Jump to content

blowfish

Members
  • Posts

    4,559
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by blowfish

  1. They should be generating the exact same lift per unit area as stock wings. If they aren't, something's probably installed incorrectly. A leftover FerramAerospaceResearch folder from a deleted FAR install is frequently the culprit.
  2. They should be producing >100kN on the runway if you have enough intake. Performance at altitude depends on how fast you're going - if you climb too fast then you're going to loose thrust. Watch dynamic pressure - if it drops below 20 kPa then you're going to have problems in jet mode.
  3. You probably have an outdated version of firespitter. For some reason that causes this bug.
  4. There's a tempMachLimit in the engine module. Beyond this mach number, the engine produces much more heat.
  5. Okay, here's what I've figured out so far: The texture errors are harmless. They're on models that aren't used anymore and Ven probably just forgot to delete them. The Skipper B model should be there. It's also harmless, since that part isn't actually used, but I have no idea why it wouldn't exist in your install. Decoupler - again no idea. This should be correct in 1.8.1, not sure why it would be broken in yours. Hope that helps. I would recommend getting 1.8.1 fresh from Github. Or better yet, download the latest version of the repository, which has a bunch of fixes and tweaks post 1.8.1.
  6. I don't think that's the right log. The correct one is located in "~/.config/unity3d/Squad/Kerbal Space Program/Player.log"
  7. Well, provide a full output log and we can see what's looking for those bad models...
  8. Because those models shouldn't be referenced by anything. But if you're using Curse, then it looks like you have an old version anyway, since the latest on Curse is 1.7.0 whereas the newest release is 1.8.1.
  9. Stock revamp appears to be installed incorrectly. Try re-installing.
  10. Thoughts on engine balance: Isp - Stock Isp is about right for kerolox, so I'd say for real kerolox engines just use their real Isp. For hydrolox, RealFuels has a conversion factor of 1.3 at sea level and 1.27 in vacuum. It doesn't have to be exactly that, but somewhere in that range seems to produce reasonable values. Thrust - My first thought is to just go with the scaling, so if the engine is 64% scale, then the thrust should be 64% ^2 = 40.96%, but there are a few problems with this: (1) A stack with the same proportions as in real life will have a higher TWR, but this is mitigated somewhat by higher engine, tank, and payload weight in KSP, (2) Greater fuel density means that the (previously) hydrolox engines won't be quite right. So maybe give them a thrust boost to compensate for this ... the RF conversions give about 1.33 but this might be a bit low ... maybe more like 1.5. TWR - I'd say just start with the RL TWR and multiply by a constant. According to NathanKell KSP engines are about 4-6x as heavy as they should be.
  11. Wow ... amazing job on that F-1 You could probably spare a few more polys on that injection manifold though ... a few more triangles on the render mesh isn't going to have any measurable performance impact. I suspect that KJR does not apply stiffening to debris craft. FAR makes similar simplifications in the name of performance, so I'd be willing to bet ferram4 did something like that in KJR. Maybe I'll ask the next time I see him on IRC.
  12. Is there a quick way to create a value if it doesn't exist but leave it alone if it does? I can do it using multiple patches with HAS, but it's somewhat inefficient.
  13. The proper way to do it would probably be to add it to KJR's data, in this file. Pretty simple to add and create a PR.
  14. The fairing is part of the service module. I don't think it has anything to do with the ICPS.
  15. Beautiful work as always Shadowmage Due to the way wings work in KSP, they need to be separate parts. And given the plethora of stock and modded wings already available, I don't think anything new is needed here.
  16. If you have yaw instability you might just need a larger vertical stabilizer. At high mach / low Q you tend to need a lot of yaw stabilization.
  17. I spoke too soon on the adapter issue. It came back in flight: EDIT: Reproduced it in the editor too. It seems to be somewhat intermittent.
  18. I meant the part that connects the bottom of the SM to the thing below it. But upon restarting, I can't replicate, so hopefully it was just a one-time bug.
  19. That definitely helps! NathanKell walked me through some of the excel calcs yesterday but it's much easier to follow in Javascript. Thanks
  20. The version on Kerbalstuff is old, since camlost hadn't been around to update it. Go to Github for the latest 1.0.4 compatible versions.
×
×
  • Create New...