Recon777
-
Posts
66 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Recon777
-
-
I'm actually not familiar with how to do this.
-
Does this actually work with 1.2? It's listed as only compatible up to 0.25 in CKAN.
-
Is there any way to trick CKAN into allowing it?
-
Just tried this out. It's beautiful. But brutal on the framerate. I get 8-10FPS at times just when launching a command pod and Flea booster. Oddly, pressing M to view all of Kerbin in its glory, I get 60FPS. Not sure if I'll be able to use this mod as bigger rocket launches would be unplayable.
-
I figure I should mention a tiny issue with this mod when it comes to a brand new game and the simplest rocket.
It seems that the mod changes the stock Mk16 chute to be slightly less effective. Enough that when you build a rocket with only the Flea SRB, that the engine will blow up when you touch down due to exceeding its impact tolerance. Landing speed is about 7.1 or so with the Mk16 chute when RealChute is installed. But it's about 6.7 in vanilla. It's just enough that you always get an explosion and lose the engine.
This is no big deal apart from the fact that it can be confusing for new players since their first rocket will partially explode upon landing even with a stock chute. Naturally if you use the other chute, it's fine and slows down quite a bit. But some of the early missions want the stock chute to be used.
Oh speaking of missions, I had this one where it wanted me to test the RealChute in the water after splashdown. I thought this was rather odd since deploying it in the air above the water didn't count. I had to be IN the water before deploying. But... you kind of have to deploy before landing, right? Not sure how to complete that mission unless I use radial parachutes in addition to touch down first. Kind of a weird mission which may be best to remove.
-
1 minute ago, RealGecko said:
Man, it appears only at KSC scene.
Aha! Got it. Many thanks.
-
-
I've installed this mod via CKAN, but I'm not sure what to do to get it to work. As a test in a brand new career, I put the capsule on the launch pad with a goo canister and did the research. In the end, I got the science for just that one experiment, and [x] Science says that this is ALL which has been completed. All the other KSC biomes are incomplete. Is there something special I have to do to activate the mod?
-
Is there any way to uninstall Mini AVC? I'm tired of the repeated warnings that mods are not compatible when they actually are. I didn't install AVC or MiniAVC, but the Mini version seems to have crept into my setup on its own somehow.
-
12 minutes ago, kcs123 said:
Well, you got more options to begin. Instead of maned rocket, you can builod some low cost balistic rocket remotely controled. Put termometer and barometer on it, do measurements in flight and send data back to KSC before rocket crash somewhere. You also have oportunity to build small rover with some sci parts on it, drive around KSC and colect enough science to unlock just enough tech tree nodes to progress career further.
Not each flight have to be executed perfectly and all parts of craft have to survive. If you collect enough knowlage to go further, test flight is success despite rocket being destroyed in process. Don't be afraid of failures.
You might also try some other contract packs that gives different oportunities to grind science compared to stock game. Like field research or GAP. Dmagics science stuff come along with this just nice too.
I'm no longer sure, Yemo will have to confirm it, but I think that those AVC messages are harmless.
Thanks, I'll try some of those things. I wasn't trying a manned mission, of course. You can't do that at the start of the career with SETI anyway. But the probe I was trying to build could not steer. It had no control (I did put the antenna on) and so the rocket just spun out of control right away. I'm not sure what the solution is, as there are no reaction wheels.
The AVC messages may be harmless, but they are annoying. Three extra clicks for a game that is already way, way too click-happy to start and to exit.
-
Just now, Gryphon said:
Ferram's comments reminded me of another option I forgot - since you are using a mod designed to increase the realism of the aerodynamics, you might look into the various mods intended to increase the realism of the tech tree.
I'm actually trying out SETI. Hoping to, anyway. Haven't figured out how to begin with it though. No reaction wheels in the initial tech. Can't control anything. I guess I'll get as far as I can figure out and then ask. At the moment, I'm trying to figure out why I'm getting crashes every time I exit the VAB. Trying to figure out what mod is the culprit. Setting up KSP is often harder than playing it!
