Kerbalnaut #55487

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About Kerbalnaut #55487

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. @Laie Thanks for the idea... 4x4way rcs on the nose cone, solar panels transfered to nose cone. Engines cutoff with 0.006 eccentricity and i haven't even separated the nose cone yet. Seems I got that just right angle of ascent and now have the attitude control to complete the current contract and should be able to accept and complete the weather satellite one at the same time! And hopefully enough dV in the rcs to get a higher eccentricity for the experiments to run... win - win!
  2. RSS - Real Solar System (KSP in our solar system) RO - Realism Overhaul (More realistic physics and stuff I believe - moar boosters isn't necessarily a quick fix for extra dV) RP-1 - Realistic Progression 1 (the name says it all - realistically progressive contracts) I'd highly recommend all of them, but be warned, the challenge is extreme compared to stock but FAR more customizable. Stock = Lego Duplo RP-1 = Lego Techniks I will add this link in case you fancy the challenge as there is alot more than just those 3 mods involved - - this is an excellent guide to use and covers alot more than just the installation. It'll give you some very welcome notes on how to get started with RP-1. It took alot of experimentation and time wasting making that step up to getting into orbit and as this is the first career playthrough I've managed it on (been using rp-1 for a month or two, KSP only since March). I may just play this until funds run out then start a new one up taking from the lessons I've learned. I'm also using Kerbalism so there is no click for all science type abilities, the cosmic Ray experiment for example takes 90 days to complete and the only satellite I've had last that long was in the polar orbit one that lasted about 130 days before the battery ran dry but due to the eccentricity I accidentally hit with it (0.03) that experiment wouldn't run - needed minimum of 0.04 if you can believe that!? Fml lol. Same goes the the micro meteorite detector! So yeh... challenges galore! I'm thinking I just need the nose cone (which is a smaller avionics unit) to separate and have some attitude adjustment abilities on it... After all... i don't need the fuel tank or engine once the fuel is expended. ....saying that.... all my solar panels are on the tank DOH
  3. The Swivel!? As in the liquid fuel engine from the stock version?? I'm using RSS/RO/RP-1 as stated... I don't believe the Swivel engine is included in that at all... I don't have any SRBs on this design. If you're referring to something else, please clarify. The setup I am currently using is a 2.2m x 14m intergrated tank with an LR79 (S-3D config) and a couple of vernier exhausts on the bottom, when the tank is staged I have an avionics package on top of that with a bunch of RCS thrusters (4x 4-way RCS blocks for directional control + 2x single jets for ullage) on for attitude control and spin stabilisation but this avionics section is staged to an upscaled aerobee (once I'm pointing the right way) on the top - AJ-10-42 and an AJ-10-37 (for better ISP). This means once I have ditched the avionics, I have no control over the satellite in any way other than running experiments. I need to essentially, get into the target orbit (>300km) with the eccentricity of 0.005. With my final ability to adjust course being before I ignite the final 2 stages. I have another contract that requires an eccentricity of between 0.02 and 0.04, this one I am very close to achieving (the above setup is the same as what I had been trying with but now has the next upgrade to the engines) and to do that, I just need to get my angle of ascent angle a bit better and I'll be able to just cut my engines once I'm in the desired orbit. If i add more RCS and fuel to the aerobee, I'm not sure I'll have the dV to even get to orbit. Although i may give it a try tomorrow, these new engine configs have given me an extra 300m/s of dV. So upto 9162m/s with that design, so far I've been getting into orbit (just) with 8800m/s ish. I may have to look at completely redesigning to a more 'traditional' satellite now I have some better first and final stage engines - perhaps multiple AJ-10 (earlies) on a larger payload with the same launch vehicle... (By Gemini, I'm assuming you're referring to the manned missions? I'm struggling to find more science to unlock the capsules atm but yeh... looking forward to them, the contracts are unlocked!) RP-1 is a beast!
