Jump to content

OhioBob

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,934

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by OhioBob

  1. OhioBob
    That's odd, I'm not getting an incompatibility warning. Works fine for me in KSP 1.3. There's really nothing in EOE to rebuild, it's just a copy of the stock engines with a few numbers changed. Maybe it's a conflict with another mod that you're using.
  2. OhioBob
    @symmeclept, I had the same problem earlier today. I had an old 2.5x save in GPP 1.4.0 that I was trying to update to all the latest versions. So what's being fixed, Sigma or Kopernius?
  3. OhioBob
    So what's the story with this? Has it been fixed? I see you're still at version 18.0, so I assume it still doesn't work.
  4. OhioBob
    Science experiments produce "data", which is converted into "science" using the processing lab. The conversion factor is 1 data = 5 science. To convert the data into science requires that the lab be crewed by at least one scientist, and you must have ample electricity. Select "start research" to begin the conversion. The rate at which the conversion takes place depends on how many scientists, their level, and the amount of stored data (there could be other factors that I can't remember). After the data has been converted into science, you transmit the science to Kerbin.
  5. OhioBob
    Having better and more scientists (the module can hold two) will provide a better conversion rate. Also having more data to start with helps greatly. For instance, if you have close to the max. 500 750 data, you'll get a much higher conversion rate than if you have, say, 100 data.* The lab also allows you to level up Kerbals immediately without having to return them to Kerbin. If your Kerbal is now in Mun orbit, he probably has enough experience to level up to one star. Right-click on the lab and you should see an option that says something like "level up crew". * I believe the data to science conversion rate is a percentage of how much data you have.
  6. OhioBob
    Speaking of Kerbal Konstruts, has the problem been fixed with it deleting all the ground stations?
  7. OhioBob
    There are many that I like, but my favorites are the ones that I consider most essential. These are just basic utility mods that make the game easier to play, and probably should be part of the stock game. For me these include: Kerbal Engineer Redux Kerbal Alarm Clock Precise Node (or Precise Maneuver) Transfer Window Planner With just those four mods and stock KSP, I can have a lot of fun. Take those away, however, and things become much less enjoyable.
  8. OhioBob
    The 1220 m/s on the ∆v map is definitely on the low side, but I ran through years worth of encounters using Transfer Window Planner and I didn't get anything approaching the ~2,500 m/s that @linecrafter talked about, or even the 2,200 m/s that you budget. I didn't keep notes, but it seems to me that the orbit insertion ∆v was usually about 1600-1700 m/s for a "good" encounter. (That is, if we throw out the really bad ones and take a median of what remains.) Of course that's orbit insertion, not capture. The ∆v map budgets 350 m/s to go from capture to low orbit. So that means the ∆v for capture should probably be about 1,300 m/s. If you guys are getting capture ∆v >2,000 m/s, then you must have picked a bad launch window, or somehow maneuvered yourselves into a poor encounter.
  9. OhioBob
    Not only do I have the problem of the light source being the wrong star, but I'm also getting other weirdness that I can't explain. For instance, shadows penetrate clean through a body and appear on both sides of the planet. For instance, the shadows in following screenshot are both being produce by the same caster (a moon outside of the FOV to the right). It's as if the shadow is tunneling all the way through the planet. ** Note that the planet is being illuminated by the nearby secondary star (behind us in this view), while the light source for the shadows is the far away primary star (to the right). This is why both shadows appears on the sunlit face of the planet. The shadow on the left is on the "dark side" of the planet in reference to the light source producing the shadows. I also keep getting odd shadows that look like the following. This shadow periodically appears for no apparent reason and sweeps across the planet. I can find no source for it. If you have any ideas on what could be causing these issues and how to fix them, I would sure appreciate some advice.
  10. OhioBob
    @Capt. Kermit,
  11. OhioBob
    Ejection and capture burns can vary considerably, particularly for a planet like Thalia. That's why we have to take delta-v maps with a grain of salt. I computed the numbers for the delta-v map, but even I don't trust it. ~1,200 m/s is doable under favorable conditions, but most conditions aren't favorable. For planetary transfers, I always recommend Transfer Window Planner. It's going to be more accurate than a delta-v map because it will compute the dV for the specific departure and arrival conditions of your particular launch window.
  12. OhioBob
