4x4cheesecake

Members
  • Content Count

    2,258
  • Joined

Everything posted by 4x4cheesecake

  1. It takes some effort but it's possible to download very old versions of KSP through the steam console. There are quite a few tutorials on this topic in general since it's possible for every steam game, for example this one: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1086279994 The oldest available version should be 0.22, but I'm not absolute sure about this. The "manifest" list doesn't contain version numbers, just dates when theses were added to the library but if you compare it with the version history of KSP, you get an idea which manifest is required for a specific version: https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Version_history Also, keep in mind that steam doesn't provide full download speed for these old versions. It is slow....really, really slow and you don't get a progression bar. You may have to wait for an hour or two to get finish the download.
  2. It doesn't complain about a missing part, just an unknown part module and KSP doesn't tell me which one. I would actually expect a more detailed warning or error message as soon as I try to load it but it works just fine and KSP loads the craft without any issues. When I actually copy it to the subassemblies folder instead of the ships folder, so that's probably just my own fault Yeah, that's the case since the 1.6 update, IIRC. It shouldn't disqualify any entry which uses the old fuel pod since it is still linked as the required payload and I know for a fact, there is at least one entry here in the thread which got verified by myself anyway, exactly for this reason^^ Still, it's nice to use an alternative pod with the proper mass Btw: which parts did you change? On the first sight, I cannot spot any difference to the old pod
  3. It weights 40t, so it's perfectly fine For some reasons, it says "unknown part modules" for me but still loads fine though.
  4. Stuff like this should be reported to @VITAS or in general in the spacedock thread: This one in particular, was reported there 6 hours ago
  5. You did a great job on clipping these parts, I didn't notice it until you've mentioned it Thanks for clarification on the used parts and congratulations to your badge Wow, that's impressive It's arguable if this is actually still a shuttle by the definition in the OP since you didn't land horizontally, but...3.44 tons?! You sir, got some serious skills and the new SRBs seem to work very well and so does the Spark engine. Since you've used the SRBs just to gain altitude but no horizontal speed, I wouldn't expect you to reach an orbit but I'm definitely wrong there^^ Well done and much kodus for this tiny build I'll give it a shot once I've updated to 1.8 Thank you very much for sharing your craft and the mission report. You already earned the STS - 1 Commander badge with your Nano shuttle, I'll leave it to @michal.don if you get another badge for this one While speaking of @michal.don: He returned from his holiday and will take care of you guys again, so for now, this was my last review. Thanks again for giving me permission to look after this great challenge once more and thanks to everyone who participated during this time, I hope you guys enjoyed it as much as I did
  6. Welcome back Michal I hope you enjoyed your holiday and you overcome the jet-lag soon. Did you bring us some souvenirs like the last time? There were indeed quite some awesome entries in the last weeks, you'll definitely like them
  7. Oh cool, these are the new SRBs, aren't they? I haven't tried them yet but they look really nice You put a lot of details on your shuttle and the payload, even the launch clamps are covered and the "heatshield" of the orbiter looks beautiful The flight itself looks very stable and the gimbals on the SRB seem to help a lot to vector the thrust properly during launch. You reached an orbit with ease and I'm not sure if you overshot the KSC on purpose to fly a little loop like the real shuttle or if it happened by accident but it definitely worked out very well I have two questions before I'll reward you with a badge though: 1) Did you use any mods? Looks like it is pure stock but I want to be sure 2) How did you manage to add more then 120k units of LFO to your shuttle?! That's insane
  8. Ok, let's see what we got here I said it already but let me repeat myself: You've done an amazing job on this telescope. It is indeed "slightly" different to a "goo in a can" Beautiful usage of the robotic parts to fold the telescope so you can perfectly use the available space in the cargobay. Once the telescope is put together in space with some help of these nice tittle MMUs and it starts to unfolds, I had a "wow" moment...it looks a bit messy in the first moment but it becomes beautiful very quick. Much kudos an this design, I really love it! Beside of the telescope, you've demonstrated some nice piloting skills. While it is comparatively easy to launch into an inclined orbit, it is pretty tough to perform a precise landing without going to an equatorial orbit first but it looks like you did it with ease. Well done For a brief moment, I thought you lost an elevon on the runway but apparently, it's just one of the landing lights xD Out of curiosity: Have you tried to roll the shuttle during the launch instead of putting it on the pad in the required orientation to archive an inclined orbit? It's surprisingly challenging with an asymmetrical design and I never managed to pull it off properly Congratulations