Jump to content

Phineas Freak

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,315

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Phineas Freak

  1. Phineas Freak
    I'd like to take a look and see how difficult it is. What are the guidelines for rescaling? @Kitspace if you are talking about the Mk2 & Mk3 then the only way to use them is with themselves (and with other mods that provide parts with the same shape of course). Or, as @winged mentioned, by creating custom parts that can fit the form factor.
  2. Phineas Freak
    Take it easy and just work on what you like . It is no good if you are doing it as a second job instead of a hobby!
  3. Phineas Freak
    Procedural parts. RO is meant to be played using them. You can create any shape with any dimension you like. The MK3 parts are based on the STS (Space Shuttle). Not yet. Rescaling internals was on the list as a "feature" to be included with the 1.0.4 --> 1.0.5 RO update but for some reason it never made it. Crew positioning is not affected but there is an obvious misalignment between the view ports and the rest of the internal.
  4. Phineas Freak
    Yummy...Delta III! Should we expect a Delta II in the future? Tank textures: check, SRMs: check, sustainer engine: check, Delta K: no check.
  5. Phineas Freak
    Exactly! Since you have already made the parts for the Agena D version, creating the A and B variants would be a piece of cake (just a shorter propellant tank that it is either a rescaled model of the D variant or a new model).
  6. Phineas Freak
    @NecroBonesis it feasible to separate the Agena D Flight Pack from the rest of the stack? It would make early Agena versions (with shorter main tank bodies) easier to achieve without making the model look squashed.
  7. Phineas Freak
    @KubaFZyou need to update your KSP version to the latest one (1.0.5.1028 "silent update").
  8. Phineas Freak
    @LostOblivionall the points that you mentioned are valid with the exception of the fuel density. In reality, even the most dense hypergolic propellants (Cavea B for fuel - 0.001501 t/L, Tetrafluorohydrazine for oxidizer - 0.001604 t/L) would have at least 3 times less massive than the stock "LiquidFuel/Oxidizer" combo for a given volume. In conjunction with the abysmal ASL & VAC ISP of the engines it leads to heavy stages that have a small Delta - V budget. Also, it is impossible for an engine to have a perfect 0 to 100% thrust scaling (a minimum of 10% the maximum rated thrust is considered top notch and really difficult to achieve). SQUAD has chosen to balance the parts by: Increasing the inert mass. Decreasing the TWR and ISP SMURF addresses these base issues.
  9. Phineas Freak
    Today was a good day: it is the first time that i finally managed to "land" an artificial object to the Moon. 1. Launch vehicle: 2. Launch Window: 3. Launch: 4. Flight & Impact:
  10. Phineas Freak
    Awesome! Here, have 10000 rep!
  11. Phineas Freak
    @KublajDRE does not display the part temperature in the right click menu anymore. KSP supports that natively so If you want to check the temperature of a part, you can toggle it via the Alt+F12 "Thermal" menu.
  12. Phineas Freak
    @dawidpotok @Nhawks17 it would be a much better practice to use the SunFlareLoader plugin than to try and replace game-critical files. I think @pingopete already uses it for RVE.
  13. Phineas Freak
    On the topic of ETS, Saturn 1C would be really easy to add, just a new fuel tank (or two if you want variation): Launchers Link
  14. Phineas Freak
    @LucidPixelsi guess i could provide that specific version but: 1. Even if the license allows it, i am not sure if it would be ethical to redistribute a version of RVE. 2. People may think that it is a pre-release. If issues arise, @pingopete will then have to deal with them. 3. It is a personal project so no support of any way would be provided.
  15. Phineas Freak
    Also, do not be afraid of using the Linux version under windows. It is possible to make it work (with OpenGL - i can manage to run a beefed-up version of RVE with all the required/recommended mods and enough of the suggested mods to make RP-0 a real joy to play
  16. Phineas Freak
    Blackleg Industries have two nice gold foil - like probe cores (one rectangular and one octagonal), along with antennae and solar panels.
  17. Phineas Freak
    @pingopetefortunately, these parameters already exist on the RSS version of Kopernicus, so the only thing that you have to do it to patch them: @Body[Kerbin] { @ScaledVersion { @fadeStart = 99000 @fadeEnd = 100000 } @PQS { @deactivateAltitude = 100000 @fadeStart = 100000 @fadeEnd = 100000 } } Insert this to the RVE.cfg, as with the solar light patching. You have done an exceptional job with RVE. Thumbs up!
  18. Phineas Freak
    @jonrd463glad that you shorted it out but it's weird that DTL causes the parts not to appear. Can you report this to @rbray89?
  19. Phineas Freak
    From a quick test that i did, all engines are showing up in the editor (they do not use MODEL{} nodes so they are directory-insensitive). If you open the "ModuleManager.ConfigCache" file and search for "RD180" do you find an entry?
  20. Phineas Freak
    @Speedster159e-dog provides the platform for creating procedural fairings, Felger provides additional procedural fairing textures & shapes.
  21. Phineas Freak
    For LEO, both Centaur and DCSS are offloaded from excess propellant and follow a much steeper trajectory. Apoapsis might need to be over 290 km for the payload to circularize at 180 km. Also, don't forget that these launchers are optimized for GTO (or, generaly, for high energy orbits and relatively light payloads). Performance is severely impacted otherwise. Example: an Atlas V 401 with ~7000 kg of payload has a delta - v budget of more than 12 km/s but it is really difficult to circularize at LEO (it will take an angle to prograde of 35 degrees or more).
  22. Phineas Freak
    @YANFRETsince you are going to be breaking crafts, could you make some changes to part names? XSMALL Kosmos_TKS_RCS_Tank XSMALL Kosmos_TKS_RCS_TankXxxf XNP_lft_ 375 x3 XNP_lft_ 375x3SHORT XDiusNP_lf222t_ 375 x3i XDiusNP_lf333222t_ 375 x3i IUSXNP_lft_ 3322HORTx23 IUSXNP_lft_ 375x3S222HORT IUSXNP_lft_ 3322HORT XNPdecouplerstack85M HS Mainly to remove the spaces from the names (they may be considered invalid characters some time in the future, it is a bug that KSP allows that).
  23. Phineas Freak
    Yes, that is good reason for the disparencies. The Shuttle SRM is a '70s design and the one from Orbital is relatively new (since there is a whole line of RSRMs, from 1 to 5 segments).
  24. Phineas Freak
    @Felbourn @NecroBones OK, now i understand. I was confused because Orbital ATK also has a 4 segment SRM in the exact same form as the Shuttle one but it has a lower inert mass and more propellant.
  25. Phineas Freak
    I am loving every minute with this pack! The DIRECT Jupiter could use some more parts but this thing has better payload capacity than the SLS and without the 5 segment boosters! Edit: @NecroBoneswhat data did you use for the mass parameters of the STS solid motor?
×
×
  • Create New...