• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

47 Excellent

About Tiron

  • Rank
    Rocket Scientist
  1. Just a note to the people of the present viewing this old, old thread: The Pancakes don't work anymore. The stock aerodynamic model was VERY different at the time. I'll also mention something I didn't at the time: I had the entire fuselage of the Valkyrie behind the cargo bay welded together to reduce flopping and lag, which is why only the nose flexes when the nosegear hits. I'm pretty sure it would've taken the hit anyway but there would've been a lot more bending. We didn't have KJR at the time, and the stock joints were even floppier than they are now, so welding was the only way.
  2. I came up with a fix for the LV-T45's bottom node, that makes it line up properly with the bottom of the nozzle. Quick modulemanager patch, just throw it in a .cfg file (it's also set to not do anything if Ven's isn't installed): @PART[liquidEngine2]:NEEDS[VenStockRevamp]:AFTER[VenStockRevamp] { @node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -8.1, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0 }
  3. It was the dumbest thing. Taniwha's script for making the .version files left the build field blank on release builds, and AVC's parsing apparently can't handle null fields. AVC actually *does* pick up the version file, and adds it to the count of mods installed, but can't parse the 'version' construct because of the null field, and thus it doesn't show up in the list. the file in question is: ..\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads\Plugins\EL.version The problem is in line 5: "VERSION":{"MAJOR":5,"MINOR":4,"PATCH":0,"BUILD":}, You can fix it in about 5 seconds on an existing install of 5.4 by opening the file with notepad++ and changing it to either "VERSION":{"MAJOR":5,"MINOR":4,"PATCH":0}, or "VERSION":{"MAJOR":5,"MINOR":4,"PATCH":0,"BUILD":0}, Taniwha's modified his script so from the next version onward it'll automatically do the latter, and should work.
  4. I'm wondering what it does if you land at KSC, but not KSC. ...You know, like here: (Single Stage Round Trip to Duna that didn't have enough fuel to make it to the runway after Aerobraking.) There's a launchpad and everything (don't recall if it had launchpad biome, but it did have KSC biome.)
  5. I agree with the last part of the statement, although I'm unsure how much the fact you weren't around had to do with it Mostly me whining and Taverius pointing out there was an empty wiki that would be perfect for such things, and then awesome people jumping all over it.
  6. Mechjeb plugin also has the same problem with the obt and tgt submenus...and the same solution. Comment out line 825 (as opposed to 862 for VV.) It's exactly the same setup as the VV one, but in the 'pluginSmartASS' page instead of the 'pluginVesselView' page.
  7. Can't wait to see it. I got a lot of work to do on the planes still. The Delta-Deluxe replacement in the pre-alpha stuff works pretty well with it, the R8 replacement not so much (those being the two the planes were using...with NTBI wings from Taverio's Pizza and Aerospace, it matched pretty good. Not so much with Pwings, especially the B9 Pwings.)
  8. Ah. Nice. I'm having to re-wing my principal (space)plane design (all four variants, whimper) because of a FAR problem with part of my wing arrangement, and the winglets I've got on it don't really match...
  9. The heck stabilators are you using there and where do you get them?
  10. ()@% ()@*%)( @()%() @%() I figured it out. It's not anything with the actual layout of the plane, but purely how I built the inner wings, to get the shape I wanted. At the time, pwings couldn't handle a shape like that(without looking REALLY stupid anyway), so I built it out of a bunch of wing pieces. Five of TVPP's NTBI wings, to be exact. Four 2x1 wings, turned sideways, plus a 2.5x2 tailfin, also turned sideways. Something about the 2x1 wing panels being turned sideways induces a HUGE amount of N-Beta. And that's it, so far as I can tell. Time to try Pwings again I guess...sigh. This is going to be a LOT of work.
  11. Actually if you hover over it, it tells you. Up to a point anyway. Just...not so much on the 'how to fix it' front.
  12. RPM also doesn't give a crap if you've got a SCANsat part on the ship or not (I think it's supposed to check maybe from looking at the code, it's clearly not working if it is), but only gives you a rectangular, zoomable map (I really wish it had some way to change it to polar or something, it's almost useless for polar navigation because it gets so distorted that not only do the shapes on the map have little meaning, but so do general directions!) It actually makes sense that the multispectral does still return something if there's no biome, for both gameplay and realistic reasons. Gameplay wise...most planets don't have 'biomes' set up yet, but probably will eventually. It'd also give an even bigger incentive than there already is to install that mod that adds biomes to the other worlds. Realistically speaking, almost regardless of what is meant by 'multispectral', *some* kind of result is going to get returned. (RADAR not as much, and probably less usefully even if there was something in the two cases it generates a static map.)
