Jump to content

tater

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    27,519

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by tater

  1. tater
    The masses, etc have not been balanced at all, it was mentioned up the thread.
  2. tater
    HUB-COS is now working nicely. The welded ports might be nice with some "this end forward" markings (I'm terrible about forgetting to flip the bloody 2.5m stock port, lol). Regarding the inflatables and game balance, how are the container volumes considered? I would suggest that whatever they end up holding, perhaps they start with the volume available after inflation, but, well, empty. This would require supply launches, just as a Bigelow will need a launch to get the thing up there, and more to fit it out. I'm thinking in particular of the tori given the huge volumes that would need fitting out vs the collapsed sizes. Dunno if that's worthwhile or not, but It seems like there should be a cost/benefit trade between solid and inflatable. The inflatables in general, and the tori in particular are nice late-tech tree items. I would sort of like to see an ability to stop rotation. In RL turning the thing when loaded and spun up would be non-trivial.
  3. tater
    Sorry if I'm less than helpful/precise in my reports. I posted that, then had to think about feeding kids (son has a friend for a sleepover, wife is on call and trapped at the hospital till who knows when).
  4. tater
    I upped the craft to the github issue. It's the autosave (I assume, since it crashed). Sorry, the core was the TKS part.
  5. tater
    [WRN 17:57:19.404] [Part]: PartModule TransferDialogSpawner at SSTU-ST-HAB-H, index 8: index exceeds module count as defined in cfg. Looking for TransferDialogSpawner in other indices... [WRN 17:57:19.404] ...no TransferDialogSpawner module found on part definition. Skipping... [EXC 17:57:19.438] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object ShipConstruct.LoadShip (.ConfigNode root) ShipConstruction.LoadShip (System.String filePath) FlightDriver.Start () OK, I rebuilt the craft, this time with the torus as root. Added the station core, and a solar array truss on top, CSM on bottom. Boom, crashed. That was where the crash started, a little down starts all the constant null refs until I killed the process.
  6. tater
    My only other mod is KJR. Is that an issue? Disable the side panels! Nope, now it works for me. Odd. Wonder if it was HE?
  7. tater
    I remember you saying that up thread now that you say it again! I did, indeed see the status of that craft as "landed" after I undocked it (the one that warped away so I could never test the docking ports). I forgot the quick save work around. Interestingly, after the crash, it would no longer load the saved or auto-saved craft files at all in the VAB. It would accept them, move the camera angle as if it was loaded, and show an engine icon on the right, but no craft.
  8. tater
    Just tested the same craft* minus HE. At least I could actually dock without the station and craft magically kraken-zooming away from each other (so the kraken-drive was HE-related, not a function of the torus rotation). The ST-DOS-TKS docking port works fine, I can both target it and dock. HUB-DOS worked as well, but not HUB-COS. *the craft in both my 2 recent tries (with and without HE) was in fact a LC2 with an MFT full of mono, not an Orion. I tested Orion again, and with the SM it does NOT like being launched on the engine bell with a huge mass on top. It's easy to reproduce a crash. Make an Orion CSM with those 2 parts. Put the huge torus on top. Launch. Game crashes. The CSM by itself is fine. I wonder if it's a combination of the pad mass limit, and engine impact resistance?
  9. tater
    It introduces more problems than it solves. Hyperedit a craft with a sub craft to the standard Kerbin orbit (100,000). Decouple the carried craft to practice docking. It now shows my craft as unable to time warp above terrain. Swap to the station to time warp, try to swap back after warping maybe 20 seconds forward (craft was drifting away at 0.2 m/s). Craft is now 40 km away. Hyper edited the crafts separately to orbit to test docking. Started the Orion with the default rendezvous lag. It's ~800m away I think. Hit RCS and think I'm closing... I close a while, then I'm drifting apart, fast when I had just been closing at 2 m/s. I set up a proper rendezvous in the map view. Do the burn, I'll get within 0.2 km. Warp forward watching the intercept... it's increasing constantly. HE puts KSP into bizarro mode, and it has happened in the past on numerous occasions for me. It's unpredictable. I use HE a lot, but it has seriously screwed things up in multiple versions more than once for me. I think my new HE methodology will be to install it for a specific purpose (I've replaced craft that have automagically vanished before, for example), use it, then remove the mod just in case. Note also that I considered the idea that the perfect circular obit of HE might have been a problem, so the first thing I did up my HE to orbit was to push the orbit slightly eccentric to avoid any issues that might cause, then I undocked the test craft to test different docking ports. Kraken happened afterwards with HE, no kraken with it removed. PS---note the LOL, please.
  10. tater
    I'm gonna dump hyperedit, hyper edit seems useful for testing, but it's cancer, lol.
  11. tater
    My big issue with the mass figure on USILS is that the cupola is incredibly heavy, hence spamming anything with those increases habitability more than adding more living volume, which seems absurd to me. Basically, if we imagined kerbal engineers deciding on part design, they'd say, "what we need is something incredibly small, but incredibly massive---with windows!" A cleaner looking cupola would be a nice part. I'm waiting on some sealer to cure on my atrium (which looks like a giant cupola), then I have to add a coat (I have some corner leaks)... was hoping to test but my son is playing minecraft (he's online, and I "get" that he can't just quit, long time online gamer that I am). Maybe after lunch
