Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    @Baleine When you specified 'without ablative material', I assume you mean you removed that from the Mk1 Pod and added a separate shield? To the bottom of the crew cabin? Can you post a picture of that so I have a better idea of the configuration? Both in the VAB from a good angle and during reentry... (the smaller parts surviving isn't terribly unusual; remember lots of the Columbia's individual parts survived after it broke up; your surviving parts probably had slowed enough and the chute / docking parts had enough drag to keep slowing it at a faster rate than heating could keep up with) P.S. The C4 is a value added service. You're welcome!
  2. Starwaster
    Then don't you think that maybe the problem is with the part maker as NathanKell said? edit: what do you mean about overriding them yourself? What exactly are you doing?
  3. Starwaster
    Glad you've got it working!
  4. Starwaster
    BTW, I replaced the fleet file with a new one that works so that you can see what it should look like. (again, this came out of a save file, so a bit of work) https://github.com/Starwaster/Ioncross-Crew-Support/blob/master/KerbalInstallFolder/GameData/IoncrossCrewSupport/Contracts/Stations/station.type2.cfg
  5. Starwaster
    @TheMightySpud I tested the code in KSP and found a few issues with it. I think some of them stemmed from a Github mishap that resulted in bad files being committed. One of those might have been the vessel config itself, which had VESSEL data lifted right out of a craft file. That does not work with ProtoVessel.CreateVesselNode()! I searched around my drive and found another version of the fleet file that actually works. From the looks of it, I lifted it out of a save file and now that I think about it, I actually had to launch a station of the type that was being put into orbit and do things like extend solar panels and generally make sure it was in the condition I wanted it to be encountered in orbit in. Another issue with the code is that although it does work as written, stationFleet is not persistent and is only generated one time, so you need to make sure that in your code the fleet list is always initialized prior to trying to read from it. A simple 'fleet.count > 0' check is a good idea followed by reloading the list if it failed the check. (in my testing, I was having to generate the contract using the debug menu which sometimes resulted in the fleet data being blank if I didn't immediately go to mission control and accept the contract) Other caveats to watch out for: Because of what I said earlier about getting the vessel node from a save file, make sure that it is empty of crew, otherwise it might try to grab existing crew who are on other missions. (Jeb suddenly got teleported to the new station. Apparently Kerbals have transporter technology and nobody told me ). Then if the vessel REQUIRES a crew, randomly generate some prior to calling ProtoVessel.CreateVesselNode() There is a way to do it with craft file format instead but I don't remember what it was....
  6. Starwaster
    Deadly Reentry overrides the maxTemp / skinMaxTemp of many parts. If you need a part to have a higher maxTemp (because it's made of iridium or tungsten or rhodium or unobtanium bullshihtzu-ium) then add the following: MODULE { name = ModuleAeroReentry leaveTemp = True } In fact, you can even just add leaveTemp in the actual PART node and DRE will detect that and add the necessary MODULE
  7. Starwaster
    Chute and canopy is the same thing. Perhaps you meant the case?? Even so that's still excessive; 2500 is too high. Just because Squad did it to their parts doesn't mean it's a good idea.
  8. Starwaster
    Well the code I used is quite a few KSP versions old so I'm wondering if anything changed with ProtoVessel.CreateVesselNode()? Have you tried searching the log to see if that function is throwing any exceptions? If that function hasn't changed significantly then it should be working. Where are you getting the actual vessel list being used? I was using nodes created from actual *.craft files for convenience. It would not work as is with the types of VESSEL nodes that you find in save files. There is a way of making that work with different code that calls different functions, but this method required something from inside craft files. So, assuming that you ARE using the right format for your VESSELs, then the next thing you want to look at is each part that is going in. So you'll want to parse each PART in the node and seeing what that part is. Maybe something weird is going on there.
  9. Starwaster
    @Paul_Sawyer I'm more concerned with why parts on the top of your plane are showing evidence of being exposed to reentry heating. See skin temp? If it's not exposed and the body of the plane is between it and the supersonic shockwave then it will say 'all skin' instead of 'exposed skin'. DRE doesn't control whether you DO get heating. Only what happens when you do. If FA hat happens when If FAR is mak Edit: It occurs to me that the max temps of a lot of parts didn't bumped up when burning damage went back in. A lot of them ought bumped up by ~18% or so. Though that doesn't really address the roto cause of the FAR problem
  10. Starwaster
    Well, that's creating more questions than it answers. What I see there is that for whatever reason, the ports mounted on the top of the craft are not being occluded even when you have a high angle of attack. The ones on the belly are being occluded. It might be something to do with the port itself but it's a stock issue that I don't see a solution to at this time. (KSP says whether the parts are occluded or not) It could be an issue with the linear ports being sunk so far into the part they get attached to. Something like 50% of them are buried in the part. Maybe that's why KSP is confused as to whether they are occluded or not. The dorsally mounted ports must be protruding below the occlusion zone created by the fuselage with the ventral ones being far enough in that they're occluded. It should be easy enough to test that by using the placement tools in the VAB to pull the ports a little away from the surface. One thing of note here is that most of your heating of those ports is actually coming from conduction, not convection. That's because the space plane parts have high skin-skin conduction. That's by design and is ok unless the ports actually explode. The convection is adding just enough to push the temperature of one part over the other. Personal testing hasn't shown it to be a problem and I haven't seen complaints about RCS ports exploding here in a long time.
