Pacca
-
Posts
36 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Pacca
-
-
I'm in science mode, everything related to building upgrades should be unlocked. I've even used maneuver nodes, not just on other probes and ships, but on this exact same probe just to get out to Jool in the first place! And on the map screen I do get to see my path, both around the current planet/moon and beyond it (I think that's you mean by patched conics?), encounters, periapsis, even my time to periapsis and encounters on the map screen, despite the fact that those exact same numbers are locked out in the corner!
EDIT: Double checked, all buildings in the KSP are level 3 (besides the flag pole :Y), and none of them are destroyed. I was hoping saving and reloading a few times would work, but the issue seems to saved to the file now :< Would sharing that help?
-
I imagine a lot of you might be rolling your eyes right now. Believe me, if I was in your shoes, I'd be right there with you. A lot of people seem to get the communications and piloting mechanics of the game mixed up. I've been playing the game for a while though, and this doesn't appear to be the problem unfortunately. It only seems to happen with probes, that have full power, are not hibernating, and have a stable connection to the KSP, usually through a relay network. Here's an example screenshot for reference.
Oddly enough, it doesn't act like you'd expect a typical control locked craft to act; I still have full throttle and orientation control, only maneuver nodes and the Maneuver mode display in the lower left corner seem to be affected. I can even transmit science data back to Kerbin! I've tried going in and out of contact with Kerbin, by having contact interrupted by a planet/moon, hibernating and waking up the probe core, and closing and redeploying the antenna, nothing changes. It has full power, and in fact should never run out of power given the RTGs and the solar panels, at least while the ion engine is off (which it is).
Am I just being stupid? Did I miss something? Or is this a bug? I'd really hate to have to deorbit this thing and launch another ion probe all the way to Jool again...
-
I had initially swapped the nose piece out for the docking port to keep it from overheating and provide a front facing control from point; I'm not sure either of those are necessary with the current design, so that's a great idea :3 I also have no idea how intakes work in general, so I'm glad to know I only need the one!
-
It usually hits around those speeds, definitely. I've been wondering if it has to do with my ascent; I don't have much experience in that regard X3 I've been trying to keep it relatively flat whilst climbing, but adjusting the craft at those speeds feels quite risky (I've had quite a few attempts simply flip perpendicular during adjustments and overheat/kill all my speed), and SAS tends to slowly pitch up if left to it's own devices.
-
Thanks! I really appreciate it ^w^
- A lot of my early designs actually tried to get away with one nerv! Unfortunately, these ones always ended up stalling at about 50,000 meters, then falling back down, usually burning up if I tried to keep pushing them... Adding some oxidizer to get a short little push to space might be just what that scenario was missing though, I'll try to keep that in mind for future modifications/craft :3
- Some earlier designs did try the smaller ore tank, but I had trouble fitting it into the design without introducing drag or getting in the way. Speaking of which X3
- Your so right, I should be using a utility bay, can't believe I forgot how useful they are when designing it! Even besides it's obvious features, it's ability to function as an airbrake and a crumplezone is nice for any craft, let alone a multipurpose one. Thank you so much for the suggestion!
- That's an awesome idea! I never would have thought of it, but I love it! Again, thanks for taking the time to tell me ^w^
-
After much trial and error, I've finally managed to make my second ever functional SSTO, and the first SSTO I've ever created with a useful payload other then it's pilot! It's built to enter orbit, land on Minmus, spend about 2 and half months processing ore, then lift off to interplanetary space with 6,000 delta V to spare!
Notes/Trivia:
The crafts' front-most two fuel tanks are intentionally under-fueled! This was done to help achieve liftoff on the run way; when full, the craft was too unstable for me to fly properly X3 You might want to take this into account if you decide to refuel and take off on Kerbin. Alternatively, you can try to fly it fully fueled if you think your up to the task; I doubt I'm the best at flying :Y
There's only one pilot seat and no probe control (making flying with an engineer not very ideal), and the ISRU module and drills are the smaller variants. Refueling takes awhile, even with stock speed up set to max! It does hit 4,000 delta V around halfway through refueling, so you can lift off partially empty if you know where you want to go, or need more TWR.
