Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    The Unity wheel classes are horribly bugged. Developers for other games have commented on it and it's just very bouncy regardless of spring or damper settings. My suspicion is that basically suspension movement is happening as an acceleration rather than a force. The more I poke around at it, the more convinced I am of that. Could be wrong but it's just not behaving in a rational manner at all. Edit: I posted further up on this very page about a fix that I'd been working on that helps a lot with the bounciness.
  2. Starwaster
    @danger cow maybe because it's D3D 9. Texture Unlimited does warn that D3D9 isn't supported and that textures might not render properly. As it happens, it works for me on 9 (though things look too shiny that shouldn't be and it looks better on 11) but YMMV. Try forcing D3D 11 or OpenGL
  3. Starwaster
    Rockets usually are full thrust. Throttling, when it happens (not all can be throttled), is for specific events or payloads (events such as Max-Q and payloads such as humans, which don't like being subjected to six gee of thrust for nine minutes). Rockets such as the Delta IV Heavy or the Falcon Heavy throttle down their core stage so that it conserves fuel while the side boosters handle the heavy work.
  4. Starwaster
    @Epox75 Apparently the AIES thread was one of a number of threads that were lost in an accident back in 2017. Squad looked into restoring them from backups but deemed it to be impractical or unfeasible. I did locate remnants of the thread on the Wayback Machine but it doesn't seem to be possible to navigate to different pages and I have no idea if more than the first page actually gets archived by TWBM.
  5. Starwaster
    Ease up man, he didn't say he thought it was unrealistic, he just asked for the ability to recolor them.
  6. Starwaster
    I suspect that the separation line between the cargo bay door and the rest of the nose would be above the nose fins.... I don't see how else SpaceX would accomplish that.
  7. Starwaster
    It's going to happen.
  8. Starwaster
    There's a very good chance that the AEIS thread is still there; but the URL would have changed because they updated the forum software so it would be new and improved. If you search hard enough for it you'll probably find it. If you know the exact name of the thread, that would make it even easier.
  9. Starwaster
    One issue; I did not include the IVA with this as it was a third party thing but apparently the tug cockpit references the IVA so it's not optional and will throw errors if the IVA is absent. (and trash any other part IVA that would have compiled AFTERWARDS) Edit: Meh scratch that, didn't know what I was talking about. I missed a texture, that's all.
  10. Starwaster
    Thanks @tater
  11. Starwaster
    The reason parts aren't compiling for some people is that textures now have a minimum resolution of 4x4. The placeholder textures this mod has been using are 2x2 so I increased resolution on all placeholders. No other changes have been made. Released as version 1.2.5 Reminder: This mod has a Creative Commons sharealike attribution no commercial use clause - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ All licensing considerations should now be satisfied and I am putting this fixed version up for download here: https://github.com/Starwaster/OrbitalTug/releases/latest No other development will be undertaken by me at this time.
  12. Starwaster
    @danger cow in that picture you posted, what mod is that part from that is vertically between the LM and HECS? @tater what engines did you put on it? I always have trouble with engines intersecting between the ascent and descent stages. (when I try to make a staged lander) In fact, mind sharing the craft file? I have trouble making a decent lander with those parts (except for when I made a non-staged, reusable SSTO back-to-orbit lander)
  13. Starwaster
    Because if a third party dependency plugin has a bug in it that needs to be fixed by its developer then you don't want to have to do a new release of your own to stay current. Because you don't want to accidentally overwrite a newer version of that third party dependency if players are forced to reinstall your mod. It makes you responsible and liable (not in a legal sense but still) for your users having the latest version of someone else's mod.
  14. Starwaster
    Challenge solved! I turned the comm dishes away from Minmus, made an announcement that Valentina Kerman and Bob Kerman perished fighting Space Krakens that were about to overrun our peaceful planet.... ... and held a parade in their honor. They are now heroes. Let's observe a moment of silence in memory of them... How did I do!?
  15. Starwaster
    Ok, even so. What I said still applies. If it's core temperature then it isn't checked for part destruction. There isn't even a maximal value for core temperature, only a target temperature that if it is not met or is exceeded then core heat dependent modules will run inefficiently.
  16. Starwaster
    That's for the core temperature. The 1210 isn't a maximum, it's the optimum temperature for core. Core temperature is not checked at all for part destruction. Depending on how the core is set up it may shut down certain modules but it will never destroy the part. It will leak heat to the part but generally not enough to destroy the part. (depends on how it's configured) btw it is not stock behavior for Nerv to utilize core heat.
  17. Starwaster
    It doesn't have its own plugins, only third party ones. You'll need to seek each of them out individually.
  18. Starwaster
    In addition to the autostruts suggested by others, enabling rigid connections can also help sometimes. Do it the same way as autostruts, from the context menu in the VAB. (you can also force the option to be available in all scenes by editing your settings file before launching the game)
  19. Starwaster
    The original one is disabled. He probably kept it in there but hidden so that it wouldn't break people's saved games. If he had just taken it out then people's craft that used that part would be deleted. Typically that's how situations like this are handled if a part changes enough to break craft or just plain look weird or function wrong if the new part were to be suddenly used on old craft. So you keep them around but hide them so that players have to use the new version but not break old craft.
  20. Starwaster
    Luck has nothing to do with it, it's a question of engineering. Not luck.
  21. Starwaster
    I realize this is an old post that I'm replying to, but there are two things that can be done here For planets with atmospheres, the minimum orbit is linked to atmosphereDepth (radius + atmosphereDepth). if atmosphereDepth doesn't accurately reflect where the edge of the atmosphere is then you get can contract orbits inside the atmosphere. (assuming that the value for this is less than the altitude of the edge of space) For planets without an atmosphere things get tricky. First the highest peak of the airless planet is found. Then the code runs through timewarpAltitudeLimits and finds an altitude in that list that is higher than the highest peak and returns that value + radius. Most of the time that's ok but it can result in orbits which are dangerously close to the highest terrain and the orbit could clip something even off rails. timewarpAltitudeLimits should be scaled by the rescale value to avoid this. These are the things I have done to my installation to avoid impossible rescue missions. (sanitize atmosphereDepth and rescale timewarpAltitudeLimits)
  22. Starwaster
    Try using World Stabilizer. I have found it useful for craft parts that load too high in the air. (there's an issue with some parts with colliders or transforms that are in weird places that make KSP think they need to be higher up when spawning in. MUCH MUCH higher....) Other players have not found it to help... So YMMV...
  23. Starwaster
    Some people just aren't sure what to DO... with the readme.....
  24. Starwaster
    Not seeing any reason whatsoever why that would be true. You're going to have to explain yourself more thoroughly than that. As has been said by @tater, it can have both engine types and use whichever one it needs when it needs it. And even IF it had only vacuum optimized engines it would still be perfectly reusable... assuming it were only functioning in space and landing on the Moon and refueled by tankers. That still counts as reusable. Not that Elon has ever talked about using it that way.
  25. Starwaster
    It can be outfitted with them though at the expense of some or all of the bottom cargo load.
×
×
  • Create New...