Jump to content

Daniel Prates

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,261

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Daniel Prates

  1. Daniel Prates
    Wonderful. This adds the IVA only, right? One still must have the actual part loades from the original mod, correct?
  2. Daniel Prates
    I am kinda guessing this applies to 1.2.2 as the fundamentals are the same, right?
  3. Daniel Prates
    Great new adition, @linuxgurugamer It can be used to take proper pictures, like with the telescopes of Tarsier, or it only provides an science experiment?
  4. Daniel Prates
    I too think this is the way to go, in order to produce a lot of cockpit choices. Radial cockpits, which you simply put over fuselages or fuel tanks. Much of the pilot remains hidden inside the fuselage anyway, with only the glazing protuding above the fuselage line. The STRIKER mod has three of those parts, one looking like a bf-109, which I am assuming was much easier to do part than a full-fuselage part. What the game needs is some more optional bubbles, windows and turrets, just for the cosmetics of it. Many 1940s planes could be emulated if such parts were available, even if they did not have the crew capacity. Think, for instance, if you razorback had an alternative 'glazed' looks to it, specially the drop-looking ones. You know those dorsal observation windows the PBY Catalina had? If your razorback had a glazed version, they could imitate those somewhat. Same thing goes for turrets and bubbles. We have so many aerodinamic nose cones, why not a glazed nose cone, to look like a bombardier station?
  5. Daniel Prates
    Oh ok! Didnt know that! Thanks!
  6. Daniel Prates
    great little plugin! Question: can I 'unselect' with it too? It is a hateful thing to unselect a vessel you just rendezvouzed with, since in orbital view both vessels will appear too close to eachother to allow the mouse cursor do differentiate!
  7. Daniel Prates
    I am experiencing something that has happened to me since the old versions of bda. When I toggle freefall bombs from my weapons manager, after turinng on master arm of course (but selecting no weapon module) a green circle appears to show where they are going to hit. So far so good. The problem is, it only appears when I am under 200 meters of hight. If I climb above that, the aiming circle disapears. So I am wondering: am I doing something wrong, or is this a bug/issue? It would be nice to drop bombs from a high altitude (meaning, above 200 meters!) without guesswork. EDIT: i read elsewhere, in a post by someone having the same issue, that the answer was to toggle the "inside bombay" option for the ordnance, but that doesn't do it for me.
  8. Daniel Prates
    Oh allrighty then! I think it must have been from another mod then.
  9. Daniel Prates
    Hello @pap1723! Tell me something. Some time ago I remember the contracts to contemplate some spaceplane missions - you know, "x-craft" missions like "go over the speed of sound and land on KSC" and the like. Where those cleaned from 'historical progression' or were they a part of a different pack (and I am forgetting that)?
  10. Daniel Prates
    For god's sake, please do so! Though I hold squad in high praise for the gem that is ksp, the truth is that in many respects the game community went far beyond anything they did so far. Just to mention one, i think it is ludicrous that they haven't thought of any life support, whithout which the game simply isnt the same. I am not judging squad, their commercial approach, their desire to please an overall target group or specific game demand etc.. I'm just saying, it would be the end of the world if we started to limit what can be done in the modding community, just to conform to vanilla in any way. Specially because ksp, wonderful a base-game as it is, leaves a lot to be desired in its pure form. Many mods improve it a lot, and some are INDISPENSABLE. Tantares is one such mods.
  11. Daniel Prates
    New version on spacedock!
  12. Daniel Prates
    @pap1723 sorry to drag this on, its on the intention of improving the mod if I can help to. So i noticed that when i launch, the mission requisites will seek any craft in the kerbol system that are able to fulfill the mission parameters. Several at once, for that matter. I also wondered if the "transmit science" has to be "new" science. So what I did was to delete some other craft I had scattered around and launch a brand new one. Also, I used an experiment that had not been done before. That did it! It unstuck the mission.
  13. Daniel Prates
    I apparently did nothing. Just installed the mod and it was that way: cloud cover in craft view, no cloud cover in orbit view. I understand now its an intentional feature. Sorry @Galileo as I was at first using low res, so that wasnt clear and though it was a bug of sorts. With better res it actually looks pretty good. Now that I think of it, youre a genious to have mimicked so well what actually goes on with venus. Good going!
  14. Daniel Prates
    Ok many thanks, I'll check it out!
  15. Daniel Prates
    Yep. Luna 13. I took a shot of the screen should you want an email of it. So it wasnt supposed to exist? Maybe thats the bug right there. The sad thing is, though optional, it is a link in a several missions' chain. Guess i wont be able to complete them.
  16. Daniel Prates
    Mmm ok hehe my mistake I think. Let me check and ill get back!
  17. Daniel Prates
    No, indeed 13.
  18. Daniel Prates
    Luna 13 is also bugged somehow. I did everything and cant complete it. In mission control the requisite "transmit etc" checks complete, but the sub-requisite "transmit:recover" does not. Or do I have to return it, like lunokhod, to perhaps unstuck it?
  19. Daniel Prates
