AdmiralTigerclaw
-
Posts
742 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by AdmiralTigerclaw
-
-
Yeah, I know it's not a perfect 'just download and drop' that you can do with some games, but it should be no more than an 'unpack into the right place' as per instructions.
-
12 minutes ago, Potato flavored waffles said:
I tried to open the .rar file but all I got was a please open this up with internet explorer and then they asked me to do the same over and over. there was nothing inside the .rar so there was no "readmerightthehecknow"
The rar file is a compression file like zip files. You need a universal unpacker like winrar or winzip.
-
As in, the whole rar file?
You didn't extract it?
You didn't open it up to look in it?
You didn't read the file labeled so conveniently "ReadMeRightTheHeckNow" ?
I want you to read that file. I want you to find, and read, that file - as it says - Right the Heck Now.
-
45 minutes ago, Potato flavored waffles said:
OK so for those details, I get all of the kerbin side remastered bases but not all of yours. Both of those were downloaded on the 1.4.5 version KK of ckan and KSR off of spacedock there are extra taxiways on KSC and there are also spawn-able airports but not things like the ones that are on the first page. I also downloaded the KSR airports_0_0_3.rar from the GitHub link you provided. Is KSR airports just not meant for 1.4.5? According to spacedock, 1.4.5 is the only version on KSR. And the save I am trying to download it on, is a 1.4.5 game.
I still need to know what your installation looks like. Where did you extract KSR Airports to?
-
2 hours ago, TM31D2475 said:
Why does everyone calling it "tarmac"?
It's "ramp"Because saying that an air plane sits on an inclined plane is just plain silly.
Also, it's called a TARMAC because old airports were made with what is known as TARMAC, or Tar-Macadams mix/process. While technically erroneous since most places where you have heavy aircraft are going to be utilizing heavy steel-reinforced concrete, it is an acceptable term due to momentum in language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarmacadam
We can also call the TARMAC/Ramp an Apron or Flight Line.
I really hope you didn't register JUST to try and play term-pedant here. Shortest blitzkrieg ever, if you did.
(EDIT: This site actually has a word replace for the shorthand name for the Third Reich? That's just asinine.)
-
3 hours ago, Potato flavored waffles said:
I have them both and it still will refuse to work
You're going to have to give us a few more details than 'it doesn't work'.
1: In what way does it refuse to work? Like, nothing there at all? Or is it no airports? Do you have extra taxiways at KSC but no KSR Airports? Details are critical.
2: I want you to double check that you are using 'Kerbinside REMASTERED', not 'Kerbinside'. This is relevant.
3: Check version numbers of the relevant mods against KSP. There have been some updates to Kerbal Konstructs that I haven't fully checked against. I need to know the version number of KSP. I need to know the version number of Kerbal Konstructs. I need to know the version number of Kerbinside Remastered, and I need to know the version number of KSR Airports. Not that the last one matters because the only difference there is how many airports it has... But details anyway.
4: I want to know what your install locations look like. Where you placed the installs... HOW you placed the installs. Multiple screenshots would be very good. I note you have all of 8 posts here as of the time I'm responding, which suggests to me you may have completely botched the install from simple lack of experience. But again. Details. Details, details, DETAILS.
Overall, KSR Airports should not at any time have any issues that are code related. So long as KK and KSR are working, it should work too. Thus, we need to walk through and go:
- Is KK working? Yes/No ? Fix or move on.
- Is Kerbinside Remastered Working? Yes/No Fox or move on.
- Is KSR Airports Working? Yes/No.
-
On 11/25/2018 at 3:28 PM, Potato flavored waffles said:
Is it the one labeled ksrairportsuntagged346183bdd628f6751b35 in the zip file?
Follow the github link on the first page of this thread and you should get a page like this:
-
4 hours ago, Potato flavored waffles said:
I cannot download this mod off github for some reason. Got any ideas?
If it's a navigation issue, I apologize because I cannot into GitHub correctly. If you look at the mod 'content list', you may see three version-numbered files sitting in place. Click on the highest numbered file, and it'll take you to a screen where the option to download that individual file is hiding in place. Download from that.
If the problem is github not liking you... I don't know what to say. Try a different browser? I noticed IE is dying more and more on websites as it becomes more and more obsolete.
-
This thread is ancient, but I was searching through for information on angles for gravity turns, and a thought occurs that nobody here ever considered, being focused on efficiencies.
Look at the space shuttle again. It's a rocket stack, but what is hanging off the side of that rocket stack?
A GLIDER. Not a pod with an L.E.T. A giant, GLIDER.
Consider from a crew safety perspective, if you have to abort early in boost phase, you want to be able to separate that glider from the stack without suffering collisions. Tests of the SR-71 blackbird launching the D-21 drone in the sixties showed that launching something from a piggy-back position on an aircraft tends to end in spectacular failure.