-
13 minutes ago, Yemo said:
Ok, thank you for the info.
Nope, it just means that you do not need a full network around kerbin. One keosync long range com sat opposite of ksc should be enough for kerbin.
Of course everything beyond kerbin is not affected. You still need networks around other bodies for full coverage.
Hmm. Okay. I'll give it a shot. Looking at it now, wondering where to begin. I'm used to the stock campaign. Here, I'm not even sure how well the contract progression will provide things like funding and science. Kind of going in blind. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem anyone's made a Youtube Let's Play with SETI yet either.
Also...
For some reason, I'm getting AVC compatibility errors with the current versions of SETI. I have to click these three buttons every time the game loads.
Did I install it incorrectly?
-
Hey all. New to SETI, so I'm trying it out. Quick question:
I use RemoteTech, and I noticed the settings mod for SETI says this... "changing the KSC range to cover the whole kerbol system "
I may be misunderstanding what this means, but if the KSC covers the entire system, then what is the point of RemoteTech at all? If you can communicate with all probes and ships, everywhere, then you don't have to build a communications network.
-
2 minutes ago, ferram4 said:
@Recon777: I'm not seeing where you have an issue with FAR here.
- FAR is an aero mod, not a crash tolerance and part survivability mod. Changing the Flea's crash tolerance is out of scope.
- The Flea being destroyed on landing does no damage to anything whatsoever; hell, it shouldn't even explode because it lacks explosives inside it, it should just crumple. However, those effects are also out of scope for FAR.
- Yes, it will not go as high. Stock does not model supersonic effects properly and short, relatively fat rockets have terrible supersonic drag. Drop the thrust so you hit that later and you'll go higher.
- That isn't the first craft that you have to launch. Although it's very likely someone will rush to actually fly a rocket, nothing stops you from just launching the pod and grabbing enough science on the pad to get to the next node.
- Editing the stock tree to make the first vehicle saner is similarly out of scope.
FAR already risks trying to handle too many things. I will not attempt to fix stock's silly career mode as well, nor do I want to expand into making an aero mod about how things are affected when they crash. I'm also not going to make the aerodynamics less realistic to save something stupid like that.
It's okay - I was just curious because usually "Something exploded" means "I did something wrong" and was wondering if I was supposed to be doing something differently if I use FAR. I'm not asking you to do anything.
-
4 hours ago, Gryphon said:
If you were going to drop the booster with a decoupler, it would have exploded anyway, right?
Anyway, if you want to safely land the craft with an attached booster, you will need more parachute. Have you unlocked the "Survivability" tech? That unlocks the radial chute.
Aside from the changes to aerodynamics, keep in mind that FAR also uses a "lite" version of RealChutes for the parachutes. Under RealChutes, the Mk16 parachute is just intended to land that basic capsule, not a heavier craft with a booster. However, if you use the full version of RealChutes (which gives you more control over your chute sizes), there's a "RealChute Cone Chute" part that is similar to the Mk16, but defaults to deploy a bigger chute. That's what I used at the start of my career mode game.
Well, my thought was simply that to begin the career, one has no technology unlocked, but the mod would likely have not forced the very first (only) possible rocket one can build to have an explosion. Yes, it would have been destroyed anyway if let go by a decoupler, but if we're talking about realism here, isn't it a bit dangerous to have an exploding object directly attached to your capsule when you land? Out of principle, one would think that this might have a chance at harming the capsule and pilot as well. But with FAR installed, it seems that one must simply accept "your first rocket will have an explosion - don't worry about it". Usually, when something explodes on your ship, it means you did something wrong and should rethink your design.
Out of curiosity... why does a SPENT booster explode anyway? Presumably, it's just a metal shell at this point with no fuel remaining? Wouldn't it simply be destroyed without exploding?
-
Having some trouble with the Toolbars and this mod. Clicking to enable Trajectories in the Toolbar does not produce a button. But it does make the toolbar go away entirely, which is a problem.
Anyone else getting this?