to your well deserved commander badge Thank you The landing looks solid and well performed as usual, so I'm happy to hand out a new badge to you. Congratulations The link works fine this time I really like your shuttle design, it looks modern and slim which is quite impressive for a mission which requires some heavy lifting Solid launch and stage separation, well done so far. Unfortunately, I have to tell you about two issues on your mission: 1) You left the fuel pod in an orbit which doesn't fulfill the tolerance requirements. You got an Ap of 88.0208km and a Pe of 87.8512km which sums up to a difference of ~170m between these points while just 100m are allowed. Even before you deployed the pod, you were above the tolerance (122m) 2) You forgot to add a screenshot to prove, the fuel pod is still fully fueled after deploying it. I'll leave it up to you, if you want to redo the mission or fix this one. For example, it would be perfectly fine for me if you launch another shuttle to deliver a little (RCS powered) tug to the pod, dock to tug to the pod and adjust the orbit. Put the tug back into the shuttle and land it back on Kerbin. If you've accidentally used any fuel from the pod, you should just redo the mission though. Regarding the landing: Even if you don't feel confident to land on the runway and the mission description says "land wherever you like", it is not recommend to land in the ocean since the orbiter is meant to be reusable Well, you seem to have some issues with the landing gear, so this was actually the only way to land it in this case but it would be much more elegant to fix the gear and land land on solid ground
  9. Wow, that's quite a lot of new content here, makes me happy every time Ok, where did I stop *scroll up* Oh, this is cool. I'm impressed you manged to balance out such a small vessel properly and you can actually land it on some gear, not just a parachute. Well done! Thanks for adjusting it, the new orbit is very close to be perfect. You deserve this badge, congratulations Would be worth a discussion. The definition states: which can be interpreted like "in a horizontal orientation". The first picture in your link show the orbiter in a horizontal orientation but on chutes, so basically just moving vertically but not prograde/forward. I think, it would still satisfy the definition even though it is a bit "edgy". Also, it would be really tough to land it on the runway, so it's will become more challenging to obtain a commander badge. I would love to hear the opinion of @michal.don on this topic, he will be back from his holiday soon Wow, these are the smallest KMUs I've every seen and they still look like some actual orbital construction equipment I love it! Are there even any reaction wheels on it? Must be hard to do a precise docking maneuver with such a light vehicle controlled just on RCS. Also the telescope which comes with a hinged lid, just beautiful Uhm...am I blind or did you forget to include the landing of STS - 3 in this album? The second picture loos like from reentry but that's it...nothing else The landing is a important part of every mission, without a documentation of it, I cannot reward a badge, I'm sorry I hope you just forgot to include them in the album or you got an savegame befor you landed... Is this supposed to be a single picture or a full mission report? The design looks really cool, looking forward to see it in action I already took a first look and the design is just amazing, beautiful usage of the robotic parts. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to do a proper review right now but don't worry, I didn't forget you Also, thanks for jumping in to answer some questions here Will be back tomorrow with plenty of time for the review such an entry deserves
  10. Thanks and enjoy your new badge Awwww, it's so cute Really well performed mission in a very unique shuttle, I love it. You don't seem to have a lot of fuel reserves, how many tries did it take for you to get into an orbit? Also, probably the first time I've witnessed an "upside down" aerobreak to protect the landing gear while exposing a kerbal to the atmosphere...whatever it is in the helmets, they should use it to build landing gears out of it Thanks for including the craft file, I'll give it a try...looks like a lot of fun For the sake of completeness, please add a complete modlist if you want to participate in any further mission as well. The craft file is evidence enough for this time though Congratulations to you very well deserved badge Cool stuff When you say "abort system" does it mean you are able to separate the cockpit and land it like a small,. bulky plane? You get quite a lot of horizontal thrust during launch, don't you? It's not a bad thing and you reached an orbit with ease, it's just something I've noticed^^ I'm curious since you didn't include a screenshot which shows the orbital parameters of the orbiter before the ComSats are deployed: Did you actually park the orbiter in a stationary orbit or is it an elliptical orbit and the satellites reached their final orbit on their own power? Speaking of orbital parameters: The second ComSat is not positioned very well, its orbital period is 14min longer then a Kerbin day, at least in the screenshot. Did you adjust it's orbit afterwards or do you have at least some RCS fuel left to allow such a correction? No badge yet but if you can provide a screenshot of the second ComSat which shows a decent amount of monoprop in it's tanks (1-2 Units should already be fine, doesn't take a lot to adjust the orbit), I'm willing to hand out a badge to you. Of course, you can also actually adjust the orbit but it would be already fine for me to know, that would be possible
