Carthaginian
-
Posts
104 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Carthaginian
-
-
About half the solar panels in the game are just decorative.
Are you sure you are using the right ones?
Yep- I used all the ones listed in the opening page and the ones which specifically say 'EPS Solar Panels.'
Only the non-folding kind are functional; not even the folding 'EPS Panels' work.
Am I missing something here?
-
Having trouble getting things to charge... I'm using MechJeb, Powersat and NovaPunch mods.
Even with four panels and the .config file played with a bit, there is zero charging taking place.
Anyone have any clues as to why?
-
Olus this is 0.17 concerns not general concerns.
I know- it's my concern that the Devs find and fix this before the new version comes out.
Others have voiced their concerns, I have voiced mine.
Critique them and thank you... reply no more.
-
Go to the bug report section and fill out the form so the devs can fix it so you no longer have to rage here. Be proactive not reactive.
No offense- there is no crash report.
There is no logfile.
There is nothing to put into the bug report forum.
Last crashfile is from the day after I bought the game in August.
If I had a report, I would have transmitted it.
Barring that, I came with a concern to the area where concerns were supposed to be welcome.
-
Long and frustrating story short:
Mun mission- resupply and expansion of my little Mun base.
New crew touches down, I cut engine (ascent stage separate) and the game freezes up.
I reload the quicksave MULTIPLE times, but the rocket for the descent stage refuses to fire!
Where in the save files can I look to find the necessary line to reinitialize the engine SO I CAN LAND AGAIN, HOPEFULLY WITHOUT THE GAME GOING BELLY UP ON ME AGAIN?
-
[frustrated rant]
How about the rockets simply ceasing to respond when you are trying to operate them?
I had a Mun landing lined up... touched down and the game froze.
NO PROBLEM!!! As a long-time save whore, I have just quicksaved mid-descent!
Boot up the quicksave, start my braking burn and THE ROCKET WILL NOT FIRE!!!!
I reload, same problem.
I reload, go out to the tracking station, re-select the craft (which usually fixes this) and the same thing happens.
I quit the game, reload from scratch, start the quicksave over and IT HAPPENS AGAIN!!!
I'm not worried about seeing any NEW features- I'll settle for having all the features in this version working solidly in the next one? ANY idea why things simply decide to stop working at random intervals? Or where in the save files I can go and turn them back on again?
[/frustrated rant]
-
For those who are planting 'hab modules' do you actually fly them to the target, or do you just send 'supply missions' there with 'building materials' and then transport the finished product there? I've been trying to land several reasonable, somewhat aerodynamically sound designs on the Mun, but can never get them out of atmosphere because the rockets 1.) become mysteriously unstable 2.) can't lift their own weight or 3.) fall apart on the pad/midflight!
Any advice on how to build a heavy-lifter that can get a simple hab module (a single 2x2 module from this mod pack [with necessary 'fixins']: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/showthread.php/6280-0-16-ExPI-Space-Stations-0-4-Interplanetary-Probes-WIP) to the Mun is appreciated.
-
The Shuttle was a good concept- in the role it was meant to perform: SPACE TRUCK.
It was made to carry payloads into Earth orbit and bring them back- not to mention its own, reusable, self.
Unfortunately, it because the focus of the Space Program... because it was reusable.
This 'economy' meant that the 'throwaway' rockets seemed to be a waste if the Shuttle could do something. Rocket design stagnated. Heavy lifters for orbital missions were abandoned- and along with them, the opportunity to use an existing airframe for Lunar missions and beyond. Everything outside Earth orbit would need 'specialized hardware designed from the ground up' and that meant too much money. Politicians balked at the pricetag associated with developing new tech.
The Shuttle was a pyrrhic victory for NASA- a great product that doomed further development with its own success.
-
I kill myself every time that I use RCS.
