Jump to content

Wobbly Av8r

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


78 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Well, looking at it, no autostruts are enabled for the vessel at all, and the result isn't so much Kraken-like as it seems to *possibly* be a bug introduced when the good folks at Squad made it so passengers couldn't EVA - I think that was one of the modifications that occurred between 1.10 and 1.11. I'm wondering if this issue isn't some side-effect of that decision, even though the Kerbal occupying the EAS-1 is a scientist (There are pilots and an engineer in some of the other EAS-1 seats in the payload bay... But what has me mystified is the noise that it makes, completely unassociated with any actions taking place and the undesired staging. Very odd. In any case, thank you, @Serenity for taking the time to respond and offer your ideas.
  2. Well, I re-engineered the vessel - I even unstaged the fairing but found out that the transition to [the problem] occurs immediately after I pick up a stranded scientist and EVA the Kerbal to an empty EAS-1 seat that is located in the payload bay - the moment I clicked on "Board EAS-1 seat", the staging status on the left goes into the "You have two stage 4's that are both empty" as described above, and opening up that seat again does not change it back. Funny thing was that didn't happen the first time I picked up the stranded Kerbal... maybe things changed when I updated to 1.11.2? I was previously running 10.2 prior to the upgrade...
  3. I have an odd problem that I'm hoping someone here has encountered and can help me to correct, or at least to understand what is going on: I am docking two ships around Minmus, one that has transported Kerbonauts from Kerbin to Minmus orbit, and a lander craft that I dock with, refuel and transport the required Kerbals to the Minmus surface and back. This has worked "famously" for a few missions until now. As I docked with the lander vessel (I docked by flying the lander because it has the RCS system, not the transport) immediately, upon docking, the TD-25 Decoupler performed an uncommanded separation followed by a sound which is best described as a Geiger Counter clicking combined the operation of a steam engine. IOW, I have no idea what sound file is called, but it's not a decoupler sound file! In any case, I've Alt-L 'd to prevent staging (which is not illustrated below, but it was tried), I've deselected each of the docking port Jr's options to not stage, I've tried to dock while flying the non-RCS transport ship and no matter what I try, upon docking the decoupler does its thing and my fuel and engines go bye-bye, along with that weird sound. I verified the file integrity. Of interest, on my transport ship staging information displays NOTHING; no decoupler (or parachutes, which are also attached) or engines and while my total dV is displayed, none of the two stages (both which are labeled "4") have any dV associated with them. I have no problem firing the engines but, again, they are not displayed anywhere in the stack on the left either. What is going on? Is this just a corrupt file? I've checked the .sfs and the vessel has all the components in that file as exists on the ship but none of the status displays seems to think so AND docking creates a weird decoupling/sound. Suggestions?
  4. Well, the picture link doesn't work, but the most common problem is that you need to change the pitch of your propeller blade as well as the torque of the motor. The blade pitch is usually done by selecting "Deploy" for the blade and changing the deploy angle.
  5. While I am sure that if one has the proper mathematical acumen this can be determined 'on paper', on the planet of Kerbin such calculations are left to trial and error - I'm pretty sure it's in their Konstitution! The steps to developing a meaningful chart/table that determines lifting capability needs a consistent launch profile, launching a specific mass (I use full 2.5m ore tanks) and verifying that you can 1) Achieve orbit, 2) Determine how much fuel is left over. The left-over fuel can either be off-loaded or payload increased, as necessary. As an example, I have a booster system that is based upon the Twin-Boar with a Jumbo-64 tank on top. That arrangement will place a relatively steamlined payload of 18t-19t into LKO. As I strap certain combinations of SRB's to it, it increases the amount of payload...
  6. I personally derive my KSP pleasure from attempting to accomplish my space program as if I had to deal with budgetary concerns as well as semi-reality in launch vehicles, meaningful to only one person, but that person happens to be me, so... In so doing, I find others making ENORMOUS ships that fall outside the boundaries I try to set on my own program, both in cost and reality potential. Instead of building ginormous vehicles, I strive to build more compact, powerful, reusable vehicles and attempt to make use of an orbiting fuel station around Kerbin as well as Minmus that can refuel heavier payloads for deep space travel. Very large vessels are built to complete their assembly in orbit with docking ports. This kind of planning (to me) causes me to 'extract' maximum performance from the parts I select, both from a weight perspective as well as a cost factor. My most expensive projects cost well under 200,000 Kerbucks, most less than 100,000 and I recover part of the booster almost everytime so my cost decreases even further. Just a few thoughts if such a thing appeals to you...
  7. I think the answer you're looking for is LEFT-ALT to terminate the fairing without a mating surface (simultaneously with left mouse click).
  8. Try the "[" or "]" (bracket) keys? That's what works on Windows...