    What @Three_Pounds says is exactly correct. In fact, the equation he gives is how we computed the solar fluxes (we just replaced 100% with the solar flux at Gael). Solar Flux = 1360 * ( Gaels Distance from Ciro / Distance from Ciro)^2 This is an example of the inverse-square law. Gravity follows the same law.
  13. OhioBob
    @Waz, does EVE shadows support multiple stars? I'm working on a mod that places planets around the secondary star of a binary system. I've set up a cfg that lists all the bodies and shadow casters, but all the shadows I'm seeing have the primary star as the light source. Is there a way to designate the secondary star as the light source for the shadows?
  14. OhioBob
    If you look in the GPP section of the KSPedia, one of the properties listed for each body is solar flux. This should tell you proportionately how much solar power you should get at each body. For instance, the solar flux at Gael is 1360 W/m2, while at Otho it is 50.3 W/m2. Therefore a solar panel's power output at Otho should be 50.3/1360 = 0.037 times what it is at Gael.
  15. OhioBob
    I can change Venus' surface pressure, but then it wouldn't be Venus anymore. If that's what we want to do, I need somebody to tell me what to change the pressure to because I don't have the time to figure that out. Alternatively, maybe we could mod the parts to increase their max setting. Of course I have no idea what I'm looking for. I don't see anything in the cfgs that indicates part pressure limits. Of course the easiest thing to so if somebody doesn't want their parts to implode is just turn off the setting. Seems like a good enough solution to me.
  16. OhioBob
    I would be easy enough to reduce the surface pressure and redo the curves. I didn't know parts had a pressure limit. What is it?
  17. OhioBob
    I've never seen it, though I've heard about it. Until I started doing atmospheres, all the mods I saw included only three atmosphere curves: temperatureCurve temperatureSunMultCurve pressureCurve I assume all the mods looked the same because they were all using the same source, i.e. KillAshley's atmosphere generator. While having those three curves is certainly important, it's also incomplete. At a minimum, an atmosphere should also include: temperatureLatitudeBiasCurve temperatureLatitudeSunMultCurve The latter curves determines how temperature varies with latitude and time of day. Omitting these curves means that those of the template are used instead. The temperature variations of the template may be entirely inappropriate for the planet you're trying to create, which means you might not be getting the atmosphere you think you are. I'm not telling you not to use KillAshley's atmosphere generator of anybody else's. I'm just warning that all five of these curves should be included in your atmosphere cfg. (There are actually three additional curves, but only the five listed above are used by the stock atmospheres.)
  18. OhioBob
    That's pretty much what I do too. Obviously there's logical progression to what I do, with some of it mirroring real life because that's what makes the most sense to me. But I don't like trying to replicate real life vehicles or missions. I want to do things my way.
  19. OhioBob
    Although I think we've settled on spelling Gaelean, I don't think it's settled yet that that's the name of the species. To me "Gaeleans" is synonymous with "Earthlings", i.e. the beings that live on Gael and Earth. However, Earthlings belong to the species Human. In much the same way, I believe Gaeleans below to the species Kerbal. I.e. those little green guys in GPP are still Kerbals, but they're also Gaeleans because they live on Gael.
  20. OhioBob
    I agreed, it would be a really nice test feature.
  21. OhioBob
    I came up with a work around as well for some tests I did earlier this year. I wanted to launch a bunch of rockets from each of the bodies with atmospheres to figure out how much delta-v it would take (for the delta-v map). I didn't want to HyperEdit my rockets to the planet, so I brought the planet to my rockets. I edited Gael's cfg by changing its size and gravity, and by copying the other planet's atmosphere curves over those of Gael. For all practical purposes, I turned Gael into the planet I wanted to launch from. I could just launch from the launch pad and get all the data I needed.
  22. OhioBob
    The density of Tellumo air varies, but depending on where you are, it could be 12 kg/m3, so that makes sense now. So are you proposing making changes to the atmosphere's pressure curve? I don't think I want to do that. I though you were talking about changing the "atmCurve" in the engine cfgs.
  23. OhioBob
    That doesn't sound right at all. In KSP, pressure never changes, it's the density that changes. It's conceivable density can change by that much, but the day-night variation on Tellumo isn't large enough to produce that big of a difference. The relationship is, ρ2 = ρ1 * (T1 / T2).
  24. OhioBob
    I've estimated the dV for a Gael launch at 4700 m/s. I haven't done any of the others, though. That would include Niven, Tellumo, Gratian, Augustus, Catullus, Tarsiss, Hadrian, and Hox.
  25. OhioBob
    Icarus never had an atmosphere. Maybe you're thinking of something else.
×
×
  • Create New...