My problem with this design is when I try to use SCS (currently near the ship's CoG) at a low altitude, instead of steadying me, it flips the ship end over end!!! I'm 10,000m over the Mun with a ship that randomly starts tumbling out of control, and three Kerbanauts screaming their heads off. There isn't any time to correct. This happens whether 'fine' or 'gross' controls engaged, and only occurs above +/-33% thrust.
-
Not working on anything Trek-like... think more like a giant version of the Saturn V's escape tower. Thrust is 'on plane' with the center of gravity- just using radial engines arrayed around the rocket rather than a single engine behind it.
Here's the CRAFT file if anyone would like to give me any advice on how to land her.
[ATTACH]32267[/ATTACH]
-
Ok, I intended to build a ship to drop off a hab base on the Mun.
I put an underslung hab module with top-mounted engines and fuel tanks.
Is this a recipe for a bad-handling ship?
Will post some pics in the morning... maybe the ship file as well.
-
The Voyager probes.
Nothing that man has built has gone so far, taught us so much, or worked so long after the warranty went out.
-
Halfred Kerman lands the first semi-permanent habitation module on the Mun.
Part of a three-stage Mun mission, Halfred will remain on the Mun at Alpha Station awaiting Stage Two- a resupply mission from Kerbal. A second Kerbonaut will then take up station on the Mun, awaiting Stage 3- the final retrieval mission. Alpha Station will remain on the Mun to form the base of operations for a long-term mission... although it retains the ability to return to Kerbal with its caretaker in the event of an emergency.
This one's for you Neil- albeit a bit late.
-
This man is born again hard- like Black Jack Pershing hard.
-
I guess we agree in the final analysis, but for different reasons. Still, it seems a shame.
It is a shame- I'd love to see a series based on a modern space program... but it just isn't something that would sell. The travel time (and related lack of 'television-friendly action') would be the biggest issue for the actual writers- that's why all sci-fi shows make use of some handwavium to get the ship somewhere interesting.
Hopefully, someone at a studio somewhere plays KSP, and is reading this.
-
Well, this is all in fun- and it's not like both sides didn't practice the same thing.
Seriously, there has to be a level of 'professional respect' in the humor; but that doesn't mean that both sides can't enjoy the challenge.
And what kind of challenge is MechJabing anything? MANUALLY FLY THAT ICBM!!!
-
I've had this bug happen to me several times with my landers when switching from map view to main view the engines would fall off.
That would be it then... the capsule would separate, then the engines, and finally everything not held together by a support strut would fall apart.
Killed a perfectly good intercept on my 'Neil Armstrong Tribute' Mun landing.
Oh, well- I'll try it again when I'm off Thursday... that is if Issac is kind when he visits, and leaves me with some electricity.
-
I think part of the problem seems to be that you're accepting it as a given that NCIS is a "realistic" cop show. If so, I think you're setting the bar for "realism" rather low.
Not that there haven't been realistic cop shows. Dragnet was about as real as could be squeezed into an episodic format, and it did well for years, both on the radio and on television.
I will admit that I am taking a loose view of 'realistic'- present day, available technology and equipment, etc.
Dragnet was an anomaly- and, frankly, confusing to those not familiar with police procedure. It's a sad sign of the times that a show today must be dumbed-down to avoid offending the audience, while Webb had an audience that would actually research what the police terminology used on the show meant. Imagine how hard it would be to create a 1 hour show which was as realistic with Dragnet involving space technology in this day and age! Seriously, how much technology would you have to gloss over, how much physics would you have to leave unexplained, and how many technical terms would you leave unexplained? Heck, the show would sound like a sci-fi show if you went full 'Dragnet' with it! People would have to do homework to understand what you were talking about... and in spite of our little community here, most people don't like doing homework for fun (part of the reason boards like this exist is so information can be passed on with a minimum of that kind of research).
And again, for the reasons I cited, I fail to see why those reasons are particular to realistic science fiction. The hurdles are higher, yes, but I do not think them insurmountable.I hardly say the reasons are 'particular' to sci-fi... indeed, I use shows that are not sci-fi to explain them! But, as we both agree, any 'realistic' show dealing with a science-based setting has a far harder time with these issues because there isn't that expected 'suspension of disbelief' buffer that a sci-fi show automatically has. All of the problems that I've pointed out individually might not be insurmountable; but if you package those problems together in a box and tie it off with a big red bow and present it to a panel of network execs, what's inside the box looks like a tough sell.
