Jump to content

Lei07

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    79

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Lei07

  1. Lei07
    Thanks for the reply, Kcs. It was only after I had posted those photos I had noticed the change in CoM/CoL. I'm currently in the middle of a large project in KSP that will require the shuttle quite often, so will either wait for that to be finished or for the next version of FAR before I look into it. But at least I now know what to look for, thanks again.
  2. Lei07
    Bump for post #6989 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-0-25-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-14-4-11-24-14?p=1587285&viewfull=1#post1587285
  3. Lei07
    Hi folks, this isnt a bug report or a complaint as such, but it is a bit of a plea for information. I recently created a HL based shuttle in FAR 0.14.3.2, it uses some Tweakscaled parts, namely two B9 RCS thrusters (R12 Block at 150%, and a Mk1 Pod at 140%) and two KW SPS (scaled down to 1.25m). I am using Tweakscale 1.44 as there seems to be alot of issues with 1.47. I made sure the shuttle had plenty of lift incase I was short or overshot on a reentry. Here is the data I like to "benchmark" at before inputting different speeds: KER is giving the same mass and vacuum delta-v, and all the control surfaces are set to the same density as before (they infact did not change, but I tested it anyway). Does the Tweakscale intergration really change the performance that much? Or are there other matters at work here. I am a total and utter novice at understanding these things, after watching some Scott Manley vids on the subject months ago all I've done since then is "green line as high a number as possible, and yellow line as low as possible", thats about as technical as I understand but its worked for me so far. I fear that I will have to rework both of my shuttles, and possibly my other aircraft too, ranging from little fighter like planes to large transporters. As long as this change is correct and is working as intended I will rework the best I can, what I don't want is to rework it only to find out that this is some form of bug and any reworking to be made moot. Any advice, comment, information etc appreciated if anyone has the time!
  4. Lei07
    Hey Enterprise, yeah it's fine. I and I'm sure many use that config as one has yet to be "officially" made to be used with TechManager over the old TreeLoader, as TreeLoader no longer works. The content is correct as of the current version, which works fine, and just needs a some MM configs (in this thread) to address some node placements on thermal nozzles. I'm sure we'll see a official TechManager tree when the next version of KSPI is released!
  5. Lei07
    Hello! A general question to KSPI users: Is having the science lab in Low Kerbin Orbit worth it if put on "generate science" mode? The numbers on it's wiki page mean very little to me, I'm afraid. I'm asking because I'm finally getting around to creating a "ISS-a-like" with modded parts, having made one in the stock game some time ago. This mockup is constructed from the modules that I have thus far: http://postimg.org/image/mbe5tbz0j/ http://postimg.org/image/5s2ug7ljn/ Currently I'm designing my Destiny Lab equivelent and am toying with different labortories as it's base. Other than KSPI and stock labs, I have recently added Station Science to help make this enterprise worthwhile, though I am debating how much use it will actually be. I prefer to create replicas from "non specific" mods, such as the Stock-a-like Station Parts, as opposed to using mods such as the, albeit fantastic, FusTek Station Parts pack, which "kerbalises" the real designs. In premise, the KSPI lab is precisely what I'm after for it's first lab. However, how rewarding is it in Low Kerbin Orbit?
  6. Lei07
    Just a bit strange that the jiggle for the guys in the front seats isnt replicated for the guy in the technicians seat. Please note this is the "facecam" down the bottom right of the screen, not the first person IVA view. Also the fact that it doesn't occur on any other cockpit (that I've seen) during atmosphereic or vacuum flight, just take/lift off.
  7. Lei07
    Hi! Quick query, I have done a quick thread search and couldn't find anything so though I'd ask. Has anyone found that the little "facecam" on the kerbals in the pilot and co pilot seats for the HL cockpit constantly jiggles about as if it were during take off? It doesn't affect IVA nor does it affect the guy in the navigator seat. Not a major issue, but I thought I'd ask if anyone else has this occur, or if its worth a reinstall. Thanks for any answer!