  11. Welcome back to the challenge That's a really cool replica you've build there, even the with a "heat shield" at the bottom, I like it The flight looks very controlled at every moment, really unfortunate that you didn't make it to the runway Before I can reward you a badge, I need a complete mod list. I can see some visual stuff and KER but there are also some parts on the shuttle which are probably not stock (I'm having some trouble to identify the OMS engines and the bottom 'cap' of the external tank). Welcome to the challenge I'm not sure if we already had a MK1 shuttle in this thread, it's definitely not a common thing...I like it These are some powerful boosters for such a small, non-cargo shuttle. You may want to consider to reduce the thrust at launch to prevent reentry effects on your way up Beside of that, your shuttle performs very well, really unfortunate that you missed the runway though. Congratulations to your first badge If you want to continue this challenge, and I really hope so, I have a little request: Please don't cut the screenshots. If you want to emphasis a detail on the picture, you can write a comment about it in the imgur album. For example: When you cut out just the orbital info display, there is absolute no way to tell, if these numbers are actually from this flight. Just post the full screenshot and write "orbital parameters" or something like this on it Regarding the chute: I cannot remember a rule which prohibit the usage of chutes in "mid air". You may get a problem, when you land the orbiter by using just chutes since it is technically not a horizontal landing which is required (definition of an orbiter in the OP) but it is totally fine to fire a chute during the descent to slow down a bit more or just by accident I'm a bit short on time and have to go, but I'll be back in a few hours to review the other entries
  12. You can basically put a goo on a service bay, strap some batteries and a solar panel on it and call it a telescope It's up to you Correct. Claw would be fine as well but it's pretty big though Also correct. You can edit the size of the pictures in your signature. In the editor for your signature, double click the images and choose a different size. I use 100pixels for my badges to fit there
  13. Cool, you managed to land that heavy beast! I love it how you use a piston to get a second docking connection. The usual solution for this issue, were autostruts but using some of the new mechanics like robotics and same vessel interaction, is great Just on a sidenote: Since it is not specified where you have to land and there is actually no pilot or commander rank for this mission, just the "you did it rank", you could have land it wherever you want but you really really don't want your orbiter to bounce on an uneven surface while it is heavily loaded. The runway provides a perfectly flat surface and is highly recommend to use for this mission Congratulations to your new and well deserved badge
  14. Nice! That's a solid station and you shuttle performed very well, as expected I like the screenshot of the tumbling STS-6 orbiter, that's beautiful (and probably a bit scary ) So the station has a mass of 20t and you had 'just' 4 ion engines? How long did you have to burn to increase the Ap above 2000km? I barely use these engines but I have the gut feeling it took some time. Are you going for Duna now? I'm already curious to see how you will deal with the thin atmosphere during STS-2 and the aerobreak while returning to kerbin Of course, you will do your next mission with a brand new badge on your chest Yeah, it's a tough mission and you are definitely not the first one, who had to rebuild or at least modify the orbiter for this mission.It may takes a few more quickloads even with the new orbiter though but I'm certain you can do this Looking forward to see your solution
  15. What's exactly a "Guest" account? It popped-up in my notifications but the thread actually contains just the post of MarkoeZ: Is that what happens if an account actually got deleted?
  16. Nice, glad to hear/see you managed to utilize a resonant orbit and it looks like, it worked out very well. The sats are at least close enough to a stationary orbit and evenly spaced, well done The landing looks like a lot of fun, except for the Kerbals on board Congratulations to your new badge
  17. I do! It's nice to see someone going for the pilot ranks. I'm around in this challenge for quite some time but I never noticed that the EEV doesn't require to reenter on it's own for the pilot badge and to be honest: launching a little rocket shaped lander from the surface of the mun and return it to Kerbin is fairly common but a rendevouz in a low mun orbit to pick up the EEV is actually pretty cool and in my opinion slightly more challenging You performed very well during this mission so enjoy your new badge
  18. I took a look at the "remotecache.vdf" of KSP (basically the config for the steam cloud) and apparently, the stock craft folder (~\Kerbal Space Program\Ships\*) is actually backed up in the cloud. So when you delete a craft file from the stock craft folder, may it be a stock craft or any other craft you put there manually, it will be restored from the cloud on the next game launch. I have honestly no idea why SQUAD decided to do this and I'll open a bug report / feedback on the bugtracker for this.