Lift off from Minmus can be kind of tricky, as the craft doesn't have the reaction wheel strength to pitch up at full fuel, and the craft likes to curve after a while and slam one of it's wings into the ice! Simply retracting and rextending the landing gear quickly can help you ascend if you don't have a convenient ramp to use.
Feel free to add your thoughts and/or suggest improvements, this is my first serious SSTO, and I'd love to keep building upon what I've learned while constructing it!
-
It depends; as it currently stands, KSP 1 might have some exclusive features, at least for awhile. I haven't heard anything of breaking grounds robot parts making it in, for example, and it's pretty much been confirmed that some other parts won't make it in (which could be big, depending on which parts they are). KSP 1 will also have a much larger supply of mods until the community catches up with KSP 2, and some mods might take a while to migrate. I personally find Outer Planets to be a must have, and will definitely be visiting Sarnus and Neidon in KSP 1 at least a little until that or an equivalent mod makes it to KSP 2.
-
The only thing I thought was a little odd was the that the deployed experiments have their own power and communications; is it possible to have them use a craft for power and communication relays? I feel it'd be rather silly to set up extraneous power and communication setups around an already established relay base (which already have very few uses for electrical power once landed).
That aside, everything else looks fantastic! Hopefully some of the larger surface features are still physics objects, so they can be grabbed and hauled into space! Could be fun to build advanced cargo missions to bring boulders from deep space to Kerbin
-
I've been paying much closer attention to delta V, engine weight, and twr as of a late, and I've noticed some interesting things.
To start, I've just recently noticed that the overall delta V of a craft is heavily affected by engine weight, sometimes even to the point of affecting which engines I'd prefer to use. Previously, I'd picked engines solely based on their ISP, size relative to the craft/stage, and the overall twr of the final craft/stage. However, since 1.6 added the delta V display to the stock game, I've been gradually prioritizing it over those other things.
Nowadays, I'm often shocked to find that the Delta V shoots up when I use an engine with noticeably lower thrust and ISP, seemingly just because of how light the engine is comparatively. I've started using the Spark engine over the terrier in all my deep space 1.25m craft in my early science games, despite the size the difference being quite noticeable; the delta V will tend jump up by shocking amounts just by swapping into the lower efficiency engine! I've even run into some scenarios that make seemingly worthless engines worthwhile; despite the poodle appearing to be inferior to the wolfhound in a variety of ways, it actually gives the craft more delta V in many cases! I'm sure this is an obvious thing that rocket science has to take into account, and I probably look quite dumb to a lot of people right now, but I just find it fascinating how a difference in mass of 1.55 tons can make 113m/s of delta V come from a noticeably less efficient engine!
I was just wondering if there was a good way to quickly quantify this at a glance looking at the engine stats. As it stands, I'm only really able to find the best engine for a craft through trial and error, since I'm not really sure how the engines weight plays into things. I've gained a general intuition for how thrust and ISP factor into a crafts design, and this new variable is getting me all confused
And now for the "Kerbal" aspect of things; I've recently been infatuated with the idea of making a rocket with the highest possible twr that can reasonably be achieved. I personally find it hilarious when I make rockets that are so powerful, that they are immediately burned up before they could ever hope to hit space
Does anyone have any tips for getting the most twr per part, while keeping burn time high enough to use that twr? I'd love that -
Funnily enough, I actually kind of hope the new suits do have tron lighting. Not for aesthetic reasons or anything, but just because it'd make it easier to keep track of them in the dark. I remember my first ever interplanetary stranding on Ike; having something other then just the forward facing lights could actually have been quite helpful there...
-
My first ever docking attempt was, believe it or not, the one in the in game tutorial. I'll bet it took me well over an hour of fiddling and bouncing around (certainly felt like it) before I finally docked successfully. Sadly I messed up a bit afterwards and wasn't able to bring the stranded tutorial kerbal back home due to ship switching being disabled X3
I spent a huge portion of my early time in the game trying to construct very poorly thought out multi-launch rocket probes, so I immediately got a lot of practice with it. Nowadays, I can do it pretty effortlessly if I have full control of both crafts. If the docking ports on both craft are both mounted away from the center of mass, or one craft doesn't have any control, it can be quite a mess, but I can still just barely pull it off with some very careful maneuvering. I still feel pretty bad at it at times, despite the practice, but definitely better then before.
