Jump to content

DStaal

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,001

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by DStaal

  1. DStaal
    That's in the air - you're looking at the outer edges of secondary heating. Realism I'd actually expect the plume to be nearly invisible - it'd be glowing in ultraviolet and possibly X-ray, but not in the visible spectrum. The red just looks wrong to me, now that I've trained myself to think of colors and heat. It looks way to weak.
  2. DStaal
    Looking good - my one comment is that I'd expect the exhaust plume to be hotter. Not the cool red glow of chemical rockets - I'd expect it to be glowing in the blue and ultraviolet range. Maybe cooling towards red near the outer edges of the plume.
  3. DStaal
    If it's for your own use, take a look at what this mod can do for you: You could also take a look at CCK, but that's more for the modmaker.
  4. DStaal
    You need to *park* your rover before telling it where to go.
  5. DStaal
    I actually did test this once upon a time - it appeared to work, though I didn't do too much testing.
  6. DStaal
    They'll add the same amount of carry weight in the ground or space. The different parts have both different carry weights they can add, and different ranges they can help with. The crane, for instance, adds 6 tons lifting, but can help with 16 meters. The magnet helps with 10 tons, but only reaches to 10 meters. The forklift can help carry 22 tons - but only reaches 6 meters. Multiple parts will stack effect (just like multiple Kerbals will stack effect), but they all have to be in range. And note that's the range from the *center* of the part - A 5m container is more than 6 meters from the end to the center, so a crane at it's endcap can't help you, though the same crane next to the side probably could. This tends to impose a limit to how big a part that you can move around usefully. (Similarly, using it in space requires all the parts to stay close together while you're working. Not always the easiest thing to manage.)
  7. DStaal
    Hmm. I was just thinking of doing something similar - I'm getting a fair amount of junk in Minmus/Mun orbit as the result of transfer stages, and was planning on building a reusable tug - with the first real use being to haul parts of a space station into Minmus orbit. That said, with a bit of planning I don't think I'm likely to need two tugs because of ports - it's more likely I'll want two or more because of transit times.
  8. DStaal
    I was waiting to give a response until I had time to do a proper in-depth response, but it's looking like that will be next year, so... For the visual glitches, I'm guessing that's because we swap out which module does the extending so we can use some USI mechanics. This may be something we want to switch back - it might be worth talking to Nils on whether getting resources to expand can be a thing using his plugin. As for the other USI-LS questions - my main response is to go back through this thread. We had some discussions on pretty much every part, as well as some overall philosophy. You can see most of our thoughts, ideas, what we chose/rejected and why. There is a little discussion in GitHub issues on specific parts, but most of it was here.
  9. DStaal
    What tool are you using to do the attachment?
  10. DStaal
    On the whole 'Kontainer Docking' issue: Coyote Space Systems' pack has a dock specifically designed for Kontainers.
  11. DStaal
    Does it show that when expanded? And does it only show that when this pack is installed? Non-expanded that could be considered normal. Also, I'm actually all for just pulling the science lab out of the Central Hub when we do this. The hub needs more of an overhaul with this pack than most parts, and I get the feeling it's just got the lab because in base KSP it should be *something* other than just a command pod. With MKS mechanics there's plenty else for it to be.
  12. DStaal
    While most of my testing was done with PF fairings, I should mention final diagnosis for me was a ship without any fairings at all. My thought for what might be happening was that somehow emissives might be getting marked as colliding - the part that 'collided' in my final test ship was a 'pushotron' - a small surface-mount separatron-like solid rocket, that was pointing towards the main body of the ship. (And was there purely to keep the radial stages from colliding with the central ship on separation.) It has very minimal protrusion, and had plenty of space - but it's *exhaust* would impact the ship.
  13. DStaal
