bewing
-
Posts
5,168 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by bewing
-
-
I assume that with such a monster that you have struts and/or fuel ducts in there? Those parts (and radial drogue chutes) accidentally got set with new insanely high drag values. It is almost certainly not "generic" drag that you are experiencing. Atmospheric drag itself is unchanged between 1.0.5 and now.
For many parts, their drag values are unchanged. For MK1 parts, the drag has been reduced by perhaps 25%.
-
You've got a corrupted game. If it's from steam, do a "file verification". If you can't access the right-click menu inside the VAB, things are very wrong.
-
I have a medium-heavy upper stage. In 1.0.5 I launched it with 5 kickbacks in a bottom stage, and 5 thumpers in a middle stage (created with symmetry), and I had big yaw and pitch problems during launch that I "solved" by slapping an enormous reaction wheel on the thing.
So, I am still having the problem in stock 1.1.2. The upper stage flies straight all by itself, merely controlled by the reaction wheel in a HECS. So the Pitch/Yaw problems are not coming from there.
I've tried rebuilding stage 2 and stage 3 from scratch, but nothing changes. In the atmosphere, the kickback stage can be controlled with aerodynamic control surfaces -- but you can see that there is a constant pitch and yaw control being applied. The thumper stage gets lit in the upper atmosphere, so the aerodynamic control surfaces are not effective to control that one. The reaction wheels have to apply more and more and more yaw/pitch until they max out -- and then the rocket starts to veer, of course.
If I simplify stage 2 to being just a single thumper, the problem goes away. If I add 2 radial thumpers to the central one, the problem is smaller than with 4. I've tried the experiment with hammers, and they seem to do something similar. If the thrusts are equal from the SRBs, then experiencing a torque would mean that the radial mountings are not exactly the same distance on one side as on the other.
Has anyone else seen this? Can anyone confirm it with an experiment or two?
-
No, this cannot be possible. Each lab keeps a list of which experiments have been processed into data already -- because you can only process each experiment once per lab. If you could process on one, and then move the data to another, then you could defeat the limit.
-
You may have had your graphics rendering set to something sub-default on 1.0 for performance reasons, and you don't need to do that anymore.
We had a lot of debates in beta testing about image quality -- text actually seems to be a tiny bit fuzzier in 1.1, but graphical rendering of the world with identical settings is nearly identical (specular reflections are not as shiny anymore, either).
-
Having an AoA of 0 maximizes the heating of the nose! Don't do that. Make your AoA 90 degrees, and you will not have the tiniest heating problem. The aerodynamic stresses are negligible -- you don't need to worry about them.
-
Yeah, using the tracking station was the only way to rename debris that did not contain command modules.
-
There is a longstanding bug in the runway colliders that causes the left-side wheels to have slightly more drag than the right-side wheels. This always causes your plane to veer slowly to the left as you roll down the runway.
Your SAS system will try to compensate for this with aerodynamic, gimbal, and steering control inputs. But with your current settings on your wheels, your plane is not stable when rolling.
You need to modify the friction settings on your wheels until the plane is stable when steered during takeoff -- there really is no other solution. Try setting the front wheel friction to .3 or lower, and maybe set the rear wheel friction to .4 to .6. You just have to try some values and see what works -- there are no rules.
-
No, even in 1.0.5 (and 1.0.4) they massed exactly the same. The cake is a lie.
-
19 minutes ago, Victor3 said:
Is there a way to have a ship maintain an SAS setting when leaving it to control the approaching ship?
No. If a ship has SAS turned on and you switch away from it, it will always revert to "stability" mode only. Only the currently active ship can have any other SAS mode selected.
-
Do you want to drive over the bumps, too? If you are just hankering for the looks of it, you could hyperedit everything you launch over onto the "old runway" on the island.
-
Huh. On the status window after the explosion, is it saying that "the linkage between part X and part Y failed", when part X and part Y are not connected to each other? Is this a big rocket?
-
Quote
my last couple of attempts to make a 100% stock SSTO only made orbit with a little over 1000dV remaining, which isn't enough is it? The designs were all quite different yet yielded very similar results , which made me feel there was a "glass cieling".
