Jump to content

wolfedg

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    207

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by wolfedg

    Devnote Tuesday: Optimistic Goals

    in KSP1 The Daily Kerbal

    Posted

    I think 1.0.5 may hold out long enough for me to make it to the next patch. Take your time :)
    I know I've said it before, but even when I first started playing this game in 0.18 (i think) it was like a complete game to me, so anything new is just a bonus. Not that I don't look forward to the upgrades though. Keep up the good work.

    What happened to the SPACE in KSP?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    It may be just me but it seems this argument comes up in some form no matter what they do. If they focus on spaceplane parts then the rocket crowd gets upset, if they focus on rocket parts the space plane crowd get upset etc. I've been around here long enough to realize that they generally rotate the types of patches each time. One patch you might get new rocket parts, another focuses on aerodynamics, another focuses on spaceplane parts, another focuses on unfinished IVAs, another focuses on optimizations, ...ui, ...tech trees, ...space center buildings and grounds, planets, navigation ui, ...etc... Of course sometimes some of these are mixed into one patch, but there are only so many things they want to put into a single patch project.

    Nothing to worry about. Sooner or later they will get around to what you want upgraded.

    My First Rover atempt

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    In my opinion the issue with rovers is directly related to the low detail scenery. Without fine details like grass and surface features, it is very hard to get an accurate representation of speed to the player. Furthermore this also makes for a very boring locale in any one place that once you've landed you've really seen everything in the local area. This is why I think that after they get down with the unity upgrade they should focus more on surface details and giving us places to actually visit and stay a while.

    Angled engines

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted · Edited by wolfedg

    You may also want to consider alternative rover delivery methods. Most of my rovers have used this type of landing. (This was my first rover MK_I and was admittedly unstable, but the delivery method lived on in my other rover designs since.

    MK-1

    screenshot10.png

    screenshot11.png

    MK-2 (Notice the landing leg on the nose that was used to cushion the topple after landing)

    screenshot49.png

    screenshot50.png

    screenshot55.png

    MK-3 (This was by far my most used rover in the early days even though it suffered from unavoidable symmetry issues that made it a little difficult to drive, nevertheless better than its predecessors)

    screenshot154.png

    screenshot86.png

    screenshot73.png

    screenshot219.png

    My experimental All-In-One moonbase with attached (and very unstable) rover.

    screenshot60.png

    screenshot61.png

    screenshot64.png

    Another possible delivery method to atmospheric worlds (though I only employed it on kerbin)

    screenshot187.png

    The strange looking vehicle to the far right was a refueling station that had been dropped in form orbit.

    screenshot202.png

    Please forgive the age of these screenshots as lately I havent really done many rover missions. I am hoping and waiting for a complete rework of the rover driving system as it is very problematic making it too easy to get going too fast or topple your rover unintentionally.

    Interplanetary Transfers - They take years?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    But it's inefficient, afaik it's best to do the whole burn to your target in one go dv wise. I usually do it from LKO using MJ as it has a brilliant, colourful porkchop plot which lets you decide when you want to start the burn, when you want to arrive and the dv required to do so. Probably the best feature MJ has.

    That works fine if you are using mods, but it is (for me) extremely difficult to plot an interplanetary transfer from within kerbin's soi.

    Interplanetary Transfers - They take years?

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    Yes, "good" transfer orbits rely on a specific alignment of the planets, and take significant fractions of a full orbit to complete. Fortunately, it's possible to cheat - if you have more than the bare minimum amount of delta-V, you can take a less optimal path to Duna without waiting as long for a transfer window or taking as long to get there.

    I never bother with launch windows, they are too much trouble. I just put my craft barely on the appropriate (inward/outward) Kerbin escape trajectory and then make my maneuver node for the transfer once I'm out of Kerbin's SOI. It usually means a bit of a wait for the transfer but it works.

    Crazy gimabling [bug?]

    in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)

    Posted · Edited by wolfedg

    There is more gimbal now, this is deliberate, as more control authority is required due to the aero changes, gimbal range is tweakable though.

    SAS is known to be poorly tuned, and should be fixed for 1.1

    Ah ok that sounds good. Now i'll have to check out how to tweak gimbal range. Thanks for the help :) SAS has come along ways from when I started and you had to set/unset it every time you wanted to change AoA.

    Note to MODERATOR: Since it is a known issue and a fix is in work you may tag this as resolved.

