Jump to content

Tyko

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,095

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Tyko

  1. Tyko
    Thanks for the update. Just tried 0.9 an I noted three things that I wasn't sure about: The glow for failed parts is gone, but I can't figure out how to toggle it back on. Currently there's no way that I could figure out to tell a part was broken - there's no glow and the right-click menu doesn't give any details. The new UPFM dialog box is great for giving a ship-wide readout, but it just says "XXX has failed, YY% chance to repair", but doesn't say which XXX failed or provide me any way to identify which XXX. Once I figured out which was broken I tried to repair. EVA'd got close enough to the part to bump it, but the right-click menu didn't offer a repair option. In 0.8 I was able to use a lvl 1 engineer to repair a part. I tried using the same engineer in 0.9 and he didn't get a repair option. Do I need a certain engineer level now? if so, how do I know what level I need? New failure model is confusing me Why do parts that are designed for launches have have longer lifetimes than a part that's intended to go on a 3 year mission? that seems backwards, or maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean? I think it makes sense that lower tech parts have higher failure rates. A lot more Atlas missiles failed than SpaceX rockets because we've gotten better at avoiding issues... Thanks! Also just found out that if I re-load a ship, the UPFM dialog box no longer reports previous failures. Is this expected? (sorry for all the questions, I hope they are helpful)
  2. Tyko
    @Ven, I believe you're working on an update and wanted to share a part idea in case you're looking for suggestions...if not, I'll just keep using my custom config. I really loved the model for the 105-7P engine, but found that it's stats didn't lend itself to that many uses. So, I created a mid-late-game vacuum engine for small ships. I scaled it to 1.25m and with 150Kn of thrust and a 345 vacuum ISP it fits really nice into the tech tree and fills in the gap between the existing 1.25m vacuum engines and the Poodle:
  3. Tyko
    I've finished a few changes to the SSRSS system and want to make them available for others to try out. Here are the changes made by each of 4 configs: SSRSS_Sigma2.5x24Hour_Tyko.cfg - Scales the system to 2.5x (approx 1/4 size of real solar system) to make it more challenging and bring the Delta-V requirements more in alignment with the capabilities of Stock parts - it's much more difficult to SSTO. To use this, replace the SSRSS_Sigma.cfg file in SSRSS/Configs. KSC_Brazil_1x.cfg - relocates the KSC to Northern Brazil. If you want your Kerbals to speak Portuguese and launch with 0.0 inclination, this change is for you KSC_Brazil_Sigma2.5x.cfg does the same move, but is designed to work with the Sigma2.5x config above. Stockalike_Inclinations_Tyko.cfg - builds on @Galileo's changes. His adjusted the planets to stockalike inclinations. Mine also adjusts the moons to be much closer to co-planar with the system by using real world inclinations for them. This replaces Galileo's version. I might change it so that it's just an add-on mod and doesn't require the other to be disabled. I might consider publishing these as an official mod, assuming I got @Galileo and @OhioBob's blessings. The files can be downloaded below: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/v6iw9qvwqs12mgu/AAB7pzxmhQBO4KGxBZvkiuBka?dl=0 By the way, in case you're wondering why I would make the game more challenging by scaling it up, but less challenging with my inclination changes...I did it because I launch all my flights manually and adding an inclination change to almost every launch wasn't interesting for me. Conversely, the 2.5x scaling gives me a chance to build rockets that look and behave a lot more like real historical rockets while still using Stock parts. Any feedback is welcome
  4. Tyko
    This...My bigger ships are built to be launched in parts with mostly dry fuel tanks to save weight. I assemble and fuel them in orbit. This allows me to build much larger ships without having monstrous booster stages.
  5. Tyko
    I support this idea
  6. Tyko
    I actually own the Kerbal Player's Guide, I've read it, and it's really well-done. it's based on KSP 1.2.x which is really close to 1.3 in terms of play. I can't think of anything a newer player would try that's changed with 1.3. The first half of the book teaches you how to play with useful tips and examples. further back in the book it touches on all kinds of detail like writing your own Module Manager config files and a lot more. If you want a structured step by step guide, I'd recommend it.
  7. Tyko
    I want to change the default values for USI-LS in the Settings.cfg file. I tried writing the MM script below as a test, but it didn't change the values for a new game. Is my syntax wrong or do I have to over-write the Settings file in the USI-LS folder to make changes? %LIFE_SUPPORT_SETTINGS:FINAL { %SupplyTime = 172800 // 48 hours before Kerbals are affected by no supplies }
  8. Tyko
