Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'modules'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
    • KSP 2 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP 2 Dev Diaries
    • Show and Tell
  • Kerbal Space Program
    • The Daily Kerbal
    • KSP Discussion
    • KSP Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Community
    • Player Spotlight
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (Console)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



About me



Found 5 results

  1. My idea is to make the arrangement of modules in the kraft more meaningful Logically, if the habitate modules are not connected by any tunnels or corridors, then to move between them, you need a minimum of EVA. But according to the logic of the game, since these modules are part of the same craft, kerbals can still move between them. For example kerbals can move between modules of this craft I propose to make a system that resembles the fuel delivey system for liquid engines. If engine not connected to fuel system, then it can't waste fuel. And if module is not connected with the interior living space of the spacecraft, then kerbals can't move to this module from anothers. For example right connected modules look like these: On the second picture you can see that modules are connected with tube. And I suggest that tubes can connect habitate modules and/or this function can be made by another parts I propose this change to make the assembly of kerbals crafts more meaningful. This adds a new layer to the assembly process, related to the proper planning of module placement and it will add a bit simulation to the space exploration simulator. I think with this fix will make game immersion is felt stronger, if I may say so. I assume that such a system is being developed for the colonies, but I am not convinced and do not know if it applies to spaceships I thought about this idea after seeing this interstellar ship with planes Of course, although it is pre-alpha, but it is unclear how the crew will get to the planes, except through spacewalking And now my fantasy, which may not appear in the game: if you can't connect some modules on interstellar ship, you can make transport, which is connected to ship's structure and can to drive on it like on rails 500m from the living bays to landers, which saves weight on the long 500 meter corridor I hope you found my idea about realistic movement between habitate modules interesting and convincing
  2. Okay, so my first station was in orbit about 85 km above Kerbin. Kerbin Station Alpha is pretty basic -- two Hitchhikers and a cupola, with a pair of Clamp-o-tron Jr., some batteries, and solar panels to charge the batteries. On a whim, the commander went EVA and took an EVA report, which produced some useful science (because it was "above Kerbin's shores" or some such -- in other words, I was low enough for biomes on Kerbin to matter, which is a science realm I haven't touched). I'd love to get this science, since it'll be nearly free (just add some instruments to modules already planned for addition to this station -- barometers, thermometers, goo cannisters, etc., cheap and easy). However, there arises an issue, and will arise another: initially, how do I get the data Lufrid generated down to Kerbin so R&D can do something with it? The station has a high-gain antenna on one of the Hitchhiker modules, but it's not the one with the working hatch (the cupola and other Hitchhiker hatches are blocked by solar panels and docking port, respectively), and when I tried to immediately transmit the EVA report I was informed there was "no antenna within reach" or something of the sort -- and when Lufrid had re-boarded the station core and transferred to the module with the antenna, I couldn't find the EVA report to transmit. Longer term, once I can reliably transmit my science from Kerbin Station Alpha, have instruments, and have a scientist aboard, will that scientist be able to reset experiments from inside the station, or will he/she have to EVA (presumably within a certain distance of the experiment) to do so?
  3. Hey all, i seriously need a second set of eyes to help me see where i'm going wrong here, or if what im doing is even possible (im assuming it is, it's just that im more of a modeller than programmer and i'm missing something utterly obvious.) To the quick! The problem. I'm trying to create a "Spacebus" a small 6 man shuttlepod to ferry kerbals around Kerbin/Mun/Minmus stations. Everything was going fine until i tried adding the engines and RCS. Now, i've done a good bit of modding before so i know the pitfalls here, and i tried to cover most of my bases. =I tried adding in RCS, and it worked fine. I tried adding the engines, and it all bust. =I tried adding in the engines, and it worked fine. I tried adding the RCS, and it all bust. =I tried using both sets of engines in one cfg without any effects at all included. Both work --perfectly-- without any effects being added. To make the point easy, here's a video. As i say, this isnt my first rodeo. I've made sure both RCS and the engines have different sets of transforms each, and none overlap or are incorrectly named (as the video proves). The problem boils down to the sodding EFFECTS module, or so i think. I first copy/pasted seperate effects modules, and that just breaks everything. I then tried to merge the two effects modules into one "EFFECTS" in the cfg, and it still buggers up. It's like the game is saying "You can have one set of effects on this part, but not two." Below ive included the main starting section of the CFG (incase ive overlooked something bloody obvious) here. And here are the two separate Effects modules that i cant seem to get to play nice together. Main Engines : And the RCS part I've tried using just fx_whatevers at the start of the cfg, but unless im adding them in wrong, they dont play nice with the RCS Effects module. Thanks for taking the time to read this, and if you've any helpful advice or can see where i've gone wrong i'll be so SO grateful (and make sure to mention you when i release my main mod, of course!)
  4. I've made plenty of stable and meta-stable rockets with stock fuel flow in my time, but while attempting a fully reusable career play-through I decided that this particular mechanic had to go. I'm aware of the workarounds using fuel pumps, tank locking, and even the TankLock mod being maintained by the illustrious linuxgurugamer: However, what I would really like is for rocket engines to just behave like jet engines, having the "resourceFlowMode = STAGE_STACK_FLOW_BALANCE" property which causes fuel to drain evenly from all of the tanks in the current stage. To that end I made a Module Manager patch with the following text: This should change the resource flow mode to the desired mode in all engines which use ModuleEngines or ModuleEnginesFX (every rocket and jet engine I've inspected the .cfg of), but it had no effect for me. I've only ever seen resourceFlowMode defined for jet engines (ModuleEnginesFX), and it's always defined as "STAGE_STACK_FLOW_BALANCE". Is this node simply not implemented for ModuleEngines, or have I made a silly mistake in my Module Manager syntax? Thank you.
  5. Even though KSP is an absolute amazing game, I would (at this stage) like to see a greater hand in the research aspects. The ability to actually design a rocket and its capabilities would be excellent, I think. To decide what kind of fuel flow versus power output versus price versus fail rate. This could be for many of the modules. Command modules with greater battery life at a cost of propellant or price tag. Construction materials that question price over durability or even the number of hard points for adding other modules. If a player doesn't want to construct their own KSP produced products, they could always default to the many companies eager to peddle their wares to them.
  • Create New...