Jump to content

Pappystein

Members
  • Posts

    2,377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pappystein

  1. Sorry for the work then. I had hoped that someone else was having problems, hence posting. I am downloading the latest update and have cleaned out MOST of the mods I have in my build. I WAS using CKAN for the first time ever with this iteration of the game. I found a bunch of crap that was never deleted by CKAN out of my GameData folder. It is all gone. I went down from 57 mods to 9 not counting SSTU. I will post after further testing. If it is any of these mods it should show up quickly in sandbox.
  2. FOLLOW UP all with previous release: I did a lot of further testing last night and today (early AM.) I launched TWO DOS 6 way (Large) Hubs connected by a probe core and some Mono tanks with RCS. un-docked the Tug that put them in final orbit and could not dock to ANY port after un-docking. So I scrubbed my launch and launched the same rocket with only 1 6 way DOS large hub. Docking worked fine. Launching a DOS with the Type 3 bottom node (5 way Hub) with 4 SQUAD BZ-52's used as attachment points for Docking ports still left me with locked docks. Bottom port would un-dock ONCE but none of the 4 side ports I put on individually (Symmetry 1x) would un-dock and the bottom port was locked after the first undock. My game crashed out when I was trying to dock onto a NON SSTU tank with a surface attached SC-GEN-DP-1P. I plan on launching another mission today trying that before downloading the latest update (after RL stuff is done for the day.) THEORY: I have never had great luck with multi-use parts working *WELL* in game. Could the Parachute modules or other features of the docking ports be causing some of this? The Rename feature? Now the questions to everyone else. Are any of you having issues with Docking ports locking? I DO run a TON of mods and I am not running an SSTU + requirements exclusive game. I am currently not running any Docking port mods (Like Capt Kippard's Universal Docking ports,) But I do have several other mods that have added their own Docking ports (FASA, Cygnus etc.)
  3. So Station parts. Bug I thought I had narrowed down to SSTU + Connected living space has reared its ugly head again. Can not undock. Parts used. DOS power core with the bottom node having the DOS 6 way HUB as part of the station part (Not a separate 6x HUB). Installed 4 missing docking ports in 2x symmetry. No nodes appeared for the docking ports so they are surface attached. Launched my craft. Undocked from the bottom node. Moved tug to side node. Can not un-dock from the side node. All NODE attached docking ports work fine on my station but the Surface attached ones do not undock. I will test another station core later today with same parts but add the BZ-1 (Squad) Surface attach Node attachment before placing the docking ports on. I am using exclusively the SC-GEN-DP-1P 1.25m docking ports on this. All parts with built in ports seem to work great. All parts with Node attached ports seem to work great. Bottom Node of DOS Power core worked for undock and then 2nd ship dock.
  4. @RedParadizeI am assuming you were responding to my liking the tinker toy "Elbow Macaroni" Torus station... I do not worry about spinning. It is a Torus therefor it spins. Does not mean the game needs to make it spin. If stock game supported persistent rotation without a mod that becomes buggy when lots of parts are involved (as you allude to) it would be one thing. Even if you run RO/RSS this game does not have enough Physics points to be real accurate. It is more game than a simulation. Mind you a Kick-butt game with lots of AWESOME modders that has soaked over 1200 hours of playtime out of me. Besides, I am running 14 parts mods on my laptop (22 parts mods on my gaming desktop with SSTU in both.) 3 or 4 more parts is a small price for something cool and re-usable. x64 FTW! Hmm, I need to play with those Merlins some more... I keep skipping them for the Russian or Saturn derived engines. The picture is PERFECT @Shadowmage
  5. I would love to see this kind of Torus construction in space. I don't think it would be TOO complicated either. The biggest issue is that you can only use X size Torrus for Y Part... unless you make less than a perfect wheel. Each piece could have either a 3 way Docking node (one inside the torus, one on each end of the Torus piece. Or a Torus piece with a one time 180 degree rotation and two docking ports. The Rocket would need an angled docking port as well to interface with the part and keep the COM in line with the base Rocket. Alternatively. The Part could launch as a "Scrunched" cylinder and then when activated expand/inflate to a curved structure. Just like a Zeppelin of the 1910s, the structure would be both inflated and rigid allowing it to withstand rotational and gravitational forces.. One side of the "Scrunched" and "Activated" Torus part would need to be painted a different color to make it easy to dock with the correct orientation... But think about all the Helical stations that could be made with such a part and some 6 way Junctions with docking ports....
  6. THANKS for trying to find the answer before you posted. Those of us here a long time appreciate it!