-
Really proud of it! Love how futury it looks :3
Both sections have inflatable docking ports on them, so the ring can be docked to transport Kerbals and resources, as well as merging the station parts into one vessel so it can be safely switched away from without the ring losing collision and drifting away. Already using it to store Kerbals in space ^w^
It's not the first of it's kind though; I launched a variety of less successful ones, one of which even survived reentry and landing! Thought the ring looked pretty neat flying through Kerbins skies :Y
-
I just realized that stock rotating parts where announced immediately after I built my first successful jointed rotating space station. Thought that was funny X3
But I'm very excited for the robotic arms and new surface features; I've always been a fan of over the top probes, and I really need good reasons to build rovers! Excited to start recreating articulated landers and rovers as well :3
-
omg yes!!! They could literally only add what's been explicitly shown in the screenshots and I'd be insta-buying it. Very excited to see incentives for making permenant surfaces bases and actually exploring the surface! And that's not even mentioning stock hinges!
-
I tried following this tutorial on the wiki, but there are no templates for C# in the copy of Visual studio I have, so I can't directly follow the tutorial. It seems there's a marketplace full of alternative templates, but I have no idea what they do, what they are for, and if they'll work for KSP. I can't seem to figure out how to compile anything when I mess about by myself, either. How should I go about setting it up so I can build my first hello world addon?
EDIT: I just realized this may be in the wrong section. Feel free to move it if necessary.
-
32 minutes ago, 4x4cheesecake said:
No clue what's going on there with the reaction wheels running while set to 'SAS Only' but I guess there is a pretty easy to solution to your primary issue:
You can bind different keys for 'Steer Left/Right' and 'Drive Forward/Backwards'. The keybindings are located in the game settings -> Input -> Vessel. By default, pitch up/down and drive forward/backwards are controlled by the same keys, so rebinding them should solve your issue
That does it! Thanks for the tip
-
I'm trying to make small rovers with only one or two wheels, which balance themselves using reaction wheels. At first glance, it seems like an easy thing to do, considering how notoriously strong reaction wheels are in KSP. I made a few designs that had a few SAS modules, a probe core, and a set of two wheels. It works just fine if you make one and say, roll it down a hill; it stays upright and moves forwards without issue. But for some odd reason, reaction wheels seem to always react to player control, even when they're set to "SAS only"; attempting to actually engage the rover wheels by pressing any of the directional keys causes it to fall over.
I tried to troubleshoot using highly simplified designs that only used three parts, a probe core, SAS module, and a set of wheels. Despite ensuring that all reaction wheels (including the ones in the command modules) were set to SAS only, it would always suffer the exact same problem. Attempting to engage the wheels causes it to stop directing itself and fall down. Releasing the keys allows it to re-right itself if it has the ability to.
I'm aware that this is kind of a silly thing to do, but I want to make sure it's possible before I start working on a 3D model for a silly little item I might want to mod into the game.
-
I'm trying to create a part based on a premade model. The only major change to the model was that it was scaled down in Blender to match KSPs' scale. I did a lot of reading and searching, and seem to have the vast majority of the work done. The part appears in game with the correct model, hitbox, and test stats (cfg copied from the atmosphere sensor, currently unchanged). The only problem is, it doesn't texture properly at all. It renders just fine in Unity, but renders improperly in game.
I think I've somewhat figured out the problem; the model accepts four different texture files, which map to different sections of the model. I set all four of these properly in Unity, and it looks fine there. But in game, it seems to map the last defined texture in the list to the entire model! I replaced the last texture with "none" to be certain, and sure enough, the entirely model was re-textured to an off white color in game. I tried looking for questions that related to this problem, but I didn't find anything helpful.
Does KSP support this, and I'm just doing it wrong? Do I have to jump through loop holes to make it work? Or am I approaching this entirely wrong? Keep in mind, this is my first attempt at modding KSP. I apologize if I'm not providing enough info; feel free to tell me exactly what you need to see and I'll look into adding it.
