rasta013
-
Posts
664 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by rasta013
-
-
I've been busy so I'm late to the party but freaking great idea for a mod man. Definitely will be giving this a go as this has been a pet peeve of mine for a while.
-
8 minutes ago, MaxL_1023 said:
It makes more sense to upgrade the DSN as opposed to the spaceborne antennas - Gael-based transmitters are already those massive dishes. They are much more powerful by default than any spaceborne antenna. It makes no sense to have a small probe be able to communicate with another probe at nearly the same distance it can communicate with the DSN.
Yes it does make more sense to upgrade ground stations - of course it does since it's easier and simpler. That doesn't mean that having powerful deep space networks can be any less valuable especially during times of ecliptic blackout.
3 minutes ago, PocketBrotector said:The current balance is strictly a mathematical progression - totally agnostic to the solar system or use-case. Each antenna is one step up in size & has 2x mass and 5x range of the previous antenna; each DSN level has 5x the range and costs 3.75x more than the previous.
Barnkit feedback is appreciated as I didn't actually test that part yet...
I've just glanced over the configs on the GitHub and see the basics of what you're doing. I'm gonna throw it in game and play around with it some to see how it operates at scale to give you some feedback. I'll especially take a close look at the CBK stuff. I know it pretty well since I was like the 3rd, maybe 4th person to reply to Sarbian's original thread for it and haven't ever had a career install without it since then.
-
29 minutes ago, PocketBrotector said:
With the advent of ultra-distant bodies in popular planet packs, perhaps this will be of use: Extended Antenna Progression
This mod adds long-range antennas using stock assets to facilitate communications networks for planet packs larger than the stock solar system. This allows the player to extend, rather than replace, the stock antenna progression, making long-range relays possible without trivializing inner-system communications.
- The RA-500 weighs 1.3 tons and has range rating of 500 Gm. It has a 1.25m bottom node and fits in a 5m fairing (i.e. it's a 2x rescaled RA-15.)
- The RA-2500 weighs 2.6 tons and has a range rating of 2.5 Tm. It has a 2.5m bottom node and fits in a 7.5m fairing (i.e. it's a 2x rescaled RA-100.)
- The RA-12500 weighs 5.2 tons and has a range rating of 12.5 Tm. It has a 2.5m bottom node and fits in a 10m fairing (i.e. its a 4x rescaled RA-15.)
As an incidental benefit, these antennas offer better transmission performance than the stock relay antennas, particularly in terms of ElectricCharge consumed per Mit transmitted.
The enormous size of these antennas demands an unconventional approach to deployment. Possibilities include:
- Off-world manufacturing via mods such as Extraplanetary Launchpads, OSE Workshop, or Ground Construction.
- Oversized launch vehicles such as AB Launchers (5m), DIRECT (5m & 7.5m), or SpaceY Lifters/SpaceY Expanded (5m, 7.5m, & 10m). To facilitate the simultaneous launch of multiple satellites, this mod adds stock-based fairings (including interstage trusses) in 5m, 7.5m, and 10m diameters.
- In case none of the above appeal to you, compact deployable versions of all three antennas are provided (via rescaling of the Communotron 88-88 to 0.625m, 0.9375m, and 1.25m.)
As the new antennas are substantially more powerful than the stock Deep Space Network, three additional levels of the Tracking Station are provided via the Custom Barn Kit (not included.) These allow the player to choose between launching local relays or simply boosting the DSN.
- Level 4 of the Tracking Station costs 2,111,000 Funds and boosts the DSN's range rating to 1.25 Tm.
- Level 5 of the Tracking Station costs 7,916,000 Funds and boosts the DSN's range rating to 6.25 Tm.
- Level 6 of the Tracking Station costs 29,685,000 Funds and boosts the DSN's range rating to 31.25 Tm.
This presents alternatives at several performance points to the excellent JX2 Large Deployable Antenna. These parts are generally cheaper and less massive than the JX2 for their range with the trade-off of being much bulkier and far less visually distinctive.
Testing welcome. If this is useful I will spin it off into its own thread, but given that GPP is the only solar system I'm aware of with bodies in the terameter range, I figured I would introduce it here.
I can dig it and can definitely get on board with some testing for it. I may also have some input on ranges, mass and CBK implementation once I dig into your methods. We're currently pretty much tied to JX2, DMOS or custom configurations right now. Please do provide a link if you decide to spin it off officially.