    Though I love that KSP is always in development, and the team has my many thanks and kudos, I love-hate incoming new versions as they always destroy my mod build... this time I am at a loss as to what happened. Maybe it's relevant for the new release so i think I best post it here (and who knows, maybe someone knows what happened). 99% of what I have is CKAN-ned. So I foolishly saw a new BDArmory and installed it. Silly me for not checking first: it was a pre-release (bda) for the pre-release (ksp) so it was not intended to work with the current version. So obviously my game crashed. No big deal so far. I removed it with CKAN, removed the old BDarmory with CKAN, reinstalled current BDa via CKAN... later on I reistalled it manually from elsewhere (github)... But no joy. This is what happened. The currently compatible BDa installed properly. I know it did, since I have old previously saved craft with BDa parts and they loaded just fine. I can even fly them. But the BDA tab (and corresponding parts) disapeared from the VAB parts menu. And from every other tab in the menu. Basically its like I have BDa, since the parts placed in previously saved craft exist allright, but I cannot access BDa's parts anymore for new craft. Also, althoug the craft did load, the BDa parts were kinda 'dead', meaning, I couldn't interact with them by clicking on them, or any other way. Weird! To quote the ending line from the movie "the sand pebbles": what the hell happened!
  20. Daniel Prates
    Well in any case this is a small drop in the middle of an ocean of awesomeness. The mod is great, congratulations on the patience you had making it - not to mention all the research. Btw, I use this mod for ages now. I noticed in more recent versions it got a little lighter (there used to be an unnecessarily high number of missions). You clearly tweaked it down to just the most historically relevant missions. That was a good move. It was boring to have to impact the moon like 10 times until you could finally move along. However you improve this mod in the future, do try to keep it down to the most relevant missions.. imagine the boredom it would be to have to go through, for instance, all the 20 ou 30-something 'corona' missions, half of which were failures ...
  21. Daniel Prates
    Oh I get it. Probably the same thing happens with the dual 'kosmos' automated docking craft, for in that mission a similar thing happens. I understand that it is difficult for contracts to discern from different craft, creating identification problems. However, on those stock 'put a sattelite in orbit' missions, there is a specific provision that it must be a new sattelite, and it works: previous craft already in position to fulfill the contract do not count. That leads me to believe there is some way to force the requisite-fullfilling craft to be brand newly created for the mission. Hence my suggestion: if everything fails, can't you divide the mission in two missions, meant to be picked simultaneously? Hence G7 would be a mission, and G6a would be another, both having its' own demand for a craft, and a docking and safe return goal. Could that work? Don't know if this helps, but most of my impacting missions failed to work because I was warping like crazy through the final moments of the probe. Then I loaded the quicksave I made prior to the catastrophic final descent and went slowly through the mission parameters. I don't quite remember which 'luna' requires you to go through 'less than 10.000' and proceed to 'less than 5000' and then 'less than 500' or so, but it only worked when I allowed myself to remain in those situations for at least a few seconds (of real-life time, that is). Guess it takes the game a brief moment to compute. In practice this meant that my first try, which was to fall head-on from high orbit in a near 90 degrees angle to the surface, didn't allow the game to acknowledge the last requisite as complete, since in the final 500 meters i was coming in 700m/s or so. I had to try again in a more parallel route of descent, regardint the surface. That allowed me to complete the mission. I think this works in every mission or situation, so now I always take into account that remaining in the scenario situation for at least a few seconds is necessary. Wanna another situation where this is important? Think of those "enter the atmosphere of jool" missions. If your craft is not made to last at least a few seconds in there (likely if you do not have any heat insulation and is coming in hot), the mission will probably not compute as acomplished.
  22. Daniel Prates
    @Beale i have noticed that the R7-a-like are supposed to be unable to be started a second time after ignition (like the real life counterpart). It is great, I love it. However you can circunvent that by throtleling down the engine to idle whenever you want! Doesnt that kinda defeats the purpose? Some engines in ksp flame out below "x" percent of thrust, and that results an engine being turned off. Maybe you should implement that somehow. Otherwise its easy to just keep idling on and off the engines. And now for something completelly different: any plans to incorporate some of the "old tantares" craft into new tantares? I miss the vostok-a-like parts!
  23. Daniel Prates
    I think there is something wrong with the nasa "gemini 7 and gemini 6a" mission. I launched only the first craft of the two-craft mission, and it checked 'complete' for both craft simultaneously. So all I had to do was to have the first craft wait the "9 days and then some" and it checked mission acomplished. My last booster stage detached from the mission craft when I was already in full orbit so perhaps it fulfilled the rendezvous requisite? Still, it was not manned by two kerbals as the mission craft was so that shouldnt be possible. I indeed think one craft is able to check both crafts requisites at the same time. Btw @pap1723 many kudos on an excellent mod!!
  24. Daniel Prates
    Regarding this mission builder.... what I would love is to have, in career mode, some way to create my own missions, which would remunerate more as the mission goals got harder. This would set us free from the standard career missions, which are not bad, but are a bit limiting.
  25. Daniel Prates
    I just reached EVE for the first time using this mod, and something startling happened: though I can see the normal Eve's surface features in the orbital view (the explodium sea, the terrain features etc.), in the craft view Eve appears pretty much like real-life venus: a purple, blurred, homogenous thing with no discernible features. Since I wasn't able to land there yet (in this savegame, that is, with the visual enhancements installed), I am trully in doubt whether this is a bug of some sort, of a very clever way to replicate Venus' atmosphere, which is 100% cloudy and does not allow you to see the surface from above. So tell me: is this a bug or if I land there, the usual familiar surface of Eve is there just waiting for me to fly under the clouds?
×
×
  • Create New...