• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About MDBenson

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Took 1.6 through a couple of launches and it's okay as long as you don't try and roll into heads-down. I'm getting quite severe slewing to the side on roll. Might just be my awful piloting skills, tough. The robotic arm is currently very unstable and messes around a lot with launch and landing stability due to it flapping about in payload bay. The braking parachute is probably a bit too strong in the drag department. It is causing the Orbiter to roll and pitch on deploy in my stock game. Other big issue I found is the RCS jets on the nose cone are not working well. I don't know if this is to balance the RCS or just an error, but I found the vertical jets are not firing fro mthe correct place, and there is no 'reverse' translation jets? Aside from that it looks sharp, EDIT: Oh, also I tested this on stock 1.0.4 Linux x86_64 and it seems to be okay, although it's laggy at low altitude, but it might just be my graphics settings as above a certain altitude it's suddenly fine.
  2. It's worst after the 4 boosters are ejected and it is long and thin. I have had other issues with the stock aero too, what initially seemed to be a great improvement to the stock game is proving to be a total PITA, especially for mod parts I threw my teddy out and decided to try it with the new FAR version, we'll see Oh, also I'm getting launch exhaust under the pad before the engines fire on the ALV and Tavio, I haven't tried others. It might be a mod conflict but I thought I'd mention it!
  3. Hmm... I've been playing a lot with Tantares the last few days in career mode and found that the Soyuz (Tavio) is mighty unstable in the atmosphere on ascent. Flying to about 6km it tends to flip or twist over. The core stage minus it's boosters is much worse too. Fitting lots of large fins to the bottom helps a good bit but looks silly I initially thought it was me nudging it over a few degrees, that wasn't the case. I thne swapped the PFairings for stock ones, still didn't help. It seems to fly fine with the Soyuz-esque spacecraft on the top, which is mildly confusing, so I'm a bit stumped. Anyone else find this? Also the pre-deployment parachutes on some craft (TK crew module and the Soyuz crew capsule) don't offer enough braking in atmosphere IMHO. If I deploy the chute at 250m/s the capsule is still doing 150+m/s when the chute deploys fully causing spine-crushing levels of G-shock to the poor Kerbals
  4. Looks like we have a scaling/attachement glitch on the KT command/control module EDIT: This seems to be intermittent, I reloaded the scene (Space Center => Tracking Station => Select Craft => Fly) and it was okay again :\
  5. Is there a central place to report repository issues that doesn't require a separate login (i.e. not on Github, as a lot of people love to whine about not having accounts there)? If no then it might be a good thing to do, then anyone who's in the wrong department can get a 'go report it here, plz' and a link to report the issue. On that subject, I can't get the OuterPlanets mod to update. It doesn't seem to be remobving or downloading the new package. I just get: About to remove: Done! and the progress bar at the top goes back and forth forever. Clicking Cancel stops the operation but clearly it hasn't updated the mod. EDIT: Can confirm I removed OuterPlanets and can't reinstall it. I have MM installed (it's only dep) and no conflicts.
  6. The KW Rocketry package is not installing the ModuleAnimatedEmissive directory to GameData that is required by the emissive on the engines. The manifest needs adjusting to include this directory.
  7. Hi, Love these parts! They look great and I really wanted to play with using Energia as a vertical stack launcher I have a few bugs to report, however. In 1.0.2 (Linux 64-bit fwiw) I am having alot of nodes not attachable (usual 1.0.x incorrect orientation issues). If I flip things upside down they work okay. I tried a bunch of parts and pretty much none of them work the right way up. Maybe you have your top and bottom nodes flipped around? Or maybe there's a conflict in my mods? Tested against the stock 1.0.2 game. same issues.
  8. I *wondered* whyt everyone had been lagging on static fairings. As if they broke that, how stupid D: Can you not slum it and balance it using PFairing fairings for now? I know it'll probably look horrid but at least we can get MOST of the rocket back in the game and balanced?
  9. You are quitre correct, it was missing, I installed through CKAN so someone needs to bug the person controlling the repo entry to alter the file manifest to include that directory :3
  10. There's something a little wonky with your emissives setup I think. All the engines glow in the VAB! Shots of a couple: I haven't tried them all but that's 4 now that all do the same :3
  11. I didn't know about the above, so no I didn't, but I'll remove them and see whether it improves I also got a 64-bit Linux PC build up and running today, so I'll try it in there too.
  12. I had a quick play with the dev version from Github in 1.0.2 yesterday and I gotta say I LOVE the way they look now The MIP Blanket textures particularly look amazing. Also, the configs seem pretty spot-on. Didn't you have some ISS-esque tin can style textures at one point too? They'd be really nice to see. There's a but (there's always a but), however, those super detailed textures (yes, I read the instructions on the docking doors) are amazing BUT they take up metric craploads of RAM I'd have left it in my game had I not had other mods I was already using. It was just blowing my RAM out of the window and right now I'm stuck on 32-bit KSP in Windows (I'm desparately scrabbling to get a Linux volume on the PC to play 64-bit KSP in Linux). I don't know what the magic solution is, whether another format of textures will save RAM or wether you should offer us a low res version to save us some RAM. Etiher way it's the only thing stopping me using the dev version right now.
  13. Ah yes, this is true. I confused them with the later B-57 type, I thought All US models were like that Well apart from the WB-57F which looks like Jeb put 2 fuel barrels on as air intakes Ah, right. I'm too used to the original RAF version (we invented it, you know! ). ANYWAY this is rapidly drifting off-topic. Beale I'm having trouble finding the Capella + Ariane parts in a science/career game? Are they all in the science tree? I can only find the Capella engine block :\ EDIT: I Should add I unlocked the entire science tree, but no parts :\
  14. I did a quick check and 3 long stock 3.75m tanks (the NASAmission ones) holds *more* than my main tank on my Delta IV CBC tank (also 3.75m) of the same length, so I don't think it's PP's fault, I am sure PP assumes almost the same volumes as the stock tanks to keep it balanced with the stock game. I wouldn't say you were miles off, just maybe a little off. EDIT/UPDATE: With a little more research I realised the Delta IV CBC is not a solid tank, it has a large gap inbetween the LH2 and LOX tanks. Once I accounted for this in my replica the fuel quantity actually balances out pretty well, I'm sorry to bother you with my lack of research
  15. Needs bigger engines, and also you need to rotate the Canberra's cockpit bubble slightly off-centre (unless the Martin version didn't have that 'feature', I don't remember)