-
Slave Nickname : Rasta
Slave's desirability to being a slave : 7/11
Slave's softwares licenses : (None. Aren't slaves provided for?)
Slave's Skills : I'm an excellent cook. I also roll a nice j**** and have been working on a degree in underwater basket weaving
Slave's Portfolio : Didn't know what color you liked... http://www.officedepot.com/a/products/751031/Trapper-Keeper-Portfolio-Letter-Size-Assorted/
Slave's Contact Info : [email protected]
Misc : I look forward to any and all software licenses you can provide.
-
3 hours ago, Urses said:
@rasta013 ty from me too. Realy nice advice! Now on the way to install a aditional sat combination. Im wondering if a sat formation like the atomic age sign would be helpful there, equatorial highly excentric? Or geostationary with sight at GSC from retrograde? For permanent contact.
Urses
I've tried the helix orbit you're referring too. In it I used two sats in each orbit setup like this:
45o N Orbit x2 / 45o N Retrograde x2
135o N Orbit x2 / 135o N Retrograde x2
90o N Orbit x2 / 90o S orbit x2
All orbits were at 95km.
I made sure that I put each of the pairs on opposite sides as well so as to have to longest coverage above the horizon as possible. Additionally, I found the retrograde relay sat orbits worked just as nicely when they were passing the horizon ahead of you as you enter on high angle re-entries. The speed of the retrograde orbit allows it to come overhead just about as you hit the high pressure zone and start plasma build up. If you use really high power antennas as well this kind of coverage can also almost guarantee coverage from all but the worst ecliptic positioning luck.
-
22 hours ago, RedParadize said:
@tater Yeah, I am playing 6.4, rarely play with stock part. Most the stuff I use is SSTU or NFT/FFT based. I did try real solar system but bugs are just too annoying at that scale.
Really, when it come to core mechanics, there is very few thing I didn't attempted. Life support and such ad a layer of difficulty on top of that, but it remain the same core. All that is good, but once I figure out how to get it done, I have no more reason to do it. And campaign with the contract system is not that good, I never managed to have a campaign save past the mun... I would like a better campaign or some new stuff in that department.Try this out for a vastly different career play experience.
Use Play Your Way, Strategia and State Funding Continued in Career Mode and using the GPP planet pack on 3.2x. This will eliminate all contracts, make you rely on a combination of strategies and funding from your chosen State Funding role (which can be added to very easily to customize something for yourself), science returns and still leave you with the challenge of having deal with increased scale. According to which role you choose you'll need to operate your program in a different way and your goals may quickly come into conflict with your needs. Set your science returns low enough in Play Your Way to balance against your chosen role - it's a very, very adaptable system to vastly change how you play your career.
-
1 minute ago, astroheiko said:
The hint with the relay in a low equatorial orbit behind the spaceplane has worked. I have not lost the connection for a second. The Spaceplane made it into the orbit.
Glad that worked for you. I had to solve a re-entry problem with sample return probes from asteroids because I kept flipping when hitting the atmosphere at 4.8 km/s when I lost connection. I ended up with a 6 sat constellation in a 120km, 8.6o inclined orbit so I didn't have to work so hard to time up my re-entries with Trajectories on return. I later noticed it also worked to keep connection during a high altitude hypersonic test.
-
1 minute ago, Angel-125 said:
Yup, keep in mind that the storage capacities are there for not just liquid fuel- that's simply the baseline that I use. You'll be able to switch those tanks around to hold, say Pathfinder base elements and the Equipment needed to assemble them.
True, true and that's considerably lighter...kind of why I'm wondering where it'll land at too engine wise. Regardless of whether it's the stock (would be nice and easy) or something new I do love the idea of the aerospike design for the propulsion though. It would give it capabilities for all bodies regardless of atmosphere.
-
20 hours ago, Angel-125 said:
More doodling tonight, needed a break from slogging through the Buffalo Wings update...
Looking really nice. Love the idea of the aerospike but that's gonna be a lot straight-up fuel mass for it to handle - may be the only concern in that doodle I see which looks like the same thing you're wondering about.
-
50 minutes ago, astroheiko said:
... I lose the connection to CommNet because of re-entry effects during the ascent. Then of course I can not control it anymore. Do you see a way to solve this without taking a pilot with me?
If I'm understanding you correctly, you're having problem during ASCENT not descent correct? If I'm wrong on that then ignore this suggestion...
