Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Space_Coyote

  1. Th hard part is done.. Thought I'd nevrrer see this happen again in my life time.. But.. BOOYAH! We're back in Business! Space _Coyote
  2. To quote a famous Kerbal: Jedidiah Kerman: "You will not go to space today, Blue Origin." But it took 23 times before this did happen.. which is kind of impressive for an upstart company like Blue Origin. I mean how many failure has another company had before its' rockets failed? But when you have 22 perfect (or near perfect) flights and you finally get a failure, the real question is.. "How far will this set you back?" It's hard to say in the case of Blue Origin.. But I'm guessing at least a year maybe? But then this is the tenacity of privatized space flight.. You trip, you fall, you pick yourself up again and you keep going... Space_Coyote
  3. I'm curious on why NF Construction hasn't been updated for 1.12.3. I was thinking the issue here is the fact that they had that bug dealing with Docking ports and the "Drift" they had in 1.12.1 and 1.12.2. But I'm just curious as to why this one has not been updated. Just asking. Space_Coyote
  4. Well after seeing the teaser for "Lightyear", I have to say this and this is for the upcoming KSP 2 that is also coming out (Hoepfully) in 2022. But do you know what we need? Buzz's test ship in the trailer as a model to be put into KSP2. No joke.. Complete with "Warp / Hype-rspeed" Technologies (Crystolic Fusion anyone?) included. Anyone want to build something like that for KSP 1 as well. Cause I know a certain "LGM" by the name of Jedediah Kerman who wants to try that ship out! I mean I'd love to see what we as engineeres (the LGM's as it were), could come up with in order to make a faster than light ship.. After all we do have the mod technologies so why not make it happen? Seems only fair enoough to go to Infinity.. and Beyond! (I just had to say that). Space_Coyote
  5. I tend to agree wit the observation given and in fact it would be back to lose a lot of "Probe Cores" of different sizes from 3.5 to 7.5 meters wide (I use a 3.5 one to do a controlled re-entry of the 2nd stage of an old rocket I still am upgrading constantly , so losing those cores because of the fact that someone just left, would be a real heart break.. which then brings up an intersting question for the upcoming KSP 2 and the modding community. And that is of ocurse, are some of these modders going to continue or give up and let their mods die? There's plenty of good mods out there, the only issue is that some go back as far as 1.3.x and some could be re-instated. But I guess to each modder his own. that's what makes KSP great.. the ability to go in and improve on a product.. and in the case of SpaceY Lifters and it's add-on, it is worth the effort. Space_Coyote
  6. It's funny that @NecroBones hasn't done a major update (or even a mior one to this mod, since 1.4.x and I've hardly seen him comment about any plans for updating this to our final release (1.12.2), and in fact I was wondering if anyone has tried to contact him in order to extend the "Shelf life' of this mode and the Spacey Heavy Lifter add-on. I mean it's kind of odd to have a mod last for so long, nad not needing an update due to some update of KSP "Breaking" the mod" so to speak. So has anyone tried to talk to him in order to extend the "Shelf" life of the SpaceY series? Anyone? Space_Coyote
  7. Well if I can make a suggestion, how about moving the water launch site start points from it's current location to the bay to the north side of KSP After all I do have a valid arguement here , and this is really more a bit of logic than anything else.. Ever see a rocket explode? Like this one? The simple logic here is really nothing more than Safety (and wince we have KSP 2 coming and we'll have Multi player modes, This is good practice to put a water launch site in a safe and secure location rather than having flaming debris falling onto your boating Kerbals heads.. It's just simple common sense.. After all sometimes to convince a person is to actually show what the issue is.. (and provide a good argument here), and thus there's my argument. Safety concerns that's all. Besides at that location you still have access to the open ocean.. much like Cape Canaveral harbor has in Real life.. So there is the argument, I'd like to see a logical rebuttal here. Space_Coyote
  8. Hello, Space Coyote here, I've been a bit of a Kopernicus fan and I know that there used to be a way to remove certain planets so you could make you Solar System look different as I recall the old coding (pre-1.12.x) the code looks a bit like this: @Kopernicus:BEFORE[Kopernicus] { !Body[Name of Planet] {} } for exampel here's this code as I rememeber if if I remove say Dres @Kopernicus:BEFORE[Kopernicus] { !Body[Dres] {} } I'm just wondering if the coding is correct or not. Because in 1.12.x (1.12.2) the code I use seems to not work Is there something I am doing wrong or am I misspelling something? Any ideas? Space_Coyote
  9. With Flight Tracker being updated (as of 12 August, 2021,) is Earn your Stripes now 1.12.2 compatible? If so then expect a download... Space_Coyote
