Jump to content

Fulgora

Members
  • Posts

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fulgora

  1. It's dead simple: 1. Get a Mun encounter while you are still in the athmosphere on jet power 2. Achieve orbit by gravity assist 3. Figure out how to deorbit w/o orbital maneuvers I don't buy the Juno jet story either though Edit: This would actually be a fun challenge but it's impossible with stock engines...
  2. The similar colors in the upload bar and forum icon are coincidental - I just removed the color channels from the second one in order to make the 3rd I could of course adjust that it if the difference matters. Personal favorites are #2 and maybe #3, my beef with #3 is that next to the youtube icon it looks a bit insignificant... Here is a final(?) adjustment - 'Forum profile' is about 30% larger now for better readability. The 3rd one has matched colors with the upload bar. Due to the slight gradients it is only a rough match but I doubt many people will use a color picker tool and complain
  3. I don't see much of an issue: Not sure what you use to resize but interpolation isn't strong with your tool I admit the one with the white borders is slightly less readable than the ones without a border but thats a minor detail I'd say...
  4. I did not resize it though, making it smaller is easy, vice versa much less.
  5. I agree to this... its not quite intuitive. Suggestion: Only if that is okay with @SQUAD though of course (If you guys are not okay with that image let me know and I will take it down immediately)
  6. STS 1 & 2 with a fully automated launch {kOS} I combined most parts of the first and second mission into a single one. I hope this still qualifies Mod-List is given in the Video description (totally not fishing for views here :p) For those who can't / don't want to watch the video here are a few screenshots take from it: http://imgur.com/a/xLxwU The screenshots are mostly PR shots without the GUI showing so it wouldn't qualify as an entry but yea... The re-entry burn shown in scene @ ~12:20 in the video resulted in F5/F9 because I overshot the KSC by quite a bit on that run so thats why the runway landing shows more fuel then I had left after the adjustment burn I showed. Noticed that when the upload was 80% complete and I hope that this is still okay. Both the craft file and the script are provided. Additionally I had about 1000m/s more dV then needed so this was over-engineered quite a bit anyways.
  7. Solution: (Credits to @Jackseller) In Scatterer, the sun png files are located in : GameData\scatterer\config\Sunflares\Sun But since the latest version (1.2.x), SVE uses its own pngs in : GameData\StockVisualEnhancements\SVE_Scatterer\Sunflares\Sun They overwrite the Scatterer files. And they use their own settings too. The best way to ignore them is to open the SVE_Settings.cfg located in : GameData\StockVisualEnhancements Then delete the following lines inside the file and save it : @Scatterer_sunflare:AFTER[scatterer] { @Sun { %assetPath = StockVisualEnhancements/SVE_Scatterer/Sunflares/Sun %flareSettings = 0.5,1,0.32 %spikesSettings = 0.7,1,0.32 %sunGlareFadeDistance = 250000 %ghost1SettingsList1 { %Item = 0.1,1,20,0.3 %Item = 0.08,1,8,0.34 %Item = 0.08,1,12,0.49 %Item = 0.16,1,18,-0.3 } %ghost2SettingsList1 { %Item = 0.02,1,4,0.66 %Item = 0.1,1,10,0.44 %Item = 0.15,1,4,0.55 %Item = 0.15,1,18,0.95 } %ghost2SettingsList2 { %Item = 0.1,1,8,0.7 %Item = 0.1,1,6,0.72 %Item = 0.15,1,8,-0.2 } %ghost3SettingsList1 { %Item = 0.1,1,6,0.4 %Item = 0.08,1,11,1.1 %Item = 0.04,1,20,1.2 %Item = 0.03,1,20,1.22 } } } Alternatively: Updating the files in GameData\StockVisualEnhancements\SVE_Scatterer\Sunflares\Sun instead of the (traditional) scatterer folder should solve this as well (untested!)
  8. Hello guys, I hope someone has a clue on why my sun went back to being stock... It used to work but somehow it changed back (mod updates i guess) and now i can not figure out how to get it back the way it was (please don't judge for updating mods) Installed mods: SVE 1.2.2, SVE HighRes Textures, scatterer, Environmental Visual Enhancements 1.2.2, Kopernicus 1.2.2-5, MM and Astroniki Sunflare for scatterer. I have done a fresh install (both, mods and KSP), copied a backup of an older (1.2.2) gamedata folder into my install (with the old mods as well!) and installed older versions of SVE and scatterer. SVE 1.2.1 made the sun about 5x brighter which was a change but not a positive one... >.< Also I have tried to install various different sunflares for scatterer via CKAN and installed mods with and without using CKAN. I am pretty much at the end of my ideas and any hint would be greatly appreciated. Current sun: For comparison: It used to look like this about a month ago:
  9. For the Jool/Laythe mission: Is it allowed to use the deployed mining equipment for refueling or not? Edit: What exactly defines a support package? E.g. fuel delivery? I have serious doubts that I will be able to complete this without refueling in Laythe orbit for the return trip... My launch system is a main booster and 2 side booster - just like the real thing. The main booster has about 1000 m/s more than required for orbit. Is that within the bounds of the challenge? I mean technically I can get a launch it to a suborbital trajectory that is on the edge of kerbin SOI... ;-)
  10. Another minimalist submission - coming in at 3.945t wet / ~2.8t dry (with a Kerbal): I did use infinite fuel in order to speed up the re-entry, but the re-entry itself was legit with a 69 peri / 70 apo. I did not feel like spending the whole day waiting for the craft to come close to the surface so I hope that this does not qualify as gate-crashing. (Its explained in the pictures as well) #fullDisclosure (Also if I would have payed more attention going into orbit this problem wouldn't have occured in the first place) Full album:
  11. Fulgora