  13. I've mapped the entire System except for the Sun...although only with the low-res and the biome maps, as I haven't unlocked the SAR yet. It's the first time I've mapped everything at all though, and it's entirely thanks to being able to map at high warp. I'll admit that my description was unclear, there are two forms of 'static' you can get, which are very easy to tell apart by looking at them but somewhat harder to describe. The first is the 'out of power' type, which results in animated static that sort-of follows the scanlines and only appears on the small map. You can still kinda see the map through it at parts, because it kinda clears out right behind the scanline for a few moments? Or somesuch. The second type is the 'nothing to display' type, which you get from biome mapping anything that isn't Kerbin or its Muns, or from Altitude-mapping something with no ground (Jool and the Sun). It's...well, I want to say 'Static' but let's go with 'fixed'. It's clearly randomly generated, as it changes when the map gets redrawn, but it isn't animated. It stays fixed until you do something that causes the map to redraw. It basically looks like a screenshot of what you get out of an old analog TV that's been tuned to a channel that isn't there: random black-and-white dots. It's still helpful because it lets you see where you've scanned so far. The multispectral will let you turn the scans in for science even when all it can do is a static "map", but the radar will not. I've yet to manage to 'map' the Sun effectively, as I've yet to figure out a way to circularize at a low enough altitude. (Mechjeb wants 26 THOUSAND m/s to do it. Or was it 28? Whatever.)
  14. To be honest, it's not the 'aerospace engineer' version we really need. We need the quick-and-dirty rules of thumb, shortcuts, and 'if this then do that' type stuff. It's like so many things in this game: knowing the 'What' is more important than knowing the 'Why', because there's umpty billion tricks and tools to figure out the 'Why' for you. The 'fly to the Mun' trick is a good example of this: Burn Prograde shortly after the Mun rises in front of you. You don't need to know WHY it works to use it. Even when you get into more advanced interplanetary transfers, you don't need to have a clue about any of the math or reasons behind a Hohmann transfer(or even that it's CALLED that for that matter), all you need to know is that you need to burn at the right Ejection Angle when your Target is at a particular Phase angle, and what the two angles are (which there's at least four ways to get that I know of.) FAR seems to already *have* the tools, it's just lacking in explanations for how to turn the data they spit out into useful design information. Edit: A good example in that thing someone posted up above: "Zδe is assumed to be correct for a standard tailplane design, so for canard designs it will be wrong." All my current planes have at least one thing showing up red, and they all use Canards, so I'm betting that's probably it. (no it's not, it's white.) Edit2: I'm also having a problem with one of my planes...I went to tweak a couple things slightly and...doing so breaks the simulations entirely. Works fine until I change something, and then boom, sims seem to just crash. Console's full of 'NaN' errors. Edit3: Okay, having read through that thing Thorfinn posted and looked at the stats on all four variants of my plane (which have some pretty large variances in how they're built), the problem seems to be coming from a large, very negative N-beta. I also just discovered you can hover over the individual stats to get a directed explanation of what they are and what they should be. Which is...somewhat more helpful. Still doesn't tell me how to fix it (something ferram said about a 'strong vertical tail', on the other hand...) Edit4: or not...changing the rudders isn't doing a bloody thing to it. It sticks on about -12.8 basically no matter what I do to it. Odd.
  15. I can't add things to it if I don't understand the things in the first place, which is kinda the point. That said, if someone that DID understand it would add some stuff, it could be extremely helpful. Edit: I'll mention also that the instability of my designs is EXTREMELY minor. The SAS damps what little of it is there most of the time, and the only time it really gets to be an issue is when I'm trying to pull the nose up to gain some altitude after it's dropped a bit too low while I'm in a mach 4.9+ cruise at 20km+. It'll either yaw off, roll off, or both(generally in the form of one and then the other). I can correct it, but it takes a fair amount of fiddling. Once I've got the correction in it's stable enough that the SAS will hold it, although it tends to let the nose drop a bit below where I left it (which I can usually compensate for by setting it higher than I want it.) It's good enough that I can alt-tab out and only check on it every few minutes to make a correction once it's established. Changing the wings from one tick of dihedral to one tick of anhedral (fairly minimal change, and still looks good) reduced it a bit.