Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. You're taking a bare minimum design there which is not good for comparison purposes. You don't really have a payload except for the capsule. Nuclear isn't a PnP option that's going to be great for all designs and it's definitely not always better. It's going to be orbital only (or upper stage, at a minimum). It'll probably be assemble-in-orbit where you don't want to be transporting tanks of dense propellants into orbit. In the real world we'd be talking 8-10m diameter. Not sure what that would be for Kerbin. To give a real world example of where nuclear could have been used for an upper stage, it was considered for use in Saturn V's third stage, the S-IVB. It would have been less powerful than the J2 but would have ditched the LOX tank. The tank would have been lengthened a bit but would have been lighter overall because they would also have ditched the common bulkhead between the H2/O2 tanks. The end result would have been either greater dV because of reduced third stage mass or more payload. So there are times and designs you'd use nuclear, but you can't just drop it in any design and expect it to be better.
  2. New official download link https://github.com/Starwaster/Stockalike-Station-Hubs/releases/
  3. If you want to make a derivative work, the license allows for it. But there will be no ‘adoption’ or ‘takeover’ and it’s rude to suggest such a thing to the author.
  4. @xelapis just having a list of your mods won't be enough. I need your ksp.log file from the main game folder and your ModuleManager.ConfigCache file from the GameData folder.
  5. As far as that goes, it'll work but there were (IIRC) UI bugs due to changes that were made. Nothing that recompiling from the source wouldn't fix.
  6. You're only providing information. Shouldn't be a problem. But if it causes any, that's on you to deal with. (Should be okay though. Probably.)
  7. It's not that KSP or MM care, it's that ModuleScienceLab specifically cares. It doesn't try to locate a suitable container module. Instead it relies on being told what location (what index) the container is in. In this case, index 0, which is the first module. If it's pointed at a location and the module at that location is not a ModuleScienceContainer, then it fails. I think it also prints a warning or error in the log but I forget. I actually didn't look at the log yet. But I know from past experience that it will fail if given an incorrect index. Anyway, in your example, MPL-LG-2, yes, ModuleScienceLab is second module. That's not important. What's important there is that it's looking at index 0 for the container, and first container is ModuleScienceContainer It's (IMNSHO) bad and sloppy coding. (no offense to any KSP code monkeys reading this who might have been responsible for that module)
  8. Sorry, took me longer than anticipated to get to this. Didnt look at the log yet. But in the cache, I see in ModuleScienceLab containerModuleIndex = 0 That is wrong, because the container is clearly the second module (0 = first)
  9. Would need to your ModuleManager.ConfigCache file and the name of the part that you're adding to... And log file would help too
  10. News to me as DR’s maintainer. possibly that 90% of the mod is sensible part failure temperatures. Maybe they moved responsibility for that into RO? edit: which obviously would affect my reply to you in the DR thread.
  11. Doh. Ignore if you saw what I posted in this response. Hard to read this on my iPhone sometimes
  12. Please clarify: is the chute part itself being destroyed? If it’s just the chute failing after deployment then you’re deploying too early Yes. If there’s an official response to your query in the RO thread, obviously go with that. I don’t know what that means either that they pulled it out of the required or recommended list either. I’ve been out of touch with any of the RO guys for over a year. Supposedly they’ve tried to contact me several times in that period but they haven’t.
  13. That’s technically possible in KSP1 right now, the textures just aren’t set up for it. (talking stock heat shield, which can be masked)
  14. The cache is absolute. how about this: if there’s wing parts that should have the option of being upgraded, feel free to do a pull requests. I can’t make a release but I can accept requests and then it’ll at least be in the repository for people to download
  15. Not sure TPS actually would have helped in that case after seeing your screenshot since the heat didn’t seem to be coming from outside. Unless I missed something. re: max op temp, it at least changed it for the skin didn’t it? If not, that’s trouble. also trouble if it’s not applying to more parts. I could have sworn I expanded the list of covered parts.
  16. @adamant365 maybe try an older install of RF from earlier in the year. I think they had a bunch of updates in March so try a version from prior to March. could also be an RP1 so report it there too
  17. @4x4cheesecake there is internal to internal heat transfer on radially attached parts but at a slower rate than stack or attachment point connected parts. I don’t recall what the percentage was though
  18. @4x4cheesecake Interesting, your skin temperature is a good bit lower so where’s the heat coming from?
  19. I replied to @4x4cheesecake and DRE is a definite possibility. I’m looking into it but it’s going to be very slow going because I am browsing the code on github on an iPhone which is all I can do for the foreseeable future. the TL;DR is that you would have to be high supersonic with wings that aren’t thermally protected. I don’t think you’re experiencing an actual bug other than lack of feedback that the wings are sustaining damage. look at the wings PAW. It should tell you they are damaged. An engineer can repair the damage. I don’t recall if I made that require repair parts or not. The damage is in levels and the higher the damage the higher the skill required. edit: the way it’s coded is that tolerances are degraded commiserate with damage level. The greater the damage, the less resistant the part has to withstand forces. It’s actually supposed to fall off before destruction but that never worked right Something else occurred to me. Those wings might have TPS upgrades. If you’re playing career, check for upgrades and research/purchase them. if you’re playing sandbox, go into stock settings for that save and make sure upgrades are turned on. They are off by default. If the wings DONT have a TPS upgrade then that should be considered an oversight on my part.
  • Create New...