nyrath
-
Posts
604 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by nyrath
-
-
One strange issue, My current ship orion engine has gone dead after loading the game.
Restarting the game does not help, chemial engines work but the two remaining is on the same side.
Only thing odd I did was spawning an service module with orbital construction close to the ship, this module spawned to far away to reach it with rcs, probably the long and non circular orbit created problems, next atempt did not leave launchpad because of some bug but this should not affect the other ship.
argh, that's back again. I've occasionally had ships from saved games ignore the Z and thrust settings for no discernible reasons. I thought it happened when I saved a ship, edited the plug in dll, and reloaded the ship, but now I'm not sure.
-
I'd be willing to offer the alternate textures in my mod package, but of course I'm fond of my own. Or TurboNisu can feel free to release them.
I did give instructions on how to alter the textures in the hope that somebody would alter the textures.
-
This is already a brilliant mod, but since there were files to help in retexturing I couldn't resist. Is it kerbal enough?
http://i1280.photobucket.com/albums/a497/TurboNisu/2013-07-07_00006_zpsa3e90b9f.jpg
http://i1280.photobucket.com/albums/a497/TurboNisu/2013-07-08_00001_zpsa6ed90a0.jpg
Ah, TurboNisu! Those are beautiful! Much more Kerbal than what I had. You did a top-notch job of texturing.
If you have any suggestions on how to improve the retexturing notes, please let me know.
Updates on ol' Project Dunaboom here: http://anton-p-nym.livejournal.com/546267.html (phase 2), http://anton-p-nym.livejournal.com/546907.html (phase 3). TealDeer; uh, you know it's bad when you see Jebediah losing his cool. (Not a problem with the Orion itself, but an undetected error I made laying out struts.)In the spirit of KSP, however, Project DUNABOOM II is already in progress with improved strut layouts. It'll be a stripped-down mission with just one lander, to prove out the main design, but it will proceed.
Still a fascinating read, keeping track of Projevct DUNABOOM. Stuff falling off is such a pain. But your design is still most impressive!
-
OK, I found the problem.
In MonoDevelop, when I imported the files, the project set itself to .Net version 3.5.
When I set the project to .Net version 4.0, everything compiled just fine.
-
So I take it that Visual Studio does not do a check on API function arguments when it does a compile, unlike MonoDevelop?
Just for the record, MonoDevelop complained about the following lines:
Windows.cs, line 67: var texture = Utilities.LoadImage<T>(IOUtils.GetFilePathFor(typeof(T), "resize.png")); No overload for method GetFilePathFor takes 2 arguments
Windows.cs, line 197: windowPos = Utilities.EnsureVisible(windowPos); No overload for method EnsureVisible takes 1 argument
Icon.cs, line 54: var texture = Utilities.LoadImage<T>(IOUtils.GetFilePathFor(typeof(T), imageFilename)); No overload for method GetFilePathFor takes 2 arguments
Utilities.cs, line 95: if (File.Exists<T>(filename)) No overload for method Exists takes 1 argument
Utilities.cs, line 97: var bytes = File.ReadAllBytes<T>(filename); No overload for method for ReadAllBytes takes 1 argument
I must be doing something wrong, MechJeb calls IOUtils.GetFilePathFor() with two arguments, just like your code does. Offhand I'd say that MonoDevelop is being overly fussy about default parameters, meaning it is not allowing any.
I'll figure it out.
-
Thanks Markarian421, I'll see if I can track down the bug
-
Hmm, you may well not be doing anything wrong - that bit of code isn't really needed anyway, it just allows you to assign a texture to the resize button.
I commented out those two lines and replaced it with
resizeContent = new GUIContent("R", "Drag to resize the window.");Does that compile for you?
Yes it does, thank you!
-
Stupid newbie here, with a stupid newbie question. Please have pity on me.
I'm trying to compile this with the version of MonoDevelop that came with Unity3D, using Assembly-CSharp.dll and UnityEngine.dll from KSP 0.20. I'm getting about five compile errors, all seem to be related.
Example: file Windows.cs, line 67
var texture = Utilities.LoadImage<T>(IOUtils.GetFilePathFor(typeof(T), "resize.png"));
error No overload for method 'GetFilePathFor' takes 2 arguments.
Using contextual help it appears to be expecting GetFilePathFor(Type T, string file, Vessel flight);
which means the "flight" parameter is missing.
What am I doing wrong?
-
I'm going to frantically do testing to see if 0.21 broke the mod I wrote. Before my mod-users start yelling at me.
