Jump to content

tjsnh

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    942

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by tjsnh

  1. tjsnh
    Update posted, mostly bugfixes.
  2. tjsnh
    For context - I found this amazing picture album today of Pitchka and Baikal rotting away in the hanger. http://ralphmirebs.livejournal.com/219949.html It's horribly depressing to look at, but a good reference for RARE up-close pictures of "the real thing"
  3. tjsnh
    For all the Buran enthusiasts out there, and amazing picture album of Pitchka and Baikal rotting away in the hanger before Baikal was moved to Moscow. http://ralphmirebs.livejournal.com/219949.html
  4. tjsnh
    I didn't think that would work - thanks!! So similarly, if I wanted to remove something from the part (say, oxidizer) would the correct syntax be: @PART[FUELTANKNAME] { @TechRequired = heavyRocketry @title = FT-450 @description = We've got the gas! -RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {} }
  5. tjsnh
    So I'm having some issues and for the life of me I can't figure out whats wrong. I'm trying to change the fuel in a tank to 540/660, and this is what I've come up with after reading the documentation: @PART[FUELTANKNAME] { @TechRequired = heavyRocketry @title = FT-450 @description = We've got the gas! @RESOURCE { @name = LiquidFuel @amount = 540 @maxAmount = 540 } @RESOURCE { @name = Oxidizer @amount = 660 @maxAmount = 660 } } It has the effect of only recognizing the oxidizer total, and removes the liquidfuel completely. It's got to be something obvious, what am I missing?
  6. tjsnh
    The service modules might not be overheating anymore, I don't remember off hand, was just adding some humor
  7. tjsnh
    Heh, as-if the Service Module didn't overheat enough already ;-)
  8. tjsnh
    I noticed the same with, and just copy/pasted the RT config from the "regular" tantares/soyuz dish antenna for it.
  9. tjsnh
    Re : Black Arrow Just played around with the beta. THANK YOU. I agree with a few of the other posters that, right now, it feels a little over-powered - BUT I can't emphasize how greatful I am for some quality 1.875m parts. The only thing lacking is a 1.875m decoupler to go with the design.
  10. tjsnh
    I've had similar problems if you upgrade/replace/etc a parts mod mid-career. The only solution is to do some DANGEROUS manual editing on your save file to remove the duplicate parts, or restart your save.
  11. tjsnh
    I have serious trouble launching a space plane vertically on top of a rocket. The lift from the wings flips the rocket over and makes the assent entirely uncontrollable, and it still happens of the entire spaceplane is inside a fairing. Anyone have experience resolving this issue?
  12. tjsnh
    Am I really the only one having issues with the texture of the mianbao module (and ONLY the mianbao), as I mentioned yesterday? Any ideas on what might be wrong?
  13. tjsnh
    Which visual mod are you using in these great pictures? None of the stuff I've tried is working post 1.0
  14. tjsnh
    Is the texture on the Mianbao having issues in the new soyuz update, or is it a problem on my end? Also - Cannot tell you how happy I am about the new docking light part. I've literally been waiting since the first Tantares release I found for that!
  15. tjsnh
    In the next update, which will be coming this week.
  16. tjsnh
    Awesome, thanks so much.
  17. tjsnh
    When you dock, does the "plant flag" objective stay green, or flip off instantly? If it stays green, does it flip off when you ditch the lander? You're using regular docking ports right, not anything from a mod?
  18. tjsnh
    That shouldnt matter. I did some more testing, and it's working correctly for me - what version of the CC library are you using? Looking at your screenshot, I also wonder if another mod might be causing an issue. The only other mod I run just adds a few parts, so I'm not able to troubleshoot possible mod interactions very effectively, but do you see any log events in alt-F12 when the ships dock in orbit? - - - Updated - - - This is the intended behavior. It needs to work this way (most of the contracts work like that) for the "return to the ground" step to work correctly. The first ship to complete the steps of a contract must be the one that returns home, with some minor caveats (some of them are complete-able if you land a ship that has docked with the main ship, etc). If you fail the contract (crash, land without completing all the objectives, or cancel it from the space center then re-accept) you should be able to complete it with a fresh launch.
  19. tjsnh
    That ship looks pretty simple. Let me do some testing later today and see what I can find. Re: Apollo-style missions, I worked with the developer of the CC library to get those contracts scripted to specifically allow apollo-style landing missions. If you dock the lander with the return-capsule, it should transfer it's "completed-ness" to the return capsule (with some minor caveats, like docking with a third craft won't transfer it, etc).
  20. tjsnh
    And the contract fails to complete after you land? Hmm. Mind posting a screenshot of your ship? All I can think of is that it's confused about what part needs to land. I tested the trio mission a few times without any issues - do the solo and/or duo crew missions give you the same issue?
  21. tjsnh
    Awesome, I'll have to give it a whirl this afternoon.
  22. tjsnh
    Anyone got this working with KSP 1.02? I haven't touched any of the graphics overhaul mods since beta, so I've got a pretty clean install to work with.
  23. tjsnh
    How often they show up will depend heavily on what other contract packs you have installed (if any) as well as if you have any of the major contract types disabled. The "manned landing on ....." contracts are only offered once per biome (Planet X has 7 biomes, you'll get the contract 7 times), the "launch a crew to orbit" should be the only ones that don't have a set number of offerings. - - - Updated - - - Can you send a screenshot of your contracts pane mid-flight so I can see what is green and what is red? Good catch - that's a hold-over from an old version, I'll adjust it in the next patch.
  24. tjsnh
    If it's a "fresh" install of the contract pack, you're fine. Just be aware that loading the contract pack mid-career will make you "do-over" some of your early missions to get the contracts caught up with your current progress. The contract for your "first EVA" won't actually be your first - - - Updated - - - "Compatible" in that neither will break the other - however I don't have contracts in for any of the planet packs (there are many) so for example, you won't get the repeatable "send a manned mission to ..." contracts for the extra planets/moons, and one or two of the "send your first mission to another planet" type contracts won't trigger if you go to one of the extra/addon ones. The way the contracts are scripted, planets/moons are named individually rather than using any kind of "ANY" modifier - you won't run into any compatibility issues, just heed the disclaimer that flying to KalamazooPlanet won't trigger the "fly to any planet" contracts, etc.
  25. tjsnh
    Perfect, thanks. Finally updated the Advanced Progression pack for KSP 1.02
×
×
  • Create New...