  9. Not to be a n a l or anything, but making a new post rather than "necro" a post from 5+ years ago might be the way to go in the future, but as to your issue... If your vessel is composed of more than one command pod, either you or the software has to decide which pod controls the vessel. This includes when you dock with another pod, whether with a docking port or the klaw. Each command pod defaults to priority "10" and if the user has not changed any of the command pods to a higher priority, it "arbitrarily" chooses which pod will take control. This is likely why, after docking with the "debris" which happened to also be a command pod, the debris became the control point. Of course your engine thrust is not aligned with the orientation of the command pod in the klaw and the result is what you experienced. Right-click on the original command pod (the rescue ship) and set the control priority to something higher than 10 and you should at least have control of the vessel as you did before attaching to the stranded vessel. As far placing items in a cargo bay to recover them, I have no experience, so I can't be of any help with that part of your problem... sorry! Good luck!
  10. @pblevy08 First, some background to make sure we're dealing with the same thing: There are two symmetry modes, RADIAL and MIRROR and you can toggle between the two modes with the 'R' key as @vv3k70r stated above. MIRROR symmetry is limited to either placing one part or two parts like a mirror image of each other, thus if you are in this mode, you will NEVER be able place more than two parts [or sets of parts] at a time RADIAL symmetry allows (beyond the standard single part placement) 2-, 3-, 4-, 6-, and 8-way placement, which you can cycle through by using the 'X' key (or reverse direction with SHIFT-X ) Okay, so that's the background; the quick answer to your problem is that WHEN you've attempted to place 4x fins and they "snap" back to 2x fins, WHILE your mouse is on the desired parent part, type 'X' twice. For most construction this will simply get your symmetry back up to what you desire. The reason is can default is because you probably already put some other parts on the rocket body that already have 2x symmetry, and as you move your mouse to place your fins you passed over a 2x symmetry part. If you carefully avoid mousing over any of the 2x symmetry parts [email protected] describes ("kind of come in from below and then place the fins") you avoid this but sometimes it's just easier to have your mouse close to where you want to place your part and type X or SHIFT-X to get to the correct symmetry. One last note: If you have already placed a part with, say, 2x symmetry, if you attempt to place something on THAT part with different symmetry, it won't let you - the results will usually not be what you want anyway. So if you want to, say, place four fins on each of two SRB's on either side of a rocket body with symmetry, you will need to start by ONLY building ONE side of what will ultimately be doubled. In this case you put on one decoupler, then one SRB, then use 4x symmetry to attach fins to the SRB... and THEN (and only then!) go back and select the decoupler (the highest parent part) which 'pulls the part away from the rocket body, change symmetry to 2x and then 'reattach' the decoupler to the rocket body... >voila< you have 4x symmetry fins on a 2x symmetry SRB configuration. Hope that makes sense! Good luck!
  11. Are you trying to build it [from scratch/on your own in the VAB] or are you trying to download something and use it?
  12. First off I commiserate with you about surface recoveries. Second, yes, absolutely using BG parts for recovery is very possible - your solution parallels my own and others I've seen and I can attest to their effectiveness (and level of frustration, so there's that too...) I can't quite venture to say why your Klaw would say it was engaged but not picking up the object, but I would offer that there is a thin line between object collection and object collision, which is a large part of the problem here - I navigate this issue by making sure that before engaging the Klaw that it is as DIRECTLY above the object to be recovered as possible; if you are not right above, the object collision is triggered rather than the connection. Whereas you use wheels to establish such as position, I took the "economical" strategy and "asked" one of the Kerbals on board to go out and push the object until it was right underneath the Klaw'd recovery vehicle. (Those snacks aren't gonna pay for themselves! We worked out a deal...) I would add, if you haven't discovered it already, that when you recover a part which has reaction wheels built in that you disable them before attempting to maneuver, and that your recovery vessel command pod has a higher priority than default or occasionally after you connect, you will have a new orientation / control point and that will definitely make the trip more, uh,... "memorable". [Edit: Oh! And the way to the get the URL embedded is to remove the html formatting - just the url location itself will allow it to be posted as an image in your post rather than a link...]
  13. Actually, I think your problem is similar to my problem (I'm running 1.10 but I've had the same kind of problem since I can remember.) It has to do with the symmetry and how it's built in the VAB/SPH and the solution I've found is to build only one side of the symmetrical structure (in single symmetry) all the way through, i.e. normally you would place two servos, then two engines, and so on, but I would build ONE side of your symmetry, THEN turn on double symmetry and select the root part of the symmetrical structure and place it back down so that the OTHER side is created all at once. Then it behaves like you would expect. Interestingly, in my experience, if you edit an outer portion of the symmetrical structure after original placement as described, you end up with the same problem again, so if you have to change ANYTHING on the symmetrical structure, you have to edit the portion and then place it ALL again in desired symmetry. Don't know why, but it works.
  14. You could very well be right - I've never accepted a contract that didn't have all the parts available, but that certainly doesn't mean that's the way it is.... (That's why I start most of my "help" replies with words like "Usually...") If you or anyone else has the definitive answer, I'd certainly be willing to read and learn!
  • Create New...