  8. Lei07
    Random question about the Science Lab, as I'm highly forgetful and quite embarrassed to ask. I've glanced the wiki and just want to make sure, so here goes. To keep the lab working long term, orbit or surface, it requires the crew of 2, decent battery capacity and standard method of energy generation, a reactor and a generator, and enough radiators to cover the wasteheat right? The SAFE 1500 and the 62.5 Elec Genny should be enough? I've started a new KSPI game for 0.25 and am just up to a point where I want my first long term orbital lab. I had a similar set up back in 0.23 I believe, but have had a bit of a mental block, hence the embarrassment. Any replies welcome and appreciated!
  9. Lei07
    Why are you comparing Frostbite to Unity? Also, that seems to be a rather high memory useage for just B9, KW and this Near Future mod. Is NF that big of a package? Sorry, I'm totally unfamiliar with it. I use just over 30 mods, not counting dependencies, including some big ones such as the current BA, EVE (both high def), B9, KW, Interstellar, Infernal Robotics etc, and I only hit 2.5gb ish, without any texture management beyond what Texture Replacer (BA dependency) incurs as default. It seems you have "tweaked" the issue, but please don't expect Unity to run as well as the likes of Frostbite or Cry Engine.
  10. Lei07
    Hi Erona! Thanks for your post, I hope it did not seem that I was trying to force your hand into commenting. It is great news though that you are considering to continue to work on BA. As I stated earlier, both EVE and BA add such a splendor to the game whilst keeping the memory hit within manageable levels, no easy feat I would imagine! Both mods deserve to be highly recognised and used widely. They really are a great inspiration for any beautification mod.
  11. Lei07
    Hey RbRay, I know this is highly offtopic, but as the lead of the Better Atmospheres mod has retired from working on it, and the other main creator has yet to comment, have you considered taking the mod over? Or maybe integrating it into EVE as default? I realise it would be an incredible amount of extra work, but BA is a very popular mod and compliments EVE well, as it really shows off what the mod is capable of without having a massive memory requirement or many dependencies. Both mods really do well at both of these factors, and any dependency requirement is kept at a minimum. Eitherway, the aesthetics of BA would be a more than appreciated addition to EVE if this were to come to be, assuming that both TSG and Erona decide to lay the development of Better Atmospheres on another author. Just wondered if you minded commenting on the possibility! Looking forward to your next build of EVE, seen the Dev build screenshots, and they are looking great. Please keep the good work coming!
  12. Lei07
    Ebigunso, is this the case of not deleting the cloudlayers.cfg file as required for the BA install?
  13. Lei07
    Taco, the multi function displays REQUIRE the JSI folder to be installed. Thats what the JSI folder does. Thats what it is there for. And use the version bundled with B9 over the one from the main Raster Prop Monitor page. Boosted, make sure you have installed correctly, and if you are referring to your career game, make sure you are purchasing the parts in each node.
  14. Lei07
    Fieel, you can use any mods you want with Interstellar, unless there is a specific conflict as written in this mods, or any mods, readme/first page. I've made quite a few installs over time and have used such part mods as KW, B9, Remote Tech, Tac Life Support, ScanSat. MechJeb, KER, Infernal Robotics, KAS etc, no issues at all. KSPI just does alot of different things and adds alot of new items in new nodes, thats why is has a special tech tree config. It does not alter the functionality of other nodes besides adding new parts. For example, if you use the latest B9 all the new HX parts are in a new node, they've gone about it in a different manner to KSPI as its just a single node, but the effect is the same. Its just a new node that blends seemingly with the tech tree, whatever parts you have installed.
  15. Lei07
    Hello B9 team! Just a quick question: How is the adaption of the Mk2 parts progressing? Or are you waiting for a more "full of new content" update to B9 before you release the altered Mk2 parts? Thanks!