As mentioned above, if you use several Direct antennas that combine you can get enough power to burn through the plasma blackout. Using a relay sat you deposit in orbit is a good idea, yes, but make sure that it has a significant amount of power. Not just the bit you need to get back to Kerbin, make it strong - 100G or better would be best but 50G might cut it if you're not rescaled. Then, when you're ready to lift off again time your ascent to when your relay sat will be coming over the horizon behind your craft as you ascend. This is particularly important when you start getting to blackout phase be sure it's behind you, not ahead. This combination will probably allow you to get back to orbit without comms blackout although you may have to experiment a bit with the number of Direct antennas you need on the landing craft.
By the way, if you time your descent to the relay sat you can use this same technique for landing to avoid the comms blackout. In that case though, make sure you start your descent so that the relay sat is actually coming over the horizon behind your craft just as you're about to hit atmosphere and you will broadcast at near full strength out of the plasma stream nearly the whole way down.
-
24 minutes ago, theJesuit said:
I myself am in two minds.
I fully understand the mindset of not wanting to mess with long process chains or simply the lightweight approach to accomplishing many of the fun things in the game like life support or off-planet construction. Myself, I go the other way. I've been heading more and more towards realism in many ways and the longer, more complicated resource chains for me are part of the fun. Having to both find a different resource and arrange for said resource to be chained together properly is all part of the fun for me.
That's the beauty of KSP - we can all get what we want in many ways.
-
17 minutes ago, dunebugmi said:
I'm confused about the relationship between density and difficulty of extracting metal. Are you saying that KSP ore is so light that impossibly large containers would be needed to store a sufficient amount to make a ton of metal ore?
Basically yeah.
Density of stock ore = 0.010 and Density of MetalOre = 0.0275 making it 175% denser. So not exactly impossibly large but definitely dealing with considerably higher quantities if you want to keep the same conversion rates of ore->RocketParts instead of MetalOre->RocketParts.
-
11 minutes ago, Galileo said:
We have brought aboard @rasta013 to completely revamp the science defs.
Jeez...who in their right mind would volunteer for this?
-
R'OKAY GEORGE!
My wife and I are going to volunteer to take on the development effort to fill out the stock experiment definitions for all GPP bodies, situations and biomes. I think this will help make the effort a bit easier to coordinate since it is so huge and we don't want to duplicate efforts. Furthermore, I've got extensive experience writing full definition files so understand the process intimately. This will mean I can answer questions regarding the definitions, their operation or any problems we may run into with getting them to work properly. Toying with the science system has been my pet project in KSP from the start. If you'd rather I didn't do this please let me know, otherwise I'll start getting the pieces pulled together and get you an updated spreadsheet to work with going forward.
-
5 minutes ago, Galileo said:
I really only care about the Gael system getting complete. Doing ALL 28 bodies is a lot of work and i wouldnt put that on anyone.
Cool. I'll decide whether I'll take it on myself but at the very least want to make sure that all the definitions we request are the ones we need as well. If we continue down the path we're on we're adding a bunch for several experiments that will almost assuredly never be seen and as such, becomes wasted effort.
-
Can we discuss the science definitions a little bit?
@Galileo was asking about definitions and I wanted to try and upload some of what I had started writing so he'd at least have part of it for the release he mentioned in the main thread earlier today. However, when I went back over to the spreadsheet (had only looked at it briefly before) I noticed there are some problems right off the bat.
Let's talk about the Crew Report first. In the stock game, without using something like Science Revisted Revisted, the crew report does not act the definition we've requested to be written. It has situationMask = 63 and biomeMask = 7. This translates into: InSpaceHigh, InSpaceLow, FlyingHigh and then FlyingLow and SrfLanded by biome type (e.g. GaelFlyingLowMountains or GaelSrfLandedMountains). Nothing else that is written will get recognized. It will use the very first InSpaceLow definition on the list every single time no matter how many are written and the same goes for SpaceHigh and FlyingHigh. The only biome definitions that will get used are the ones for FlyingLow or SrfLanded situations. EDIT: Plus, once the experiment is run once, it is never run again and cannot be run again for additional science so any other definition that is there is wasted as well for this reason - Crew Report is a single shot experiment for the above listed situation/biome masks.
