The Flying Kerbal

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

282 Excellent

About The Flying Kerbal

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

2,048 profile views
  1. OK, after a great deal of fluffing about, fiddling and futtering, I finally got EVE to work. I changed over to AVP and am stunned by the results! Just a few more little things to sort out and the KSA will be back in business.
  2. Hi Heirloom and thanks for responding. My apologies for the slow response, I've been a bit busy since my last post. OK, so after fiddling around most of this evening, I finally managed to completely corrupt my install, Kerbin ending up completely white, so I give up uninstalled it, and went for a completely fresh game downloaded from Steam. So the GameData folder is completely stock. The only addons here are the two DLC's Making History and Breaking Ground. Here's a picture of my nice clean GameData folder: Mods I would like are EVE, together with other Mods needed to make it work, Kerbal Alarm Clock, Probes Before Crew, and KER, although I am aware Dv and so on have been added to the stock game now. I've actually installed mods in earlier versions of KSP, indeed I'm playing 1.2 simply because I do have EVE working perfectly in it, but in 1.7 I'm stuck. So any help or advice you can offer will be very much appreciated. Thanks.
  3. Hey Guys, OK... I'm stuck! Try as I might, I just can't figure out hot to get EVE to work with 1.7. I have it working fine on previous versions, but not the latest version of the game. I had thought it wasn't working with 1.7, but watching some videos on Youtube shows it working fine. So can anyone help me get my clouds back? Thanks everyone.
  4. Thanks very much for taking the time to provide such a detailed and helpful response BlackHat, I'll start acting on your suggestions this weekend. Sorry 'bout that Snark, me bad.
  5. Hey Guys, I'm wondering if there is, or ever has been, a mod that would allow players to run missions based on the early days of the American space program, only staying in the Kerbin system? I've seen videos recreating some of the projects the US ran in the late 40's and 50's in RO on Youtube, but I'm not really interested in RO (that's code for I'm not a good enough player to use RO), but I'd be really interested in being able to run Kerballised experimental flights and missions similar to the X-Planes, etc. Any information will be very much appreciated.
  6. IMHO Scott Manley wins hands down. While I don't pretend to be any good at the game, what little I can do is all because of Scott's videos. I've watched a few of Matt Lowne's videos, but to be honest, there's something about his style I find wearisome, indeed the only one he did which I really enjoyed was when he give his girlfriend a go at playing the game. I do understand Scott has other commitments these days, but his videos have now got rather dated. Wouldn't it be great if he should ever decide to redo them with an updated version of KSP? One guy I highly recommend on YT is ShadowZone, some of the things that guy cobbles together and missions he pulls off are truly amazing!
  7. Oh NASA does refer to the Apollo 11 landing site quite regularly, for example here: You know guys, it isn't actually the end of the world, certainly not in the same league as another poster who has to live with the fact that Squad is busy sorting out a bug causing exploding flagpoles while he still can't use his joystick because of another bug deemed to be of low priority. To me that's inexcusable, Squad really should know better. No, my little wish is something I would like to see in the game personally. It doesn't in any way detract from the game, it's would just be nice to be able to call a descent stage sitting on another celestial body something a little more meaningful than "Debris". As someone else suggested, maybe a few Custom Icons similar to Custom Action Groups would be possible? Anyway, I've a Kerballed vessel due in from Minmus shortly so I'd better be pop round to the KSC and make sure it lands safely!
  8. Yes I do reslise you can change the name and type of vessel in the tracking station, but to what? It isn't a base or a probe, it's not a space station... really none of the available options are suitable IMHO. Just a little icon added to the options offered saying "Landing Site" would make for a very happy Flying Kerbal. It's like I said in my OP, have you ever heard NASA refer to the descent stage of Eagle as debris?
  9. One little addition I would like to see added to KSP is a new icon for "Landing Site". You land on a moon or planet for the first time with your two stage lander, make all the historical quotes and so on, get back home and discover the latest most historic place on all Kerbal history, is called "Debris". Imagine NASA calling the Apollo 11 landing site, debris?
  10. If I'm reading this right, the fuel lines will do what you want but you don't want to use them for aesthetic reasons? If so then I can fully understand why, that's one classy looking little vessel you've got yourself there! If it was me, I would seriously consider using the radial chutes, but would you be willing to place fuel lines as close to the docking port as possible, making them much less unobtrusive? Just an off-the-cuff-thought that came into my head and I'm sure other people will come up with a much more elegant solution than that. Again full kudos for designing such a flashy spacecraft, I really like it.
  11. Thanks so much for going to all the trouble of putting together a rocket to demonstrate how to do this. Believe it or not, but when I woke this morning, your Option 1 sprung into my head for some reason. So just in case I forgot it while at work, I powered up the computer. So there I was at 6am in the morning, playing KSP instead of preparing to go to work. I might need some professional help maybe..? Anyway, here is what my early morning efforts came up with: You used decouplers in your example, but wanting to limit the use of non RSR parts as much as possible, I was forced to use stack separators as decouplers aren't part of the RSR mod. Option 3 looks really cool, but again there are no sepatrons in the RSR package. However I definitely want to try that in a regular save. I don't quite understand Option 2. You have a stack decoupler between the nose cone and the tank, so the tank falls away when you stage. But what happens the nose cone? Does it stay with the rocket? I do realise I'm being stupid here, but it's now 3.40am and I'm knackered so expect I'm missing something obvious. Anyway, again thanks so very much for going to all that effort.
  12. Hey Guys! I haven't been posting is some time, but I haven't gone away, you don't escape that easily! I have a question which I hope some of you will be able to help me with. I've heard a few Youtubers comment that there's a way to jury rig radial decouplers if the genuine ones haven't already been unlocked in the tech tree. Well I'm playing a career game at the moment using Rusty Star Rockets (in 1.2), and part of the limits are to use only RSR parts unless there is absolutely no option, ie the part required has never been given the RSR treatment. Unfortunately radial decouplers falls within that category. So I've been trying to figure out how these guys on YT can decouple side boosters, I've never actually seen them do it, indeed one lad says there are ways but "that's another issue". Normally I can come up with some ideas to try, even if they don't work when put to the test, but this time I can't even begin to think how to do this. So this is where you come in... can you help RSR beat the KSA to be the first space agency to land a Kerbal on the mun? Any help or tips would be very much appreciated. Thanks everyone!
  13. Yes I did play around with the new functions, but no joy unfortunately...
  14. Hey Guys! I haven't been playing KSP very much, but last weekend I got the urge to give this 1.6 a go. I added Kerbal Alarm Clock and Probes Before Crew (a great mod BTW), and started a career. I've read all the things that's good about 1.6, and yes I do agree it's a big improvement with the new readouts and the much more accurate burn times, etc. But unfortunately I must say how bitterly disappointed I am that we still have landers bouncing about on the Mun when I switch to them from the Tracking Station. Here, say hello to Skippy: This is a simple little lander I cobbled together and sent to the Mun to fulfil a contract to return or transmit science from the surface. Everything went without any drama, the science was returned and I got my reward for completing the contract. However when I later tried to switch back to this lander, it immediately jumped several meters above the surface, and promptly fell back down to land on its side. When I first started playing KSP a very few weeks after 1.2 was released, this was an issue even then, yet here we are, now in 2019 and the developers have yet to resolve what is a danged annoying bug. I realise they are hammering out new version at a very fast rate, and 1.6 is a big improvement on what has gone before, but surely they could set aside some time to iron out bugs as old as this one which really is most frustrating? It's seldom I rant about much on the internet, but to see a bug as ancient as this one still present in the game is very disappointing and disheartening.