• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

192 Excellent


About overkill13

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

1,451 profile views
  1. Firespitter fixed the gear. Engines work fine though I might argue the ISP is too high. Wing areas are still 5 Body and 5 each wing. This is unrealistically high compared to stock parts and quite a bit higher than necessary for the ship. It still requires a fairing to launch, but that could probably be fixed with some fins at the bottom of the rocket if the wing area on the body and wings weren't so high. I would suggest moving the CoM to the centre of the craft, front to back and move the CoL back a bit. This will fix the RCS being off centre and be a bit more realistic with the shape of the wings. I am unable to activate the staged decoupling on the docking collar though decouple node works fine in flight. The attachment node on the docking port is quite a bit too far forward/up. Lights on the docking port have a nice pattern, but only appear to be half working. There's something wrong with the colliders. The ship does not sit flat on the ground. It looks like the nose wheel holds the ship up even when retracted, and the wing wheels don't seem to interact with the ground. The control surfaces are not working at all for some reason. No visual and no control authority. The nose wheel has an odd handling point when being placed in the hangar. The cursor is not on the part. Grabbing the part after adding it to the craft seems to work fine, only happens when pulled from the part menu. Yawing into the airflow seems to cause the ship to speed up. Aero might need some work.
  2. Mini Puff engines don't attach anywhere on ship and cannot surface attach. I used tweakscaled stock puffs for OMS Coupling node decouples from the back of the ship, rather than decoupling attached fuel tanks. Aerodynamics are so harsh that you cannot launch it on the front of a rocket. The OP mentions a fairing, but Kliper did not plan to use one. Placing it in a fairing makes it flyable, but requires a much larger/more expensive rocket. Lift from the wings and fuselage is too high, compared to stock parts. I was able to significantly increase my downrange flight by pitching up a few degrees, to the point that I nearly exited the atmosphere from a normal reentry setup. CoM is very low, which makes the ship offset launch vehicle thrust significantly causing poor launch performance and basically requiring a hold prograde capable pilot or probe core. RCS is out of position causing rolling when you translate in any direction. Likely due to the low CoM. Aerodynamics on reentry are terrible causing flipping and rolling immediately in even the tiniest atmosphere without the reaction wheel. With the reaction wheel the ship still becomes highly unstable lower in the atmosphere. I think the CoL is too close to the CoM as I was able to move the wings back a bit and get a flyable machine. Yaw control is not working. Pitch control is very weak, making the ship impossible to pitch up for a controlled landing. Roll control is pretty good. Wings show 78% of their wing area is used for control surfaces, which, looking at them visually, is way too high. Control surfaces do not visibly move and wheels do not retract. Wings have different max temps. No overheating on reentry from LKO was noted.
  3. Non equatorial orbits are going to have differing amounts of daylight depending on when in the year you are orbiting. As the planet orbits around the sun, your orbit angle relative to the sun will differ and as a result how long the planet blocks your line of sight to the sun will differ over time. At some points you may have a continuous view of the sun, other times you may not see the sun for days and any possibility in between. It may be possible to calculate for a particular day, but you are going to be all over the place over a planetary year.
  4. Did you also download the original OPT and optionally OPT legacy? The base mod is only designed to patch the parts from the old OPT parts to work in later KSP versions. If you only grabbed OPT reconfig it won't work.
  5. I believe that higher thrust results in higher consumption. ISP is, in a basic sense, a measure of fuel used to create a change in velocity. Without changing the ISP, doubling thrust doubles the rate at which you change velocity, which doubles the amount of fuel consumed. So to halve fuel consumption with double thrust, you need to quadruple the atmospheric curve. At least this is my understanding.
  6. Also Tantares for the Russian segment.
  7. You are in luck. Since Mechjeb parts are radially attached, this will be quite easy. If you try to do this with inline parts, the attachment nodes make things much more complicated. First backup your save file. These instructions will show Kerbal Engineer chip parts, which work similarly to Mechjeb so the screenshots are for examples and WILL NOT match your exact files. I use Notepad++ for my mm patches and file editing, but this can be done with any text editor. First you need to find the Mechjeb part for the controller/computer/whatever they call it. It should be in Kerbal Space Program/GameData/whatever folder Mechjeb goes into/parts/whatever they named to control module part. Find the .cfg for the part and open it in a text editor. Should look something like this: Copy that part name. Again, it WON'T be EngineerChip for Mechjeb. Now Open your save directory Kerbal Space Program/saves/the savename and find the latest file with the persistant name, mine was "zKACBACKUP20200215120530-persistent.sfs" because I use Kerbal Alarm Clock, yours might just be "persistant.sfs". Back it up then open in the text editor. Search for that part name. Ignore the first search, that is the part listing under the research tree, it should be fine leaving it alone without causing any issues. You want to find all the ones that start with PART at the top of the saved section. See the screenshots below: Highlight everything starting with and including PART and go all the way down to the operator squigly bracket that lines up with the one directly under PART. Notepad++ is highlighting the bracket locations in red for ease of reference. See screenshot: The next section might not be an ACTIONGROUPS section like mine. Just for reference, that is the action groups for this vessel, not the part. And it might not be the same on each vessel. Delete that whole section of the file to remove the part. Now find the next "MechjebChip" or whatever the part name is and do it again until they are all gone. Save the persistence file and load your save to see if everything still works. Again, this is fairly easy with radial parts. Inline parts make this process a real PITA.