    Vulkan API

    --- deleted (wrong topic) --- An official statement on this would be nice though :-)
  12. Fulgora

    Vulkan API

    Unity has now integrated Vulkan API support in their latest release: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2017/03/31/5-6-is-now-available-and-completes-the-unity-5-cycle/ It is needless to say that this bears a huge potential for a performance boost. KSP 1.2 changed Unity from 5.2 to 5.4 so it seems possible to get another update to 5.6. There is no way that this is coming in 1.3 but there might be a chance to get it in 1.4. Here's hoping ;-)
  13. Any part can fail at any time - example: Tanks have an MBTF of 350400 hours but my 350-part-ish ssto (loads of MK-1 LF tanks) had one tank failure on its way to orbit recently. The chance of a tank failure (leak) at launch is just very slim, opposed to when the craft is older e.g. a 17 year old craft with two thud engines failed within 30 seconds usually (at least one of them). Lifetime counts for unfocused time as well - said 17 year old craft was not focused (landed next to the KSC monolith, while I was timewarping in the KSC). Technically it might have been in physics range but that would not have made a difference. Only thing is that parts can not fail if the craft is not focused. So if you send your probe out of the solar system and come back to it after 100 years it will still be intact - for a second or two at least ;-)
  14. Another big thank you for continuing this mod from me! It may just be a 'smaller' mod but it is a giant step for KSP - in terms of realism. I would suggest to port the wiki from ippo343's github repo to your fork and maybe expand it a bit - especially effects of maintenance and repair on the aging / MTBF should be more detailed. Since your github fork apparently allows me to create wiki pages on your repo I would volunteer for this if you are okay with it. Also it seems that engine aging is a bit buggy(?). According to the wiki: So naturally I would assume that leaving a craft, doing other things (e.g. timewarp one year) would have no effect on my engine status. However that is not the case and it does not make a difference whether that engine is activated or not Tested with MK 55 "Thud"´-> 20 seconds in use (MTBF 8760, Lifetime 1 hour, EOL 9 hours) the engine is still in good shape. After timewarping one year the engine is showing some age. Shutting down the engine before timewarp does not make any difference. This means that probe missions to eeloo or missions with ~1 decade of flight time in general become extremely risky since your engines have a (random guess) 99% failure chance once they reach their destination. A simple way of fixing this would be to simply increase the LifeTime of engines and all other parts which are supposed to age only when used. It would obv. be more realistic if the engine aging would behave as intended. Generally having a MTBF which is much higher than the expected lifetime appears a bit odd but that isn't really important if the overall behavior is reasonable. As a general balancing suggestion I would propose to make complete engine failures less common than cooliage leakage / gimbal locks and not the other way around. But this is certainly debatable. Second bug (minor / visual): After reloading a craft the context menu entries are reset to show a generic value. Testcase: 1 MK1 commant pod with a terrier engine and 1 engineer as crew 1. Launch -> EVA -> rightclick engine -> It shows "clean engine" etc. as entries for maintenance (from Engines.cs) -> board again (might be optional) 2. go back to space center 3. Go to the tracking center and select your craft or go to the craft directly since it is sitting on the launchpad (it does not make a difference which way you choose) 4. Go to EVA again -> rightclick engine -> it shows 3x "Maintenance" + 3x "EvaRepair" for engine, coolant line and gimbal It should still show "clean engine" for the engine maintenance etc. otherwise it is a bit tricky to figure out which is which. Note that I have a few other mods installed on my install. All tests were done on stock parts only, FAR and procedural parts are not installed. If it helps i can post my complete modlist ofc. but I suspect that the issues are not related to other mods..
×
×
  • Create New...