Rather than go into all the different experiments we've requested definitions for I'll just say that the above is indicative of many of the other issues I've seen. We need to have each one of the requested definitions laid out according to the stock definition as defined by biomeType and situationMask. Otherwise we are asking for a lot definitions that will never be seen.
Also, are we intending on expanding this to all bodies and biomes for GPP? Right now, only homeworld bodies are being covered by the spreadsheet albeit with the aforementioned problems.
Last but not least, if not solved before this weekend I'll have my own spreadsheet generated with the existing GPP definitions imported and all GPP bodies laid out by biomeType and situationMask for each stock experiment. It's really not hard just time consuming to get the initial large biome/situation template made...
-
1 hour ago, akron said:
Well, if I were to do it, I'd use a MM patch to convert my experiments to DMOS experiments to prevent duplicate science. I plan to eventually do my own version of the DMOS Biodrill and Solar particle colletor so this will be more prevelant in the future. Thank you for the feedback
Now, MM patched for compatibility to keep the duplication process you currently have (in a way) would actually be a good way to get both worlds. It'd allow those of us who relentlessly use DMOS to keep it and not worry about science duplication (or really, any behavioral change) and others who don't want to run it to still have experiments and not need another dependency. I can see a lot of benefit to this actually.
-
Personally, I hardly ever use the 2.5m tanks themselves but do use any of the several 2.5m up/down conversion pieces be it tanks, decouplers, trusses - whatever - from all your various mods. Any of those that are in MOLE would be pieces that I use but not the regular circular tanks.
I know...embarrassing I don't remember which pieces from which mod...I never use them separately.
-
35 minutes ago, Angel-125 said:
Right now, when you recycle a vessel, you get all its resources distributed, and the mass of all of its parts recycled into Equipment (up to 50% based upon engineer skill). The downside is that it's instant. With EL, you get a similar result, but it (realistically) takes time.
Ok cool. Honestly, the difference in time between the two is why I've never stopped to add up the numbers to get a comparison.
-
4 minutes ago, TheRagingIrishman said:
How well does Asteroid Day work with GPP?
It's been...well...slow. Since almost no asteroids ever come that close it tends to take a while...
-
7 hours ago, Ed_ said:
I'm visiting asteroids for the first time since I installed GPP, but hitting a weird problem:
Just an idea...try installing the Asteroid Day infrared antenna on a probe and get it orbiting and detecting asteroids. Once it finds them it starts the track itself automatically and maybe this will get you past whatever weirdness RB is doing atm. (uhmmm...nevermind.
)
1 hour ago, Galileo said:Has anyone posted and science defs to the spreadsheet as of lately?
I will be getting some time to work on that finally in the next day or two myself. I've got several written for the stock experiments but have to move them and move them into the right spots on the spreadsheet and I've just not had the time yet. I'll update the other GPP tracking thread as soon as I get mine inserted since I've filled in a few.
-
1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:
Thoughts?
YAY CONFIRM BUTTON!
As for the EL question - yeah, I'd remove it if EL is installed. It's either that or make it just as worthwhile and valuable as the EL method.
-
6 hours ago, akron said:
I can fix this, but I figured it would be faster to just point people to use that mod as well since it works perfect for my mod. Is there a wish from you guys for me to make ProbesPlus independent of DMOS?
Well I've been using your mod over a year now and my vote is a resounding NO.
For those of you who may think initially that this is a good idea....
PP+ parts look far better than DMOS parts
Since it is things like Magnetometers and RPWS what experiments are they going to become? Would we then have Magnetometer for DMOS and Magnetometer for PP+ as well as dual RPWS experiments (and all the others)? This would be an overabundance of science or non-installation of one or the other if you don't want that...which means...
If it is decoupled and you choose not to install DMOS then you'll be losing at least a few experiments since PP+ doesn't have all the same ones covered and also, if you use the Universal Storage form factor version of these experiments you'll lose those as well if you don't have DMOS...
I could go on and on about why it would be a bad idea to decouple PP+ from DMOS but these were the things that came to mind just in the course of writing this post (and I could've added a few more still even now)...
-
1 hour ago, theJesuit said:
Just wondering... what would it take to change the density of stock ore? Could that be achieved through an MM .cfg patch?
Yup exactly. You could MM patch the Ore definition in Resources.cfg to change it's density.
[WIP] [1.1.2] DIRECT - Super-Heavy Launchers - REVAMP RELEASE
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
As I haven't looked back into the thread - are these updates on the existing patches or add on to them?