  8. I was running the game with a whole crapton of mods on a laptop with a 2nd gen i3 and a GPU, but I needed 16gigs of ram to keep from maxing out the memory. I don't use graphics mods, but I've seen some graphical improvement with an RX 570, but I'm not convinced the i3-9100F has made much difference. The real improvement came from the SSD for initial loading. Interestingly I only use around 9g of RAM on this PC while the old laptop was pushing closer to 11 or 12, despite the same KSP mod suite. Realistically, all you need is a couple decently fast cores and a basic GPU, and a bunch of RAM. Unless you are really cash strapped, nobody is building a PC that can't run KSP with a bunch of mods. I built this PC with some of the most middle of the road brand new parts and I couldn't be bothered to upgrade. Not for KSP anyway. If I didn't keep my PCs well past their expiration date already, I'd go with Incarnation of Chaos' old business PC with a few add-ons.
  9. Engine Ignitor requires ullage, but it also limits engine ignitions. I don't think it is possible to stop limiting ignitions other than writing a mm patch to add a ridiculous number of ignitors to every part with an engine module on it. Closest to stand alone that I am aware of.
  10. I had a go at building your craft. Your main gear are too far back from the CoM so the plane cannot rotate and those control surfaces are pretty weak. I was able to take off, though. If you let the plane run all the way off the runway it will lift off without much issue. Move the wheels forward a bit, just behind the CoM and it will rotate off the runway around 100m/s. I also see no vertical stabilizer, which shouldn't affect your rotation, but could cause stability issues in flight, especially if the Panthers aren't running during landing or at altitude. I even had a couple of out of control yaw rotations even with the Panthers going. The NERV is pretty weak and I couldn't get it to space either. I can't really tell from the pictures, but you would benefit from angling your wings up a couple of degrees too since that will bring your prograde marker inline with the fuselage at higher speeds, reducing drag. F1 to take screenshots.
  11. First, probe cores do draw power at all times and then more when running the reaction wheels. As we are in the mods section, most life support mods include some kind of power drain for crew compartments. They also come with the need to feed kerbals, of course, and often detrimental effects when Kerbals do not have power to run the life support systems, which might not be to your liking. Some of these functions can be turned off. USI in particular can allow you to remove the effects for lack of power, lack of food, lack of habitation time, etc. while you could still run the components to simulate power drain.
  12. I have been seeing constant orbital decay in both 1.7.2 and 1.7.3. It seems as if physics/air resistance continues to be calculated above 70km around Kerbin for the active vessel. I don't see this around the Mun or Minmus. Furthermore after upgrading to 1.7.3, I am seeing terrible slow down in game play, particularly with space planes in orbit, as if the physics calculations are bogging down the game. Only seems to happen with craft with wings These are craft I have used in previous versions without issue. Each time I recreated them from scratch. I upgraded from 1.7.2 before accessing the plane parts in this particular career mode. I just attempted to launch a single piece space station consisting primarily of 2.5m fuel tanks, hitchhiker, science lab with some radial bits all contained within a fairing, which had intermittent normal speed and very low frame rates and returning to normal play at roughly 20 second intervals. Once finally in orbit I had no problems. Launching virtually the same space station in this career when I was still using version 1.7.2 did not suffer from any of these frame rate issues. Removing a ton of mods did not solve these issues. Completely reinstalling 1.7.3 and the Making History and Breaking Ground DLCs also did not solve the issue even on a stock game. I found my old 1.7.2 installer I reinstalled the game and found the orbital decay is the same, but a hastily put together space plane does not have the same framerate issues. I am unable to confirm with the exact same craft, in the same save for the other complaints as the game is blocking all craft and save files from 1.7.3. Is there any known problem that would cause these issues? Is there a way to recover my saves and craft files for use in 1.7.2 again?
  13. It uses old patches for the greenhouses, but I think they will still work. Unfortunately the living spaces don't appear to have patches for the habitation parts of USI-LS. So, it will work, but it won't work to extend the available hab time for your Kerbals other than simply the seats in each part.
  14. Hmm. I've never seen that before. Then again I NEVER use the Mk25 because it's ugly, looks non aerodynamic and inline mounting is seldom a desirable location for my drogue chutes especially in a 1.25m stack. The Mk25 does have a higher minimum safe deploy speed but probably should switch the semi and fully deployed diameters on those parts so it at least makes some sense.