-
1 hour ago, cantab said:
All looks normal there to me. The Flea has an impact tolerance of 7 m/s, you touched down doing 7.2, it's gonna go boom. You probably didn't get as high because of the weight of the fins, especially since you left them on the default wing strength of 1, which is overkill for most purposes, and that extra weight might also account for your landing speed.
As I understand it Ferram is targeting realism. He's not going to fudge his aerodynamics just so that the starter rocket lands more slowly.
Wait, you can adjust the fin strength? First, I tried not having fins at all, but that made the rocket highly unstable and crash anyway. So I slapped fins on to keep it going straight. 3 doesn't work. Needed 4.
Reducing the fin weight (and limiting the thrust of the engine) got me higher, but it still landed at 7 m/s and blew up. The capsule and pilot survived, so I suppose maybe this is simply a rite of passage to have part of the first rocket explode when the career begins? It's not like there are decouplers when the game begins. Landing with that heavy booster attached to the capsule is the only choice.Has anyone here not had that happen?
-
What am I doing wrong?
Yes, I installed manually, following the instructions to copy over all the files myself rather than use CKAN.
This is a brand new career file, so the very first rocket you build pretty much has to be just the capsule, the Flea booster, and the parachute. With FAR installed, I also had to add fins, since the rocket was not controllable without them. That's fine. But it EXPLODED when returning to Kerbin.
Also, is it normal that such a rocket only made it about 65% the height as without FAR installed? Less max height and greater terminal velocity with parachute deployed. But this can't possibly be how you intended the mod to work. Surely, the initial rocket for a brand new career game would not crash. What's going on?
-
Not sure if this is because I used CKAN to install FAR, but I'm posting here as instructed.
What am I doing wrong? I've got a brand new game and not that many mods installed, and I noticed that FAR causes the rocket to fly less high and also explode upon landing.
Without FAR, the rocket goes up to 10,200m but with FAR, it tops out at about 6,650m. But what's most alarming is that when the rocket touches back down on Kerbin, the descent speed is 50% higher.
Without FAR, the rocket lands at 6.5m/s. With FAR, it lands at 9m/s and explodes.
Observe.
That's pretty much the only rocket you can build when you first start your career. So why is it that this lands so fast with FAR? Is it because something went wrong due to CKAN? Surely, this isn't by design.
-
Does Outer Planets Mod break Stock Visual Enhancements? I noticed that when I installed Outer Planets, suddenly Kerbin looked naked w/o any clouds. Are these two mods incompatible?
[edit]
Strangely, when I uninstalled OPM and then reinstalled it, SVE still worked. Can't explain that. :/
-
Does Outer Planets Mod break SVE? I noticed that when I installed Outer Planets, suddenly Kerbin looked naked w/o any clouds. Are these two mods incompatible?
[edit]
Strangely, when I uninstalled OPM and then reinstalled it, SVE still worked. Can't explain that. :/
-
Not sure what happened, but I installed Toolbar and when I tried to select Trajectories to be displayed in the toolbar, the entire toolbar vanished. This happened both in the VAB and Launch instances of the toolbar (independently - I tried it twice).
-
I simply cannot believe that in 1.1, with ALL the time Squad had to implement this, that they still have that retarded game exit process. I can't think of any other game that makes you go through so many steps to quit to desktop. And on top of that, you have to wait for the pointless ANIMATED menus to slide around the screen before you can click quit again.
I truly hope QuickExit comes soon!
-
Getting back into KSP with 1.1 now that most of the mods I used to use are updated. However, I've noticed that when using ckan to enable all these mods (which are all listed as up to date now) I'm getting crashes right away in the VAB. Trying to narrow down which of the 40 or so mods is causing this is proving to be a headache. Is there a simple way to narrow down the culprit, or am I going to have to start from vanilla and add them one at a time to figure out what mod is causing trouble? That could take a while, especially since some bugs may not show up just from loading the game.
[1.5.1] Engine Lighting (1.5.1) Little Config Update (13 October)
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
Awesome, thanks. That seems to have worked.