SilverWolf

I've been debating with myself about offering my thoughts for a few days, now. With regards to the development and launch of Kerbal Space Program 2, there are many things that occupy my thoughts. That said, brevity is my native tongue, and so I may not adequately articulate or explain some of my concerns. My point of view is also counter to the majority, so I recognize I am about to generate more enmity than an endgame tank (Final Fantasy reference) in about zero point three eight seconds, but I feel the need to speak. I am approaching Kerbal Space Program 2 with very curbed, perhaps even absent enthusiasm. As I look over game footage, something jumps out at me: the polygon models of most of the parts are the same as they are in the original game. New shaders are being implemented with new, massive textures. The planets in the Kerbol System have received new visuals. Effects have been overhauled and buffed. The UI has either been completely rewritten, or significantly overhauled. Visuals. Visuals. More Visuals. This is what taxes a consumer PC. Texture map size and image processing is the most intensive task of any video game. Add a physics-based simulation on top of it, and well, things get heavy quickly. Yet what are we actually getting for all of these taxes we are about to pay? I personally have not seen anything that tells me there's any real fillet and potatoes to go with weighing the system down. My priorities are probably different than most others': I'm more gameplay-focused than visual-focused. I watched the DailyAstronaut's video from the ESA event, and the higher-end gaming system he was afforded struggled with a simple moon mission because it was bogged down with all of the graphics. Those of us who had initially purchased KSP for $5.00 when it was in alpha were promised by Harvester and his team that in return for backing them so early, we would receive any DLCs to come down the pipe, forever. As soon as Take2 purchased the game, they announced the sequel, and immediately I felt I knew what was going on. They had just purchased a title that had gone viral across the world, and now they wanted to extract as much value from it as they could. The only way Take2 could get around Squad's promise was of course, to terminate the project and launch the sequel, KSP2. Visuals. Visuals. More Visuals. That's what KSP2 so far is. Visuals are inexpensive, modeling and coding are not. Metaphorically, they are applying lipstick and eyeshadow to a pig, and asking all of us to purchase a minimum viable product while dangling a carrot in front of us, a carrot we all have been waiting years and years for, since we started playing KSP in alpha: Colonies, Interstellar, and Multiplayer. The reason these features aren't ready to go on early access is because they require coding, one of those insanely time-consuming and expensive things, and they have yet to determine how much money they are going to pour into them. They're waiting to see how early access sales perform before determining that number. With early access opening in less than twenty-four hours, I just want you all to be careful about your enthusiasm. You're already made the choice, You're here to understand why you made it. I'm not writing to dissuade any of you. If I have given you something to think about, however, I am grateful. My attitude towards this launch precludes me from investing in it, because I see it the same way I see most modern Hollywood sequels: a money grab. However, for those of you diving in head-first, Good Luck and Have Fun.

I'm looking forward to releasing the Kraken. Most of all, I look forward to an updated aerodynamic model that will better facilitate my spaceplane-based space program.

I'm sorry, friends. I know everyone is on the hype train for KSP2, but I'm still awaiting a solution for this problem. I've gone as far as to: Empty GameObject containing the R_Wing_204 model, R_Wing_204 model has it's pivot aligned with the aileron, Renamed Aileron to ControlSurface, R_Wing_204 and ControlSurface's pivot points are +X outboard along intended axis of rotation, +Y forward, and again their pivots are co-linear along the +X axis of rotation, Remove the collider from R_Wing_204 Verify on every test case that ModuleManager.configcache has the module "FARControllableSurface", and the key: transformName = ControlSurface, spelled correctly. As I said, my part works perfectly if I unload FAR. Can someone please educate me what additional requirements FAR has that I am not fulfilling? Thanks, SW

Good evening, lads. I'm experiencing some difficulty with a control surface part I've made with reference to FAR, so I wanted to inquire as to how FAR wants surfaces rigged up. What is happening? The aileron mesh is not being rotated to the full-scale deflection specified in the PAW while running FAR. If I remove the FAR module, everything functions as expected. I have attempted using both the ctrlSrf gameobject and the aileron as the transform with no change to my result. Understanding the heretical nature of my inquiry, I came bearing receipts. I'm also experiencing another anomaly whereby if I write-in the node_attach in the parts' configuration files, their centers of pressure move. Can someone educate me on how node_attach interacts with rootMidChordOffsetFromOrig? Thanks guys, SW

I really admire what you’re doing, sir. You told us if anyone talks about the secret organization, we gotta get his balls.

