All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. A circular Air intake brings in 2 cu. of air while an engine nacelle bring in 5.0 cu. I can't figure out if I put an air intake on front of engine nacelle if it will bring a combined 7.0 of air in?
  3. I just found my next Module Manager patch; i'm guessing i would need to restrict it to Fuel Tanks, Cargo Bays, Wings (not sure?), science experiments and add some logic to prevent it from ever being the root part. But even just fuel tanks would reduce the load immensely, it's exceptionally rare that the bulk of the part count is engines/wheels/gears. The question isn't "Can it be improved"; given unlimited time and funding you bet they could crank out something resembling a proper fluid-dynamic simulator that would make universities blush. But that's not what you're asking; the question you want to know is "Given the current game; is there low-hanging fruit to be had". Which several posters above have already described fairly interesting fixes that shouldn't take much time to implement (Chasing bugs resulting from them would likely take longer). But as far as how it uses memory overall; programs allocate the memory they "Need" according to what's specified. The reason i say "Need" in quotation marks is because the majority of programs today allocate much more memory than is actually required at the time; this is so the program remains smooth and has time to allocate more memory when more is demanded (This is an EXTREMELY simplifed explaination btw). So what does all of this mean in english? If KSP is only asking for 4-5 GB than that's not only all the memory it needs; it's a pretty hefty pile over what it actually would need at that moment. So while i'm sure there's stuff they could do to enhance it's use of memory; that's not really an issue on your system or many others. The physics is a completely different matter; they can optimize it further to make it much smoother than it is currently but without changing how they actually handle physics (Which would likely break quite a few things) it cannot be multithreaded. So they're stuck in a rut; and i don't see how they could get out of it without a hard break. This in my mind would be the actual purpose of a KSP 2.0; a clean slate to allow that hard break and get a sturdy foundation setup for the future. But for the most part; KSP runs pretty well in my opinion and i frequently launch ships with part counts > 200. And to be honest; very few games do what KSP does. No other game i know of gives you a pile of parts, then tells you to wack it into something pointy and see what happens. Everything past the VAB is pretty much handled via physics; which while not entirely accurate still comes damn close to real life. This isn't me saying KSP should be excused for it's flaws; just me saying the scope of what KSP does makes it inherently difficult to account for every potential interaction and situation. Which means i doubt the code could ever be perfectly efficient; as that would limit the possibilities for the player at some point.
  4. Define stuck? My game can take upwards of 20 minutes to load with a full set of mods, a vanilla stock game far less, but the game is notorious for long load times. If you've only waited 30 secs to a minute, you haven't waited long enough. Give it a good ten minutes one time and see if the loading screens pop up. If not, then we're really going to need those log files.
  5. I don't know what's up with KAS right now, but you can turn on resource distribution. I'm not able to give specifics right now, but look for "setup distribution" on the part action window or the operations manager.
  6. This is a bug I encountered a year ago that still seems to be present. I've seen it happen to a Timberwind most often, but I might have experienced it with a NERVA last year. The engine will work fine until something causes it to be saved, at this time, the engine will be "Offline" with no PAWS option to reactive it (you can activate/deactivate the nozzle or the generator but not the reactor itself). If I look at the save file, the problem module is: MODULE { name = InterstellarPebbleBedFissionEngine isEnabled = True electricPowerPriority = 1 powerPercentage = 100 forcedMinimumThrottle = 0 render_window = True fuelmode_index = 0 fuel_mode_name = Uranium Nitride Pellet fuel_mode_variant = FissionUN IsEnabled = False isDeployed = False isupgraded = False breedtritium = True last_active_time = 21847023.009077851 ongoing_consumption_rate = 0.03259285260460424 ongoing_wasteheat_rate = 0.00025000000000000001 reactorInit = True startDisabled = False neutronEmbrittlementDamage = 1.2056905787904126E-11 maxEmbrittlementFraction = 0.5 windowPositionX = 994 windowPositionY = 744 currentGenerationType = 2 storedPowerMultiplier = 1 stored_fuel_ratio = 1 fuel_ratio = 1 requested_thermal_power_ratio = 0.00025000000000000001 maximumThermalPower = 50 maximumChargedPower = 0 thermal_power_ratio = 0.00025000000000000001 charged_power_ratio = 0 reactor_power_ratio = 0 power_request_ratio = 0.00025000000000000001 thermal_propulsion_ratio = 0 plasma_propulsion_ratio = 0 charged_propulsion_ratio = 0 propulsion_request_ratio_sum = 0 maximum_thermal_request_ratio = 0.00025000000000000001 maximum_charged_request_ratio = 0 maximum_reactor_request_ratio = 0.00025000000000000001 thermalThrottleRatio = 0 plasmaThrottleRatio = 0 chargedThrottleRatio = 0 storedIsThermalEnergyGeneratorEfficiency = 0.092384031265024577 storedIsPlasmaEnergyGeneratorEfficiency = 0 storedIsChargedEnergyGeneratorEfficiency = 0 storedGeneratorThermalEnergyRequestRatio = 0.00025000000000000001 storedGeneratorPlasmaEnergyRequestRatio = 0.00025000000000000001 storedGeneratorChargedEnergyRequestRatio = 0.00025000000000000001 ongoing_total_power_generated = 0 ongoing_thermal_power_generated = 1.6296426302302121 ongoing_charged_power_generated = 0 stagingEnabled = True EVENTS { } ACTIONS { ActivateReactorAction { actionGroup = None } DeactivateReactorAction { actionGroup = None } ToggleReactorAction { actionGroup = None } } UPGRADESAPPLIED { } } You'll notice, there's an `isEnabled = True` and `IsEnabled = False`, capitalization being the only difference. If I edit the capitalized version to True, it's active again. I have not been able to find a way to activate the engine from this state in-game. The reactor control window has no interactive button (no deactivate or activate button at the bottom) and the PAWS menu has activation only for the generator and the nozzle.
  7. I agree. I used to love playing KSP for linux and MacOS and I just recently purchased KSP for PS4 and it is completely unplayable.
  8. Yeah, I know, although I figure that "shedding the outer layers", which end up moving away at decent speed, has to be a reasonably energetic event.. Of course, the planets would already have been cooked by the preceding red giant phase, too, but the wave of starstuff coming out afterwards can't help whatever's left But that's in the real universe. In the Kerbalverse, all the fundamental forces and, therefore, matter itself and all the laws of physics, are different. Thus, I figure stars have rather different lifecycles there than here, and I have to explain why there's so much nebulousity strewn about already.
  9. Hmm... I have an idea Will try and mock it up when next I have some modeling time. Should be relatively simple, if I grasp what you are getting at regarding overall concept (probably not, but gotta start somewhere).
  10. I took a quick peek at the web page for the program you found, and it looks like it does everything my spreadsheet would and then some! My plan of attack was: 1. Find an engine with known: Propellants, mix ratio, expansion ratio, Isp (ASL), chamber pressure, and exhaust exit pressure (guesstimate this last one by looking at exhaust expansion as it exits the nozzle) 2. Use the Isp (ASL) to back-calculate the temperature in the combustion chamber. Just use guess and check iteration until the right temp is found- the adiabatic flame temp can be used as a starting guess. I was planning on using JANAF thermodynamics values and an assumption of fast kinetics and adiabatic expansion (so all points are at equilibrium, and all of the losses are modeled as a simple reduction in combustion chamber temp). The one thing I wasn't sure about is how to deal with the non-ideality of the gas. I was planning to use Redlich-Kwong, but there's quite a few exhaust components I'm not confident I could find critical temps/pressures for. For starters, the ideal gas assumption may be 'close enough' though. 3. Using this combustion chamber temperature, calculate the Isp of the engine for different expansion ratios. Of course real life doesn't really work like this, but the problems caused by the assumptions made here will tend to cancel eachother out. It should come out pretty close! Since you've got the program, maybe give this a go?