    @OhioBob Thanks for your advice the other day on modding this to 2.5x. I spent most of my weekend fooling around with it and I'm positive I've created a franken-system I was annoyed that USI-LS, TWP and KAC were calculating days and years based on a 24 hour clock while my system was running on a 12 hour clock. It threw off launch window dates compared to system dates. It also meant that life support estimates were off by a factor of 2. To fix this I've moved the system back to a 24 hour clock to align with what the mods expect. The only obvious issue was that the Earth's orbit was only half a year long, so I forced the year in Kronometer to a number of seconds equal to 1/2 of a real year. I checked my transit times to Mars and they come out to ~133 days for a Hohmann Transfer according to TWP - I believe this is correct for quarter scale because 2 x 133 days is just under 9 months. My question is - what did I break that I'm not thinking of? Thanks again for your advice, here's my config:
  9. Tyko
    @NathanKell thanks for explaining. I had the misunderstanding that a game day could be adjusted by mods. Playing with scaling SSRSS to 2.5x was the first time I'd actually dug into mucking with time via SigmaDimensions. As I was checking the changes I was making, I noted that USI-LS, TWP and Precise Maneuver were off compared to the day as defined by a rotation of Kerbin/Earth. Going back and checking other solar system setups (Stock w/Sigma 2.5x, GPP w/Sigma 2.5x) I see that this is a consistent problem that I'd just missed before. Maybe I was better off before when I didn't notice
  10. Tyko
    Okay, that makes sense...TWP and Precise Maneuver are also "locked" at 24 hours regardless of the rotation period of Kerbin/Earth... Can you please point me to how I could force the time format to a different length? I couldn't find the relevant code in any of the RSS configs. Thanks!
  11. Tyko
    Is there a way to force USI-LS to use a specific time-scale for number of hours in a day? the default is 6 for stock and looks like RSS has it set at 24. Wondering how to adjust it for other solar system scales. Thx
  12. Tyko
    SSRSS is built off of RSS which would have a 24 hour day. I'm guessing that there's something about RSS that's involved? @NathanKell, is there something in RSS that's forcing USI-LS to use a 24 hour day?
  13. Tyko
    I think I've found a conflict between SSRSS , USILS and Sigma Dimensions. Running the default SSRSS config with @dayLengthMultiplier = 0.333333333333333 days should be ~8 hours long. The USILS Life Support Status screen is calculating based on 24 hours/day. So, USILS will say I have 1 (24 hour) day of supplies, but I actually have 3 (8 hour) days of supplies. Not sure if this is better directed to @RoverDude or @Sigma88?
  14. Tyko
    I'm testing this mod and have a piece of debris in a 125,025m x 87,470m orbit. I've fast forwarded 10 days and orbit hasn't decayed at all. How long does it take?
  15. Tyko
    Glad to help! Just remember to disable the stock SSRSS_Sigma.cfg file. I renamed it to xxx.txt in case I ever wanted it back. EDIT: Just updated the length of day and atmosphere heights to higher degree of accuracy
  16. Tyko
    The settings I've come up with (below) seem to work well for the most part. Earth's terrain was highly exaggerated around KSC, so I used a custom landscape modifier for Earth to smooth things out a bit. I expect that it's off from reality, but it's a lot closer. Not sure how to get it exact without a frame of reference. I also moved the @altitude *= 4.602. This is 1.3x stock SSRSS. I pulled this number from the @OhioBob's original recommendation to increase AtmoTopLayer to 1.3x. Thanks for all the input. Everything in this game is a learning curve and I'm enjoying messing around with planets Here's my config file as it looks now.
  17. Tyko
    Yep that worked...last change I've found so far is I have to update @atmosphere too. looks like 1.3 works Only issue now is the the KSC is partially buried by the terrain and there are hills at both ends of the runway ...getting close!
  18. Tyko
    Tried that...it did really interesting things to Earth's cloud layer...I may stick to 1x. Thanks for the advice though
  19. Tyko
    I'm interested in resizing SSRSS up to 2.5x stock. Roughly quarter-size and I'm aware that there's a quarter-size RSS mod out there. I'd rather build off of @Galileo's work though. Can you point me in the right direction on how I'd go about modding the Sigma config to go this? If I figur it out i'll be happy to share thanks!
  20. Tyko
    Using procedural tanks to round out the crew modules is genius! Thanks
  21. Tyko
    Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. And that one sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, and then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that’s what you’re going to get, Son, the strongest castle in all of England.
  22. Tyko
    Which mod includes the station parts in the bottom pic? Thanks
  23. Tyko
    Cool! Is the current version downloadable anymore? I'd like to take a look at it.
  24. Tyko
    How are the built in handholds on command pods coded? I can't find anything in the part config that seems to control whether or not kerbals will have something to hold onto when they EVA through the hatch.
  25. Tyko
    aiming for a periapsis of between 30K and 35K seems to be a sweet spot for re-entry. low enough to get me into the denser atmosphere quickly, but a shallow enough angle that the craft has time to slow down. Another trick...if you place your de-orbit burn maneuver node over that giant crater on the far side of Kerbin from the KSC it usually drops you pretty close to home on splashdown. I think of that crater as a target and usually place my node in the trailing half of that circle to avoid under-shooting and landing in the mountains outside West of KSC
×
×
  • Create New...