Some time ago, I noticed how disproportionately massive cockpits were to other aircraft parts, resulting in nose heavy planes in the absence of a rocket engine on the back. What started as a rampage against heavy cockpits metamorphosed into something much more sinister. Using 3ds Max, I created and weighed aircraft structure to create a frame of reference, and thus the games began. Aircraft parts have all been measured and "weighed" using the "volume" of their surface area, including external and internal structure. A considerable weight reduction for airplanes has resulted. Flight deck components such as switch panels, computers, seats, and pilot interface have also been accounted for in part mass. Fuel tanks were measured, and internal structures modeled from scratch to determine fuel capacity. Fuel capacities have also been added to additional wings. Applying rules learned for aircraft has also resulted in dry-mass reductions for all fuel tanks. Liquid Fuel, Oxidizer, and Monopropellant were removed from the game, replaced by JetA-1, KeroLox, HydroLox, and MMH/NTO. This is where Firespitter comes in: each fuel tank has several variants, but now only carries one type of fuel per tank. As a friend kindly stated, I went "Vlad the Impaler" on reaction wheels; they have been removed. Engines have had their masses tweaked, placing them on a steady TWR curve, with the most powerful engines featuring the highest TWRs. Many liquid fuel engines can no longer throttle below 70%, so stages and burns must be planned accordingly. MechJeb is not required, but the module has been integrated into command modules, as well as Kerbals on EVA. Requires Module Manager and Firespitter Download: SilverWolf Rebalance 0.1 Imgur Album: https://imgur.com/a/Mo8GpCY All Rights Reserved.

SilverWolf Aerospace 0.1 has been re-released, and is available on CurseForge.

ModuleManager, there it is. lol. Thanks for the reminder.

Is this compatible with 145? I'm having some trouble in that department, despite a clean install.

I have two saves. Once is aptly named "Crashbox," and the other is my career. All vehicles are tested ad naseum in the simulator (Crashbox) until confidence is high. Once all the gremlins are worked out, the vehicle enters production. Its craft file is moved to Career, and only very minor alterations are permitted (such as adding a piece of equipment, or removing an antenna.) Any modification that does not fall under the purview of a CDL essentially cancels the vehicle's airworthiness, and it must return to Crashbox to receive an STC. What happens in Crashbox, stays in Crashbox. Once a vehicle flies in career, optimal or catastrophic, the results are final. There is no reverting. There are no quick saves. Kerbals do not rise from the dead. I find the introduction of such finality keeps my knuckles white. No one gets left behind, and no Kerbal is expendable. On a side note, I don't hire new Kerbals. I bolster my ranks by rescuing those the Contractors left for dead. As a result of playing MMOs for many years, I'm a completionist. I farm Kerbin for every scrap of science possible before leaving for the Mun. This is quite tedious, and dangerous, but it also means I typically leave for the Mun fairly well prepared. I don't use rockets. Everything, including tankers, are airplanes.

Heavy aerodynamics, isn't it?

Good evening. I am attempting to unify my ID across several forums. Is "SilverWolf" available? If it is, I request the change of my username. Thanks.

Maybe sometime down the road, after I finish other parts I have planned.

SilverWolf Aerospace is reopening its doors! After mulling it over for some time, I have decided to re-release this project. So, what is it? It is a humble collection of things I have wanted over the years. A more attractive, familiar cockpit for airliners and small freighters. Something a little more iconic when economy gives way for haste, and something completely new for exceeding the boundaries of sanity and atmosphere. I've also paid attention to the back of the plane, too, adding tail connectors I have longed for. Auxilliary power units included. Finally, I have a bad habit for mounting my wings low; so wing boxes of varying lengths with various cockpit and tail adapters have been thrown it; because an aircraft just looks better when it's streamlined. What's next, I have no idea. Download: https://kerbal.curseforge.com/projects/silverwolf-aerospace As a friendly reminder, All Rights Reserved.

Good morning folks. I'm having a frustrating one here. Unity refuses to write an IVA cfg file upon commanding "Save to Config." The errors follow. I have attempted the following resolutions with no remedy: Clean, unmodified KSP installation. Re-import of the latest KSP Part Tools in unity. Starting a config file for Unity. Deleted all objects and props with exception to the empty game object. Assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thank You.

Edit.

I'm slightly disappointed that I don't have your support. Regardless, before you call it an "exploit," I would like to make you aware that while the reports themselves were rather generic, biomes splashed data rendered higher science data than their landed counterparts, much as Water Landed has a higher value.

