Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    @etheoma there's no need to get snarky with me. Your reply very much made it sound like you were expecting it o be in electrical so what the hell else am I supposed to say? I have no idea why it's not in your installation.
  2. Starwaster
    No it's under category Utility because it was patched to be there instead of Electric. The manufacturer is 'Various' Yes it is for 1.3.1
  3. Starwaster
    It should be under Utility then. It looks just like the fuel cell array since it uses that model Edit: In fact it's just a +PART clone that's been patched to be a liquefier instead of a fuel cell array...
  4. Starwaster
    Is it a career game and do you have the specialized electrics node researched? Also... I haven't tested anything with modded tech trees so that could be a potential source of trouble?
  5. Starwaster
    One other thing you can do is use the liquefier to capture boiloff gas and reliquefy it. (the TANK node has to support the production of boiloff gas however in the TANK_DEFINITION and currently only the ServiceModule tanks do)
  6. Starwaster
    @etheoma @hypervelocity As to the state of the mod, I've been going over recipes and making sure that they are consistent and accurate as best I can. I've also replaced unrealistic power production parts (which I think were just for testing anyway) with more reasonable parts (10kW and 40kW Kilopower reactors). I wouldn't say it's complete but it's more so than when I started looking into it. Right now I think I'm *IT* as far as contributors go although I've had input from a couple of members in #RO. So if you think there's anything missing or if something needs correcting, raise an issue at https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealISRU which I have write access to and I'll try to address it. I probably won't be able to do anything with regards to models which is too bad because the Kilopower reactors could use decent models, especially the animated umbrella radiators.
  7. Starwaster
    Something about this has been bothering me and I finally figured out what it was. I said that lack of a control transform is a problem. And it is. However, the docking node code has fallback code for situations where the control transform isn't explicitly provided. The problem is that it depends on the part's up transform being aligned with the docking node's forward transform and for that part they are not. The node points out the bottom and the part's reference transform out the top... @damonvv I don't know what you're doing for the next BFR's docking but please keep that in mind?
  8. Starwaster
    @Drakenex @rib3irojr Apologies, I didn't realize that was the case about the missing control transform as I hadn't actually tried to use that part before. The issue with the port module is (SHOULD BE) a non-issue though as it is derived from the stock ModuleDockingNode and should be recognized by MJ2. But the missing control transform would be a definite deal breaker.
  9. Starwaster
    docking autopilot requires that RCS control be perfectly balanced. Make sure that you can translate in all directions without introducing angular momentum. The same RCS that you use for translation is also used for rotational control and you don't want it having to maintain attitude at the same time as it is translating.
  10. Starwaster
    Just because that one image doesn't show them firing radially doesn't mean they CAN'T. They just aren't right now because it's just doing a pitch over maneuver. There's no reason or need for it to be yawing right now so they aren't firing.
  11. Starwaster
    Both Kerbal Engineer and MechJeb use staging logic that gets confused when a part is both engine AND decoupler. They expect it to be one or the other when determining staging statistics.... I'm guessing it checks for decoupler before engine and doesn't consider it could be both.
  12. Starwaster
    ... 'kay...
  13. Starwaster
    Is that the one with a decoupler? If so then that's definitely going to cause a problem.
  14. Starwaster
    The service module has its engine integrated? Not two separate parts like before?
  15. Starwaster
    Scatterer uses screen space post processing, like every other game out there except Kerbal Space Program for the past 15+ years. Unless you've got a really low end system, I wouldn't worry about it.
  16. Starwaster
    Please take this discussion outside this thread. If you have a problem with either FAR or MJ or both interacting with each other than discuss it in a valid forum where it can be addressed. This thread is for the discussion of Deadly Reentry and nothing else.
  17. Starwaster
    @Gordon Dry ok so... what am I supposed to do with that exactly?
  18. Starwaster
    Uhm no, that picture is something like 70 years old...
  19. Starwaster
    Yes and no. The only thing that truly controls the rate of ablation is the temperature of the ablative material which is controlled by the speed you are passing through the atmosphere (determines shockwave temperature) and atmospheric density which controls how much of that heat is transferred to the shield. The shield undergoes pyrolysis anytime it is above 500K so your shield had to be at least that hot and you don't give details about what the temperature actually was or what the actual total absorbed heat was. (that info is available in the part action menu if you enable thermal debugging. It will tell you actual heat lost through pyrolysis, ablation rate in kg, total absorbed heat, peak absorbed heat and heat per cm2)
  20. Starwaster
    Ah, right. I momentarily forgot that KSP is scaled down since I always play scaled up.
  21. Starwaster
    @damonvv That's cool. BTW, what diameter is it going to be? Is the new BFR still at 9m? (or was that 10m...?)
  22. Starwaster
    Looks good... now hand it over!
  23. Starwaster
    @The-Grim-Sleeper @garwel Ok so it has ablator? It should survive then. Probably.
  24. Starwaster
    I don't have Making History and therefore am unable to give any consideration to its parts. I have no idea what the 'onion' is nor what the justification would be for it withstanding reentry so have no idea how to treat it.
  25. Starwaster
    Shuttles: Depends on what parts they are made of and how much drag they actually have (surface area). Any known spaceplane parts are modeled after the space shuttle TPS (tiles). Thermal mass is scaled down as the skin is basically foamed glass with in a heat resistant coating. They are designed for shallow reentries. heat shields: conductivity is reduced. They conduct much less heat. When their ablative resource is depleted they become pretty useless unlike the stock shields which have high max temp even after ablator is depleted. Your cigar: I have no idea. It probably should fly? I guess? If we're talking about a standard rocket design, keep your angle of attack low (you probably need to do this anyway if you're using FAR). high angle of attack at supersonic speeds will cause excessive heating and you will have a bad day. If heating on ascent becomes a problem, consider doing a steeper ascent until after MaxQ. (even though this runs counter to what you've probably been told and runs counter to how a lot of rockets actually launch except for the Falcon 9 which does do a steep ascent with only a small amount of pitch to clear the launch pad and doesn't even start its gravity turn until a minute into flight)
×
×
  • Create New...