  11. Starwaster
    Use the debug menu to enable thermal data in the context menu. Then, when that part overheats, right click it and take a screenshot. Let me see that so I know where all incoming heat is sourced from.
  12. Starwaster
    CKAN didn't get ALL its files from Kerbalstuff; just a lot of them. It depends on where the mod was hosted. Some mods were hosted in multiple sites but maybe CKAN can't handle site mirroring. To all: The situation will be resolved; the CKAN folks are working tirelessly to set up an alternate to Kerbalstuff (using the Kerbalstuff files actually) and as soon as mods can be reuploaded and re-indexed, things will start working again.
  13. Starwaster
    @TheMightySpud Ok, this section is how you search for a specific config. This is pretty much how every mod out there does it. https://github.com/Starwaster/Ioncross-Crew-Support/blob/master/Source/IoncrossCrewSupport/Contracts/Templates/IonContractResupply.cs#L47-L64
  14. Starwaster
    It won't appear in the debug menu database. Pretty sure the code that parses through the configs is in that file. I'm BBQing right now but I'll go digging for it when I'm done.
  15. Starwaster
    I pledge to slip more Melificent into people's KSP experience...
  16. Starwaster
    ^^^^ this ^^^^ If your engine bells are too close to the pad or embedded in it, they won't provide thrust.
  17. Starwaster
    That's not the same shield that was from Deadly Reentry, is it? Because that shield did have some pretty serious issues. (which is why it's not in Deadly Reentry any more....
  18. Starwaster
    Yes, it was a foregone conclusion given the way this entire thing has gone down. The instant KS was shut down the way it was instead of a clean transfer to new administration, it guaranteed having to start over from scratch regardless of whether or not the mods were backed up.
  19. Starwaster
    Here's some more code for you to peruse, if it will help. This was functional to the point that I could spawn space stations using config data. (it would look for a specific named node in all game config nodes until it found the space station template) https://github.com/Starwaster/Ioncross-Crew-Support/blob/master/Source/IoncrossCrewSupport/Contracts/Templates/IonContractResupply.cs It was designed to work with the format used by *.craft files. The config data was here: https://github.com/Starwaster/Ioncross-Crew-Support/blob/master/KerbalInstallFolder/GameData/IoncrossCrewSupport/Contracts/Stations/station.type2.cfg Feel free to use any of this that is useful to you.
  20. Starwaster
    Granted. Unfortunately, 'sick' manifests as illness and 'rad' is the radiation you absorbed to make you 'sick'. Your hair and teeth are falling out and you've got the runs like no other human before you has ever experienced. I wish to go to Mars.
  21. Starwaster
    I've been watching this; I'm not seeing a lot about how steep or how shallow your reentry is. Maybe a screenshot would help figuring out your trajectory. hint: excessive G-forces indicates too steep a reentry. You want shallow so that you get as much braking done as possible in the upper atmosphere rather than in the lower atmosphere. A lifting reentry would also help with the G-forces. The diagram below is a good example of what I mean except that most reentry capsules are blunt body but can still fly lifting reentries if they have an offset center of mass. Right clicking on your capsule might show you an option to do that. I know that RO used to have that option; I'm not sure if that's still the case. (Edit: In space, right click the capsule. Look for 'turn descent mode on' - that will alter center of mass)
  22. Starwaster
    Huh, ok. Personally I think it looks metal enough and hope it doesn't get changed. It would ruin the aesthetics of the mod.
  23. Starwaster
    There's foamy material? That's confusing, I don't remember seeing anything like that on Nils cupola but it sounds like you're talking about something like the protective blankets like the ISS has? (thermal + meteoroid protection)
  24. Starwaster
    This will work, and it patches ModuleEngineConfigs as well for RCS that are configurable. @PART[*]:NEEDS[RealFuels]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleRCS*]]:Final { @MODULE[ModuleRCS*],* { %resourceFlowMode = STAGE_PRIORITY_FLOW @PROPELLANT[*],* { %resourceFlowMode = STAGE_PRIORITY_FLOW } } @MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs],* { @CONFIG[*],* { @PROPELLANT[*],* { %resourceFlowMode = STAGE_PRIORITY_FLOW } } } }
  25. Starwaster
    @Sahadara That person could be you...
×
×
  • Create New...