Jump to content

Bishop149

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    402

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Bishop149

  1. Bishop149
    Excellent, look like an useful little mod. I will try it out post-haste
  2. Bishop149
    I started a new game recently (having been away a while!) combining KSP-IE with some other mods I haven't played with before, one of them being USI-MKS. Do these play well together? I ask because MKS isn't on the compatible list both add nuclear reactors so I'm wondering if everything in the tech tree is correct and in the right place. The two nodes in particular that are bothering me are: Nuclear Power - Unlocks three sizes (0.625, 1.25, 2.5) of Nuclear reactor + Molten Salt Improved Nuclear Power - Unlocks 3.75 USI Nuclear reactor, pebble bed, Thermal electric generator http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/263836971402084476/4CFD2B62ADB0A9CDC8F20FB8CEAF6E07D0E1C9F3/ Now the molten Salt in particular looks like a USI model, however all seem to produce KSP-I resources and the extra info text all looks very KSP-I. Did you and Roverdude integrate them? Also they all seem to not require a Thermal electric generator seemingly having one built in, is that correct? FInally I noticed there are two versions of the Thermal electric generator, one unlocking in the nuclear tech tree arm and another "advanced" one in the electric tech tree arm. . . . they appear identical at a glance?
  3. Bishop149
    Can I just say that I'm having this issue too. Lots of mods seem to have a miniAVC.xml file so I can't figure out what if anything I should delete. I assume the fault must be something in IFS because all the other mods update fine. I think so, I noted this before FreeThinker said the differences reflected the variation in structural integrity of tanks to confine different fuel types.
  4. Bishop149
    Pretty sure that's the way I've done it before.
  5. Bishop149
    Yeah, I managed to get it to work by stretching that y dimension to 2048. Had to convert to .png to do so, will try the tool you link to convert back. Edit: Any other tools for converting to .dds? That one requires python and converts the whole folder, and this one doesn't work on WIndows 10
  6. Bishop149
    Any ideas why my Kerbin looks like this: If I remove my KerbinScaledSpace300 texture it returns to normal. Is there something up with my Kerbin texture? It worked several versions ago. The texture is 4096 x 2044, bit depth 32 and is a .dds file.
  7. Bishop149
    Oh excellent, thanks for the reply!
  8. Bishop149
    Might I just ask if this one is being maintained? Or has it it been supplanted by another mod doing the same thing? Been away for a while!
  9. Bishop149
    Just wanted to give a shout out to this mod, I consider it to be one of my "essential" ones and I'm not sure it gets the credit / attention it deserves. Keep up the good work and I eagerly await a 1.1.1 version!
  10. Bishop149
    I made this a while back, after such a thing was suggested: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/134414-KSP-I-Craft-showcase It hasn't proven popular . . . .
  11. Bishop149
    Hi I have identified a few minor issues: Firstly the nosecone tank is behaving weirdly. . . . it seems to get fixated on containing a particular resource and switches back to it even if you change it to something else. It's even done it post launch when the tanks was actually full! I swapped water for some hydrogen! The image below might shed some light, the right click for the nosecone tank looks different to the regular one beneath it, it seems to think it contains two things. Secondly I lost the ISRU menu, tis blank! Ship contains multiple ISRU modules, issue applied to all of them. No a big issue, it came back after I restarted the game (although switching scene might also have fixed it, didn't check) and I'm not sure what caused it. . . . this was a ship that was docking and undocking a lot to ships that also contained multiple ISRU modules (new MkIII refinery, taking the resources of the old ones before I de-orbit them) so it might be something to do with that? As a side note the menus system doesn't seem to like multiple ISRU units, you can only have one units menu open at a time . . . . try and open more and they kind stack up but won't open until you close the current one. Edit: Should note that I haven't applied the latest update yet.
  12. Bishop149
    I have previously rectified a similar situation in a very Kerbal manner by taking off with one Kerbal in the capsule and another holding on to the ladder. You have to thrust VERY carefully (I only did it on Minmus, might not be feasible with higher gravity!) and periodically switch to the Kerbal on the ladder to climb up a bit as they tend to slide down the ladders under thrust. Obviously you can't re-enter with a Kerbal hanging off the ladder but you can ferry them to somewhere where rescue is a bit easier, such as Kerbin orbit.
  13. Bishop149
    I made this thread, partly with this in mind, partly just as a pictures thread. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/134414-KSP-I-Craft-showcase
  14. Bishop149
    It was recently suggested in FreeThinker's KSP Interstellar - Extended thread that it might be nice to have somewhere for people to share and show off their interstellar creations without cluttering up the main thread. Therefore I have duly created this thread in a more appropriate place. I'll kick off although I'm not sure either of these are particularly special . . . . This is the Kallichore, one of my largest ships to date, my first real attempt at a "mothership" type of set up. Propulsion is a single 2.5m Gas Core reactor driving a thermal nozzle, it has about 12k DeltaV when fueled by water, over 20k when fueled by Hydrazine. Crew of 6 and can act as a Remote Tech control node with a maximum Comms range of 350mM on the main dish but multiple smaller ones for more local control. It also carries two landers which should easily manage a Duna landing and ascent. This is my water mine on Minmus, which incidentally was used to fuel the Kallichore above. The central core is mostly just the reactor, some drills (allowing it to mine Ore too) and some radiators. There are then three outlying BIG storage tanks which also contain another refinery each for extraction connected to the core via KAS pipes, it can pull up about 6 tons of water a day. I was quite pleased with the aesthetics of the tanks.
