Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RocketBoy1641

  1. 2 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

    Honestly, I have a gtx980, which is approximately 1000 miles below min spec for KSP 2. Yet in KSP 1 I can run 90+ mods (~17k mm patches), tons of which are part mods, all the usual suspects for graphics (doe/ps/scatterer/eve/tufx) on both KSRSS and JNSQ, and I get 20-30fps on launch, 30-40 during ascent, and 50+ in space (capped at 60), running at 2650x1440.  I'm very fortunate my potato hardware performs pretty well.

    They will get optimized.... some day.... maybe.

  2. 18 hours ago, marxman28 said:

    So, a future update for the BDB Octans port means I won’t have to do some program sorcery right now?

    Program sorcery is good.  If you make too many cracks about it, they might suggest you play vanilla KSP.  BDB, and indeed ALL KSP mods are sorcery.

    3 hours ago, Rodger said:

    If “SWE” in your gamedata is Solid Waterfall Effects, that’s likely the cause of the ullage motor plumes being bugged. 
    As for the J2 issue, all I can say is the low fps is the only thing that seems likely to have broken the deployment and activation. The dev for the deployable engines mod has retired from ksp1 as well, so your best bet is fist trying the action group workaround posted above, or maybe removing graphical mods like scatterer and EVE/upgrading your PC to get a more stable frame rate.

    I'm thinking: logs, craft files, mod list.... the usual (with the crat file being an extra).

  3. 3 hours ago, Blufor878 said:

    I don't know what that is.


    Pretty sure a multi purpose module with arms is discussed in that or the "After EMIPRE" article.  They were both dreaming big ideas when the budgets didn't happen, they folded to smaller stuff.

    NASA has always been long on pitches, and short on closing the deal with the people that hold the purse strings.  Odd to, because NASA projects can create the ultimate tool in the war on poverty that Johnson pushed for instead of NASA.  That ultimate tool: JOBS.

  4. Has there been any consideration of Pioneer Venus multiprobe (1978)?

    Would a Nerva powered wetlab be something we could get (LH2 only tank)?  Thinking of this for a Venus/Mars flyby.

    Asked and answered on the wetlab.  Had been too long since I looked at it in detail.  I see it has the full range of B9 fuel switches.  But the real question becomes, what color do Kerbals glow?

  5. 1 hour ago, Alpha512 said:

    Am i doing something wrong or is INT-20 (3x F-1A) a ridiculously anemic vehicle? With full S-IC load it can't even lift off, and even with reduced prop load, dry weight is way too high and TWR is way too low. Shortening the S-IC makes it a bit more reasonable, but the overall performance is hardly any better than LRB-260 (2x F-1A) with S-IVB on top, so no extra gain for an extra engine


  6. imgrrrrrowling.  They don't want to upload nicely with the URL insert tool.  But, for what it is worth, here are the current pics of the Skylab B cluster as it would launch.  The SpaceLab airlock gets mounted to the UP node of the rear docking assembly.  I am still not settled on port types.




    Note: yes, I chose the skylab airlock module instead of the SpaceLab module because it never hurts to have an emergency airlock (after other modules are incorperated).  Skylab 2 crew will bring the BDB airlock module.

  7. 32 minutes ago, NaviG said:

    Yes, i have kerbalism. Thanks for the explanation. 

    Any one know how to avoid fast EC draining when cooling the LHO tanks?

    The widget will tell you when you are working with the thermal control system that is bundled.  Part of it will be just how big of a tank you are keeping chilled as volume of the mass (and surface area) will come into play.

  8. So, a few points on what I am cooking up

    Apollo 18 & 19 go ahead for Hyginus Rille and Copernicus Crater.  One or both may get upscaled with a Titian III or Saturn I launched SheLab.  These would be scheduled in July and December of 72.

    Apollo 15 would be treated similarly J missions but with a reschedule to Feb 72.

    Apollo 1 and Apollo 13 happen as historical.  More work towards safety comes out of 13 than historical.

    Vietnam conflict has less political interference with military efficiency.  A lot to be said here, but ultimately several events having to do with Tet 68 preparations turn it into a complete and TOTAL disaster for China, N. Vietnam, and the Viet Cong.  This leads to an end similar to a truce as with the Korean Conflict.  Costs draw down in 1968 ilinstead of rise.

    Apollo 20 is used to launch Skylab in May 73 (as historical).  The Skylab 4 expedition gets the extra six days to make a full 90. Skylab 5 launches 6/74 and lasts 120 days using remaining supplies on station as well as supplies they bring, and one resupply mission with an Ardvark.