  10. Well, I am having other issues and this involves the docking ports (Most notably the Clamp-o-tron Port Sr. Now when I create a station I use Clamp-otrons on all points include the seciton that is connected to the until that helps get the station part into orbi.. Now then, I get to the station and try to stick this part onto another part where another part also has had a booster attached to it.. Now these two parts should be able to be welded togather and I've tried both the compress parts as well as the Multi-weld with no suck luck.. Also what does the "Reset Acquire do. Hat I'm wondering is really how to put parts onto a station so that you have one long line.. (Apparently It seems either the parts are bugged/Broken or something is up as I can't attach a part to the back end of a station. It's getting rather fustrating as it seems that there's a bug somewhere ein the coding.. but what it is.. I haven't the clue.. Maybe @RoverDude Can enlighten us all on how to work around this issue.. Space_Coyote
  11. I'm having an isue with the "Konstruction" part of the mod and this involves weldable docking ports.. The Problem: I'm buidling a space station and I get two arts docke now one of the joints is a primary joint where the booster to the station was in fact moved away and thus freed up the port , now I want to bring in a new part (Say an extention to expand the station), and in fact now I dock and want to compress weld and... 'Nothing" no weld no smoky poof or whatever.. Okay posible misalighnment maybe? So I try to undock the part to try again and surprise! It won't undock either.. So what now/ how can I unock the part and then redock it if th edocking port won't let go..(This seems to be an issue with every version I've played with ince this mod has come out.. Also now with the fack that we have "Some assemby required" Wouldn't be be easier for a kerbal with a welding tool go out and start welding in order to remove the locked welds (thus weling it into place.. Might be something to look into when it comes with the Konstruction Side of the mod.. Space_Coyote
  12. And if I don't mind asking , which "Dependencies" should I be looking for?" After all I went front to back on this thread to look for them. and I could find none . So if it is at all possible , could someone please pointme to said "Dependencies" and I will be more than Glad to install them Space_Coyote
  13. I just installed this into 1.11.2 and apparently the parts that are in the set are now reverting to a basic PPD_10 type with extneded node point. So I'm starting to wonder if 1.11.x has broken something with the mod. Which is kin of odd, considering tha bird worked all the way up to 1.10.x. Any ideas as to why? Space_Coyote
  14. As long as we don't have P.A.P.P. * I've liking this mod But what about LEMON? KIWI? TOMATO? but please no P.A.P.P. I just don't want this song running though my head again! Space_Coyote
  15. I'm just curious if Restock and Restock + work in 1.11.2 or not.. simple quetion. Space_Coyote
  16. @JadeOfMaar Well I can understand maybe that is why i pointed you to that link as there is source code that could work.. Another thing that I bet a lot of folks wouldl probably look at is in fact the dreaded.. 'ICBM Missile Silo" . I can imagine having test fires of ICBM's from something like this (Though it would be interesting to see someone work on that idea.. I mean Kerbal space program and the mods are so versatile it's amazing these will or will not be incorporated when kSP2 comes out. but since w ewait, it's funny that some folks haven't updated some mods in eon while others have been taken over or improved to keep them up to standard. that's the key thing here. Trying to keep things up to Standars since KSP seems to do an upgrade every 6 months or so. but I do hope pointing you in the right directions might make the finalized product better.. that's all that matters when it comes to mddding. so keepup the good work Space_Coyote
  17. @JadeOfMaar Personally I wouldn't mind seeing even a submarine area as well that way you can launch a sub if you wanted to.. I mean if you want to look at the idea look at the thread titled called Water Launch Sites . I mean the developer here had the right idea, but again if you look at his placement of wher eit is, you can see that if a rocket exploded, well you get the idea.. (Also I have been studying the terrain around The Kerbal space Center and in fact where the harbor is IMHO is a good spot. The logic here is because in a polar orbial shot the rockets tend to head south (Look at real life Vandenberg Air Force Base, in California, and you'll see why. but if we use the area to the north of the ksc, that whole area around the inlet is a perfec spot to expand and or widen the actual harbor.. just my thoughts and observations. Space_Coyote
  18. Here's another suggestion for the guy with the brains.. make the harbor larger in space (that way you can dock an aircraft carrier or some boats in said harbor.. also maybe move the one side ot that other area but it's still a good mod, and yes I am still using it. Space_Coyote