  4. KSP 1.8.1 w/ RSS, RO, RP-1 and other assorted mods. Ok... so I finally managed the frankly epic achievement of 'simply' getting into orbit and I've unlocked a lovely array of satellite contracts. One of these is the First Weather Satellite which is asking for an eccentricity of 0.005. If I understand this correctly, that means very, very close to a perfectly circular orbit. Quite by fluke, I managed to hit about 0.03 (Pe @ 350km and Ap @ 830km) when I performed my first Polar Orbit (using the MechJeb orbit info window for information). Since then, i have not been able to get even close (0.074) has been my best attempt since trying this. I was expecting the eccentricity to hit zero and begin increasing again as the orbit becomes established, this doesn't seem to be happening. I think I understand why but can't articulate it... In stock KSP, I would have found this a fairly simple task with little, low throttle burns at Ap/Pe but I am still fairly low on the tech tree and as such have no throttleable or multi-ignition final stage engines. And am essentially still using a sounding rocket on top of a launch vehicle for my satellites. Are there any fool proof ways to hit a target Eccentricity? Or even any tips and tricks that would be helpful? Thanks in advance.
  5. After watching the scrubbed static fire testing of the SN-5 Raptor engines this afternoon, it occurred to me i could possibly do this in rss/ro to improve engine reliability before using for launching rockets. While you correctly state the old school testing techniques, would it be possible to have an entry for static testing somewhere in the tech tree to allow this ability later on? Or is this too complex a task? I'm still new to modding games so just tell me to shut up but as you say, boilerplate test flights were the realistic test method of choice but we do now have the static flights as a realistic test method. [SNIP] And thanks for the effort you have already put into this mod, along with many others, it has vastly increased my enjoyment (and frustration at times) of ksp!
  6. Perfect! Started a test career and followed the steps mentioned in the question. It's back to normal now. Thanks so much linuxgurugamer! Another question raised now regarding save games - I started one yesterday on the rolled back version of CTB, will I be able to continue that career save with this fix or will I have to start again? I should have mentioned I only play on career mode too... hope that didn't slow your investigation - pretty damn quick fix if you ask me
  7. One reason and one reason alone - inexperience. I wasn't picking on you or your mod, my apologies for not digging further. I noticed CTB when I was copying the list of mods for the log and didn't recognise it as one I'd manually installed, when i found that first exception at the moment in the log where the problem manifested in game, I didn't really understand what it was telling me but I did notice the similar looking 'ClickThrough' reference and chose to investigate that with rolling back the CTB mod. That worked so I assumed it was that. I didn't look too much into the other exceptions further than noting their existence (I guess making another assumption that they would all be similar). Historically I'm a purest when it comes to games, I play them as they were intended. I am also fairly new to KSP but couldn't resist the urge to play in our solar system (which I believe wouldn't be possible without this mod and others of yours so thank you for your efforts in creating them!) and there started my modding of this game. I will test that link out shortly, thank you so much for taking a look into it. I will learn from this and investigate a bit more in depth if I come across any other bugs. EDIT - recalling opening CKAN with my last install - which I messed up - hence the reinstall... upon opening CKAN it notified me of 2 mod updates - one of which was the CTB and one other I can't recall (possibly RO) - knowing it had been updated since I last had it working could have been why I stopped looking after finding that first exception.
  8. Firstly, Hi linuxgurugamer, thanks for the mods you've created! I may have found a conflict with your latest CTB update, however given the time it takes my slow ass laptop to load KSP, it could take me forever to narrow it down but hopefully this bug report will help you a bit... it is my first so be gentle Extra note... I do not have either DLC installed on this install... if you need any further info to help you, let me know. I couldn't locate the Player.log file when I created this report but I have now and updated CTB again and reloaded so I could see if the issue is replicated and I get the appropriate log file. The problem does indeed persist, fixed by rolling back to v0.1.10.6. As the previous version seems to work, an easy fix might be to update the version compatibility to exclude 1.8.x? That is... if this issue doesn't happen in 1.9.x+. As I'm using RSS/RO/RP-1, I can't update KSP to attempt a replication of the bug with later versions.
