AngrybobH

Members
  • Content Count

    244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

319 Excellent

1 Follower

About AngrybobH

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I wonder how your engine would handle diesel fuel. Of course it is much harder to atomize so probably would require a different engine entirely. Just a thought though.
  2. So, uh, this is a bit surprising. But, yeah, I'll take a ride on the train.
  3. Looks fantastic. I can't wait until this releases AND all the mods I use get updated.
  4. This is similar to something I have wondered about for some time. Why can't you boost a rocket engine with a magnetic field? Turns out rocket exhaust isn't that ionized. But, how could you increase that? would there be a benefit? What if you already had the power to run the field in your payload? I am nearly completely out of my element answering any of those questions.
  5. No supersonic speed for me. I took a break from launching mission pre-supply rockets to take in the sunset in with an easy flying airplane.
  6. Is there a reason for the Kopernicus spam like in this pic. those numbers started small at about 100m off the surface and the frequency they get posted also started small. Then the numbers get bigger, frequency gets faster, and on and on. At the point of this screenshot, the ship was uncontrollable(i.e. cannot rotate or translate in any direction) and shutting off the engine gave constant accel. Looked at the console first and saw this. replicated several times. I have 67 mods installed, so sure, it could be one of them but, this is the only clue I have so far.
  7. Try looking in the Kopernicus discussion within the last 4 or so pages(pretty much all about slow downs with Kopernicus). If you are using rescale of any kind it might be something else they were discussion. I don't rescale so I didn't pay attention to that.
  8. @Kopernicus:AFTER[Kopernicus] { @Body:HAS[@PQS,!Ocean] { %Ocean { maxQuadLengthsPerFrame = 0.03 } } } Copy and paste that into a notepad (or whatever you use for .txt files). save it as whatereveryouwant.cfg. make a folder in your game data folder for temporary fixes and drop it in there. You will have to delete it once a permanent fix is released for Kopernicus.
  9. I was having an issue that I thought was OPM. I had low FPS while landed on Duna and the Mun but not other bodies in a mostly stock install (stock scale, tested all bodies). I tried the add oceans patch and it fixed everything so well I have higher framerate than without Kopernicus/OPM now(~60FPS no mod, 7FPS OPM, 68FPS OPM and ocean fix). The discussion for the last couple of pages seemed to be about rescaled systems(and ROCs). I just wanted it to be known for sure that the oceans fix probably needs to be stuffed into the mod even with stock scales.
  10. I'm having an issue with OPM. I getting extremely low FPS on the Mun and Duna with OPM installed. I deleted all mods and installed MM, Mechjeb, KER, and KJRn. With a 34 part ship, Mun orbit 90 FPS, near surface 88 FPS, landed 63 FPS. Then loaded EVE and SVE with high res textures. Same ship, 93 FPS, 87 FPS, 58 FPS. Then loaded OPM and dependencies + custom barn kit. Same ship, 92 FPS, 23 FPS, 7 FPS. I removed just OPM(left Kopernicus, custom barn kit, and CTTP installed). Same ship, 92 FPS, 86 FPS, 46 FPS. I can duplicate this issue on Duna as well but, Kerbin and Minmus are unaffected. I have tested no other bodies. All mods were loaded/unloaded with CKAN Is there something I can tinker with or try? EDIT: I found my problem. It is with Kopernicus. Apparently, some of the places(like the Mun) don't have oceans defined and Kopernicus gets all weird without that definition. There is a super simple script in the Kopernicus thread that fixes this and brought the landed FPS on the Mun up to 68 FPS.
  11. Except batteries are awful for the environment. As far as batteries go, our technology is terrible at storing power. And, we really need batteries for solar to work really well. We would be swapping our air pollution for ground pollution and probably more air pollution. Electric cars are a good example here. The carbon footprint of making the batteries for electric cars and recharging them is greater than the footprint of a similar sized gasoline powered car in normal operation for ~10 years. And how many batteries will an electric car need in 10 years? 3 probably. And, that only considers the carbon footprint. What about the mining waste from getting lithium? On the subject of 'hyperfisssion', I really think we have taken fission about as far as is possible. Maybe one day with some super alloy or something that can contain nuclear bomb levels of energy continuously, we could get MOAR fission in a single reactor, but probably at the same efficiency we get now.
  12. I finally got time to play with the new props. I built an ok helicopter that is almost stable. Then I tried a basic prop plane that turned out to be the most fun I have had in KSP in some time. It's a little tricky to take off and land but it looks and flies like an RC plane I once had. Airspeed is ~80m/s max.
  13. I am entirely unsure of what KSPs' future actually is because I don't have Squads' metrics. It seems to me the game is doing pretty good in terms of people playing and, more importantly, buying the DLCs. I do wonder how much more content they could make for future DLCs. I do know I will probably buy future content. This game is cheap in $/hr of entertainment. For the future I would like to see some improvements in performance, career mode, and graphics. Sure there are mods for graphics but they can reduce performance. Maybe there is an optimization that can be made somewhere modders cannot access. DX11 support maybe? Performance is a big issue for me because I like to build extremely large stations. I am not sure what could even be done to improve that. I have heard that rigid body physics calcs are hard/impossible to multithread. Maybe there is a way for the game to cheat a bit to improve speed. I've already done what I can on my end by putting together a rather strong computer. Career mode is something I would like to see totally revamped. Contracts need some form of personalization. They need to give a better sense of accomplishment. The funding system is mostly bad. I would like to see something along the lines of a budget. You get x funds allotted and have to pay active and training crew, part development, constuction, and operating cost along with being given directives of things to achieve and a time limit on them. If the budget allows then secondary objectives can be tried. What if you got restricted to a selection of boosters until you developed other ones? I think constraints can actually increase the fun. I actually wouldn't mind any kind of change to career mode as long as it changes.
  14. @Cavscout74 That is exactly the same way I did my last career run. I liked it ok but career mode started to bother me. I'm only doing science saves from now on until career mode gets some love.