Selentic

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About Selentic

  • Rank
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I've done a number of LES aborts during flight, a couple on the ground, and one accidental one during orbital insertion when the staging got mixed up. I tend to only play campaigns with KCT and Kerbalism running, so when something goes wrong during a non-"simulated" launch I need a way to save as much of that expensive payload as possible! I do have to note, looking over my last campaign's designs, however, that once I unlocked the nose-cone docking ports, I retired the LES in favour of seperatrons strapped to the capsule or interstage... Also, playing with a part failure mod makes having abort modes in your design a must!
  2. While we're piling up bugs or potential bugs here, I found a minor/wierd graphical one I didn't see anyone mention in the last few pages: With a craft directly between the Mun and Kerbin, pointed at the Mun, and the Timewarp turned on (x10) if I switch BodyRelevantRotation between Kerbin & the Mun the craft appears to flip headings instantaneously from pointing at the Mun to Kerbin, and back as I toggle the PR setting button. Crazy, right? This seems like the kind of thing that might be hard to hunt down, but at least it doesn't *actually* affect anything... I think! Edit: Oh, I should point out that the craft in question was uncontrollable due to being powered-down.
  3. Those are very, very nice! And I love that flag! But, really - printing out the names as "Kerman"? That is stroke of brilliance! Brilliance. Mine aren't nearly as pretty, but I've put together quite a few patches as well. Let's see if I can share them.
  4. Very interesting for a new game mode! I'll have to try this out with the "minimal set" I'm putting together for my next career game. >_> One quibble though - maybe you shouldn't call it a "contract pack" in the thread title since it is a complete tech overhaul!
  5. Not sure if this is fixed yet or not, but in the 3.0.5 pack I just downloaded the engines all don't flameout properly. Judging from playing with the RLA pack, the issue is with using "directThrottleEffectName" - the effect keeps playing as long as the throttle is up.
  6. I have to say I really appreciate the simplicity of this mod. I am looking forward to the diversity of failure modes and necessary backend improvements (I'd like to be able to use MM to key failure rates for different part categories or something like that), but I like what the mod does in the simulation: sometimes things just go unexpectedly, unpredictably wrong. >_<
  7. Apparently, it's 93.75 kg. Well, those space suits certainly are heavy!
  8. This is wonderful! Much more fun (for me) than the more complex failure mods! (Except Engine Ignitor - I miss that one! ) Question: Does the mod affect launches from *other* planets? Whether landing/take-off or using Extra-Planetary Launchpads? The config text seemed to imply that it would generate failures on any planet with an atmosphere, but it's a little unclear.
  9. Wow... that would be cool. Newbie pilots are all shaky and wasteful, while skilled veterans provide smooth and quick transitions! Maybe a skilled engineer could even decrease the reaction wheel's bleed rate... It all sounds like a pain to code though!
  10. Liking the new RCS chines - very practical and good looking! I noticed a couple of bugs, though: - VTOL Standard is trying to call "Model.mu", but the actual file is "model.mu", so it fails to load
  11. Thanks for the fixes! One thing: The EVA-X still doesn't have an entry for USI LifeSupport... although it doesn't really need one if using the default USILS extinction settings. Just thought I'd point it out, since the new radial food container has one.
  12. The Orb has a great one! With RPM support, even. The others are more bare-bones, but the FLAT is the only part that is missing its IVA. (Though you can always use the Inflato2's.)
  13. Any reason why you don't have TechTree integration? Here's my config for the techtree, if you want to add it into your MM config package:
  14. This is very cool. One thing that doesn't seem to be working for me is using the "Name = * " line in the .layout files - the in-game layout selector displays the name of the file for the three standard configs (although it lets me change everything else about them as usual), and leaves any custom configs (created by making an new text file and changing it to a *.layout) blank, though they're still usable.