Jump to content

NecroBones

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,820

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by NecroBones

  1. NecroBones
    KSP normally does fuel capacities based on units of fuel, not liters. One of your other mods is messing with it. I have definitions included for ModularFuelTanks which should set their capacities correctly in that particular case. So I don't really know which of your other mods is breaking it. I would need to see a KSP.log to get any further idea.
  2. NecroBones
    Normally (using ModuleManager) it should be able to detect if you don't have Firespitter or InterstellarFuelSwitch installed, and just use the default appearances only. But if that's not happening, make sure you have a valid/current copy of MudleManager, and then yes, probably install FS or IFS. Either MM is broken, or something else is tricking it into thinking you have those mods, so you might as well use one of them if that's the case.
  3. NecroBones
    I like it.
  4. NecroBones
    Updated: 1.16 (2017-01-30) - SRB Update. - Corrected smoke emitter location on the 3.75m SRB, 21m length. - Added a 30m long 3.75m SRB. - Added a 29m long 2.5m SRB.
  5. NecroBones
    Yeah, I can't say I'm surprised. Unfortunately, this is just how KSP works now. I created those parts back when we had the old aerodynamic model, and it was OK to create these sorts of adaptive parts. But the new aerodynamic system isn't cooperative with it, so I've stopped designing parts that way. But we still have these. I'm afraid that the fix for this is to use FAR. Certainly doable. Bigger is better, right?
  6. NecroBones
    That's not a bad idea. The tricky thing with making them stackable, is ensuring the angles line up and that they actually look good that way. But it's a versatile design, if it has the standard stack nodes to work with. I think I boosted them a little bit, a while back. They can always be supplemented with more stuff, but yeah, I can probably bump them up a bit. To keep the mass consistent, I might default them to the current propellant amount, but allow the maximum to go higher when you're building in the VAB.
  7. NecroBones
    Huh, strange. The bun is missing some of the science and kerbnet stuff that was added, but it should be able to throttle. I'll probably go ahead and add the missing modules anyway.
  8. NecroBones
    Using RSB's Stockalike patches, and trying to mix that with RF and RSS is probably not the best idea. RSB is designed to be realistically scaled by default (including correct fuel mass for various types of fuels/tanks, even though it uses stock fuels), and then the Stockalike patches scale it down for use with a normal-scale KSP game. As far as I know, RF doesn't have support for RSB, either with or without the Stockalike scaling. RO added its own support for RSB, so I'm hoping that could be used as a basis for RF at some point.
  9. NecroBones
    Not yet, sadly. Man, I have so much stuff on the "to-do list" these days. I'll probably get back into another development cycle sooner or later, but I don't know what I'll work on first.
  10. NecroBones
    Yep, there is a way, but it's not pretty. If you look in the color-changing patches for CCC, it has rules in there that FTP doesn't. The only stock-alike way that I know of for disabling meshes by name, is to turn them into shrouds and associate them with an unusable attachment node. For example, in CCC, in "ColorCodedCanisters-MM-FTP-size0.cfg": // Appearance switching turned off, when FTP is absent: @PART[miniFuelTank]:FOR[ZColorCodedCans]:NEEDS[!FuelTanksPlus] { node_stack_disabled = 0.0, -1000.0, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 0 MODULE { name = ModuleJettison jettisonName = CCtank0m-White bottomNodeName = disabled isFairing = True jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1 jettisonForce = 0.1 jettisonDirection = 0 0 1 } MODULE { name = ModuleJettison jettisonName = CCtank0m-Checkered bottomNodeName = disabled isFairing = True jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1 jettisonForce = 0.1 jettisonDirection = 0 0 1 } MODULE { name = ModuleJettison jettisonName = CCtank0m-Black bottomNodeName = disabled isFairing = True jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1 jettisonForce = 0.1 jettisonDirection = 0 0 1 } MODULE { name = ModuleJettison jettisonName = CCtank0m-Red bottomNodeName = disabled isFairing = True jettisonedObjectMass = 0.1 jettisonForce = 0.1 jettisonDirection = 0 0 1 } } It creates a "disabled" attachment node. The node is actually a real attachment node, but it's placed a kilometer away, so you can't connect anything to it. Then each mesh gets its own ModuleJettison that points to that node.
  11. NecroBones
    No, it's designed around mesh-switching. If you don't want IFS specifically, it also works with Firespitter or B9 Part Switch.
  12. NecroBones
    In that case, you would use RSB without the stockalike patches, and use the normal "RSB" sample rockets.