    We actually spent quite a bit of time and have what we believe to be two good balance sets for USI-LS - the one we submitted to KPBS as the 'standard' and the one integrated into this pack. (Which uses some MKS-specific features to expand options.) We even have a decent rough outline for further MKS support. You can see current issues tracking this and a rough idea of current status here: https://github.com/DanStaal/KPBStoMKS/projects/2 General thoughts are to have a bit more emphasis on the 'efficiency' mechanic than standard MKS - basically to have a paired set of parts, one manned and one automated for each of the two general stages of resource extraction/processing, and try to balance them so that you typically want to build both as a pair. The Central Hub should rarely be useful on it's own - even just as hab space. However, it should offer good bonuses across the board to *other* parts, so that you'll want one on any decent sized base. (It gets lots of multipliers and efficiency modes - but not much in the way of direct modes.) (BTW: in one of your deleted posts (I get them via email) you mentioned changing the science multiplier. I *hate* that: It's 'invisible' in-game, and is therefore just confusing to the user. As far as I'm concerned *all* labs should have the same multiplier, unless and until the UI changes to include that data.) I'll try to take a look at your spreadsheet in a bit. We had some extensive thoughts, and and I know I didn't always translate them to the configs I've got in-progress completely.
  14. DStaal
    Not transferable, but an engineer (or appropriate sub-class) in a workshop will automatically 'preform maintenance' to transfer it where needed. Or an engineer on EVA can transfer it by preforming maintenance on the part that needs it.
  15. DStaal
    Honestly, I wasn't expecting support for it - typically mods are supported for the most recent version of KSP, and this isn't. I just wanted to report that while it may appear to work (game loads, you can do anything you want), it didn't seem to actually work (it caused rockets to fail). I may try for logs, but I suspect there won't be much in them - the explosions were all 'normal' explosions based on colliding parts - even though without that mod the parts didn't collide, even in the same rocket using the same profile.
  16. DStaal
    Well, 'works' appears to be going a bit far in my opinion... The game loads, no exceptions, etc. Until I try to stage a rocket, at which point the ship explodes. Textures Unlimited being the culprit - remove it and no explosions.
  17. DStaal
    More directly for you, you should probably be looking at how to write an MM patch to add them to USI Kontainers or whatever parts you want to add them to. Adding them to CRP just means that they are a 'community resource' and that multiple mods are likely to be using the same resource. It doesn't automatically add the ability to carry them to any parts.
  18. DStaal
    Per bay, at base colonization rate, with no efficiency parts, IIRC.
  19. DStaal
    BTW: I wrote the KIS patch for Konstruction. If you have any questions, I'd be glad to help. In some ways it's a bit of a hack - KIS just views Kerbals as a part which happens to have a ModuleKISPickup module on it. So if you add that module, they act as another Kerbal, and Kerbals can help each other carry things... (And only Engineers can carry tools to attach things, so you don't need to worry about that.)
  20. DStaal
    As a quick question: Is your main engine part of your current stage? If the launch stage is just the two side boosters, not having LF/OX shown for that stage makes sense - there isn't any LF/OX in that stage, just solid fuel.
  21. DStaal
    The default state of the kontainers for planetary logistics was changed fairly recently from 'enabled' to 'disabled' - this prevents problems where you launch a full container, and the moment it hits the launchpad it empties itself into PL. Just get the container in place and click the button in the action menu to enable it.
  22. DStaal
    Then I don't know what's going on. Thanks for thinking about it anyway.
  23. DStaal
    Given this is the case, can I ask you to change the KSP-AVC file to mention that? (I believe that's possible.) Currently KSP-AVC will suggest you upgrade to 3.5.0 when you're in KSP 1.3.
  24. DStaal
    Yep, that's the correct forum. As Mandella said, the part is the XT-LB 'LCRAB' - the main focus for the mod has always been it's own engines, and the box was a later addition, but it looks like it's just a few lines of code: MODULE { name = LandertronBox electricRate = 0.05 stagingEnabled = true } I know I've used the box within the past few days for a similar use as Mandella: Giving a slightly heavy capsule a bit softer landing. (Come to think of it - the capsule I'm using it on is a MK1-2 pod on top of a modular pod extensions hab and areospike/heatshield - end result being very close to your new pod...)
  25. DStaal
    It's a simple little mod: You attach a part with the controller (either a stand-alone box, or some specialty engines), and on your descent arm the controller. It will automatically perform a 'suicide burn' just before impact to enable a gentle landing. Horizontal speed is not taken into account, and you have to be pointed the right way on your own - all it does is fire the engines at the appropriate time. (It does have a mode for planes as well - upon touchdown it'll fire to arrest forward velocity.) I was thinking if you put the controller in the capsule, it could be armed from there and then the last step in your landing procedure can be automated. It's fairly small, but a neat touch I think.
×
×
  • Create New...