If you want to escape from a very soon to be very much volatile rocket stack while stuck in a glorified glider, you want access to the best maneuver energy possible. In an unpowered 'aircraft' with only altitude and speed available to it, that would be in the form of some kind of dive. The only option for a dive would be from BELOW the stack. In this case, you roll program and pitch onto your back as soon as you can. That way, as soon as you blow the bolts on abort, not only does gravity pull you away from the stack, the pilot has immediate access to a Split-S maneuver, which will pull the glider down and away from the rocket, and if there's room in the maneuver, a full direction reversal from the stack itself. The stack, with the SRBs still blazing away, continues on to whatever fate awaits. Probably explosive.
If you attempt this in a more near vertical state, you stand a higher chance of collision since you don't have gravity to help pull you out of the slipstream of the stack. Remember, as air passes quickly between two large, fast moving objects, its pressure lowers, pulling those objects together. You an see this happen just watching two semi-trucks on the highway fight not to be sucked together. The shuttle and it's booster stack are BIGGER.
Thus, it can be surmised that part of the Pitch-over program happening so early is in part to put the shuttle orbiter into position for a quick abort from boost phase. I'm even willing to bet that if the flame from the SRB that killed Challenger had been spotted in time, that accident would been exactly that abort mode.
-
1 hour ago, Pds314 said:
Hmm.. I'm pretty sure IRL the ground effect reduces LID and applies within one span of the ground (although the math is different and more complex for moving ACVs and rotorcraft).
Nice idea to make a mod that at least does SOMETHING in this regard though.
I know from flying quadrotors that you can hover about have a prop span off the ground with much lower throttle than what's required to hover mid-room.200 knots? Wow. That's faster than a Tu-22, the Concorde, the F-104, a packed 737-900 landing on a hot day in Vegas, the Buran, and the Shuttle.
(yes, this list is in order. Landing a 737 at 166-175 knots is something that is done and it's weird landing at a speed some planes cannot even reach. I swear in the future airliners will be landing at cruise speed).There's a reason the Bird needs a drag chute on touchdown. It does NOT like being slow.
-
I've put my work on KSR airports on hold until your next version release with the tower and hangars. I really want to apply those to airports when I can.
Also, any word on helipad structures?
-
On 10/16/2018 at 8:18 PM, Capital_Asterisk said:
Well, new release: https://github.com/Capital-Asterisk/KSP_GroundEffect/releases
A few new changes with this new version. Along with some optimizations, control surfaces are now supported properly, and the increase in lift now depends on how aligned the wing is with the ground. This means vertical stabilizers don't get an increase of lift, previously resulting in extreme yaw control during development. This version is compiled for KSP 1.3.1, and is practically ready for an actual release. It just needs more testing with different versions and crafts.
Have you tested it along side running FAR? I don't think that was ever clarified. I run 1.2.2, so I can't help you run that test if it's not at least backwards compatible.
-
59 minutes ago, The Amazing Popsicle said:
Okay, I’ve been having this issue with the runways I select to take-off from. The issue is that when after I get done with a flight and return to space center the runway acts as my space center; it’s very glitchy. Is there anyway I can go back to the actual Space center?
(I’m using version 1.4.5 with this)
That's Kerbal Konstructs working as it should. Keep in mind when you click the button in the SPH called 'Make Selected Runway DEFAULT', That's what Default means.
To get KSC back as your default, go into the SPH and bring up the runway selection, find KSC, and select that. Then hit the 'make selection the default' once more.
Also: Check over with Kerbal Konstructs, I don't recall the 1.4.X versions of kerbal being very happy with KK.
-
7 hours ago, ss8913 said:
So I was flying from KSC to KCHG last night (cape hook global) and noticed, in one of the little bays along the shoreline... runway approach lights. with no runway. just.. 2 sets of approach lights just in the middle of nowhere out of place. Not sure if this is coming from this mod or from Kerbinside Remastered itself but.. thought I'd let you know.
It's a placeholder for those using Kerbin City. The approach lights are where the KC airport runways sit. I asked about that myself. That's why Cape Hook Global is off to the south. So it doesn't sit on the Kerbin City site.
EDIT: It would be responsible of me to mention that I'm sitting on hold here and not doing any more airports for the moment. Eskandare's latest show-offs of tower and hangar models has me wanting to add and modify to existing airports. That means, the more I do now, the more I have to redo later.
Those playing the test versions, how are they working out for you?
-
6 hours ago, StevieC said:
@AdmiralTigerclaw That thing about the Blackbird, is it anything like the issue that U-2 pilots have with trying to land?
Yes and No. The issue with the U-2 is that it's a gigantic glider with a jet engine hiding in it. It's designed so that it has a LOT of lift at a low indicated airspeed, so that it can soar really, really high up in thin air. When the Dragon Lady is trending towards an empty tank, and really light, it will descend very slowly unless you want to figure out how to get rid of excess speed. So it just takes a LONG time to come down, and likes to stay flying at really low speeds. Ground Effects on such a design make it REALLY hard to settle. It can fly at speeds as low as 70 knots. For comparison, a Cessna Skyhawk, your typical civil single engine prop you might see fly over your house on a given clear day, takes off around 55 knots, while air liners will take off more around 160 knots.