    Skylab B to commence fitting out as a resupplyable station with more advanced life support systems, use of the BDB CADs docking on the axial port, rear docking adapter  with rear CADs, 2 Apollo docks and two other docking (yet to be decided for sure).

    Launch date TBD

    ESA Lab will be first add (axial dock).  Later additions will include the power tower above Harmony, (ESA moved to either port or starboard as Harmony takes the axial), and Columbus as the balancing module.

    Space Shuttle- starts SLOW development on schedule, but at a sluggish pace.  It is designed to be an augment instead of a replacement.  It will do things that a shuttle is needed for.  Repair, retrieval, construction that a rocket/pod can not.  Initially TWO shuttles are built.  Challenger accidnet does not happen.  The Russians do build one shuttle (Buran) which is used operationally. This who Shuttle/Buran area has not been looked at much.

    Growth continues slowly through the 80s and 90s.  TBD.

    Feedback welcomed.

  9. 27 minutes ago, Zorg said:


    I dont have a full timeline as the documentation I have are from the later years but best I can tell it started out exclusively assuming a Gemini crew vehicle but then morphed to an Apollo baseline by the mid 60s. 






    Do you have Kerbalism? If so that needs to be fixed on their side. But in the meantime it should be relatively harmless. I believe this means that when you switch to the double sized radiators you will not get double cooling power until this conflict is fixed. Not great but also wont kill your game.

    Pretty sure that is the same one I was getting fatal errors from about 60-90d back.  It was kerbalism side of things.  I know there is a patch; but for the moment I just ditched Kerbalism.  The weights just outweighed my interest in what it does for the moment.

  10. 21 hours ago, Blufor878 said:

    Something I learnt recently was that there was a proposal for SLS to use modernized Saturn V hardware.

    SLS was pretty much guaranteed to not be a move back to a Saturn V with modernization.  I don't recall if it started with Congress making a law; but it was forced to use as much shuttle derived tech as possible.  You might say it was legislated or fiat (one or the other) pork barrel from the start.

  11. Working up an alt timelines and the launch/assembly logistics for a Skylab B based advanced station that builds out to incorporate ISS, MIR and planned but unemployed elements from Freedom/ISS.

    Starting point will be Skylab V mission (expends remains supplies and some they bring).  The mission will have a secondary goal of finalizing design for a new advanced Skylab (Skylab B) that makes use of the Oxygen tank (nearly 25% increase in pressurized volume), but most is devoted toward advanced life support systems.  It will also use what I am approximating at the Common Berthing Mechanism or the BDB one that has the similar 50" wide passage as the lessons learned through Skylab & Salyut have suggested a large passage for equipment upgradablility or repair.

    More to come over time....

    Edit: Note- point of departure may get bumped up slightly to incorporate the canceled lunar missions....or most of them.

  12. 6 hours ago, Richmountain112 said:

    I use Stock System + Planet Cyran + OPM. It explodes if returning from Sarnus (and I assume Urlum and Neidon, maybe Jool. Needs testing to make sure). It's fine from Eve though.

    Also my original comment about Kane heat shield exploding was returning from Sarnus, not Duna.

    Ok, sounding familure.  Not getting time for much sleep let alone looking back at the back stuff in the tread.  Look at the speed differences in that article.  It really blows the mind just how much speed difference is involved in -just- that.  What you did would have been many times faster.... so really hot entry.  Do you happen to have any screenshots of what your inbound velocity was?  Just currious.

  13. 2 hours ago, GoldForest said:

    More MORL tax. And if you're wondering why I needed such a powerful launch vehicle to launch Gemini to the station... I put the station into a retrograde polar orbit (95 degrees)

    Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet







    A lot of people massively underestimate the extra delta v needed when you loosed the benifits of a equatorial orbit profile.

  14. 30 minutes ago, Richmountain112 said:

    Also, why does physics warp always destroy my parachutes?

    Most likely shock when exiting warp if they are open....which may be in your settings for various mods/physics that you selected.

    If they are deploying when you are at warp....ya, bad things happen with warp.


    Can you give more details about sequence of when it is happening and things like altitude and velocity?

  15. 1 hour ago, Richmountain112 said:

    I usually play on settings that Kerbals don't pass out due to high G's. And regarding aerocapture, I almost never actually capture for another pass. Instead I usually proceed straight to landing because the G loads but sometimes if my capsule is too heavy it will escape Kerbin's SOI.

    Ever use balloots?  They can be useful in high atmo

  • Create New...