  9. I have just reinstalled KSP v1.8.1 with RSS/RO/RP-1 amongst other mods I'll list from the KSP.log (some of which I never never used before and I have found no known conflicts between them) and a curious and very irritating bug has occurred. - Player.log - KSP.log This issue has never occurred during past installs using ALL but the highlighted mods - see spoiler. SIDENOTE- Previous installs have used Principia but on this occasion, I chose to use PersistentRotation instead. KSP 1.8.1 64-bit - Win10 PROBLEM - Loss of green part highlights during flight and design while mousing over parts and editing of action groups disabled. STEPS - Design rocket - start KRASH simulation (highlight issue manifests) - Terminate simulation (highlight issue persists and editing of action groups doesn't work - including no editor dialog for RealChutes - to clarify - I can get to the Action Groups tab but cannot select any action group or part). TRIED - leaving and re-entering VAB - issue still apparent, exiting to main menu and reloading save - issue still apparent, closing application and re-loading - issue resolved until KRASH simulation started again. MODS installed (extract from KSP.log) - most have worked fine in previous install - new ones to me are highlighted in BOLD in the section 'Folders and files in GameData:' as not all are listed with version numbers. I don't know much about the KSP.log file and it's contents but I do have limited Java programming knowledge and NullReferenceExceptions are never good news, the following is an exert from the KSP.log file that appears at the time of the scene change from editor to flight (simulation) - I don't know if this is related to this issue but similar Exceptions are listed in following scene changes and in large numbers when returning from flight to editor - will show all Exceptions if required and requested. The only mod installed that i can glean from this exert seems to refer to the ClickThroughBlocker. Upon first load of this install (and any subsequent Career mode start) I received a pop-up that I believe is due to a recent update to the mod on this pop up, I select the previous default of following the mouse and not the click. I never installed this mod manually so I have to assume it is a dependent for another mod and was installed thusly and automatically by CKAN. Perhaps this new update is causing a conflict with one of the other mods? After investigation, ToolbarController is dependent on the ClickThroughBlocker which is in turn depended on by the Patch Manager which I believe is a mod that cannot be removed without wide ranging mod removals... My suspicions seems to have been confirmed - after rolling back the ClickThroughBlocker to version, the problem appears to be resolved after starting a new save. Will update again if the issue rears it's ugly head again. Re-updating CTB does replicate the problem, rolling back does fix it.
  10. First load after a fresh reinstall of RSS/RO/RP1 and associated mods - 354s 2nd load - 257s After adding this mod - 255s Meh... I'll keep it 1.8.1 with a boatload of mods (including visual (EVE with added modifications) and audio mods for the first time) running on 2.3Ghz i5 laptop with 8gb ram - 64bit Win10 and KSP without dlcs installed. Numbers are much quicker than it feels while loading though, i put it perceptually at about 10 minutes... nice surprise. Thanks for the mod.
  11. Ignore - how do it delete this thread?
  12. You're making assumptions that it's an 8GB stick I would use... try 2 x 16gb so I don't need to upgrade again in another 6 months after another ton of memory crippling updates from more than a dozen pieces of software already installed... Seems my personal observation on the term perception of value - an entirely unique per person aspect that no one person can enforce on any other person - is a source of contention, so you have my apologies for that. I only mentioned it as some had mentioned the pricing and I added my perspective on that. Which also seems to be derailing the thread a bit. The main point I wanted to make with my first post was... Electronic Arts not getting involved.... phew and T2 are too big of a company to warrant the use of the Early Access program - they should be able to put out a spotless KSP2 in full on day one! I would add that a demo would be the perfect thing for it, it'll showcase new features and whet appetites, also... if polished enough there should be an early release to the more popular modders under NDA so they can work their magic and maybe even have some mods ready for the day the game is released... Demo - yes, EA - shouldn't qualify to use the facility in my eyes
  13. Because I have different priorities perhaps... rent to pay etc... not to mention I didn't have hardware good enough to play a game like this until the prices for those came down too. I can be pretty sure that the hardware I have upon release of KSP 2 won't run that either... it's not just the software, it's everything else with it. EDIT - and to be fair, after adding the RSS/RO/RP-1 mods and associated additions, the 8GB RAM in my £700 'gaming' laptop is showing signs of needing to be upgraded - 90%+ usage launching sounding rockets... that's another £100-150 I need to spend.