  12. tater
    Wonder if it was the engine bell of the Orion SM making it bounce into space... Except I never even saw the pad, it immediately switches to a distant view (I can see the craft as an extended dot) but I cannot zoom at all... everything locks up aside from me seeing it rise. Had to pick "taterkerman" as my github name. Not yet. My next test was to try that craft that zipped to space. I put Orion on there as a good craft to use for docking tests. I was going to try the station for port, then retry the multi-hub. I am home today so I can mess around a bit after I caulk a window that was leaking (monsoon finally hit, and we're scheduled to get slammed by some afternoon storms down here in NM). My daughter is finally awake, so I can leave to buy caulk, but I'll mess around later.
  13. tater
    I opened a new issue (not well titled, sorry) and included a craft and log file (zipped). I made a craft with the large torus, a COS hub, and a station core, with an Orion attached so I could test docking ports. I hit launch, and the thing flew into space by itself, lol, and I could not hi map view, etc, had to quit KSP. Only mods are SSTU, KJR and hyperedit. I had planned on popping the station into orbit with HE, but it flew into space before I could ever do that. Next testing I will just launch the stuff, but I was being lazy.
  14. tater
    I did some quick testing with the large torus with a multi-port COS module (the larger one) on the end. Targeting was only possible on the white port (that one was on the axis of the station), the other colors would select, then immediately say "No Target." I was also unable to dock at all with any of the ports. The only mods I have on this test installation are KJR and hyperedit (so I can throw stuff into orbit fast for testing). Regarding life support, the torus parts should have a huge multiplier. I have always disagreed with roverdude using mass for that one multiplier, it should be volume related. Regardless, the large torus should have a habitability multiplier high enough that pretty much only supplies limit anything. Gravity is a huge LS multiplier from all current data we have.
  15. tater
    It was crazy time that in fact prevented another global catastrophe (a conventional WW3 could have many more than WW2 the old-fashioned way). Like any particular point in human history, generally speaking, the Cold War was the safest time to be alive as a human up until that point.
  16. tater
    Here's a workshop concept that has other uses. Allow lassoing parts in the VAB (an entirely normal UI thing that should ideally e a thing, anyway). You then have a group of parts selected you can move around. If a craft is saved already, allow the lassoed parts to be saved as craft-specific sub assemblies (a new tab). So you create a huge "Jool Explorer" craft that is too big to launch at once on a rocket that actually looks like a rocket (sorry, my bias is showing here, I never make anything that doesn't pretty much look like a real rocket). You could add a bunch of 2.5m clamp-o-tons to it, and try to launch in sections, but for the sake of argument let's say it has laterally mounted stuff that makes it wide, and that docking it precisely would be hard as a result). Instead, you lasso parts which get saved as Jool Explorer:sub1of7, Jool Explorer:sub2of7, etc. You launch them, and have them grabbed by the "orbital workshop" (a large truss section with grabber arms along it capable of grabbing X number of sub assemblies. The Orbital Workshop would see that they are craft "Jool Explorer" and sub parts 1, 2, 3, etc of 7 total. Once all are delivered, it could load the completed craft and "launch" it (which would simultaneously delete all the grabbed subassemblies).
  17. tater
    I have no personal desire to retrofit, as honestly I don't think that should be a thing. I'd be fine with assembling sub-assemblies, and adding parts small enough to be packed in a KIS container (solar panels, experiments, and other stuff to get added to the outside). I'd personally never add/change engines.
  18. tater
    Yeah, I got an email saying I should change my passwd.
  19. tater
    This reminds me. Squad should stop using "biome" for places without life.
  20. tater
    Yeah... I'lll admit I want a bigger one since I usually play at 6.4X, so it would be amazing to see a realistic part from the spacecraft scale standpoint.
  21. tater
    Yeah, it would be awesome to have an appropriate diameter for at least 0.38 g or something at a reasonable rotation rate. They say up to 4 rpm with adaptation, with 2 being optimal, right?
  22. tater
    Sadly, Mars 5 didn't work well. If we think of the CCCP as Charlie Brown, Mars is the kite eating tree.
  23. tater
    That's why I think a "workshop" approach, for an orbital facility makes more sense for stock. Just the ability to put parts together in a way that reduces part count, and increases strength and precision.
  24. tater
    Yeah, I see a difference between a facility to enable construction of prefab elements, and a scifi 3d printer in space.
  25. tater
    Also flat out "welding" of parts. I can do this with KIS, but it's a pain, and a wrong move can get splodey. I am not interested in having a drill turn out spacecraft, myself, I want the ability to do some VAB-style assembly on orbit is all. The use of the facility can of course pre predicated on having EC, crew, etc. As pure eye-candy, it would be cool if construction took some decent amount of time, during which if you were to visit the station, you'd see the crew on EVA doing the construction To be clear, I'm not in favor od a 1.25m part that magically poops out 3.75m interplanetary mother ships. I want all the supplies to be brought up in most cases as the size they are---though I could imagine certain new parts that could perhaps be collapsed in some way that are designed for orbital construction use
×
×
  • Create New...