  16. Lei07
    Thanks for your reply! I did also bring it up in the FAR thread, thought best to cover both sides
  17. Lei07
    Hi! Firstly, just want to say I highly enjoy DRE, it adds realism and difficulty to the game, and makes a nice companion to FAR/NEAR, which is sort of what my question is all about. A few days ago I finally updated my modded build to KSP 0.25, fresh install, all updated mods, and a new Interstellar mod based save game. Working with basic tech I'm at the stage of returning from orbits of about 100km - 300km, but always using 100km as a parking/transfer orbit, before doing returns from moons. I've had some aerobraking issues which I've requested help with in the FAR forum, as FAR has been altered for the latest version of the game, but through a bit of trial and error, I may have found a bug relating to the heatshiled for the Mk1 Pod. I was on Skype with a friend, using a near identical craft, returning from a near identical orbit with a 20km periaps, with one difference, he did not use DRE, and as such, I neglected to add a heatshield. I was expecting sparks but I was infact rewarded with a nice safe landing, more akin to how FAR for KSP 24.2 was for me. He then added the DRE mod, got the MK1 Pod, added a heatshield and then started having the issues I was suffering. He then suggested that the drag vector could be accidently "inverted", so you are infact slightly accelerating during the intial stages of reentry and thus coming in alot faster in the lower atmosphere and making a nice green splat on the ground. I'm happy to post log files etc if required, once I figure out how Just wondered if anyone could confirm this, or if this has already been adressed, I did scan the last few pages of this thread, and the patchnotes, but didn't spot anything.
  18. Lei07
    @ Master Lao. Just on Skype with a friend that is quite knowledgeable about this kinda stuff, I've gotten him to install FAR into an otherwise stock KSP 0.25. We made a practically identical craft (ie, me missing out some stuff from my extra mods) and got into a similar orbit. He had no issue and gave similar paramaters for a 20km PE to what I had in 0.24.2 and before. It was at this stage I realised I didn't have a heatshield on, and with DRE installed, I was interested to see how many sparks I would be making. However, although I entered slightly faster than he did, I did infact slow down within much more acceptable parameters and much more like how the mod was before 0.25. So that means that the drag model (I guess?) for the small Mk1 Pod heatshield is incorrect, be it due to Ferram or Starwaster, or both, of course. I will make a quick post over there also, after scanning the thread to see if anyone else has had this issue. At the moment not outrulling a dodgy install, or some kind of imcompatibility issue, but I run 0.25 in 32 bit, as the 64bit is worse than before and many mods do not support it. I have also done many installs of the game in the past, testing mods, adding mods, always making a fresh install with the smallest of changes. It's not impossible I've made an error, but I do doubt it. All functionaility of FARs GUIs and toolbar stuff etc work. EDIT: My friend thinks that the drag vector on the MK1 Pod heathshield is inverted, so I'll mention that in the DRE thread, if no one else has reported it. I'm happy to give a logfile, I don't however know how to do one! Will figure it out and do so if still needed
  19. Lei07
    Hey Master Tao, well, in FAR for KSP 0.24.2 and prior I had the rule of PE 20,000m from a 100,000m LKO, and 30,000m from a return from a moon, and I had no problems at all. I basically got these numbers from a Scott Manley video, and he is a rather good indicator on what and what not to do! This now leads me to the current version for KSP 0.25. I've restarted my Interstellar mod based save game to incorporate the new KSP features from the start, so currently my tech level is rather basic. After scanning about the last 30 pages of this thread, and a few other info sources, I posted this basic information and my problem: returning a basic Mk1 Pod from a 100km LKO, posting my previous guide rules. I have been told that due to aerodynamic changes in the mod this is now way too steep. So I was quite literally up long into the night trying out different things, different Pe and AoAs, looking up youtube videos of how Apollo did it, trying to create a asymetric "floating body", trying to find equations, trying to find specifics as regards Kerbin and FAR etc. I'm really not that intelligent when it comes to maths and what have you, I'm more of a "recreate as close as possible then tweak til it works" kind of person. And after spending today with no success either it has started to get to me somewhat. I did find that, if I keep my upper stage attached, use the engine to help me decelerate through the lower atmosphere, then ditch the thing once I was under 300m/s surface speed, it worked and everyone survived and didnt get squashed or turned into paint. But that isn't a very realistic, long-term solution ^^;
