Nertea

Members
  • Content count

    2693
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5132 Excellent

About Nertea

  • Rank
    TIE/sa Pilot
  1. See, this is the thing. I can add this, but then people will ask for another, and then another, and then another. There's nowhere to draw the line once I start catering to this. So probably not. Probably not going to happen either, sorry
  2. Yup that is what they are for. The actual engine cost is the same (which you can see if you remove all the uranium in the VAB). Delete SimpleBoiloff.dll.
  3. You probably want this mod, it's more or less the same as anything I would make.
  4. Nuclear fuel is expensive. Because of the way KSP calculates costs, to add 50u of enriched uranium to the engine I must add the cost of the uranium to the part. If you change this, your engines will end up with negative costs.
  5. Doesn't interstellar do its own cryocooling?
  6. So here's some more finished parts! From left to right: the utility module (1 Kerbal and EC/mono), the habitation module (2 Kerbals), the station core module (2 Kerbals, command and control point). And lights!
  7. Oh, something is coming along.
  8. This part doesn't show up in the editor because it's going to be deprecated next version. I don't mind you posting this here, love seeing people using my parts. Models are hideous. Lot of work to go tag all those, I'll make a better album when real release happens. RealPlume supports mods, not the other way around. Up to them.
  9. Need more info, because I fixed it on my end. I tested the following cases Both reactors on the pad with both fuel types Both reactors on the pad with both fuel types, and an auxiliary 1.25m NFE reactor working at full power Screenshots of the craft while the event is happening and as much info as you can provide. Log too even though it won't be that useful.
  10. Oh please don't post screenshots if you pulled the repo! They're not done and I don't want them shown off yet! I'm also constantly changing the repo structure, stuff will break so be careful.
  11. I had a rough day at work so I require internet happiness. You all better like this.
  12. I don't believe that's an issue in this case because there aren't any side nodes on these parts.
  13. What like with unique models and stuff? Nah.
  14. I remember now why I did this originally. It was CLS reasons. It seemed too easy that all crew tubes would be able to surface-attach via CLS into whatever. So the tubes were non-cls-passable, except the attach points.
  15. What do people think of this? It's done this way by convention (practically all KSP cylindrical parts attach like that) but I am open to changing it.