daltonater
-
Posts
46 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by daltonater
-
-
On 4/7/2015 at 5:35 PM, occ said:
My current problem is that my spaceplane's pitch keeps fluctuating wildly. I can barely get it off the runway before it crashes.
I also had this issue in stock. My solution was to have both canards and tail controls, but to inverse one of them. Which ever one is inverse also needs to have the pitch limit set lower then the non inverse one (I had the canards at 100% standard, and the tail at 50% inverse). This helped smooth out the pitch issues for me.
-
I have yet to install KER but when using MecJeb, I tend to avoid using it whenever possible. That said, I typically end up pulling a Soyuz and let auto docking handle my station docking. In large part, this is because I have a really hard time docking ships manually.
-
So Nils. With 1.1 out as of today, the question on everyones mind is this. "Will that time line prediction for the 1.1 update hold true?"
Sorry if it feels like im trying to presure you or anything. Just curious as to what a rough estimate will look like for the complete 1.1 overhaul.
-
Having gone out and gotten my feet wet with 1.1, time for me to try the experimental update with this mod.
-
One thing I have noticed, is that when I looked at a lot of my older base projects in the VAB, most of the craft files appeared corrupted. Any base designs I have made post 1.0 mod update appear fine, but every single one I have in the VAB from before that is corrupted.
-
Fact is, you would burn to death long before reaching 6000m/s. I built a craft that pulled off a velocity of just over 1500m/s at an altitude of roughly 20-23 km altitude (20,000m-23,000m). At that point in the flight, both the nose cone and wings had already exploded from over heat, and everything else threatened to explode as well.
-
Found a small visual bug in the VAB with certian parts. I put a twin base part mount on top of the new central hub, and while moving the camera around, the bug occured. I had the currently non attached large storage unit between the actively being built craft, and the camera, yet for some reason, the bicoupler turned invisible, but only the portion being obscured. Funny part is that the central hub didnt share this problem, despite also being obscured.
-
22 hours ago, Nils277 said:
Update to 1.0.6
Download:
Thanks, happy to hear!
Your problem was indeed a bug, which turned out to also apply to Snacks! I have uploaded a patch for it.
It really seems that not many have used KPBS with either of these mods together.Geez nils. Im starting to lose track of which update version im on here. I didnt even get to open the zip folder for the 1.0.5 version before I have to now go and download 1.0,6.
Sorry if im sounding a bit hostile here. I trully enjoy this mod, im just puzzled by the seeming avalanche of updates.
-
Kind of off topic here, but I have to ask: Why no poetry? Seeing the dev teams issues in poetry form gave a nice comedic twist to the dev notes.
-
Gotta say, I do love this mod. While I havent been doing much base building as of late (VTOL design work is way more engaging than it should be), I do look forward to finally getting back to base building with all the new parts.
Speaking of parts, I think congratulations are in order Nils. I just checked on curse, and currently your mod is the number one most downloaded parts pack for ksp. Very impressive. Time to update my own install.
-
Ah. It seems this update is right around the corner. I really like how this mod is comming along, and as stated many times before, no stock alike mod is better than this one for base building. If only my launch vehicals, were well, reliable. I gotta say, some of the designs that people have made are jaw dropping.
-
I kind of hope that option 3 becomes reality, in large part because my hardware would benefit greatly. Running multiple big mods, such as KIS and KAS tends to slow down the game rather heavily (Laptops suck). So I end up needing to go rumaging around in the mods files to strip out what ever supported content I cant run (since KIS and KAS are just to problamatic for my hardware). This is mainly done to try and speed up the initial load times, and to keep my frame rate at a decent level as much as possible.
-
Also, double check that the ports were properly installed to begin with. One half is narrower than the other half. The narrow half actually does the docking while the wider half stays attached to the rest of the ship.
-
2 hours ago, ndiver said:
Yes but part of my question was: what makes them incompatible to each other? Specifically, is it this bulkheadProfiles line?
Yep. From what I know of the coding in ksp, that line is the only reason. The idea behind it is that it prevents mk2 docking ports from connecting to mk1 docking ports.
-
11 hours ago, TheReadPanda said:
I started playing with this mod just yesterday and I must say I am rather impressed and wish I had spotted this mod earlier! I will definately be playing with this mod more on Twitch in the future. My only concern is the TacLS balancing. That plus for my needs I really need some EPL tie ins but that is my issue and not yours!
I may tweak some part cfg files to make some parts work a bit with epl better. But... I would love a drill that fit into the bays, like a 2 slot drill that could extend up and out.
So my dream wish list?
1. Some clearer and easier integration with TacLS (I need to build my flow chart and balance checks for it to see best way to make something self sufficient right now but it seems possible! If you have a source of ore)
2. My request for an integrated Drill system
3. Integration in some way with EPL that will allow me to use some new part from this as perhaps a manufacturing base for Rocket Parts and an EPL surveyor hub.
That said, awesome work Nils27! I look to playing with these parts on Minmus in serious play to see what I can do with them!
4. PS: I would love an RCS part to be inline similar to the landing engines too!
Drill is confirmed for the next update. Nils even posted photos a while back as I recal.
-
1 hour ago, Cdodders said:
what is the best way of landing these bases? Skycrane? Built in rockets?
Regarding your question, personally I would have to go with parachutes whenever possible. They have low mass, allowing more base per mission. Problem is that there less acurate than the alternatives. In the case of a body without an atmosphere, things get a bit more challanging. In these cases, a skycrane is not a bad idea, but a skycrane can end up having a fairly high mass. The base landing rockets can also work wonders here, but the low fuel supply means that some form of additional fuel storage is needed.
In a nut shell, it all depends on the destination.
