All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Hey guys, I'm new to releasing mods, at least visual/planetary ones that require new textures and configs so any help would be appreciated. Tnx... I've created brand new lightning textures for Jool, Eve, Kerbin & Laythe (main textures, detail textures) but have some questions as to how best to 'package' my mod as I would like to share with the community and not step on any other modders toes, if you will. I also created a 'Lightning.cfg' file from scratch (to be used via EVE) based on review of several other visual mod configs. My questions: for UV noise, I see a lot of the visual mods out there using what seems to be the same 'uvnoise1.dds'. Is there a community one people are using or do I need to create my own (or grab it from a mod with license that permits use)? If this lighting mod is used in a vanilla install, no prob...but what if someone wants to use this mod to 'replace' another lighting config already being used? How do I best handle that, at the top of the config file with a BEFORE or AFTER statement as I have seen on other visual mods? Sorry, anything beyond light coding is not my cup of tea. Do I need to create a Module Manager patch for this type of mod (for basically a config file plus several textures)? Again, not sure when one is needed or not but seems most visual mods do not contain MM. Any other considerations for posting a new mod (other than mentioning licensing, source code, etc)? Thanks in advance guys, I just want do it right and have a good mod launch! The lightning is looking good and I want to share (or possibly show off a wee bit, lol).
  3. The Minmus Derp

    Forgotten Space Program

    EYYYYY! IT's BACK!
  4. Well

    [1.7.0] Ж-20 "Moroz" Spaceplane

    A WIP test for a White variant :
  5. Rudolf Meier

    [WIP] Kerbal Joint Reinforcement - Next

    ah... interesting... it bends ah, interesting... maybe the KJR joints are too strong in this situation ... the other thing, that's something I'm still thinking about... and I also found another little bug
  6. Mikki

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Hinges

    Hinges are going to unfold Kerbal madness. (Warning, deeply hypnotic gif ahead) Kerbal Ospreys are go!
  7. Spacenerd Kerman

    Top Five Best Planet Packs

    My 2 pence (Sterling FTW!): 1. Whirligig World (JUST GENERALLY AWESOME!) 2. Any of Gameslix's Planet Packs, mostly. 3.GPP. 4. Ummm... I haven't tried any other packs... 5. That's about it.
  8. ZodiusInfuser

    KSP Loading... Breaking Ground: Hinges

    +1 to this. Given robotics is being advertised as a main feature of this paid DLC, I have yet to see anything that suggests this will be anything more than the bare minimum of implementation. I'd really love to be proven wrong though, which is why we need more info.
  9. RealKerbal3x

    [1.7.x] Heisenberg - Airships Part Pack

    I'm pretty sure the HL toolbar app is the only thing that controls buoyancy, so it's probably the way you've built your airship. Make sure that your centre of mass is as close to the centre of the airship as possible. If you still can't balance it properly, adding some gyro rings and/or compressed air RCS thruster blocks may help with keeping the vessel stable.
  10. Challenge: Launch a rocket and land the first stage as close to the launchpad as possible. Rules: 1) Maximum of 2 stages. SSTOs allowed. 2) The first stage must escape the atmosphere before the landing attempt. 3) Must be able to deploy a Convert-O-Tron 250 (4.25 ton payload) into a stable Kerbin orbit. 4) No parachutes on the first stage 5) No wheeled landing gear or rover wheels on the first stage. 6) No parts destroyed on the landed stage. 7) No mods except KER and Trajectories. Leaderboards will be split into Trajectories and non-Trajectories. Scoring: Once the first stage is landed, spawn a craft on the launch pad (just a command pod will do). The distance from the newly spawned craft to your landed first stage will be recorded as your score. Screenshots required: Craft on launchpad First stage above 70km Payload deploy Landed first stage Close-up of distance marker to the newly spawned craft on the launchpad.
  11. Company towns are a real thing, and only increased regulation put an end to them. They’re not limited to dystopian fiction. And a space colony is an ideal site for a company town—people can’t even leave without paying. And neither can their children, or grandchildren. These people aren’t making a choice that hurts them, they’re making a choice that hurts all of their descendants. And the degree in “whatever-studies” only creates debt because the colleges have become bloated and increased pay for administrators while reducing pay for teachers. These systems aren’t natural law, they’re created by humans. A rising tide may lift all boats, but a lot of people don’t have boats. The portion of the world’s wealth and resources owned by the wealthiest people continues to increase. We grow enough food to feed everyone on the planet, and have to pay farmers to produce less, and people still starve. Why? Because the distribution of food is flawed. The “commercial system” cannot produce a post-scarcity society because it relies on scarcity and creates more when scarcity begins to disappear. Look at all the fear over technological unemployment—the reduction or abolition of scarcity through technology is instead recast as a creation of scarcity because the benefits of this reduction in scarcity will be concentrated in the already powerful. As a post-scarcity society draws near the commercial system will destroy itself because the now-unemployed people will not be able to afford goods, even if production costs are zero, because they cannot pay for the company’s cut of the take. Either a violent uprising or government-enforced regulation results, and both of those are bad results. Change needs to be made before then, or the power of the state will be entrenched and oppression will follow. And for the last time, NASA DOES NOT BUILD ITS OWN SPACECRAFT. IT CURRENTLY CONTRACTS OUT TO VARIOUS COMPANIES, INCLUDING SPACEX. EVERY CRAFT SINCE GEMINI HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED BY PRIVATE ENTITIES AT THE BEHEST OF NASA. Plus, you toss around $20 Billion as if it’s a lot, as opposed to being less than a fifth of Bezos’s net worth, or less than half of one percent of the federal budget.
  12. 4x4cheesecake