  13. NecroBones
    Yep, if you're using the Stockalike patches, there should be a second set of sample rockets in there with "RSBstock" in the titles.
  14. NecroBones
    Yeah, I'd put all of the engines on first, and then snap the decoupler on. As long as you're using the right decoupler, it should pop right on without too much trouble, and it keeps you from having to reach up from underneath to stick engines inside.
  15. NecroBones
    Huh! I never even thought to play with collider sizes for that. I could see that being taken into account to adjust stiffness too. Bigger->Stiff. Smaller->Floppy. (insert "that's what she said" comment here?) Unfortunately it's hard to use this to make some parts exceptionally strong, since an oversized collider is usually out of the question.
  16. NecroBones
    Heh, thanks for playing with it a bit. I didn't test it that extensively, but the only thing that was obviously making big differences for me was the starting mass of the parts. Tanks get really stiff joints, for instance, but small inline decouplers, docking ports, etc can be quite floppy, despite having the same node size. I'm wondering if there's some goofy equation that takes all of these things into account, and some have a greater impact than others at different times, depending on size of the part and other factors? I wish I had a view into what they're really doing. And I've been begging for a "stiffness multiplier" setting forever. We can change the breaking strength directly in the CFGs, but not the stiffness, which is really a shame.
  17. NecroBones
    Make sure you use the appropriate interstage/decoupler. The engines attach to the stage, and there's an interstage decoupler that covers them and allows you to connect the lower stage. This is more realistic to how the rockets work in the real life, plus as @Phineas Freak mentioned, there are node-stickiness issues with having engines and decouplers at similar lengths, plus there are many rocket designs that don't use a center engine (such as the 2x RL10 arrangement on the Centaur Atlas upper stages), so it was best to use a design that works universally for this pack.
  18. NecroBones
    The good news is that RSB's tank capacities with the stock fuels are based on mass, not KSP's standard fuel densities. So the "100%" thing isn't too far off. Of course it doesn't have boil-off or anything like that, but since it's based on real world fuel mass capacities and ISPs, the performance will be pretty close to the real world counterparts. The exception to this is if you use the "RSB Stockalike" patches, which rescale the parts to a smaller size, and then base the fuel capacities off of the new size and KSP's fuel densities.
  19. NecroBones
    The storage is based on the volume of the parts. Unless another mod is messing with it, they should all match based on volume.
  20. NecroBones
    As far as I know, node size has little to no effect on stiffness (I could be wrong, but that seemed to be the case). Mass of the parts has a huge impact on stiffness though.
  21. NecroBones
    You can kind-of fake it by putting the SRB on one decoupler, and then strutting it to a second one. Or, just strut it directly to the inner stage, and the struts will detach when the decoupler is separated.
  22. NecroBones
    That's all controlled on the RF/RO side of things, rather than on my side. I'd point it out to them.
  23. NecroBones
    I don't think the auto-strutting is involved, at least not directly. It's possible that there's some funky code interaction with that internally in KSP, but I don't have a view into that of course. For now the easiest thing to do, is to use the right-click menu and turn off the shrouds on each tank in the VAB.
  24. NecroBones
    Awesome! LOL at: 10.. 9... SPACEBAR! It's a stock bug in the 1.2.X versions. It's just more noticeable in SpaceY, because of the disk end-caps for the tanks. I've been tempted to remove those, but I don't know how much people are attached to them for some rocket builds.
  25. NecroBones
    Updated: 1.15.1 (2017-01-03) - Compatibility Update. - Added "NEEDS" conditionals for ConnectedLivingSpace and EngineIgnitor patches, to clean up log spam. - EngineIgnitor patches moved to their own file in the patches folder. - Added "NEEDS" conditionals for Engineering Tech Tree compatibility. It's hard to tell exactly, but it looks like it's a modified version of SpaceY? The folder name appears to be "SpaceY-Lifters-4", and it has rules for "ETT", which I hadn't added yet until today. I really can only debug it when it's a pristine copy of SpaceY. It's possible that the rules are stepping on each other. In fact, the new Engineering Tech Tree rules I just added might need some testing (I don't have it installed). I used nonstandard names for the "Massive" tech nodes, and it attempts to use those if no other tech tree mods are installed. I might still need to add some patch rules for specific parts.
×
×
  • Create New...