@Brent Kerman What exploit are you referring to? The tundra biome next to KSC? The point I am attempting to make here is that there is now lost science in the ether. I plan to continue demonstrating scenarios where a vehicle (or in my case, aircraft) is actually in a biome that is no longer recognized. Losing access to situations such has Highlands, Mountains, Badlands, and Ice Caps splashed is a large chunk of lost science, and if you're striving to restrict yourself to airplanes and spaceplanes, that's valuable science.

Squeaky wheel is making some noise. Will continue making noise until squeaky wheel gets oil from development. There's nothing "Shores" about the aircraft's current position. KSC 104 radial for about 400. Please repair the biome boundaries.

If it's volume and capacity you're looking for, I already did this, in 3Ds Max.

If we're going to lose sleep over inaccurate science, then there are existing issues that should be resolved before we haggle over adding new content. The first one that hits very close to home is the IntakeAir resource. Essentially, we're teaching that if you slap enough intakes on an engine, it'll run, and a jet engine is nothing more than a rocket that uses air, when it's something that's so much more complicated. It's not that this is a bad idea, it just belongs in a standalone modification, and not the base game itself. We want to keep the learning curve for new players as shallow as feasible, given this is rocket science, to maintain interest. Players desiring a more difficult experience can install mods, as most of us have.

No. Kerbal space program is a conceptual learning game. It is not a high-fidelity simulator. Players who want high-fidelity simulation are more than welcome to install RSS, RF, FAR, AJE, MJ, and any of the other ad nauseum reality enhancements. The majority of KSP players are not represented here on the forums, and the average player should have a reasonable expectation that once they achieve orbit, and start parking things above the atmosphere; those objects will remain parked above the atmosphere until they uninstall the game.

So, as I continue to re-explore Kerbin, one of the thing's I've immediately noticed is the biome maps have been redrawn -- much to my (and I hope others') displeasure. A perfect example: this was once my go-to spot for Highlands and Mountains Splashed data. Now it's been reduced to Shores. I've noticed the same thing has occurred in the Badlands way out East. There are many little lakes out there that are no longer Badlands, but shores. Now, don't get me wrong; I'm all for pulling the Tundra biome that was right next to KSC. But downgrading areas to Shores when I'm clearly in the Mountains or the swamps? C'mon Squad, quit fixing things until they're broke, will ya?

Ah, so you're using NPR as EPR. Hey, last thing. I noticed you've got all the Tdes set to 250K and Mdes to .80. Typically at .8 my ITTs are 750ish C, so I plugged 1023 K into Tdes, and this is the error I got:

Having a spot of trouble with this engine. Idle thrust is in the ballpark of 15 kN. minThrottle is being ignored. This is what I'm putting in: @PART[GE-CF34-8C5]:AFTER[AJE] { @MODULE[ModuleEngines*] { @name = ModuleEnginesAJEJet @maxThrust = 64.5 BPR = 5.0 CPR = 28.5 FPR = 1.5 Mdes = 0.8 Tdes = 250 eta_c = 0.95 eta_t = 0.98 eta_n = 0.9 FHV = 32000000 bird = 1350 TAB = 0 exhaustMixer = False adjustableNozzle = False thrustUpperLimit = 200 maxT3 = 900 defaultTPR = 0.90 drySFC = 0.3084428116 dryThrust = 64.5 minThrottle = 0.05 } @MODULE[ModuleResourceIntake] { @name = AJEInlet Area = 1.105 #@AJE_TPR_CURVE_DEFAULTS/PilotTube/TPRCurve {} inletTitle = #$@AJE_TPR_CURVE_DEFAULTS/PilotTube/title$ inletDescription = #$@AJE_TPR_CURVE_DEFAULTS/PilotTube/description$ } } And this is what I'm getting back: GE-CF34-8C5 { ModuleEnginesAJEJet { Area = 0.245555 BPR = 5 CPR = 28.5 FPR = 1.5 Mdes = 0.8 Tdes = 250 eta_c = 0.95 eta_t = 0.98 eta_n = 0.9 FHV = 4.191106E+07 bird = 1350 TAB = 0 exhaustMixer = False adjustableNozzle = False defaultTPR = 0.9 minThrottle = 0.3300256 turbineAreaRatio = 0.0621081 drySFC = 0.3084428 dryThrust = 64.5 wetThrust = 0 idleNPR = 1.1 engineID = Cruise DeclaringAssemblyVersion = 2.7.3.0 DeclaringAssemblyChecksum = B2-4C-74-C7-7F-FF-DF-77-74-48-3E-5B-C0-D3-E9-22 SolverEnginesVersion = 3.0.0.0 SolverEnginesAssemblyChecksum = 15-EF-7B-EB-02-D4-AC-AC-7D-7A-4D-5D-34-F9-77-D2 } }