    [Tutorial] How to install mods (manually & CKAN)

    Ok, didn't know that. I'll add a hint, thanks again
  13. Ninja'd by @Stariy_Yevrey with a perfectly fine explanation, thanks Just think about it as a fancy term for "docking the solar panels to the core"
  14. RocketSquid

    [1.7.x] Heisenberg - Airships Part Pack

    Airships don’t take off, and instead flip in such a way that they smash into the launch pad. This may just be a problem with my design, but it persisted through so many edits that I begin to think there’s either something fundamentally wrong with my concept, something wrong with my piloting, or something wrong with my install.
  15. @Mopoii It means that you need to attach solar panels to telescope on orbit. Also challenge requires that you have to do that with 2 MMU's.
  16. Note that while SpaceX might be Musk's vanity project, without it and Telsa he likely wouldn't crack the Forbes 500 richest Americans. Hardly "nothing left to conquer but the sky". Nitpick: the first real operational "computer" was likely the Z3. This computer was built more as an "art project" and had to be kept secret from the [censored German] government, or they'd take all the components as a "misuse of war materials". Shortly later the ABC computer was built, presumably as an academic research project (note, the ABC was neither programmable nor Turing complete). The ABC lead directly to the famous ENIAC (Mauchly had a good look at the ABC computer before building ENIAC). ENIAC (and most computers to follow) was most certainly built for governments (as was Colossus, a British computer built to crack codes a little after the Z3). After Eniac/Univac decided they could sell 3 computer to the government to fill the nations [electronic] computing needs, IBM (and the seven dwarfs) starting building computers for large companies. Eventually one "dwarf", Digital, decided to build computers for smaller companies and launched the minicomputer. One of these (the PDP-9) was so cheap to make Steve Wozniak wonder if he could buy one (could have happened any time between 1965-1975). He was quite disappointed when his father told him it cost as much as his house (Silicon Vally housing prices hadn't taken off yet). Steve wouldn't be able to make computers for people until he saw MOS technologies selling 6502s for $25 a pop (1975?). Finally, as much as SpaceX has managed to drop the price of entry into space (and don't think for a minute NASA has been trying since 1969, although Orbital did make some progress), it is still staggering. And even if you look at only the fuel costs (a tiny portion of the cost to go into space), it is still sky-high. It will be decades before all the low hanging fruit will be plucked before things air-augmented boosters and ramjets will be suggested to lower the cost into space (assuming those who make such decisions still care about such things), and possibly make space available to the general public (assumes that the wealth distribution will maintain constant, any discussion of the probability or desirability of such should be scrubbed). To get back on topic: NASA really doesn't build anything, they give specifications to contractors and let the contractors subcontract things out and provide something to that specification. Thus it has been since at least Apollo and I'm sure NASA/NACA didn't have the massive infrastructure when it was new to build Mercury, so it did the same thing the DoD does: put out a spec and let contractors bid on it. What has changed drastically is that things like "commercial crew" has a spec like "get three astronauts to orbit with a high (specified) margin of safety" instead of their usual "block diagram level + plenty of physical envelope dimensions" that micromanage the contractors. I've mentioned that Falcon Heavy looks ideal for "cargo launch vehicle", Delta-IV heavy also exists, but can get only half the mass to GTO (and thus presumably LTO). Starship and New Glenn are still paper, so can't be considered. No idea if the Falcon Heavy or Delta-IV can deliver Blue Moon to the Moon (Falcon Heavy has nasty envelope issues, Delta-IV has mass issues), but it is almost certainly paper and could presumably be made to fit whichever restriction needed. I'm not sure why, but for Apollo the Command module was the "glory contract" of the Apollo program, although the lander seems the coolest part. I imagine that Bezos would do what it takes to get Blue Moon to the Moon. Atkins Rule of space design: 39. Any exploration program which "just happens" to include a new launch vehicle is, de facto, a launch vehicle program. Artemis is fundamentally a job program for SLS, so it already is a single launch vehicle program, it doesn't need to design another. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouRbkBAOGEw Link goes to JFK's speech at Rice University "we choose to go to the Moon". The money was never there for Apollo for science. The money was always there "to beat the ruskies", it was just that science happened to be a good way to beat them. The US government can hardly be convinced that it needs to go to space for science (how many elected officials will publicly agree that "evolution is an obviously proven scientific fact that the entire field of biology depends on" and then imagine the same crew spending billions "just for science".) Note that corporate support for science hasn't always been negative. Bell Labs was legendary in their scientific output (being a regulated monopoly had a lot to do with that. Do we have any of those anymore?). While Claude Shannon did invent information theory (and everything Bell Labs needed to go digital in 40 years or so, and thanks to their replacement schedule needed that timeframe), plenty of general science was done. With Bill Gates showing himself to be the ultimate philanthropist in terms of lives saved and general well being improved, I have to wonder if the next multi-billionaire might want to try to personally fund science (Warren Buffet's wife pretty much single handedly funds reproductive science R&D). On the other hand, the Tobacco Institute showed corporations just how profitable and effective anti-science could be.
  17. bulletrhli

