SilentWindOfDoom

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About SilentWindOfDoom

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. SilentWindOfDoom

    [1.3] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

    After making the post I tested it some more. the supplies kontainer is laying about, unpowered/uncrewed as a single part and I was able to transfer from it using the local logistics window. It is s scavenging that doesn't seem to work.
  2. SilentWindOfDoom

    [1.3] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

    Yes to both questions, the configuration is seen below. I attached a supplies tank to the top of the kerbitat using KAS so the base had something to pull resources into but it didn't transfer, even after several restarts. The kontainer is parked right next to the base. Edit: I can transfer resources manually through the Dashboard, it just doesnt happen automatically. This may be irrelevant, but. Out of sight here is a lander, I cannibalized the life support tank from it and attached it to the kerbitat. Maybe that somehow messed things up, because the base and the lander were considered to be the same entity as far as usi was concerned? Just spitballing here.
  3. SilentWindOfDoom

    [1.3] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

    Going by the documentation I thought that a resource consumer, in this case the kerbitat would automatically pull resources from any warehouse enabled container within 150 meters if storage for $resource is >50% empty, it isn't doing that. The container itself isnt powered or manned/controlled. Is that the issue?
  4. SilentWindOfDoom

    [1.3] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

    Hello, i'm trying to build my first proper usi base. I'm experiencing some difficulties getting the Tundra Kerbitat to pull supplies from a nearby container, is there any reason why the situation in the screenshot provided shouldn't result in a transfer? My only guess so far is that I have to mount a usi "supply" module on the side of the kerbitat, rather than a random life support tank? I've tried powering the containers to no avail.
  5. I will look into that, thank you! I generally have a fairly low TWR of 1.6, but I suppose I may have the wrong idea about how much of an impact FAR is making. I read about that little factoid waaaay back before KSP stock had its atmosphere tweaked so I suppose I just think its a bit too easy now, regardless of FAR. My bad.
  6. I had a quick question. I am looking to nerf the global atmospheric isp for all rocket engines in order to offset Ferram Aerospace's thinner atmosphere while using the stock-size solarsystem. Could I potentially use this mod to achieve that?
  7. I apologize if this has been asked before. FAR makes rockets a lot more efficient due to the reduced drag, reducing the amount of Deltav required to get into orbit. At least as I understand it. I'd like to counteract that, is there an easy way to globally reduce atmo ISP for rocket engines?
  8. The same configuration with the latest versions of KSPi and NFT installed in 1.3 seems to work just fine, so it is possible this "bug" has been fixed already. I really don't want to abandon yet another advanced career save, so I'll look around for a fix for this 1.2.2. mess, if possible. Either way, thanks!
  9. Is that so? The "manufacturer" for the reactor and the radiator is "kerb kastria inc", so i figured they were both NF. Either way, looks like all my radiators have a "waste heat" resource assigned. Is this some sort of KSPi patch screwing me over? I'll try editing out the wasteheat resource and see what happens.
  10. I'm having some issues cooling a NFE reactor using NF radiators. I'm on ksp 1.2.2. the reactor .cfg says this is NFE 0.7.3. I'm trying to use the "MX-4 'GARNET' Fission Reactor" but I cannot cool it once it is in a vacuum, on the ground everything is fine but once it isn't it'll overheat even on 5% power. I'm probably missing something here, can someone tell me what i'm doing wrong? Heat mechanics are a bit confusing to me. I'm using what I believe are NF radiators, oversized for a reactor this small (seems to me) but it isn't enough even at a fraction of the power.
  11. I didn't think about that. I mean I did notice the overall mass of the craft was much lower, I just didn't connect the dots. It is a little bit unfortunate as far as game balance is concerned, seeing as putting mass into orbit is a lot easier than putting those massive (in terms of size) LH2 tanks up. At least for me. I suppose I can always just ignore the Lox mode, or only include a little bit of Oxidizer it for when i need a boost. Thanks for the reply.
  12. I am sorry if this has been asked already in this thread, but can I trust kerbal engineer on these delta-v calculations? LoxAugmented gives me almost double the delta-v and double the TWR of pure H2. The TWR I expected, but not the delta-v, as it makes pure H2 kind of absolete, no? Edit: Has been answered.
  13. SilentWindOfDoom

    1.1.2 Magic Smoke Industries Infernal Robotics 2.0.2

    Hey thanks, I did as you suggested. Then reinstalled it when it still didn't work and then tested IR on a clean install and you were correct, it was a problem with KJR. Thanks for your help. For anyone who comes after, the fix is here:
  14. SilentWindOfDoom

    1.1.2 Magic Smoke Industries Infernal Robotics 2.0.2

    Hi, I'm having similar problems as @Rainbowd4sh, but I don't understand your fix, or i'm applying them wrong, could you explain it another way, maybe?
  15. SilentWindOfDoom

    [1.5.1, 1.4.5, 1.3.1] RemoteTech v1.9.0 [2018-10-29]

    On the face of it it seems like a pretty good solution. You fly one sat up to a given orbit, create a group for it, which inherits the SMA of the sat and will serve as a SMA snap point for other sats (and the original) once they get "close enough" and are set to snap to it. To clarify there will be no "master sat" but just a group that copies the SMA from the first one, but doesn't inherit any changes from it afterwards, correct? That would keep the SMA from drifting on load/unload of the first sat, but also make it impossible to ruin your entire group if something happens to it. It would be nice if there was a provision to alter the "Group SMA" after creation, but I feel that might be open to exploitation and increase complexity too much. One can always nuke the group and create a new one on an altered sat. Would it be possible to initiate a group with orbital bodies? I like having my sats lead and trail behind moons for cheap, "good enough" coverage. It would also make "Kerbol orbitals" less of a suicidal proposition if you can park it somewhere along the orbit of a planet. I'm all for it, especially if the mod is separate from RT itself because the KSP-I sats suffer from the same problems. Would it help if I posted this in the Github thread? The thread there is a bit dusty. I honestly don't know. Spotting that option lead me to reconsider my RT-less career and post here to see what the current status of orbital drift was in the game before i went out and set it up. I'll definitely keep an eye out to see how KSP handles orbits now and report any findings.