  20. Lei07
    Still having an issue returning a simple Mk1 pod from LKO Don't get me wrong, I love the challenge FAR provides, and I just love playing with shuttles (which I ironically find easier), but I think this update is beyond my capabilities. Was awake into the early hours trying to stop going splat over the surface of Kerbin, or squashing myself under g-forces, and I'm back at it today with no success. Does NEAR offer a bit more of a ... "soupy" atmosphere? One that slows craft down more without suffering the g-force that would incur in FAR? Would be a shame to change over, I'd rather stick with trying to learn this but I truely think it is beyond me. I can honestly say this is the first time FAR has me stumped ^^;
  21. Lei07
    Thanks Starman! I did think that it would be far too steep now, those numbers are from a version for KSP .23 I think. I'm trying much shallower angles now. I actually know an aerospace engineer (works for Airbus in Toulouse), he helped me alot in the past when I was designing my shuttle, and though he was short on time tonight he gave me some pointers. Thanks for the video link! I'll have a look at that. As regards the craft, the bit that matters is just the Mk1 Command pod, as I jetisson the rest before the heating begns End of the day its trial and error, and Jeb has enough snacks to keep him going a while. Again thankyou so much for your time!
  22. Lei07
    Hello again, I don't want to take up too much room in this thread but I am having problems surviving reentry in the newest version. Although I do use Deadly Reentry overheating isn't the issue, I can't seem to slow down enough before I paint the ground with a very interesting shade of green. I've restarted my long running Interstellar campaign with the latest version of the game and the mods that I use, including my beloved FAR, so currently I'm working with basic parts for rockets, and nothing related to spaceplanes at this time. At the moment we're just past the first suborbital tests and now doing orbits between 100km and 300km. I've had one successful landing, which was still a close call, from a transfer orbit of 100km, which I always lower myself to for reentry. Basically I run out of altitude before I get under the 300m/s Surface Speed required to deploy the chutes, as they tend to break at speeds faster than that. I aim for a periaps of 20,000m from when returning from 100,000m, 30,000m if returning from a moon, so I need to sort out the former before I can attempt the latter If anyone would be kind to either post a couple of hints/pointers here, or send them in a PM, Jeb and myself would greatly appreciate it! I'm not giving up and have just taken a break from testing different things to write this post. I love the mod and am happy using it the way it is now, its just a case of relearning some stuff! Sorry for the long post, any help would be great! Thankyou!
  23. Lei07
    Thanks muchly! Oh yeah, I knew it would mean learning a new descent profile, just wanted to make sure all was working as intended!
  24. Lei07
    Thanks muchly!
  25. Lei07
    Hi! Firstly, just a massive thankyou to the Ferram for keeping this mod up to date and working well. It really does add alot of realism (anf fun) to the game, and is pretty essential for the likes of shuttles and SSTOs! Okay, this is just a quick question, not a complaint or a gripe, and I'm repeating this post in both the B9 and FAR forums, as it relates to both. Are the airbrakes working as intended? I remember many stated that there were "overpowered" in 24.2 and prior builds, have they been adjusted to compensate for this? Just cant find anything specifically in the patchnotes of both FAR and B9. Just an aside that I was going to ask, though Blowfish has just summed it up nicely: Has it been altered so that the atmosphere doesn't slow you down as much now? Jeb keeps overshooting KSC in my refitted shuttle, the silly devil. Thats it! Thanks for any response, and please keep up the fantastic work!
×
×
  • Create New...