Jump to content

Friznit

Members
  • Posts

    753
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Friznit

  1. 12 hours ago, shakuvendell said:

    Apologies are rare on the web. When I do get them, I take them with much gratitude and cheer!

    Also, as an aficionado of puns, I appreciate the "apollogies" on a mod currently developing Apollo related content. The well placed surplus "L" gave me a giggle!

    In other words, it's all good!

    Both are two-man (Two-Kerbal?) Stations, so that sounds like a good fix. Also sounds like I'm playing some KSP today. Someone's gotta test it! :D

     

    Another question - How is Friznit getting those blueprint-style images for the Wiki when Kronal Vessel Viewer has been dead for a while?

     

    11 hours ago, RocketBoy1641 said:

    Inquiring minds *DO* want to know.... how the heck does he get them that nice.  I guessed that he was just doing section by section in the VAB with a chromakey of some sort; but it would be interesting to know the 'behind the scenes...

    Share my trade secrets?  Never!

    But yes, its just a bunch of KVV images and judicious use of the offset tool.  KVV works fine in the latest version of KSP, although it doesn't like module depth mask so the images sometimes need a little touching up in paint.net to fill in resulting blank spots.

  2. 14 hours ago, Noname115 said:

    I need some serious help with a ghosting texture problem on 2.5x KSRSS. For some reason, whenever my craft is near a body, the ground textures seem to overlap. I have removed multiple mods that I suspected may be the culprit, but I have had absolutely no luck in deciphering the cause. KSRSS should be installed correctly, and I do not have any mods that conflict with KSRSS to my knowledge. If anyone has ever had a similar issue to this, or has any kind of solution, that would be greatly appreciated, as this issue is driving me insane. 

    Here are images of the issue at hand as well as my current GameData list: https://imgur.com/a/FYS2aAy
    And here is the Player log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/og6vxqvrvj3pyj2/Player.log?dl=0

    Edit: I have found a topic that had a similar problem with GPP, and the solution was to turn off the Temporal AA in Scatterer while at the Space Center. If anyone comes here with this issue, all you have to do is load into the KSC, then open the Scatterer menu from the bottom right, then navigate to the "Customize Settings" tab, then under 'Scattering', un-tick the box that says "Temporal Antialiasing". I was able to test this multiple times and can confirm the ghosting effect with the ground textures has some kind of issue with that setting. I hope this can help someone who was having the same headache as I was.

    Prime suspect is Outer Wilds Program, given it's another planet pack running alongside KSRSS I'd imagine that might cause a conflict.

  3. 14 minutes ago, Pudgemountain said:

    The Apollo lander Proserpina has docked with Bradbury and once Bradbury gets resupplied it and a crew is launched, Bradbury will be ready for a manned Ceres mission. It's first manned interplanetary mission.

    20220526122323_1_by_pudgemountain_df65m3f-pre.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9NzIwIiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvNWNlZDA4NmItYTUwYy00YjFkLWJmZmItYmRhOWYxOTgyNzVmXC9kZjY1bTNmLTIwMTVmZDYyLTQ4MDctNGVjNC05ODQyLTIwODBjYzc2Y2M1Zi5qcGciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTI4MCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.7GeaBhJouoNGpbutKrmjLFgrI4azNJ2mdSWA5YHYyiM

    I will still either refer the lander as Apollo or Lunar Landers since trying to think of a name for Ceres and other Moons will dwindle my sanity.

     

    Cerebral Lander?

  4. On 5/20/2022 at 5:26 PM, CessnaSkyhawk said:

    Hi everyone - I've got a quick balance question I'd love to hear people's thoughts on.

    I like the concept.  Science labs tend to be a bit of a catch all currently whereas I agree they would benefit from more niche roles.  The Projects lab could have limited slots but support many different experiments that could perhaps only be switched by delivering "new science kit" to the lab.  The kits could be a single part (e.g. science storage capsule with "stuff" in it) or require specific parts attached to the station/base before they become available (e.g. "black hole observatory" experiment needs a telescope fitted) - allthough that might create a painful network of interdependencies to maintain.

    It would be nice to have more progression in the various labs available in BDB (and stock).  For example, early Mercury lab can only do a couple of projects, but not General Studies whilst GMSS labs are more versatile but commensurately more expensive.