-
I am NOT using autopilot, people.
I simply have a ship that is breaking apart when I switch back from my map view and want to know has anyone else found this bug.
-
Yeah, so my game has thrown a new bug at me. I have a ship in a highly elliptical orbit for a Mun landing.
I can't get the SAS to turn off (no biggie) so I drop back to the Tracking Station, re-select the flight, and then jump back in.
When I get there, my ship falls apart.
Any suggestions?
-
MiG-15
Will post later today.
It turned out to be a far more manageable design than I could have imagined, and the cruciform tailplanes worked well!
-
I have the same spinning problem, ranging from a mild 'rifling' effect to utter uncontrollably.
I must correct you on the rotary engines: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine#Rotary_engine_controlNone of these are really a 'throttle', the article even says so says so; your options for 'throttle' were to 1.) use a blip switch to kill 'fire' to the cylinder, 2.) choke the cylinder by using a sub-optimal fuel-air mix (to varying degrees), 3.) use a 'selective blip' to kill fire to a set number of cylinders while leaving others running. While the net effect is a form of speed control, none of them are really a 'throttle' in the same sense that can be applied to any other form of internal combustion engine. The most telling comment in the article is that none of the methods are regarded as having been particularly safe or reliable, and that intentionally stalling the engine using fuel/air mixture control was the recommended 'throttle' technique.
Perhaps the most accurate way to say it would be 'a rotary is either firing or not firing'- even if the engine as a whole remains in motion.
-
Lofted, will complete its trip to Mun tomorrow.
-
I believe that SRBs were not used on early manned rockets mainly because of safety reasons. The big one being that they could not be shut down. Trying to abort a launch during ascent with SRBs still going can't end well... imagine being pulled away by the escape tower while the rocket is chasing you under SRB thrust *shudder*
Also note that the Challenger disaster was due to SRB failure.
Obviously, in the Kerbal Space Program, attitudes to safety are a little different.
I know what caused the loss of Challenger- watching the the accident on TV is one of my earliest memories.
That's one of the reasons that I'm so adamant on not using SRB's 'early in the program.' I mean, right now there are no 'automated launches' so everything has to have a Kerbal ride OR a mod present... but a great deal of my program is centered around keeping the pilots alive as long as possible. Most Kerbal players would laugh out loud at the number of parachutes and staging devices on my designs- every rocket has an 'escape stage' which is capable of getting my Kerbal out of harm's way.Improperly cast solid rocket propellant goes *BOOM*.
Improperly maintained solid rocket boosters go *BOOM*.
Solid rocket engines are like rotary aircraft engines- they are either 'all stop' or 'balls out,' you have no throttle control.
Liquid fuels present their own dangers- but they are easier to abort, which is a big issue when you're still learning.
That's one of the reasons that I'm so adamant on not using SRB's 'early in the program.' I mean, right now there are no 'automated launches' so everything has to have a Kerbal ride OR a mod present... but a great deal of my program is centered around keeping the pilots alive as long as possible. Most Kerbal players would laugh out loud at the number of parachutes and staging devices on my designs- every rocket has an 'escape stage' which is capable of getting my Kerbal out of harm's way.
[PLUGIN, PARTS 0.17] Zoxygene (Life Support) mod v0.7.1 (12.09.27)
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
LOL- I'm planning something like that.
I currently have three separate installs: 1.) Pure Stock Install, 2.) RP install (with only the ExPI: Space Stations & Interplanetary Probes mod) and 3.) 'Just For Fun' mod with ExPI, Novapunch, Mechjeb and Zoxygene installed. I'm planning to tear #3 apart this weekend and make test 'installation order' to see how to get the most parts working.
Thanks for the advice guys...