-
I feel it'd be better to have some sort of robotic arm part that has a claw or attachment node on it, kind of like what the ISS has. It'd cover everything you'd want functionally (although not visually, but it makes more sense for space).
-
I can't figure out what an "NRE" is, but if it's what I think it is, then I'm very excited to try out the SM-25 again :3
-
2 hours ago, JTeam_ said:
I think the idea is you conduct a low resolution survey with the M700 Survey Scanner, then orbit right above the point where a planet's atmosphere ends, and do Narrow-Band scans to get a higher resolution ore map. Remember to use KerbNet!
Oh, so it's Kerbnet map is different from the Survey Scanners results? I couldn't tell the difference...
-
I simply have no idea how to properly use this piece...
I used it a lot in sandbox because it looked cool, but the actual information it provides seems very difficult to use. Having to actively monitor it and guess which section of the ground it's referring to as it sweeps past in orbit is not an easy task. I initially thought that maybe it would update the Survey Scanners color map to be more precise, but it doesn't seem to affect it all that much. The only feature I actually found to be somewhat useful was it's unique Kerbnet ore highlight feature, but that can easily be done using just the Survey Scanner instead.
Initially I didn't think too much of it; being in sandbox mode starting out, I just saw it as another mediocre part. But then I started my science save to discover that it was an extremely high tier part stuck all the way in the back of the tech tree at 1,000 science points 0.o
How are you actually supposed to use this part, and why is it so expensive? I feel my mining operations could really benefit from it, but I have no idea how to use it to its full potential.
-
I tried building a new Service Module by completely throwing out the SM-25 and it's added parts and building a new one based off of a new SM-25. And it suffered from the exact same fueling issue
I decided to ditch it for a more standard setup with a rockmax tank and some radial additions, but given all the trouble the Sm-25 has given to me in the past I feel I should just stop trying to use it now...
-
7 minutes ago, bewing said:
Wow, how do you find all this crazy stuff?
Of your list of troubles, the only one I know about is the undocking problem. It's been an issue in KSP for ages, but almost nobody can manage to make it happen twice. And unless we can do it repeatably, the devs can't fix it. They've tried. The way you fix it after it happens is by using a persistence file editing tool. If you need it in the future, just search the forum for "Can't Undock".
As far as your fuel problem goes:
^ this is correct. If it isn't working like that, then you need to post your craft file here so that other people can test it and verify the problem.
The staging GUI never ever breaks. So the way you keep it from breaking is that you just use it normally and it doesn't break.
So, once again, if you can make some other funky thing happen, then you need to post your craft file so we can all verify that something is broken.
It's good to know there's a proper solution for at least one of these issues! I imagine that undocking issue could potentially ruin all sorts of stuff if there wasn't at least some workaround.
The issue appears to be consistent with the craft, so here's the .craft file. Feel free to tell me if I messed something up, this is the first time I've shared a craft publicly before. The former issue near the beginning can be replicated by simply placing the Service Modules Wolfhound onto the SM-25, and the later issue is already what the craft is suffering from; I don't know how to fix it without doing something dumb like adding fuel lines. The rest of the rocket appears to work as intended, though.
As for the staging GUI, it's fine that it's unknown; the fix was as easy as switching vehicles, so if it ever comes up again, it shouldn't be that big of an issue.
Does anyone have any tips for getting the most twr per part, while keeping burn time high enough to use that twr? I'd love that 
I decided to ditch it for a more standard setup with a rockmax tank and some radial additions, but given all the trouble the Sm-25 has given to me in the past I feel I should just stop trying to use it now...
Manuever nodes and Orbital Info locked for seemingly no reason?
in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
Posted · Edited by Pacca
On further inspection, it seems like every single one of my in flight craft are affected by this! Which would really suck considering how far I am ;w;
None of them are labelled as debris or asteroids and most of them have functional connected probe cores (except for a few with no connection, which have limited probe control as expected). And all my craft use stock parts.
After checking my mods though, I did notice I had one mod I that I'm not sure how I got in the first place, "Custom Barn Kit". Removing that seems to fixed it!