Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

About Exposure

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Is there anything in particular I should keep an eye out for? Decided to see if it would work in 1.3 and it seems ok so far, nothing particular out of place or whacky going on that I would expect from a planet pack integration gone poorly, but it's been a while since I played KSP, so I may be ignoring something obvious to others.
  2. Any plans to let us add in exceptions for designated folders in a future update? For some reason the 3 man stock pod's textures "unloaded" for me even when I add it in the VAB or launch a rocket that uses it, but it works fine for every other part I try out, both with the other stock parts and parts from mods like Tantares or Near Future and SpaceY. Other than that, the mod's quite excellent, and I can always try doing a Gemini or Soyuz mun landing when I get that far in my career save. Might as well branch off from the usual Apollo-esque ones I usually do.
  3. Perhaps time the change with the 1.1 update? The unity 5 upgrade is bound to break a lot of things, so people are probably going be starting new games when they get around to updating KSP for it.
  4. The heatshields were made before 1.0 and thus are configured for Deadly Reentry only, so I just copy pasted SDHI's config and upped the resource amount to match the stock 3.75m heat shield like so: MODULE { // pyrolysisLossFactor changed from stock value of 10000 to 15000 // // Forum user johnsonwax explained that increasing this value allows more heat energy // to be removed per unit of Ablator, which essentially reduces overall Ablator consumption // // This fits the narrative of SDHI's PICA-X heat shield material being more durable than // whatever fictional material is use
  5. The first one is happening because the Taurus mod changed its folder name since Aerojet last updated, so at (wherever KSP is installed)\GameData\AerojetKerbodyne\Parts\TaurusExtras\AerojetTaurusUmbilicalMM.cfg... Change MODEL { model = R&SCapsuledyne/Parts/TaurusHCV/model scale = 1, 1, 1 } to MODEL { model = RSCapsuledyne/Parts/TaurusHCV/model scale = 1, 1, 1 } And it should load in the Taurus model just fine.
  6. A note: the tweakscale value of 1.5 doesn't really seem to cut it with the latest versions of KSP. (I presume something changed from the last time the mod was updated). A value of 1.85 seems to be close enough for kerbal work when it comes to making a service module that fits on top of 3.75m wide designs like how the SDHI service module fits on top of 2.5m wide designs.
  7. It's DECOUPLER_VERT for the vertical decoupler staging icon.
  8. Does this apply to spaceplanes that launch via the runway as well?
  9. It's not a concern for kerbals on EVA at all, as to quote the USI-LS thread:
  10. Yeah on my tries afterwards it seems I just happened to got spectacularly lucky by the time I started staging the chutes (since the occluded effect goes away if the boost cover goes boom upon encountering terrain), with all the other ones giving out the same behaviour as regular staging.
  11. I was, yeah. After switching to testing out the boost cover, I did get the behaviour of parachutes to just not functioning even when they ejected, unless I right clicked on the port and clicked on decouple node. In fact the rest of the pod seemed to remained occuluded from physics when I staged the cover, since MechJeb kept reporting a drag coefficient of zero while it kept accelerating absurdly fast all the way past mach 1 (or was it 2?) into the ground.
  12. That's weird. I covered the pod and chute with the stock fairings both from a fairing starting point below it, and a fairing starting point attached to the chutes to test this out myself, and it works just fine with RealChutes once I eject the fairings. Are you using a different set of fairings?
  13. You're thinking of the recent devnotes, specifically Harvester's section:
  14. Did you check that they were *actually* broken? KSP will report that any mods that weren't designed with the current version in mind as potentially incompatible, but as the "potenitally" implies, it's not outright confirmation that they won't work. I had some 0.90 mods that were working fine that KSP 1.0 reported as potentially incompatible, for example. Heck, I have MechJeb as well and it still seems to be working just fine in 1.01 for me.
  15. Ahhh. Thanks for correcting me NathanKell! In fact I didn't even realize fuel tanks specifically meant for cryogenic fuels were a thing.
  • Create New...