-
Having done some testing, heres what I have found:
The large stock ISRU can sorta (it does it in a weird way) attach radially to other parts. No part is able to attach radially to the large ISRU though.
One of the inline RCS tanks (FL-R25 RCS fuel tank) cant attach radially to any part of a craft.
Most engines cannot attach radially to other parts. The are exceptions though. The puff, twitch, thud, spider, Twin-boar, goliath, and all solid fuel rockets are exceptions.
I havnt gone into the config files for these parts yet. I simply took a peek in the VAB to test things. Im not great at programming, but its likely theres a piece of information in the config files that is responcible for this behaviour. I hope this information is useful in solving the above mentioned problem.
-
7 hours ago, Nils277 said:
Hey, progress is still slow at the moment. I still haven't got my computer installed. I hope to have it back running until the next weekend. It is really iching in my Fingers to finally make something again.
Thanks for the report, i will take a look at it, as soon as i can use my PC again. Maybe an update from RPM changed something.
Hmm, the Images you posted look strange. I already tried to make the attachment easier. If anyone has an idea on how to make it easier, i'm glad to hear it. Pressing ALT while attaching might help, you can only attach at the nodes then, they should be correct.
This looks really cool B-)
The Legs can be detached via staging when attached at a Stack-Node. I hope to make this also possible for surface attachment.
Dont certain stock parts have radial attaching disabled by default? I would have to go and double check about this, but assuming im right, that could be a solution. Have the radial mounting disabled by default on the wheels. No idea if that would actually work, or how it would affect the mod, but it might serve as an answer. I seem to recall the large stock ISRU being subject to this, along with some of the inline monopropellent tanks. Havnt really messed with those parts for a while, but I will look into this.
-
On 1/14/2016 at 3:06 PM, l2oss said:
What I did was extend the legs inside of the VAB/SPH, and turn off angle snap. That allowed me to place the wheels where they needed to be (that's for the wheels that fold down).
Yep. Pre extending isnt needed but can help. Big trick is to orientate prior to attaching, as this makes life easier. After that just hold down the so called mod key to disable surface attaching. The mod key differs based on OS, but for windows its the 'alt' key. From there, you can use the duplicate function to speed up the construction process further. with surface attaching disabled, you only way for parts to connect is to use the nodes.
-
11 hours ago, Nils277 said:
Sorry for the late reply. I still have no internet in the new flat
Glad to hear that you have managed to get it to work
The rough foodprint of the base is about Size 3 (3.75m) while the garage has a has the MK3 as diameter. It is hard so say which length the garage has. You'' have to have at least one adapter at each end. (Adapter for landing legs) and it depends on how many "normal" garage parts you put between. But on garage part is roughly as long as the science lab.
I'm using Blender as a 3D Program. I really like it. And honestly any other program i know that has all the functions Blender has costs more than 1000$
Glad to hear you solved the problem
When you don't use other mods, you can delete the "PlanetaryBaseInc\Parts\Mod_Support" Folder.In there you could also decide which mod you don't use and delete the folder with the names of the mods not installed.
A already heard of this problem a few times. I think it most often appereas when therea are multiple stack nodes on a part. Sometimes the game does not register that they are decoupled. The only solution i found was reloading (Or in editor replacing the part with the missing node). I am afraid that i can't do much on that end.
Hmm maybe the decoupler from KSP does only work when attached at a node. (The node for surface attachment is another node). I have to look it that.
I will have a look at it once the next update it made
Thanks for the information. Now that I know a good program to use, that will help me a lot. As always, thanks for taking the time out of your day to answer our questions.
-
13 hours ago, Orisi said:
Take your time Nils, I love the mod though. I didn't realise there were so many extra parts for other mods I might have to install them all just to see them....
on a similar vein I know you've shown some pictures of the base but do you have a rough idea of its footprint? Is the basic garage the same width/length as, say, the 4 way adapter?
I would have to agree. I believe that a plan is in place for a now adapter for mounting to rockets during launch, which may also serve as the adaptor for use with the other base parts. All of this would of coarse take time, but we are patient.
On a very different note, I have a question to ask nils. What 3D programs do you use? I have been considering building a mod myself for a while, but I have had problems with my preffered 3D program of inventor with unwraping/texturing parts ( Im pretty sure it cant actually).
-
Most likely case is that you dont have the additional mods needed for some parts. KAS, KIS, and various life support mods add parts. Additionally, it is possible that module manager cant read all the parts in question. If thats the case, erease all older module manager files. The final possibility is that the file structure isnt properly set up in your game data for some reason.
-
7 hours ago, Tex_NL said:
And this is exactly why it is always a bad idea to give an ETA.
Nils, take your time. Don't let yourself be tempted into a premature release. It's ready when it's ready and not a day earlier.
Oh I do agree. I was just starting to wonder. But quiality is key.
-
One of the best things about this mod: you can heavilly economize the base building missions through multi piece transport. I have almost gotten to the point were I can move nearlly a full base (some assembally required) to duna from kerbin with only one launch. I seriously doubt something like that could be done without this mod. A full, albiet limited base, in only one mission? So much faster than any alternatives that come to mind.
PS: Whats the ETA on the next update? I know christmas is a busy time of year but I seem to recall the plan being to have the update out before christmas. Then agian, It seems that 1.1 may be out soon.
I may tweak some part cfg files to make some parts work a bit with epl better. But... I would love a drill that fit into the bays, like a 2 slot drill that could extend up and out.
Kerbal Space Program 1.12: "On Final Approach" Grand Discussion Thread
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
I downloaded from steam, updated my mechjeb install, and my game is broken. I cannot access the VAB, SPH, or launch any existing craft blueprints, stock or otherwise.
Was working fine until I updated 1.12. Any suggestions for a fix?