Jump to content

Northstar1989

Members
  • Posts

    2,644
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

723 Excellent

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • About me
    Capsule Communicator

Recent Profile Visitors

3,556 profile views
  1. It appears I was trying to install the unpacked source code, which was the source of my difficulty. Getting the proper .zip from "Releases", there are none of these odd "bin", "spec", or "template" sub-folders; there is a dll where I can easily find it, and it is obvious what goes in the GameData folder. My bad! What I get for trying to install mods late at night, I guess...
  2. In addition to the Aviation Fuel Cylinders not swapping between fuels as they should (might be an issue with the B9 PartSwitch dependency that ships with the latest versions not being updated fully, and possibly my attempts to manually install the updated one- or even the more updated B9PartSwitch not being updated for the very latest version of KSP). I am having a more basic issue with the balancing/configs of the parts themselves that definitely needs to be fixed... The "Heavy Engine Nacelles" from NearFuture Aeronautics are not capable of supporting a reasonable amount of weight in surface (radial) attachment mode to the underside of wings, like they should be able to. With even a very modest load attached to them: an appropriate-sized and weight 2.5 meter BROADSWORD engine (also from the mod) attached to their rear, and stock 2.5-->1.875--->1.25 meter fueled diameter-tapering parts (two parts, in that order) plus a 1.25 meter nosecone, and a single stock ExtraLarge landing gear, the Heavy Nacelles are ripping off the bottom of the plane soon after it lifts off the runway- both immediately after, and a few after pulling the nose further up out over the ocean. This even occurs when I reinforce both the nacelles and the tapered fuel tanks attached to the front with manual struts, as well as turning on auto-strut for all parts. In fact, it takes 3-4 struts to even have a decent chance of the nacelles not ripping off in the first minute of flight, and more still to keep them on for an entire spaceplane ascent. TLDR: The strength of surface attachment for the Heavy Engine Nacelle part grossly inadequate to support the weight it is clearly designed for. It barely hangs onto the underside of a wing when stationary on the runway without any landing gear directly underneath (or that particular gear retracted), and even the *slight* additional stress of nosing a plane up 4-5 degrees at low speed (120-150 m/s) is enough to rip them right most "heavy nacelles" off the bottom of a wing. The "Heavy Engine Nacelles" desperately need stronger surface attachment to actually be remotely useful. EDIT: May be possible both this, and the Aviation Fuel Cylinders issue were due to a mistake made in installing an updated version of B9 Part Switch dependency (since the version shipped with the NearFuture mods is outdated, not the post 1.12.2 recompile one). Among other things, that dependency allows both swapping resources AND adjusting part/node sizes, which can affect the strength of attachments (the latter of which, if it occurs automatically, as a scale-up of a smaller reference config, rather than Nertea having created a config with the correct part/node sizes initially, can cause issues like this. I encountered something similar myself with rescaling and attachment sizes having issues when first making my Netherdyne Mass Driver Mod configs usable, before eventually handing the mod off to another maintainer...) EDIT #2: Fixing B9 Part Switch fixed the Aviation Fuel Cylinder issue, but did absolutely nothing for the pathetic attachment strength of the Heavy Engine Nacelles. They still fall apart with barely any stress placed on them.
  3. Ahh, ok, thank you. I might go back and grab that. Does anyone, or @Nertea know why the Aviation Fuel Cylinders from NearFuture Aeronautics, which say they can be filled with jet fuel, rocket fuel, or nothing; actually cannot be filled with anything and are completely empty for me? Other parts from, for instance, B9 Procedural Wings (the only non-NF parts mod I currently have installed)- though I will eventually add others once I get NF working right) can be swapped between LF, LF0, and even Monoprop at will. But the Aviation Fuel cylinders have no toggleable, high weight (for a structural cylinder with no fuel), and only modestly higher tmperature resistance than the stock rocket fuel tanks (which they weigh more than). I need these parts to be able to hold fuels if possible in a non-RealFuels game (in case that's what it is expecting to be toggleable). EDIT: Also, don't forget what I said jsut a few posts back about the outdated dependencies shipping with some of the NearFuture mods.
  4. As far as I know, the edges only modify the wing lift/drag some, when FAR is not installed. With FAR (which you should use with RO anyways), I'm pretty sure the wing lift/drag are entirely recalculated. What counts as "only at high speeds"? And with how much weight on the wings? (Liftoff Speed is ALWAYS a function at least partly of wingloading) Note that a true biconvex wing (both edges biconvex, no flat area in between) doesn't fly amazingly well in real life either, if I recall correctly.
  5. Question: what does the "OrbitalLFOEngines" extra with NearFuture Spacecraft do? It's not explained anywhere easily accessible, like on the original post or the SpaceDock info page.