    [1.7] CommNet Constellation v1.3.2 [16 April 2019]

    For sure! Its called Signal Delay
  18. IceTitan

    Konstellation HLV

    I love the look of the parts
  19. when I was doing a mission with a craft without normal engines and just RCS systems and tried to do rendezvous, when I went to the map view to fine tune the encounter, Instead of thrusting forwards when I pressed RT I just spun around and had to scrap the mission, I don't know if this is a bug or if you just can't use docking mode on the map view but I'm pretty annoyed P.S. I was using linear not rotation in docking mode I'm pretty sure It's a problem with the map view
  20. For future reference, what was the other mod?
  21. Yes it does. The service modules are very buggy indeed. Upvote so they get some attention, please. Apparently not enough people care for it to get a simple confirmation. https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/21878
  22. Spacenerd Kerman

    Conquering Whirligig (Chapter 20 - Interplanetary Ballooning)

    Well... I said I was transferring to this series, but I'm having some issues... I can't really get it to work. I've tracked the issue to KopernicusExpansion-Continued, and I have a bit of a dilemma. I play 1.6.0, but KopernicusExpansionContinued, only has 1.7.0 and above releases, and KopernicusExpansion (not continued) only goes up to 1.4.5... ah. @GregroxMun said that he needed KopernicusExpansionContinued because of certain PQSmods in it. Which ones? I'm gonna have a go at relocating the Continued PQSmods into an older version. *Crosses fingers that it'll work*
  23. Today
  24. Paadwyn

    [WIP] Kerbal Joint Reinforcement - Next

    Kind of, yes. When Global Construction finishes and removes the crate and pops the vessel into the world. It might do some funky stuff with joints or connectors. The shuttle I had docked to it will rip off, the other unused connectors will also pop off. I noticed solar panels flying, but that could be from other parts hitting them. As soon as it popped in I saw it kind of bending before it stabilized. The parts twisting as if they were trying to align properly. Then it became stable and rigid, except for the parts floating away. Presumably, they couldn't handle the stress. Without KJRn the ship still popped in and did the same bending, twisting, except it didn't stabilize...but no parts broke free. Turning on autostruts stabilized it. I think this instability is the result of the construction, a few more struts seemed to stop that instability. I will have to test it again though. In the meantime, I can easily turn on unbreakable joints when I finish construction then turn it back off.
  25. MinimumSky5

    NASA SLS/Orion/Payloads

    "Did you know, that the US governments pork distribution scheme reaches millionaires in all 50 states with a ridiculously convoluted and difficult to trace supply system?" There you go, fixed it for you! But yeah, there are many logistics experts crying tonight, at this tweet.
  26. Zhetaan

    Rigid Attachment?

    @Climber Rat: Also, welcome to the forum. Anyway, I wanted to mention that I do use rigid attachment sometimes on side boosters to prevent too much oscillation, but only in combination with struts. It may make sense to use it on long station sections, as well, but no more sense than it does to use autostruts, instead.
  1. Load more activity