagrange points and play with tidal forces on orbits, without any worries about the orbits of planets being unstable. (*)I suspect the criteria for 'nearby' might be rather strict, maybe only Rask and Rusk, so that satellites in low-Kerbin orbit are not perturbed by the gravity of Mun. Or maybe not. It is not obvious to me whether very weak effects of far away celestial bodies would be interesting or just frustrating.
  9. by default, the Δv indicators in the VAB show the results you would get in atmosphere. The nuclear engine does not work very well in atmosphere. You can press the Δv button and select 'vacuum'.
  10. I was also unable to get that aircraft to take off. Before taking off, an aircraft needs to rotate the nose up a few degrees (unless it already is raised by the landing gear) but the I couldn't do that with the elevators trimmed (alt-X) fully pitch-up. There just isn't enough lever arm to the main landing gear for the elevators lever up the mass of the craft. At 100 m/s (223.604 miles per hour) the wheels start to shimmy. If I move the landing gear forward, closer to the centre of mass, then I have enough lever arm (barely). So probably try more of these adjustments, going further than I did. Sometimes it is nice to rotating the wings up a little (giving them angle of incidence) or rotate the rear stabilisers down, until the centre of lift is right above the centre of mass. CoL behind CoM is good advice for beginners, to make the aircraft stable, but once you know it is stable you can adjust to make it easier to fly. and also real aircraft (wheel-barrowing) .
  11. and you do not need to do that rescue right away. The game KSP made Kerbals perfectly happy to sit in space for long periods of time, so you can + rendezvous to get the 'Science' and leave the Kerbal there, or + repeat the mission with another Kerbal, repairing any mistakes so it succeeds, using quick-saves to re-try as many times as you like, + do different missions to build up Science, until you can build a bigger craft to bring that Kerbal home.
  12. True. Turning the rocket about 45° from vertical on the way up is the only way to survive this tutorial. When you build a rocket in the VAB you have the option to reduce the thrust on a booster, so it burns slower (but usually you want them at full thrust or just use a smaller one). In the tutorial where they built it for you, you do not have that choice. A few other tutorials have bad instructions. I made a list here that I think has all the problems; at leas no-one has corrected me yet
  13. KSP1 provided some helpful options, for people using regular computers, as opposed to gaming PCs. I hope KSP2 does similarly. I use a laptop that I bought in 2016, which is the only time I ever bought any more than the integrated graphics : CPU i7-6500U at 2.5 GHz GPU AMD R7 M360, 2 GB memory and with this I turn most graphics settings down, but keep shadows to help in landings, and use Environmental Visual Enhancements with a simple configuration file to give me clouds to help with situational awareness. This laptop performs better with KSP 1.10 than it did with 1.0, maybe due to streamlining in KSP or maybe in Unity. (For example, KSP 1.0 would often miss key-up events, so if I pressed the key to rotate the view it would oven continue rotating after I released the key. I learned to make extra keypresses as a workaround.) One setting useful to people with slower GPUs and faster CPUs is: Maximum physics delta-time per frame: 0.1 second of Kerbal-time (default is 0.04) It is explained at length here, but I think of it the other way around, 10 fps rather than 0.1 s: "let the GPU go as slow aa 10fps without making the CPU and physics simulation wait on the GPU." My frame-rate drops when the ocean is in view (which doesn't bother me much) but with the default setting, the physics simulation slows (indicated by the yellow clock) which bothers me more. Allowing more time to pass between display-frames keeps the physics smooth even when my GPU struggles. It is also nice to have the option to reduce the resolution in KSP. I use 1900×1080 for work, when I'm slowly poring over details, but don't need that to play a game, so I use 1600×900 for KSP. (Unfortunately, either KSP or Unity or Windows10 intermittently resets the resolution to whatever Windows10 uses, so I try to remember to change the resolution in Windows before starting KSP.)
  14. Don't ask me; I looked for an explanation but couldn't find any. Since I get reasonable behaviour in 1.11.1 with a similar pod, maybe there is something special about yours that you can find,. Maybe one of FleshJeb's ideas above leads you to the cause. The shield might be offset up so that the pod peeks through (KSP gives you some margin here). Maybe you attached it inverted, and then rotated it, fooling simple KSP into thinking the pod is connected to the ablator side. Maybe your later trajectory spends much longer in the upper atmosphere than I was able to do. The Kerbalism mod has considered requiring a 0°-40° (270K--320K or so) for manned pod interiors, which would be difficult to maintain during re-entry, but I don't think they ever added this to the mod. Maybe some mod (like my old mod that I linked above) has made the pod overhang the heat shield slightly.
  15. The answer to the top-post question is, no, they did not change re-entry heat, anytime since 1.2. At least not on purpose. There was a bug in 1.8.0, for example, where lots of parts lost most of their drag, so different parts would overheat than before; they repaired that in 1.8.1. The images in the top post show the stock cabinet icon, but not the alarm clock, so I guess those images are from version 1.11. For me, in stock KSP, the heat shield barely survives a 7km/s re-entry of the 3-kerbal pod. I don't use ablator because it doesn't help much; the T4 radiative cooling of a 3300K heatshield (hotter than incandescent light bulbs) is enough to cool it. If you stay perfectly retrograde, the capsule is completely protected. A small imbalance that tilts the craft would let a bit of the capsule feel compression heating, and in KSP if part of the skin overheats the whole part gets the warning thermometer and is destroyed. The skin of the pod has a 2400K temperature limit. I posted a patch once to make the mk1-3 pod fit the other 1.25-m parts at its top node, and this patch causes some of the pod extend beyond the heat shield, and feel some heating. Maybe some other mod does similarly.
  • Create New...