Jump to content

kellven

Members
  • Content Count

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About kellven

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Really don't desire more argument today, but they're absolutely right, using QoL as a game balance tool is just plain the wrong answer. Always. I've always thought the whole research implementation was gimmicky, clunky, and just didn't belong with the rest of the game, but nobody asked me. It served well enough as an early placeholder for a system to get players to go places with an in-game incentive, but at the time, I assumed it would be replaced with something more...organic to the game systems. Instead it seems to have simply stuck around so long it's now canonical.
  2. I just have steam set to only update ksp on launch, and never launch through steam directly, so it stays on 1.5. The particular way squad went about obfuscating code and locking down their content was truly unfortunate. I'm sure it made sense to them back in the early panic about pirate distribution, but it also made it all but impossible to create a real, effective mod api that would avoid constantly breaking mods. Btw, I was gently prodding at getting some kind of very basic, stipped down version of MKS into stock, not just welding on the whole mod array as is. I m
  3. I completely understand we're still well into the part of the year where work is unofficially over, so kudos to RoverDude for still being active here. Whenever the new work year starts, perhaps a cleanup of the version numbers & individual mods would be appreciated by your adoring public. Personally, I just never liked firespitter, and not really sure what parts of constellation are safe to excise in what groups. I guess you got hired by Squad, or whatever they're calling themselves these days, so congrats. Probably been asked already, but is there anything in the works to fold M
  4. Way way back, I had an inline rcs "slice" part that was just indispensable. Not only did you give us an updated, prettyfied version, it looks like yours can actually affect roll, something mine never could. I see a lot of old ideas cycle back around, but almost never an actual functional improvement. My hat is off to you.
  5. A little late, but Destroyer's shuttle made me nostalgic for the good old days of crazy flying contraptions before I begged C7 to give us that landing gear just before he joined Squad. Kind of wonder what KSP would look like now if he hadn't, as it's basically the same part now. Jumping the tower was an art in itself, but we used to launch all aircraft vertical, should be much easier now. Landing was done on skids or the struts, don't know how the current physics joints would handle it though.
  6. Apologies in advance for any ranting, simply thinking of Squad-code induces compulsive rage. Q: -Does anyone know how gravity is handled in code now? -From what I remember, it was handled (back in 2012) in some hidden method of the ancient Part class, and all the gravity modifying mods had to recompute the gravity of every single part, and apply a second force with opposite vector, doubling the instructions just to get back to base, this was beyond stupid. I also remember that when PartModule came out, Squad just dragged along nearly all the ancient code, and stuck it in a new package. From wh
  7. A long time ago in a galaxy far far away... http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/12743-KIS-Kerbal-Mart-IMOP-0-13-0-17-2Oct12 Consider everything under the WTFPL Total Irresponsibility No Liability License re G Sillius Maximus. Remembered I also planned at the time to make "The Gap", but couldn't get transparency to work properly for the physical gap back then. Just wanted to pass along some ideas.
  8. Feel free to ignore this unless you want to code aerofoil physics. Ok, so obviously nobody gave a $#!^, so I didn't either, and dropped the thing. And decided to kill my KSP modding habit for good. But I mod things because I want to, and this gave me an itch that needed scratching, so... I spent a couple hours dusting off C# and came up with https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/74137297/AtmoData.cs which is an interface/default-implementation/static-factory for encapsulating the atmospheric data one would need to have to compute aerofoil thrust, or at least the start of all that. No idea if it
  9. Would really really like a wedge mystery goohickey, the pill is just so incredibly awkward. I'd like a science jr wedgie also, but know someone will veto that. I realize I could do it myself in 2 minutes with notepad, but I'm religious about not modding these days. Great stuff with the rest of the parts I've tried so far.
  10. mindstalker & qfeys: What mindstalker is talking about is VECTORED thrust, not parallel axis thrust. It's a terribly old bug in the engine code that nobody at Squad ever bothered to look at. I was complaining about it back in 2012, but soon realized it was a lost cause, and assumed had been fixed when they fixed the screwball PID controller settings. I really wouldn't bother trying to get a fix in now, Squad just doesn't do that kind of stuff. If I remember right, the idiot code was hardwired into the old engine "Part" code, and apparently just got copypasted into the PartModule scheme. Un
  11. The Hummer dealer. Either that, or where you left your keys. Sorry, I had to.
  12. There's a whole bunch of problems here. 1. Rotors are heavy. 2. Rotors with high inertia are the ones that autorotate well. They have weights added to the rotors specifically for that purpose. 3. Heavy is bad ultimate evil for spaceships. 4. Go to orbit without chutes, deorbit, pay attention to your airspeed at altitudes. Preferably write it down, especially when you hit about 250m/s. See how many more seconds it takes for you to impact, and write that down. 5. Why 250 m/s? 0.8 mach asl is the absolute maximum you're going to sustain with a rotating aerofoil design without going into transonic
  13. No. For the simple reason that it's just a bunch of meaningless scribbles on a piece of dead tree. The idea of space, or the international oceans being a shared resource is just a way of saying nobody with enough guns and peasants to do anything about it actually cares enough about it to enforce a claim on it. If that ever changes, whomever decides it is worth the effort to claim it will do so; a silly piece of paper and a bunch of political posturing isn't going to stop anyone if they think there's a profit to be made in the end. And no, nobody's going to put nukes on mars, or the moon, or an
  14. Sorry, didn't make it clear, the broadswords were SABRE engines, the game just couldn't handle curved colliders, and I wasn't about to model them, so they became straight. Ok, tried working the fuel thing again, but found another problem, can continue it over here where it belongs. On topic, had an idea which really appealed to me. Since taniwha apparently understands how to muck around with terrain editing and static planetary objects; how many people would give their left arm to see these again? <insert darkness joke here> It's probably obvious where I'm going with this. Instead of ju
  15. Well, I was trying to work out the fuel numbers again with 0.35 1/2 parts, but it seems someone last year figured out resource densities only make sense using 5L volume units. That is a huge problem when we figured out back in 2012 Isp only make sense if the volume units are liters, which you might just shrug off, until you realize the engine code doesn't have any concept of fuel consumption anymore, it works backward from an Isp and thrust value. Anyone want to try working the math again, and post what they come up with today? Anyone care to take a stab at what fuel the math resembles now? Th
×
×
  • Create New...