Jump to content

Starwaster

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,282

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Starwaster

  1. Starwaster
    I need to see your ModuleManager.ConfigCache file please. You can upload it somewhere like Dropbox and include the link here. I need to see what the base state of various shields are so I know what RO is or is not doing. No way does 47k worth of shield just burn away in 10 seconds. Something is horribly wrong there. What is that the tweak scaled lunar shield?
  2. Starwaster
    That shield is barely big enough to cover the bottom of the core. But the probe's sides extend straight up from there. That means if you don't have exactly 0.0000 (feel free to stick on some more zeroes; the point is it's gotta be really SMALL) deg angle of attack / sideslip then whatever the thing you're protecting won't be. And the smaller the shield then the smaller the vertical area of coverage is so the payload can't be very tall either for a 625 shield
  3. Starwaster
    No, what you do is change their category and research tech to something that doesn't exist category = none TechRequired = none
  4. Starwaster
    Uhm ok. Planet is a secret. No, you did not mention that before. I don't even know what to say to that. Whatever. Pe of 18km is way too steep. Not enough time for aerobraking; you need as much aerobraking as high up as possible. And then you say the shield lasts.... one minute. That does not sound like a shield intended for 15km/s reentry. In spite of the orbital parameters provided, those are lunar reentry speeds and the shield has to be rated for lunar reentry.
  5. Starwaster
    And those guys are actually available in the astronaut center? If so then I misinterpreted the situation. I thought they were missing without being listed as missing.
  6. Starwaster
    The closest to that which I've ever seen was an engine module that technically was all junk that was deleted because I went over the junk limit and didn't find out until I launched my crew into Duna orbit and their engine compartment was gone. But I don't think that can apply to anything with crew capacity unless it's a modded part that's classified as junk and the vessel is without any control parts. I'd open the save file in a text editor and see if the crew can be found on any vessels at all. And do you have any older manually created saves that they might exist on?
  7. Starwaster
    The fastest way of finding out what changes have been made (if any) to the RTG is to open the ModuleManager.ConfigCache file in a text editor and look up the part. You will see the current state of the rtg part after all changed to it by any mods.
  8. Starwaster
    You shouldn't need more than one. If your shield is burning up, either it's not properly configured for RO or you're coming in too steep or too shallow. (too shallow is the most likely cause. Too steep will increase the heat pulse but the total heat loading is lower) But tell me, what kind of angle are you coming in at, how fast when you hit reentry interface and how long until the shield fails? And what planet?
  9. Starwaster
    I don't sorry. It only happens for the rotation animation though so maybe something is being deformed?
  10. Starwaster
    @Tokamak the centrifuge seems to have a degenerate polygon. Nothing I can do to fix it in current KSP. It has to happen at the source
  11. Starwaster
    Either it's an ablative shield and you configure it the same way as stock ModuleAblator (ModuleHeatShield is a child of that) or its space shuttle / space plane and you configure the way stock does the Mk2 or the way DRE does it .
  12. Starwaster
    Make a new save to troubleshoot that e
  13. Starwaster
    @charliepryor removing parts from your installation WILL break craft. They will be deleted when you load the save file.
  14. Starwaster
    Either a part has negative mass or references a resource that doesn't exist in KSP. (typically because a mod that provided the resource was uninstalled) Sorry but there is no option for hiding the icon and Blizzy is unsupported. Maybe someday.
  15. Starwaster
    One of the parts on your craft has an improperly configured heat shield. I tried to guard against situations like that but apparently that's not working. The craft has B9 parts so I'm guessing they haven't rewritten the spaceplane parts to account for changes in DRE + stock KSP after KSP 1.0. Or possibly there's an update for B9 that you haven't downloaded given that it's being maintained by different persons. So, problem in a nutshell: Prior to KSP 1.0's new thermal model, DRE's ModuleHeatShield was used for both ablative and non-ablative shields. The latter were typically not configured with any ablative RESOURCE, and that's where the problem lies. ModuleHeatShield is a child of KSP's ModuleAblator and null refs get thrown if the module can't find the designated resource or if it was not configured with a resource at all. If it is a spaceplane issue then the way to configured it for non-ablative shielding is at the PART level (stock KSP). This means giving it very high emissive values so it can shed heat rapidly. (and optionally, low absorption). And either very high or very low thermal mass. (stock KSP takes the former approach. DRE takes the latter approach to simulate space shuttle tiles which were very light and had low thermal mass)
  16. Starwaster
    I'm not entirely sure what you mean?
  17. Starwaster
    @ErevanGaming no. It doesn't work that way. MM can work on any config node that was configured in a cfg file. At that time, no planets have been initialized as that only happens when you load a saved game. MM can't access that information.
  18. Starwaster
    The original g-force settings were, out of necessity, harsher than they would be IRL because they were for the stock game and reentries there are so much shorter that g-force damage was scaled up. But RSS / RO are supposed to be about realism, and humans can actually take quite a bit of g's before it's fatal. We have to abstract things quite a bit; IRL it varies quite a bit depending on which way the acceleration is and there's a lot of gray area involving injury as opposed to outright life or death which is the extent of DRE's scope.
  19. Starwaster
    The following code would cut all ISP values in half. Obviously you want to change that part to suit your needs. If you need something other than a static modifier then you'll need a more complex config. Otherwise, this will do it for you. You may want to make another one for ModuleRCS. Also note that this will affect jet engines as well, so if that's not to your liking then you'll also need to figure out a way of weeding them out. Maybe by excluding all engines that have IntakeAir as a PROPELLANT (:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]:HAS[!PROPELLANT[IntakeAir]]] ) @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]] { @MODULE[ModuleEngines*],* { @atmosphereCurve { @key,*[1, ] *= 0.5 } } }
  20. Starwaster
    Oh yeah? Do you maybe feel like giving some IVA love to these guys?
  21. Starwaster
    Uhmmm I launched without it...
  22. Starwaster
    That's why Module Manager has scheduled passes for modders to run with. Three per mod. Surely there's room for you to work with that? And for cases where DRE's max temp limiter does affect a part, there's a a way of opting out of that too. (Technically this should happen :AFTER[DeadlyReentry] but it's currently scheduled for final so as long as you don't do this in :FINAL too then you're fine)
  23. Starwaster
    Just to make sure I went looking as far back as Feb, 2014 and there's several posts asking when an IVA will be added but it just never happened.
  24. Starwaster
    But where does the chart max out at? And are you measuring that minute in game time (by the MET clock) or real time? Also, that 'max g force' is the maximum amount of g's that DRE will apply, not the max that Kerbals can take. If anything it can be higher. It's only there as a practical limit on what to apply. No, they're only useless for the role that you're trying to force them into. RSS is Not Relevant unless you're referring to reentry and I already told you I don't see them as withstanding reentry. For supersonic flight they're fine unless you're flying at some UnGodly speed with KSPIE supertech. The 'max temp limiter' is only Relevant if it was responsible for the reduction to begin with.
  25. Starwaster
    maxTemp is set to 1073.15 Kelvin (800 Celsius or 1472 Fahrenheit) That's fine for a supersonic plane in stock KSP. If you're putting it through reentry then yes you should be designing your craft differently.
×
×
  • Create New...