  19. Where do you download the .craft files and do you use a tool/mod for this like Craft Manager? KerbalX? Steam workshop? If you get the files from the steam workshop, you have to unsubscribe from the crafts or steam will keep them for you. These crafts are also not stored within the game files but in your steam install directory: ~\Steam\steamapps\workshop\content\220200\* ("220200" is the steam id of KSP. There are probably more directories with just numbers instead of names) If you download them from KerbalX via Craft Manager, they are probably stored within your savegame. I don't use the mod, so I'm not sure about this part but if you backup your savegame, reinstall KSP and then restore the backup, that would perfectly explain it. Since KSP 1.4.4, steam cloud is supported and enabled by default so the backup is created and restored by steam automatically. You can test this by creating a new sandbox savegame. If you installed the crafts manually in "KSP\ships\VAB\*" they are probably saved into the steam cloud as well...I remember some cases where people complained about crafts not getting removed from the game after a reinstall and these crafts where stored in the same directory. I don't know why SQUAD should setup the steam cloud config to backup this directory but this might be the case. Should be easy to test by removing the manually installed crafts and then start the game directly via the KSP_x64.exe and not via the steam launcher. Regarding the missing parts: Well, that's something the creator of the craft have to take care of. I would suggest to write a comment on KerbalX or the steam workshop and ask the creator for more information. Since KSP will tell you the names of the missing parts, you can also try the part search of KerbalX to figure out the mod it comes from: https://kerbalx.com/parts
  20. Well, it's not prohibited but the required docking port of the habitat module is supposed to be used to dock the rover to the base. I'm not going to decline an entry which uses the claw to bypass the typical hight issues since it will create a docking connection as well but it is not exactly how it is supposed to be
  21. Well done mission and thanks for keeping the space clean by crashing your debris Don't worry too much about missing an screenshot of the last aerobreak, it's really just the first one which is interesting Congratulations to the upgrade of your badge Correct, 350km is not geostationary but also, no one said it must be a circular 350km+ orbit Of course you can launch into a circular orbit above 350km, release the comsats and bring them in their final position on their own power, it's perfectly fine. A different approach would be a resonant orbit, for two reasons: The Pe would be above 350km (to fulfill the requirement) and it will also allow you to place the comsats in equidistant position. If you've never heard of resonant orbits, you may want to look at this nice tool: Well, if you actually want to try it without a resonant orbit: there is no official threshold and I'm not going to measure the angles of your final triangle. If you can look down at your satellites in map view and think "yeah, looks like an equilateral triangle", that's totally fine (It's also not perfect when using a resonant orbit though^^)
  22. Yes, you already performed an aerocapture in your last mun mission. If you enter the atmosphere multiple times or just once, is up to you. It is just important, that you have to use the atmosphere to slow down your orbiter to reach an orbit around kerbin (circular or elliptical, doesn't matter). The opposite would be a "powered break" by using the engines and firing them in retrograde direction. This one as well I personally prefer to create the screenshot close to the Pe...if you got there without burning up, you'll be fine. Uh, nice! What are all these explosions during the launch? Looks like you got some parts overheating by exposing them to the engine exhausts Beside of that, it was a really good flight and you demonstrated some serious piloting skills by adjusting the engine thrust during the launch to reduce the torque and by controlling your descent trajectory by changing the pitch of the orbiter during the whole flight. The orbit of the fuel pod looks fine and luckily, all the fuel is still in it this time Also, you actually hit the runway this time, that's an important improvement This badge is for you and well deserved If you don't mind, I have a little suggestion though: It looks like your reaction wheels take too much control during the final approach of the runway and prevent small adjustments. You may want to switch their mode to "SAS only" (probably via actiongroup) or turn them off at all, so your orbiter is actually controlled by the elevons and not the reaction wheels
  23. Silly me, you are absolute right. Commander needs a manned research facility, I'm sorry. Thanks for correcting me, here is your correct bade (I'll edit my previous post as well, just to prevent confusion) I see, thanks Well, I already thought that it will help you with this mission Oh, so close to the runway...that's unfortunate How did that happen? You were lined up very well during your approach. While I'm inclined to turn a blind eye regarding the landing this time, I need to ask you for another screenshot to proof that every tank of the 40t pod is actually filled and untouched. I can see the amount of ore in the resource window and you show the LFO tank but there is also a monoprop tank which need to be untouched and since you have used some monoprop during your mission, there is no way for me to see if the fuel was provided by the orbiter or the fuel pod. Just load your game, switch to the pod in orbit (which is hopefully still there) and open the resource window or right click every tank
  24. Looks like you are right The shuttle looks very stable through the flight whole flight and even survived the steep reentry. I'm a bit surprised that you aimed for the Dessert Airfield instead of the KSC but of course, that's up to you and a perfectly fine choice I have a few questions though, just out of curiousity: These are a lot of engines you're firing during the launch, do you really need all of them? And why did you place the landing gear in an angle? Just for your personal style? Anyway, congratulations to your first badge
  25. Career was added in version 0.22 and apparently, you try to play version 0.21... which is ancient. Where exactly did you buy the game?