  19. I think the mod you are missing in that case is the "Tundra's space ccenter" mod as I've had this happened.. Also if you want to use all the launch pads you have to go into your game settings and go to the Kerbal Konstructs (KK) inside of settings and turn on 'Open all bases from the options menu." Tundra's Space Center: Space _Coyote
  20. I have a simple question as I am using the "Bleeding Eagle" version of this mod, plus OUterplanets. But I would like to delete a planet (Body) from this planet pack (Dres, most notably.) As I recall and going over previous versions of Kopernicus (non RTB Versions) the format for removing a planet was this line of Code: I tried this with the current RTB Kopernicus "Bleeding Eagle" update an ti seems that this bit of code seeems not to work. Am I doing something wrong? Space_Coyote
  21. 1.11? Well.... If you want my opinion on what should be done, I personally think we don't need another expansion to tie the game into another space company.. Instead 1.11 should be more about "Quality of life" updates.." and whhere's a couple of good examples.. First off I'll be honest if you look at the mod pages there's a wide swing betgween some of the modders like Linux Guru Gamer who can keep up with the updates every time a new one is released and some who don't update for weeks/months till after an upate has come out.. Guys like Kerbal Konstructs and Environmental VVisual Enhancements are couple of good examples, and others that go back prior to 1.8.0 To be honest, it would be nice to see something called 1.11 "Weather or not" and this one would be more about environmental visual enhancements like Clouds and updates like that .. after all that would be one option.. Another would be an idea called "Expand the universe" which would help out the guys like Kopernicus and the planet builders a lot.. I think these two areas the environmental ones for Kerbin and planet/Universe building is overlooked.. Because every time the game gets an update some of the gamers fall further and further behind the curve until they just finally give up and in some cases if they don't leave an opening to let someone to readopt the mod the mod falls by the wayside and disappears only to show up a few years later when someone discovers it then tries to revive it only to fail.. I think it's not about the modders not being able to program it's just that now that these updates are coming in every six months or so, it seems more and more modders are falling behind, and by the time the modders do finally get around to getting their mods updated the next Update has come out and has made the game mod obsolte again. and for the gamerr who loves mods like myself this can be rather frustrating having to wait up to six months and then when the next new update hits, you're behind the curve again.. So yeah I think it's time for some folks to either start learning to keep up with the curve or abandon projects and if you think I'm kidding just go take a look at the mudding section of the forums and you'll get an idea of what is going on.. So yeah this is what 1.11 should be about updating the Kerbin environment with Clouds being allowed to mod the Universe to our own likings or maybe come up with an idea to start creating worlds outside the Kerbin system or giving the players enough time who do mod to bring the mods up to speed (with KSP 2 due out later next year or so), it's amazing that these features haven't been included and each time the unity game engine updates it seems that somebody are falling more and more by the way side as the mudding community is gettnig more and more frustrated at being able to keep up.. So yeah that's where 1.11 should go.. to address these issues and to help the mudding community along.. not to hinder them and to let palyers go back to the good old days when you didn'thave to wait too long to get a mod update.. or incorporate it into the game.. Look at what they've done in the last couple of updates and you'll get an idea.. In fact why not call 1.11 the "It's a mod mod mod world update (a play on worlds of a famous comedy movie..) after all itf things don't star changing soon mor ena dmore modders will fall by the way side and slowly the mudding community will fall apart faster than a poorly built rocket designed by Bob Kerman So that's just my thoughts on the matter, I'd like to hear some feedback o this.. Space_Coyote P.S. I am still a fan of SPaceX don't get me worng but I think eveyrtime a space company gets involvedf the modders get left further and further in the dust.. and some of these mods are rather important to help build the game not destroy it.
  22. Long story short, if you keep bugging the Developer about when this next version is going to come out, expect a 1 day delay as he has to stop and answer all your silly questions.. Now, back to the regularly scheduled conversation Space_Coyote
  23. And has this been tested in 1.10? (Since I fond that it works in 1.9 and 1.9.1) Space_Coyote
  24. I had a question about the Comets and if they are already turned on or if not , how do you turn them on especially in Sandbox mode? Any Ideas? Space_Coyote
  • Create New...