    Crazy gimabling [bug?]

    in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)

    Posted · Edited by wolfedg
    Explained/Semi-resolved

    I launched a very basic orbiter (flt200, lv909, small rcs tank, rcs thrusters over the cm, 1x6 solar array x2,and a pod/parachute)yesterday and i noticed if i put SAS on their was extreme fighting b/w the engine gimbal(even with the engine off), rcs, and pod torque. Disabling 2 of the aforementioned did stabilize it but I would hope this is not an intended (feature).

    The K-15 [Stock 1.0]

    in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange

    Posted

    Bump for final update

    - - - Updated - - -

    No problem!

    Ok.

    The cockpit looks perfect- can't get much better than that! As a bonus, you get a pilot and a WSO!

    The nosecone should be angled downwards.

    The intakes should be moved forwards.

    Personal preference- I'd offset the gears a bit into the fuselage.

    Vertical stabilizers are to the outside of the engines, not the center.

    The wings are the hardest part here:

    I would use at least 3 parts for the wings, they are broken up into 3 shapes. Here is a helpful (simplified) link to the wing shape, and this is the full drawing.

    I updated what I could. I had to change the nose back because it was messing with the aerodynamics. The wing project was turning into a horribad clippy mess so i just stuck with what i had. If you want to work on it just pm me and I can E-mail the craft to you. That goes for anyone else that wants to work on it as well and you can share your changes in this thread.

    The K-15 [Stock 1.0]

    in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange

    Posted

    Nice job! Could use some aesthetic tweaks, but I like it. +Rep!

    Comments:

    Cockpit- try using the Mk 1-2 cockpit in tandem: one facing forwards, one facing back. It'll also allow you to make a slightly better nosecone.

    Intakes- The top of the intakes is about even with the middle of the cockpit.

    Wings- Missing the curve at the back, but it's really really hard to do. Also, there are strakes between the intakes and the main wing.

    Engines- Should be a little closer together. In the drawings I've seen they are slightly angled towards each other.

    The above criticism was meant to be constructive and was in no was in no way a comment upon your plane-building skills. Sorry in advance if I was too blunt.

    Thanks :) It is somewhat a work in progress. I was struggling with the engines the spacing makes it look closer to an F-14 but not a big deal to me. Another problem is that the center fuselage on the F-15 is more oval shaped and the sides down from the intakes are flat (unless it has conformal fuel tanks like the E model). There really is only so much you can do with stock parts, but I personally like the way it turned out, and its flight performance is the best of any of my aircraft after the update to aero. Very easy to fly and land.

    The K-15 [Stock 1.0]

    in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange

    Posted · Edited by wolfedg
    Video found

    It had to be done. With the addition of the new intakes and the new air brakes that both look surprisingly familiar, the ability to make flaps, and the fact that it is my favorite aircraft that I have even been blessed to have worked on IRL, I made an F.. um i mean K-15.

    http://s1075.photobucket.com/albums/w424/wolfedg/2015-04-28_00006.jpg

    http://s1075.photobucket.com/albums/w424/wolfedg/2015-04-28_00007.jpg

    http://s1075.photobucket.com/albums/w424/wolfedg/2015-04-28_00010.jpg

    Its not a perfect replica and I had some debate over which mk-1 cockpit to use which ended up being the one I thought looked best, but it does fly and it flies well.

    EDIT: Design updated(Final Version)

    2015-04-29_00002.jpg

    2015-04-29_00006.jpg

    2015-04-29_00001.jpg

    Download (Be sure to assign the flaps to your action group of choice and remove any axis from them.)

    EDIT 2: Update (See it in action!) Very special thanks to DevildogGamer and props +

    why do you have to be so negative

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    Most of the people who like the changes are probably playing the game right now so theres a disproportion of people on who are complaining at the moment. This happens with most every game release nothing to see here really. Change can be hard, but it is often needed. A lot of the complaints I see are ones that are easily resolved by just revering back to your previous version of choice.

    I for one am enjoying the changes but do agree that they are going to make me relearn a lot of stuff. A lot of the changes that are causing me trouble are ones that make the game more realistic so thats a good thing in my opinion.

    Nay-sayers, unite!

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    Not to say I don't greatly enjoy many of the changes since, but as far as I'm concerned they could have called the 0.18 release (when I first found out about the game) 1.0 and I would've been none the wiser. To me it has always felt just as polished as most other games out there and it has only been getting better.

×
×
  • Create New...