Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    You should reproduce the problem again. Then get your output_log.txt file (NOT ksp.log) put it up for download (zip it up if necessary) post the link here
  2. Starwaster
    What engine pack are you using? (RF doesn't come with engine configurations anymore) If you're using Raptor's stock alike then there's at least 2 nuclear engines. The one that uses LH2 / LOX is a LANTR engine (LOX Augmented NTR). It can be switched on the fly between using 100% LH2 or LH2 + LOX. Think of the latter as its after burner mode. You get increased thrust for as long as you have LOX. If you don't want to use that then there is another NTR in the pack that can be configured between LH2, methane or ammonia. LH2 has the best efficiency per kg of propellant but not being very dense you will need a lot of it. Lots of fuel tanks, big fuel tanks. Methane and ammonia have the benefit of compact storage, more thrust (because, density) and much higher boiling points. (trivia: Discovery in the novel/movie 2001: A Space Odyssey used ammonia as its propellant)
  3. Starwaster
    I didn't like the viewpoint in your photo so I instinctively pressed 'V' to change the camera angle.... (spoiler alert: it didn't work!)
  4. Starwaster
    Ok, I tracked down the source and the only field for named transforms is gimbalTransformName. There is none for thrust at all under any spelling. The section also where you're trying to remove KM_Gimbal is way more complicated than it needs to be and I'm skeptical that it's doing what you're intending. Have you taken a look at your Module Manager cache file? Do so, find the lightbulb part in there and verify that it's actually removed. (on the other hand, if you don't even have the original KM_Gimbal plugin actually present then removing the config is superfluous)
  5. Starwaster
    How are you determining when to switch? Are you grabbing the actual fade altitude from ScaledSpaceFader? (there's one for each CelestialBody)
  6. Starwaster
    Unless the KM gimbal module actually uses a mispelled field then you've got a spelling error in there I think. trustTransformName. Shouldn't that be thrustTransformName?
  7. Starwaster
    Porkjet has said that he's going to revisit his old stuff and update them. And if nothing else, I want to continue to use these parts too so I'll be updating them for my personal use. It's not a stretch for me to provide fixes in the form of Module manager patches.
  8. Starwaster
    Where is KSP installed? If it's in ProgramFiles (or ProgramFiles (x86)) then move it to a different folder. I installed mine to \Games which I created for that purpose. (ProgramFiles can cause perms issues)
  9. Starwaster
    It's more accurate to say you shouldn't change it. At least not to unreasonable values. It's editable to allow you to recreate real tanks. But ultimately it's your sandbox and it's up to you to play in it as you like.
  10. Starwaster
    Damn you Jeb!
  11. Starwaster
    I don't see anything really obvious, no smoking gun. There is a null ref error on the camera when the scene loads up but that shouldn't blow up anything. Other than that there's not a whole lot of reported errors. I do see though two references to loading Deadly Reentry; one of them definitely doesn't belong AssemblyLoader: Loading assembly at L:\Games\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\Plugins\DeadlyReentry.dll Find that one and delete it. DeadlyReentry v1.2.0.0 / v1.2.0.0 It's apparently a very old version.... I don't know if or how that could blow up your ship but it definitely doesn't belong there. Nothing belongs in the \Kerbal Space Program\Plugins\' folder. That's legacy stuff, used by very old and outdated mods. So delete anything in that folder leaving only the DeadlyReentry in the GameData folder. Then try again. Let me know how it goes.
  12. Starwaster
    No, it really wasn't. I know people like to say that but the issue with pre 1.0 stock aero was that it applied drag as an acceleration instead of a force. (i.e, if calculated drag = x then x was applied as x m/s instead of x newtons of drag) In a way, you could say it ignored mass. (which if you're applying force, you can't do) @Sarbian: Re maneuver node chasing. I have an idea to eliminate node chasing. At the time that MJ first starts execution, have it hold position instead of actually locking onto the node. You can try that yourself manually either with stock SAS or MJ so that basically you're just ignoring that the node other using it for initial orientation. Really there's no need to change orientation regardless of whether the node stays put (which it won't. It's going to dance when it gets to the end of the burn)
  13. Starwaster
    Please don't get rid of the parts based sides. There won't be anything to strut long wobbly payloads to. Also I won't be able to make launchers like this
  14. Starwaster
    Ah great, a potato video.... ok I get the picture. I'll look at the log file next Edit: There's not enough in that log file. It's incomplete. It doesn't even show the loading and compiling of game parts.
  15. Starwaster
    Hey, at least I took them there! I wanted to tape a picture of the Mun over the porthole for a few hours and then tell them we had arrived.
  16. Starwaster
    Glad that worked for you! Did you do the parameters in OnRenderImage too?
  17. Starwaster
    Read up on the different update passes here: http://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/ExecutionOrder.html Specifically OnPreRender and OnRenderImage (this last one is mentioned specifically for post processing but you may also want to look to moving some code to OnPreRender. I haven't looked at your code very closely so I'm not sure if that's necessary or not, but I'm thinking for the post processing effects that Update might be too early and LateUpdate might be too late to process the image so it will end up not showing up until next frame) DEFINITELY avoid FixedUpdate which only runs... 50 updates per second and is used physics and game updates or other non-graphical updates.
  18. Starwaster
    Do flybys have a max altitude? Because I'd swear it worked right for my Mun flyby. (and prior to closing my Minmus orbit I did lower the altitude too....)
  19. Starwaster
    I'm doing a multimission flyby for 5 tourists. A special ship was constructed, a long duration touring ship. This craft uses stock Mk3 parts, KWR 5 meter tanks and Real Fuels with nuclear rockets configured for methane. (methane stores easier than hydrogen and actually offer excellent performance and delta V of 16,000 m/s. The ship is now enroute to Kerbin where it will be met by a shuttle to take the tourists back home. (The tour ship will remain in orbit and be refueled if we get another multimoon flyby)
  20. Starwaster
    Take a look at what exactly? You're not giving me enough information to go on. It doesn't happen to me and I can't remember anyone else every reporting that either. It sounds like your launch pad collapsed under the weight of your vessel but I don't think it reports overheating for that. Other than that, the only thing I can think of is bad interaction with another mod. At the very least you should make that log you mentioned available. (output_log.txt if Windows. player.log if Linux / Mac. NEVER ksp.log) Zip it up and upload it to dropbox, then share the link.
  21. Starwaster
    Then download it and use the spinning ring. It works fine. Especially once you download the plugin and patch I developed here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64442-0-23-5-Habitat-Pack-v0-4?p=1768106&viewfull=1#post1768106
  22. Starwaster
    LH+LOX are useful for reducing upper stage mass. Reduced upper mass means more DV for the first stage. Look to the second and third stage of the Saturn V rocket. There are no in-game effects of toxic fuels. And I don't think the Kerbals give a darn about toxic fuels They certainly won't stop to put on a 'good pair of running shoes' just because you loaded up with chlorine trifluoride.
  23. Starwaster
    Yes it works. Since it works it isn't dead.
  24. Starwaster
    You mean the FASA pack? And/or RO? See my previous response on that (1-2 pages back) It's how that part is configured by one of those mods Last two posts: Will address those concerns in a later post today
  25. Starwaster
    Definitely. 3.5 is what KSP and all us other modders around here are using
×
×
  • Create New...