  6. @Nertea Love the hard work as always! Wanted to give a heads-up that the mods all currently come bundled with B9 Part Switch version 2.18.0 when the latest version is 2.19.0 (even that one wasn't made for KSP 1.12.3 explicitly, but is more likely to work with it without issues than 2.18.0 at least...) EDIT: Other dependencies with NearFuture... - Packaged Module Manager versions with all the mods are outdated, EXCEPT for with NF Spacecraft for some reason. They are version 4.1.4 when there's a MM version 4.2.1 except, again, in NF Spacecraft, which carries MM 4.2.1 as is the latest. - Dynamic Battery Storage (with NF Electrical) is outdated version 2.2.4 when there's a version 2.2.5 . The update has a few feature fixes beyond simple bugfixes (should have been called 2.3.x instead) - Kerbal Actuators (with NF Aeronautics) is outdated. It has version 1.8.3 when the mod was recompiled for KSP 1.12.2 with mod version 1.8.4 (the latest version). -The Deployable Engines Plugin in NearFuture Aeronautics (but NOT Launch Vehicles) is outdated. It has version 1.2.2 instead of version 1.3.1 - Community Resource Pack is up-to-date as far as I can tell (can't locate versions past 1.4.1/1.4.2, with some nonsense about them possible being identical...)
  7. Love the hard work, as always! Two quick things: 1. Is this updated for 1.12.3? If so, could the thread title be updated? GitHub says for version 1.12.2, so I assume is still up to date 2. Could some more detailed information be added to the original post about manually installing (by adding the folder to KSP folders) B9 Part Switch? It is unusually confusing to install manually, as there is a folder labeled "GameData" *within* the top-level folder, below levels like "bin", "spec", and "templates." For most mods, only what is a layer BELOW "GameData" is added to the GameData folder, and occasionally some DLL's float in GameData without a folder (few mods have anything outside GameData, except occasional reference craft, etc.) Anyways, great work, really appreciate it, hope that this mod will be kept current well into the future!
  8. Love and appreciation for the work as always! Getting back to KSP after a bit of a break, now that my preferred mods are all updated. I do recall some lingering issues with the Advanced SAS when controlling vessels in-atmosphere or with very low rotation rates outside the atmosphere last I checked, though. I'll try to post about them if I notice them again (although I normally just use Atmosphere Autopilot for really finicky spaceplanes instead...) Wanted to say, hope this mod won't be abandoned/frozen! There's always more ways to improve something like this, when time permits- and KSP has lots more development potential for mods - so people need not treat it as dead (SQUAD could release another DLC, too, to keep funding up for more free updates, if they would give their focus on KSP2 a rest for a moment- as it looks to be hitting countless development delays...) Anyways, thanks and appreciation! Hope all is well!
  9. Thanks as always for the great work Sarbian! Hope this will still be updated as future KSP updates come out (if any), or at least once in a long while to let people know it's still active (maybe with tiny changes like cleaning up code or fixing a lingering bug). MM is as always, essential for any Kerbalnaut, and I appreciate the dedication!
  10. So, hate to ask this, but is this working on 1.11+ yet? The thread title still says 1.9.x I'm waiting for this to be fully compatible with latest KSP versions (currently only using 1.11 because of un-updated mods) before jumping too heavily back into my current career save. And may I say, as always, to past, current, and future modders here, great work and I appreciate all of it! This mod has been a cornerstone of my playthroughs for years!
  11. As always, a great mod! Loving it, and really wish they would bundle something like this into the stock game. I find my spaceplanes are impossible to fly without this (particularly as I don't have a joystick), without insane levels of built-in stability!
  12. Just checking in, to see how this is going. @linuxgurugamer?
  13. Awesome! By the way, one thing that may need to be considered (and rarely is in mods) for balance and realism: tech node and unlock cost (that one-time fee you pay to unlock parts with the right difficulty option enabled...) Both should probably be somewhat higher than where I had them before: for gameplay purposes, too many mods cluster parts about where they were (especially in Community Tech Tree), and the unlock cost needs to reflect their high utility... And, for realism I did more reading since setting these parameters in my mod: and it appears that while Mass Drivers like this can ABSOLUTELY be built, there are more obstacles to cost-effectively upscaling some of the needed electrical systems for them than I originally expected (meaning the technology still probably wouldn't reach full tech readiness for at least another 10-20 years if we really invested in researching it today...) Mainly, though, it'll minimize complaints of their being "overpowered" (Gosh I hate those people- when they're complaining about things feasible in real life! Compared to the primitive tech of a Saturn V rocket ANYTHING New Space or even slightly futuristic is realistically overpowered!) if you can point to their advanced tech node (in the custom tech trees) and very high part unlock costs and simply ask players if they were using a custom tech tree and had part unlock costs enabled. Also, what ARE the most popular custom, advanced tech trees (those going into future tech, used with mods like NearFuture pack and KSP-Interstellar Extended) nowadays? I'm still only really familiar with a couple of them, and Community Tech Tree remains my old standby favorite...
×
×
  • Create New...