-
Beyond things that KSP models, I have to wonder what the effects might be of putting your payload "downwind" of your propulsion. This sounds like it would have less-than-ideal results, especially in the case of nuclear thrusters.
It is possible to mount your thrusters so instead of firing their exhaust directly backwards into the payload, you instead have three or four thrusters firing at an angle away from directly backwards. The vector sum of the thrusts is still forwards.
The good news is that can prevent the possibly radioactive exhaust plume from hitting the payload. The bad news is that the effective thrust is reduces by the cosine of the angle off from backwards. So for example, if they were firing 30 degrees away, the effective thrust would be about 87%.
Having said that, a solid core nuclear thermal rocket like the Kerbal nuclear engine has a non-radioactive exhaust. Unless the engine is undergoing a nuclear melt-down or something catastrophic like that.
See "Helios"
http://io9.com/5928996/the-50+year-history-of-nasas-revolutionary-sky-crane
-
I've made a mod using Blender and Unity 3D. I did NOT make a collider in Blender. I dragged my Blender mesh into the assets folder, and assigned it to a new Empty game object.
You click on the Blender file in the assets folder and look in the "Inspector" tab in the upper right. Ensure that the "Generate Colliders" check box has a check, and click the Apply button. This means you don't need to have a collider in your Blender file, Unity will make them for you.
Then you click on the Empty object in the project window to open it up, and systematically select each mesh item. In the Inspector tab, be sure that the Mesh Collider section has the "Convex" checkbox checked. I've heard tell that if you fail to check the Convex box, your parts will fall through the floor.
More details on what I do available upon request.
-
Time for some real missions.
This ship is on an 28 day trip to Jool, cargo is 800 ton of spare parts for orbital construction crew is 18 ketbals.
I lost one of the chemical engines, think the problem is that they has to be strapped both ways, both to be pulled by the orion and pushing the ship.
four mainsails is a bit overkill but gave me the option to land the ship then it started to become empty.
That's one serious mission. And you have a mean stack of nuclear magazines if I'm any judge.
-
I'm gonna analyze what's wrong with this post:
Alas, it would appear that Poe's Law strikes again.
-
Peter de Selding said:
Fast-shrinking Ariane 6: Once 8,000kg to GTO, then 7,000, newly decided design tops out at 6,500 kg to keep EUR 70M per-launch cost target.
Rodolphe D'Inca explained it this way:
They had to design the launcher with three constraints: low price by mission, low development cost and equal share among all important european companies.
The result is a downsized rocket using existing technologies. I bet that the boosters are coming from Vega or from ballistic missiles (probably the second case given their length and diameter). No more Vulcain engine (which is a pity because it is a nice piece of engineering) and a Vinci due to the lobbying from Safran.
I am not sure that the development will be easy: taking existing components and putting them together in a configuration they are not made for is utterly complicated. But we will see.
-
Ogre
WarpWar
Triplanetary
Homeworlds
-
i really think the issue isnt engines, its power. more power, more thrust from your engines. if you can provide a steady 200kw, vasimr gives you 5n. mpd thrusters are nice too, and they get you in the tens to hundreds of newton range (at the expense of thousands of kilowatts). there are a dozen high performance engines that would work if we had the power. a 1MW nuclear reactor would allow for some seriously powerful super efficient ion engines. the need to use solar power is why ion engines are so damn slow.
Ummm, you are aware that these engines have to work with CubeStats, are you not?
This means the engine has to fit inside a couple of 10 centimeter cubes, and run off four solar cell arrays that are each 10 cm x 30 cm.
You are not going to fit a VASIMR into that small a box.
-
I read that NASA JPL is working on new ion engines for the asteroid capture mission. In theory the asteroid tractor probe which will bring it to lunar orbit will be propelled by these engines. Interesting is that they, according to the animations and news, want to catch an asteroid about two times bigger than the Orion module. They are in testing phase now but I'm curious if they are going to be powerful enough to bring down a space rock.
Well, typically a gravity tractor used to divert an asteroid is going to be hovering above the asteroid on ion drive for about ten years. It does not have to be powerful, it just has to be persistent.
-
Any real-world electric propulsion system makes the kerbal ion engine look like a ferrari. Many ion engines operate in the range of millinewtons, so 20 from something that small is pretty damn good.
Yes indeed!
On another forum somebody was expressing disappointment with the performance of the Kerbal ion engine. He pointed out the CubeSat CAT engine and said that looked more like what they were looking for.
I tried to gently pop his bubble with hard reality...
-
http://www.space.com/21867-cubesat-deep-space-propulsion-kickstarter.html
On the surface the CAT thruster looked pretty good. Then I went to the kickstarter to get some real figures.