  5. It's uncharted territory to some extent.  It's up to us figure out the most efficient method then we'll send it to Bill at NASA so he can correct the docs from the 1960's.  I'm sure he'll appreciate the input.  Otherwise I'll put a guide on the BDB wiki.  Come to think of it, they should be using the wiki build guides anyway, save themselves a fortune on SLS.  Anyway, let me know when you've worked out which is the best approach and I'll write up the winning entry :kiss:

  6. As @Zorgsaid I updated all craft files to use SAF fairings and bumped the version to 1.12.3

    If you have old save games or your own craft files that you'd like to update, you  an find and replace the old part names using a text editor fairly easily.  What I do is make a new ship with the "offending" part in a simple build, look up the name in the craft file then copy, find and replace in my "broken" craft.

     

    With Notepad++ you can find and replace across all open files so you can quickly fix a whole bunch in one go. 

  7. 2 hours ago, GoldForest said:

    Probably not. The 1.11.0 Saturn Apollo update has no release date. Cobalt, Zorg, JSO and Invader are working on the 1.11 update, but IRL takes precedent. I don't expect the 1.11 update for a few months, possibly more, way more. The Saturn Apollo update is one of the most complex, if not the most complex, updates that the BDB team has ever done. 

    What you're probably talking about is the April Fools update, which is a fake update, just a changelog, no actual parts or anything. 

    There's not all that much left on the github To Do list.

  8. 16 hours ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

    Now that the Atlas booster skirt has a module to decouple it at a specified TWR, I updated the Δv maps on the wiki.  Now the Δv is shown as a function of payload mass (including upper stage) and TWR at booster skirt jettison instead of payload mass and propellant burned by sustainer phase.

    The new maps are more straightforward to use. (well, at least they are intended to be)
    Just take your payload mass and desired Δv and find "at what G should I jettison the skirt"

    ZMPn9eG.png


    But they might be a bit more complicated to understand though (see spoiler for why). Some feedback would be nice

      Reveal hidden contents

    The new maps have a clearly defined flight envelope bounded at the top with the full booster scenario with no sustainer phase (skirt stays on until payload separation) and at the bottom with the full sustainer scenario (skirt jettisoned at launch - good luck with that). Booster engines have high thrust and low Isp while sustainer engine has low ~ish~ thrust and high Isp so it is important to know when to jettison the skirt to get the most out of your Atlas rocket.

    This also implies in different regions based on TWR after booster skirt separation, specifically:

    • below 0.5 Gs the rocket might not reach orbit nor be stable in atmospheric flight :0.0:
    • between 0.5 and 0.8 Gs, the rocket is flyable but gravity losses increase quite a bit.
    • between 0.8 and 1G, long sustainer burn but maximum Δv. Great for heavy payloads or high energy launches
    • between 1 and 2Gs you are good to go, you won't loose too much Δv due to the Isp difference
    • above 2Gs you loose quite a bit of Δv because the booster phase is not as efficient as the sustainer phase

     

    Awesome.  Fancy doing one for Saturn S-ID as well? 

    Incidentally, do you want to migrate the page to the Unofficial Wiki?  It's kinda unofficially the official wiki now.

  9. 2 hours ago, CollectingSP said:

    Quick question- I’m seeing DSCS and GPS sats on the wiki.

    are these in the mod yet or are they kitbashed?

    sorry, it’s been a while since I’ve kept up with the development.

    edit- I see these are built with NFE and other parts. My bad.

    And annoyingly I nuked that install before remembering to backup all the craft files, so now I have the great delight of doing them all again, hopefully better this time!

  10. Stuck a Big G on top of SLS?  Horrible but awesome.

    Throwing my opinion out there on post-Saturn revamp projects:  I've just started working on a fairings and interstage guide and if nothing else it would be great to see some of the older interstages & adapters brought up to speed with the recent modelling & config techniques.  There are several parts that I reckon could be rationalised  and simplified using B9 Partswitch, reducing part count and making finding the right bit in a busy part menu a bit more logical.

    As for proliferation of Centaur types - my view based on trying to write simple guides for rocket building is that there's little value in adding different models unless they have a material impact on gameplay.  Many real life variants only changed internals, which aren't modelled in KSP anyway and adding them all just complicates an already confusing evolution of rocket designs

×
×
  • Create New...