  15. Bishop149
    Noticed something. The processes in the 3.75m ISRU are no faster than in the 2.5m version (Haber process at least, the only one I tested) which is a little odd, I kinda assumed the bigger refinery would have a higher throughput.
  16. Bishop149
    Here: http://ge.tt/8C6JZqN2/v/0
  17. Bishop149
    Well, I got the texture working! I think this would make for a pretty good replacement model for the atmospheric scoop, I nicked it from this mod. The license is Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 so I guess its fine if you wanted to switch it officially . . . . . that mod actually uses your FuelSwitch so I can't imagine the author objecting but I guess it would be polite to ask. I can post up the modified files if you like?
  18. Bishop149
    Many Thanks Porkjet, As suspected it was that lack of basic understanding of exactly what the comma was doing that was causing my issues, thanks to your clear explanation I managed to get it working.
  19. Bishop149
    Atmosphere processor idea is cool, is it one you plan to implement? I did some testing in replacing the model, pictures below, the battery in the middle is 10m scale. I think my favourite is the last one, it has nicely balanced dimensions, but I can't get the bloody texture to work (posted about it here) The stock radial intake version texture works but on balance I think the intake area looks a little small and it gets very long when scaled up.
  20. Bishop149
    I am experimenting with a minor tweak to a mod and just can not get a texture to apply. The code I'm basing it on is below: MODEL { model = MarkIVSystem/Parts/Intake/mk4intake-radial-1 texture = mk4pods-1-blank, MarkIVSystem/Parts/Nacelle/mk4pod-1 } I'm basically copying everything DIRECTLY from another mod and the texture just won't work. I initially changes the names and the paths, which didn't work. . . . . so I applied the same names and path and made all the appropriate folders, still doesn't work. Its the comma in the texture field that I don't understand. I've never seen a comma separated string in the texture field before and I don't know what it means
  21. Bishop149
    Yep, I'm in this club. . . . I feel very uncomfortable timewarping away more than about 1x Minmus transfer time (6-10 days) In my current career save I think the longest I have timewarped in one go is about 30 days. Therefore I have thus far only visited (and returned from) Eve and sent a multiship mission to Duna which will arrive in the next 60 days or so. One of the earliest things I did was launch a bunch of stuff at Jool. . . .don't think it even half way yet. It just feels wrong to "waste" years.
  22. Bishop149
    Can they not? Is putting the "ISRUScoop" and "ModuleResourceIntake" modules on the same part not possible?
  23. Bishop149
    As far as I can tell a KAS fuel line connection is indistinguishable from a regular docking. Some musings on the atmospheric scoop, which most of my recent designs have centered around. Basically I think the model is a pain in the backside, its fine when it at its default scale but as soon as you start scaling it up is rapidly become very unwieldy. The actual scoop bit isn't so bad (although that too is scary big at 3-400%) its the curved flange bits that are a pain as they don't really fit around scaled up tanks (who want to scale a tank to 10m anyway!) and if you try and put more than 4 radially they will always overlap / clip which can make for ships that are prone to random physics bug flip outs / explosions Personally in my game I think I'm gonna swap the model for either the stock radial intake (the one that used to be part of Spaceplane Plus) or nick this large radial one from MkIV spaceplane system: I'll have a play around with how to scale them etc and let you know how I get on. Also the scoops power requirements seem a little on the high side to me, now I don't know the real world power requirements involved in sucking in atmosphere, separating the gases and turning them to liquid but it seems odd to me that it's higher than any of the ISRU reactions and just over half what it takes to mine and refine uranium ore. It's possible that all the ISRU type reactions power requirements might requires some thought / re-balancing, if realism in the goal.
  24. Bishop149
    Well I can give you my take on it based on my testing, FreeThinker can correct me if I'm wrong. When you dock two ships (launched separate) that both have power generating capacity there is some kind of bug / error that leads to the power manager not combining the generating capacity of both ships. It sounds like that upon docking the module that is doing the power calculations should reset and recalculate are the values afresh for the two docked ships and a single entity, but this isn't happening. Sounds like it should be fixable? Upshot: Docked ships can't share power generating capacity. . . . . unless they were launched pre-docked.
  25. Bishop149
    Ok more testing. Same rover setup as above, but launched pre-docked. In this situation everything seems to work as it should (in my head at least). Initially both reactors can contribute to satisfying the power draw. Un-dock and they become their own entities, re-dock and it goes back to being joint effort. Interesting but pretty useless for practical application. I also tried a variation in which all the power drain (the scoops) was on one of the rovers and all the power supply (the 2 reactors+generators) was on the other. These were launched individually and then docked. . . . under this circumstance the both reactors throttled appropriately to cope with the power drain. This is a setup that may be workable, for large constructs involving multiple docked segments a construction rule could just be; "Ensure all your required reactors / generators are either on the same segment OR that each segment has a supply that can cope with its own drain" In situations where both reactors could contribute I also noted the way in which they did so. Say you have a setup in which power drain is 150% of a single reactors supply, two reactors will throttle 100% and 50% to cope with the demand. It would seem neater to me to have both running at 75%, so the 2 reactors age (fuel use, potential damage) at the same rate.
×
×
  • Create New...