Jump to content

riocrokite

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    855

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by riocrokite

  1. riocrokite
  2. riocrokite
    yah fully agree, this renders SAFIRE incompatible with pretty much everything else that takes resources density into consideration. Thus for now it's mostly stockalike proof of concept with minimum mods installed and mostly stock parts. Nevertheless it plays nicely with Rescale and SMURFF mods. As for ISRU I think it's a nice basis for a career when costs are consideration, thinking of maybe increasing further costs of NERV so that bigger rocket + ISRU will be comparable cost to NERV cluster (especially with SMURFF when you get more dV). When comparing direct to ISRU chemical rockets and landers 3/4 in weight of you total propellant needed can decrease your rocket / lander weight in roughly half so I think worth it.
  3. riocrokite
    awesome, now I'm stuck with another problem, how SSTU container determines tank dry mass compared to resources it has - does it take their density or volume into calculation?
  4. riocrokite
    how can I change ratio of LF/O in SSTU tanks? so far it's locked at 11:9 and I would like to change it to 3 to 1.
  5. riocrokite
    hello, superb mod congrats @Katten Just wondering would it be possible to move IVA with an animation? for now IVA navball updates but IVA view is locked in previous position unless I save and load the game.
  6. riocrokite
    sure, Safire changes densities of all stock resources including monoprop, ore and xenon so that 1 unit of those = 1 kg. And then adjusts tank capacities so masses are consistent with stock.
  7. riocrokite
    I don't really like stock ISRU mechanics since it can magically produce infinite LF/LOX/Monoprop. I liked 'the old times' more with stock KSP without ISRU when you had to prepare really big rockets for extended missions. It's like KSP is going from one extreme (no option to produce propellants) to another one (infinite oxidizer / fuel / monoprop pretty much everywhere). With this mod I wanted to give best of both worlds - can't produce all propellants so still have to take liquid fuel with you for the whole journey. But with advance planning you can produce 75% (oxidizer part weight) of your propellant in advance in-situ so you can build smaller landers for the same payload. Benefits of single propellant ISRU should be even greater with SMURFF and rescale mods. some pics how SAFIRE looks in game https://imgur.com/a/yM5sagD
  8. riocrokite
    continuation and release of this mod is here >
  9. riocrokite
    S A F I R E - Stockalike Adjustments to Fuels, ISRU, Ratios and Engines Main ideas: 1 stock resource unit = 1 kg -> check propellant mass just looking at the units Oxidizer : Fuel ratio = 3:1 for all LFO rocket engines -> more realistic and great for semi-direct ISRU, where you can produce locally only part of propellant Rocket engines generally cost 60% more, tanks cost ~60% less and rocket fuels cost much less -> more or less same rocket costs but with much more realistic distribution - better for reusability, TSTO, SSTO and drop tanks designs ISRU produces only Oxidizer from ORE; no heat, needs high energy input and is slow -> no more unlimited fuel production, realistic ISRU operation, semi-direct missions (produce 75% of your propellant, bring the rest with you) This is a continuation of an idea from couple of years ago, you can read more about it here How does it look in-game: https://imgur.com/a/yM5sagD Requirements: Module Manager by Sarbian. Warning: Save-game breaking and not compatible with old and stock vessels because it doesn't update values in old saved craft parts. New vessels should work fine. DOWNLOAD 0.2.0 GITHUB CONFIRMED COMPATIBILITY: - SMURFF - Making History Expansion - Rescale mods such as Sigma Dimensions CURRENTLY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH: - mods using Community Resource Pack, procedural and fuel switch modules Changelog:
  10. riocrokite
    Inb4 concerns how new poodle works with MH 1.875 parts and soyuz-esque rockets > compact poodle fits within 1.875 envelope; proof:
  11. riocrokite
    Yah, crusher is an interesting option, as I understand it will ultimately boost ISRU speed in every condition (ore concentration) at the expense of higher EC usage per fuel produced.
  12. riocrokite
    great work!
  13. riocrokite
    this is great Shadow! have an upvote:)
  14. riocrokite
    that is an awesome little mod, have +1 mate \o/
  15. riocrokite
    yah, ryzen is great especially for multiple vessels on screen, having said that the single physics thread is bottlenecking everything else and it's only single-core so cpu's with better single-core performance will allow for smoother gameplay.
  16. riocrokite
    just letting you know guys that I'm still here, it's just RL stuff takes precedence so the development is on hold. I intend to get back to this stuff eventually.
  17. riocrokite
    thx @Pappystein for the help. Let me know if that solves errors in log and works okay with RealChute, if yes I will update the version on the github with your patch. I'll also swap credits for original MM patch to ABZB since he's the author
  18. riocrokite
    thx @Pappystein, Iet me know whether this solved the issue. Other thing that might be worth trying is to delete moduleaeroreentry (I guess this should only be added in a patch when deadly reentry is installed). I don't have much time for KSP/modding currently so all your help is greatly appreciated, cheers, Rio
  19. riocrokite
    works with my clean 1.3.0 install so don't know what might be the problem, you could try to see whether it works with clean KSP installation
  20. riocrokite
    I won't finish all things for the mod to publish before holidays so will be back to development on late august-september, meanwhile finished solar concentrator model that is meant to be mount on LL-shaped MFS frame:
  21. riocrokite
    Gerry, look at the bottom of the 3rd post in this thread, DMagic explains carefully how to make a plot of fps there If you still have problems then hit me up.
  22. riocrokite
    from what I can tell calculation might use normalized multiplier depending on angle between surface vessel velocity and intake transform. basically if the angle is 90 you get 0 and harvest rate = 0. with angle = 0 you get 1 multiplier. You can check it by trying to position several harvesters on each direction and see whether any of them works when stationary: (total of 6 combinations +x / -x / + y / -y / +z / -z) edit: might want to do second test with vessel moving so there is vessel movement vector present edit2: ah just read the op topic, so yah that would confirm that it might be a bug (or stock code intention?) to prevent harvesting air scoop when not moving.
  23. riocrokite
    made test model of large concentrator dish to beam heat to harvester, scale: now will try to write a plugin for it to beam power (similar to what interstellar mod does)
  24. riocrokite
    as for depletion I could never get it to work in stock, as for air scoop harvesters try changing harvestertype from 2 to 3 and let me know if that works. Edit: After further inspection there might be a bug in a code so the harvestertype = 2 function might never work I think the code has changed a bit for air harvester so it behaves more like air intake (so there needs to be an intake transform for the code to work and now the position of the transform relative to vessel movement has a meaning similar to air intakes).
  25. riocrokite
    cheers man, to be more precise I was looking to implement functionality on top of existing docking ports (since there will be quite a few on a single frame: forward backward, 3-5 on top etc). Namely I was looking to implement module that looks for existing moduleDockingNodes on a part (in extension on a vessel) and disables / enables them - similar to what shielded docking port does - mostly for performance issues), secondly that module would hide all the buttons connected with docking modules pm a part to avoid button clutter with several docking ports on one part (could be connected with deactivation mechanics). I guess that part module could be implemented on each part with multi docking ports, a vessel-wide module (activate/deactivate docking ports on all vessel) could be added to parts with command modules. GUI change would also be nice as you wrote. So in short yah I'll appreciate help @Shadowmage
×
×
  • Create New...