Mine is a little tricky to get to orbit, but I don't have KER currently so I can't give you an LKO dV readout. If you want to try flying it you are welcome to see what it can do. I can give a (fairly) short list of launch instructions. I can either post the craft file here or email it to you.
-
1 hour ago, AeroGav said:
whether it's possible to truly single stage to minmus without abusing clipping, dropping any external tanks or booster engines, or use mods to overcome the ludicrous drag the game now assigns to struts and fuel ducts has yet to be proven.
Really?? I find going to minmus and back to be very simple with a stock ssto and no cheats. What kind of proof do you want?
-
5 minutes ago, Edax said:
But is that a strut that's failing? I removed all struts attached to the nose cones, but I still get a "linkage" failure between two parts that aren't even near each other, with nothing connecting the two.
That's the thing -- a linkage between two distant parts sounds like a strut to me. So it sounds like you've got invisible struts. *shrugs*
So is it a problem with the craft file being incorrectly ported to a new version? Is a mod making invisible struts? Are you running KJR?
Have you tried taking the ship apart and putting it together again?
-
I still think that we should be warned just before doing an EVA, if the resulting suit temperature will kill the kerbal. I've never tried to make it happen, but I've done what the OP did, and did an EVA from a capsule just after reentry -- and had an instant red heat bar on Jeb. Scared me silly! But I can easily land a pod that's glowing red and try to EVA from it and see what happens.
-
Well, it's certainly pretty -- but I'm thinking you have too much airbreathing engine, too much wing, you need nice canards, you should get rid of the ailerons, and there has been a bug with those fuel ducts and struts creating an insane amount of drag.
(And I'd get rid of most of those RCS ports -- one vernor should be enough.)
Oh, and you should move the front wheel back past the nose section -- and maybe even cheat a little and clip it into the fuselage a bit to reduce its drag.
-
The destruction itself is, I'm sure. But a strut doesn't just fail for no reason. So there is either internal stress from a clipped part, or aerodynamic stress that will show up in the form of pieces of the craft starting to wobble. So any wobbling that shows up just before the explosion is interesting. But we beta testers were in fact seeing non-part mods causing in-flight issues. So don't rule them out completely.
-
I've had that happen to me also. Except it was a little worse, as the brakes were invisibly engaged -- the symbol for the brakes action group was not lit. After an hour of frustration and trying things, I tried toggling the brakes and that suddenly freed up the rover wheels.
-
Well, I can say for certain that the "parts missing after reverting to launch" thing is a new bug that I've never heard of before (and I keep close track of the bugtracker).
You do have one mod loaded (at least) -- and you really have no choice but to also try removing all the mods and launching the rocket again to look for differences.
One other thing I can say is that I know it is possible to slow down time. I'm not exactly sure how to do it, but I saw it done once on youtube. So you may want to figure out that trick, go 50 seconds into your launch, and slow down time so you can maybe see better. It's not an answer, of course, but we all need more info here.
-
Hmmm. And it still gives you that same status report when it explodes, after removing the struts from the nosecones?
-
It is always the same linkage that fails? If so, try adding a strut. Or remove the girder.
-
Funny that nobody is mentioning the resizable and movable navball? Very nice!
4 hours ago, RocketBlam said:ETA: Except... the plane still veers out of control when taking off, for no apparent reason.
If you want to email me your .craft file (bewing0 at gmail) -- I'll take a shot at figuring out the reason. There are many honest reasons for a jet to veer, that are not bugs. My planes are working very nicely. Rebuilding some planes from scratch actually seems to make a difference, too.
-
Are you using any mods? It looks like this is regarding a Mystery Goo instrument?
If you right click on the Mystery Goo, is there a Collect Data button? If you click that, does a new window pop up? Is there a "Remove Data" button for you to click?
The warning message on that window is not about problems collecting the data. It involves resetting the instrument to take another measurement afterwards.
Can i run KSP?
in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
Posted
Even if your GPU can still run it, 1.1.2 uses more RAM than 1.0.5 did. With only 2G, you'd need a massive amount of virtual memory.