Alas, the CAT thruster on the CubeSat is so pathetically weak it makes the Kerbal ion engine look like a Ferrari.
The Kerbal ion engine has a thrust of 0.5 kN and an Isp of 4,200.
The CAT thruster has a thrust of 0.00002 kN and an Isp of 2,000.
The main thing the CAT has going for it is a much lower power consumption and a lower mass. All it needs is about 20 watts, which is easily achievable by a small solar cell array.
-
Main problem might be to differentiate between the two docked ships, in the game they are treated like one but have no idea how they are handled in scripts. .
I'm pretty sure that all parts are leaves on a tree data structure, with the roots being a command unit. So the magazines would be grouped according to which command unit was their root. In this case a docked ship would be an assemblage of parts with at least 2 command units.
Your other ideas for testing docking are good, I'll try them out, thanks!
What I propose, in short; is this: you only have one resource,the different magazines will then hold different loads of the resource (the higher capacity the more weight)
Thank you, that was a nice brain storming idea. I was toying with something similar, where a Blutonium-236 resource would be transformed into bomb units of the same type as the magazine. But the basic problem is that an infinitely dividable fluid resource does not work well with discrete bomb units. They just do not play well with each other.
-
At the risk of spamming, here's a link to my overly-wordy write up of the first phase of Project DUNABOOM, Big Stan's voyage to Duna. http://anton-p-nym.livejournal.com/544267.html
As a teaser, and because it's so pretty, here's a picture of Big Stan circularising her orbit.
As I noted in my blog, this is about as close as I'm going to get to being Chesley Bonestell.
No, that is not spam at all, I love it! And that is a remarkably dramatic image of the Orion, most impressive! As is your commentary in your blog.
-
{ Marvin the Martian voice } De-lays, de-lays!
Using a menu to transfer looks do-able, and I'm proceeding along those lines.
Then it dawns on me that in order to test the transfer of pulse units between docked vessels, I need two vessels that are docked. Which means I have to quickly learn how to dock two vessels. I'm probably going to cheat just this once and install MechJeb.
Then there is the slight matter of the nuclear charges destroying everything within a quarter of a kilometer (including the ship you are trying to dock to). So I strapped on some fuel tanks with chemical motors. It wasn't until I started circularizing my orbit that I noticed the strap on rockets were missing. Apparently the Orion's accelerating stripped them off slicker than scum on a Louisiana swamp. I'll fiddle with the design just a wee bit, but if it takes any longer I'll just temporarily disable the nuclear destruction code in the plug-in.
I'm visualizing the menu like this: it is activated by right clicking on the Orion engine. If the vessel is docked to another vessel that has Orion magazines (empty or not), the pop-up dialog will appear.
There will be a button in a tool-bar for each nuke type that [a] is represented by at least one magazine of that type on both vessels and at least one vessel has some spare capacity for that type (you cannot load 3.5MN nukes if all your 3.5MN magazines are full).
Click on the nuke type you want to transfer. Two indicators appear, displaying the number of that nuke type on the docker and on the dockee. Between will be two arrow buttons, one to transfer from docker to dockee, the other to transfer from dockee to docker. Each button will disable as soon as the recipient ship has no spare capacity for that nuke type.
If I am feeling energetic I'll put an "OK" and "CANCEL" button.
To simplify the dialog, the transfer will automatically evenly distribute the new nukes among all available magazines. Allowing the user to do it on a magazine by magazine basis will be incredibly complicated.
-
Can you do the transfer with an script.
Right click on magazine A and B, and you get the bomb transfer menu who transfer bombs between them, you basically only need the transfer all option so if magazine A has 20 bombs and B has 60 A would get 40 from B.
One other way who might be more user friendly is to do this on ship basis, require that you can differentiate the bombs/ magazines on current ship and the one docked, now transfer the selected amount from ship A to B.
Naturally to use another orion for resupply.
Fallback plan might be to use specialized refueling canisters.
In short don't try to treat the bombs as fuel. Optionally use an dummy fuel you transfer and then convert into bombs.
Hrpmp. From a menu, eh? I like that idea. Thanks, I'll look into that. I'd much rather fool with making a nice GUI to transfer stuff instead of trying to make resources do something it was not intended to do.
I had thought of using a dummy fuel for transfer (blutonium), but that quickly got messy as well.
-
So today I finally finished my trip to Duna via Orion.
Congratulations to your ship and your brave crew!
How many bombs did you burn for the trip?
A GUI framework for modders?
in KSP1 C# Plugin Development Help and Support
Posted
evilC, are you compiling with .NET 3.5 or .NET 4.0?