The SR-71's problem is different in that its induced by its shape in ground effect specifically. Delta wings are known for getting extra lift in ground effect. But I think the chines on the Bird also play a part. When they interact with ground-effect, they get a little more lift themselves, torquing the nose up just a bit. Where most aircraft have to flare to smooth out the last few dozen feet of descent into a gentle touchdown, the SR-71 flattens out without the flare to the point that the plane won't settle on the ground. Combined with a small amount of upward push from the chines, the bird likely naturally flares and tries to climb. A little extra forward stick input corrects for the natural flaring, and cuts the lift the aircraft has, allowing it to settle. Usually, on landing, the flare is induced by aft stick movement from the pilot. To not only not need it, but need to reverse it, means a LOT.
However, for all this difficulty, the SR-71's doing its landings at a teeth-clenching 200 knots, not 70 knots.
-
Not sure why you didn't PM it to my like you normally do.
Anyway, a thought occurs. Are the new tower and hangar assets already in KSR? Or was the last update just the 4km + runway? I've been procrastinating badly.
-
Nifty.
I might have to go back in to existing airports and do overhauls. Hangars with open space, and Towers that aren't bolted onto the side of them will be wonderful.
-
Hey, a good measure for the effect of this mod would be with an SR-71 Blackbird.
The Bird has a behavioral quirk in ground effect on landing. It likes to 'float' so much in ground effect that pilots have reported that you have to force the stick forward and push the nose to get it to finally touch down. When you can get that kind of performance, the ground effect is working very much correctly.
Also, a suggestion for your code, use the radar altitude as a processing gate. IF RAD-ALT < 50 meters, THEN execute code. Saves on raycast passes.
Also, how's this work against FAR?
-
Watching and lurking.
Ground effect is very important for aircraft behavior, especially helicopters.
-
5 hours ago, Ger_space said:
Can you create the folder manually? And try again.
I don't know if I ported the fix for that to the 1.2 branch.
Manually created a NewInstances folder and it looks like it created the decal file for it. I'm kind of glad I was feeling lazy and only did the map decal and not the whole airport before I ran into this.
That would have left me Enraged.
-
Question: When you fixed the Map Decal glitch, did you change how new Map Decals got stored? I planted one yesterday to make the next airport, and I discovered today that it didn't stick. And when I went and checked the KK folder, the NewInstances folder isn't there. Any new procedures I should know about?
-
8 hours ago, Ger_space said:
I only use the unity game object scaling. I think the source of the problem is that the tm runway doesn't use a single big runway collider ( Which it should do)
Then you would only see the gaps in the paintings, but you drive magically above it.
Please contact the creator of the asset, either he can create a single collider or move the vertexes closer together
Wut?
*Blink*
GUYS! Come on!
Are you two not in constant communication with each other about how this stuff works? Because NOW Ger_Space is making a post like you've never even exchanged posts before.
-
1 hour ago, AlphaAsh said:
I never could track this down when I was working on KK. I've always suspected it's a conflict with garbage handling and video drawing. The common symptom was you'd make a base, go to KSC, select the base and then promptly spawn on an invisible runway, where the colliders worked fine. Only a restart of KSP sorted the issue.
@Ger_space may have more up-to-date info on this, if it is related.
This is extremely insightful and I'm pleased to see you have formalised it from a technical perspective. This issue is something all static modellers should be aware of, especially when making larger statics, such as runways. It's also why sometimes it is better to break up a larger model into multiple meshes.
The mesh drift problem is less about the model being large, and more about the model being scaled up using the KK scaling option. The gaps tend to still be there, it's just that when the model is scaled to normal size or smaller, the gab isn't pronounced or dangerous. When you scale the model up, the gap becomes wider in direct proportion to the upscale. Get big enough, and landing gear slip into the hole.
-
5 hours ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:
@AdmiralTigerclaw How many paragraphs is this??? How long did it take you to write that?!
9-ish paragraphs, 20 minutes. (Some of those lines I don't call a 'paragraph' because they're one-sentence points.)
I'm a writer. I can put out a LOT of information in a very short amount of time. If I know what I'm talking about, I can put out up to 4,200 words an hour. Or around 8 to 9 pages. I don't normally go that high because I need to think about what I'm saying and/or give my eyes a break. But I've spent entire days just typing.
The Delta-V explanation can be simple, but I want you to understand what it's doing under the hood. You don't need to know all the math, but as my calculus instructor in college emphasized, if you can RECOGNIZE what's going on, you can make the computer do the work. (Which is especially important in Calculus because there are equations that you actually CAN'T put in a computer or calculator because they'll just get stuck in a recursive loop trying to solve them. Learning to recognize when an equation was going to get stuck looping was a big point there. And not knowing that could happen would have been... BAD.)
KSR Airports for Kerbinside Remastered
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
Version numbers. Use the highest numbered file. Never really got how to use Github properly.