  11. Purdy Purdy, Question for everyone of my fellow Kerbalnauts... What do you suggest, a 2 Rocket Lunar Orbital rendezvous launch or do you think a Shenanigan Rocket is the way to go (use a PLF with the nodes on to stack Gemini + A Transtage or 2 ABOVE the lander) I am just curious how others are going to try to launch this beau of a little lander.
  12. Hi @LMRaptor, the new arm that I'm doing in 3Ds Max will be similar to the below with all the same movements as the real one. I can confirm that the End Effector (with the light and camera) are on the Roll axis. My model from 3Ds Max into Unity is working to plan, just doing some small model changes and texture updates to make it look better before posting images of it. I don't want to Kerbalise the scratch build to much, by that I mean I'd like it to have the same movements as that of the real one.. Do you think this will suffice or do you feel we will need a Kerbal version and a 'real' version that can be easy transferable to RO. (I'm hoping to make one model that fits both, where RO would require very little change).
  13. It has been recently brought to my attention that I caused distress with my loathsome utterance of the words 'inverse kinematics' I humbly beseech you all to forgive this grievous transgression. I go now into exile in the wilderness no doubt to die a lonely death at the claws and teeth of some fearsome predator.
  14. Great! As mentioned, I think now it could be done relatively simply by using rectangular petals with a tongue (as in tongue and groove) that, once the petals are folded down, extends out of one side of each petal and into a groove on the next petal. Or they extend from both sides to meet each other. Some greeble and it looks like a fancy part that took years to design. For visual interest and a little more aerobraking you could fiddle around with the outside edge of the petals, adding a slight point to each one so the heat shield edge isn't perfectly round. Thinking about it a bit, I think it should expand maybe 20% of the stack core diameter, but petal length (and therefore expansion ratio) would be very nice as a dynamic parameter. Will definitely fill a glaring parts gap if you can make this work
  15. Craft Manager does a wonderful job of that. I think you can even set the scale of the thumbnails:
  16. As I understand they will have an docking port in the air lock in the cargo bay. Guess it will pop out a bit for two starships to dock.
  17. @benjee10 so the robotics the HTrobotics must have contain the robotic parts but i launched the game (as usual) the robotics are not showing up is their a way of enabling them???
  18. Somebody had to explain it to me, I'm just repeating that info
  19. Gemini lander parts all survived the transfer to Unity intact... hopefully sometime later this week I have time to get cfgs made and get this up on Github
  20. Psst nova isn't the sun-mass version of supernova. A Nova just means "new" or "visiting" star, and as a phenomenon these are usually used to refer to the outbursts caused by white dwarfs as material from a binary companion falls onto them. Sunlike stars do not explode at all, they simply shed their outer layers into a nebula and their core collapses into a white dwarf, non-violently. Supernova are when massive (>8 Msol) stars die and turn into neutron stars or black holes, or when white dwarfs collect so much material at once they completely explode. (>1.44 Msol) These are much more luminous, hence the "super." Just a nitpick.
  21. Possibly, but those look a lot more like jet engines than rocket engines. Also, there is no indication that they are getting anywhere near orbital velocities as opposed to just climbing high in the sky to avoid bringing planetary chunks along for the ride. I have not seen that movie, so I can't speak for how a large flying vehicle like that one could travel at off-road bus speeds and stay in the air with little or no wing surface, but I am sure they are using the same space-magic to protect the gang-plank.
  22. @Maxx The difficulty will depend on a number of things 1) How familiar you are with programming 2) How familiar you are with the Unity API 3) How familiar you are with the KSP API #1 and #2 have lots of online as well as offline documentation/tutorials, #3 has bare bones API documentation (mostly a list of classes and methods) with a few comments at and lots of examples in the form of source code from most of the mods out there. I've found it to be very satisfying as well as intensely frustrating - I seem to keep coming back to it so either the satisfying out weighs the frustrating or I'm a masochist. If your interested I can dig up some links that I've found useful.
  23. It's something that's theoretically possible, but would require a lot of design work to be made viable. So it almost certainly won't be done.
  24. Is it possible to change the map displaying the location of ore deposits to a heat-map, with lower concentrations of ore represented by one color and higher concentrations by another?
  1. Load more activity