  7. First, Love the LR-81 engines. I have not unlocked them yet in my Career yet so hope I don't step when I ask. Will these have a buried mount similar the the RS-68 / are they 0.625m or smaller so a fixed shrouding structure/Mono tank can surround it like the Agena A, or the Agena Target Vehicle? http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/rm-81.html Second, I don't play with any life support mods so I won't comment on that part. The geometry changes for those modules looks great so far however. I am seeing lots of career missions spawn for stations wanting 10+ Hab in my game. Mind you I have a ton of mods and some of those (DMagic likely) could be spawning the larger capacity station missions.
  8. I too use them but I would prefer to use @CardBoardBoxProcessor and co's KOSMOS URM Engine parts. They are even more fantastic looking! While I wish him all the best in his Digital Imaging endeavor I would love to have CBBP back on working on more engines. His art skills with those engines is absolutely amazing. Of course I can say the same thing about @Shadowmage and the SSTU engines
  9. First off @delta wee Welcome to Kerbal Space Program. I see you are relatively new to the Forums. If you are using the 6.0 Pre-release They are not available. Why? See the post directly above yours. If you are using the last 5.94 release from Frizzank, They are there but not usable in the latest builds of KSP. If you are still playing 0.90 to play with FASA, more power to you, but you should know how to find the craft files if you can still play 0.90 As of RIGHT NOW, until SQUAD fixes the wheels/gears this is a PARTS pack not a SHIP pack Several parts will not work until SQUAD can fix these issues. These are KNOWN issues and much of the non mod forums are filled with comments about this. As many of these parts are REQUIRED to build many of the FASA rockets, no craft files are provided Please read the last 4 or 5 pages before posting questions in a forum. As @raidernick has implied the post right before yours, it gets annoying when everyone keeps asking for completion dates or repeated questions that (the mod developers) are not paid for. Hey, other than some personal use work I have done for myself, I am NOT a mod developer for this or any other mod and it is ANNOYING to me.... PLEASE Consider others before you post
  10. Ok so testing complete. Single Bell engines NOT of RD-170 decent (IE the NK-33, etc) seem to work fine. All the RD-170 engine family have no gimbal... Except wait. I DID get the RD-180 to Gimbal.... ONCE Here is what I did; Disabled Gimbal in the VAB. Once I was on the Pad I opened all the "Triggered tweakables," DE-Selected BOTH Gimbal commands, De Selected Pitch,Yaw and Roll, Then I reversed my process and Viola! I had a working Gimbal.... Right until I Krakkened the Universe... Love a Rocket that has no planets to orbit around.
  11. @tomasantony Funny! I am just today playing with URM engines myself. First off I have the latest plugin from @MOARdV but it is obviously for an older release and is as the notes state, limited, in what it can do. I do have updated data entered in my test build for all the engines, as well as many engine variants (same models) that were not covered (RD-151 for example.) And no, what I have right now can not be released (the license.) I am however making headway on the engines (the only part I actually care about sadly.) I still find these to be the best looking and most authentic working Russian engines in the game. Unfortunately no gimbal on my first test flight (just finished.) If I can get things to work... I will update. Back to Testing
  12. I was wondering the same thing. Best part, it appears to only have STOCK and SSTU parts. Unlike a lot of other (mine) launchers needed to get to Duna and Beyond. So unrelated to above posts but totally in SSTU. I usually make a 3 Hub based super "Tinker Toy" ship to explore past Kerbin. Still running @Kommitz's Nukes on the outbound flight and back. I know the ISRU (or whatever that acronym is supposed to be) was put in place so we could get to and fro without massive tanks but I have never liked the grind it introduced. With the SSTU DOS docking ports, has anyone else thought to make such a ship? My last career game (pre) SSTU had me use the same ship for three "there and back" missions to the outer planets. I finally got stuck in the gravity well of Jool with no chance of a refuel (Tankers from Kerbin were filling it up at Kerbin return point.) I guess what I am asking is what are your other suggestions using SSTU's modular part structure?
  13. Yep that is one of many possible outcomes. ALL of them are bad... BUT it is a nice fireworks show @raidernick Is doing a Great job but cant even touch them until 1.2 assuming the exiting .mu file will work. *UNRELATED* I am pleased to report that I have no Docking/un-docking issues in the current launch cycle for my 2nd Kerbin station. I have 5 parts in (DOS and TKS derived parts mostly thusfar) and everything is behaving correctly... well as correctly as a pre-release can. *RE my previous posts on Docking ports...* it APPEARS that Connected Living space bombs the ports out of you try to move a Kerbal through a blocked path. In going through my limited notes on Kerbal Contract Station 1, I noticed that I had tried to move a Kerbal from a habitat can to a science lab before I had issues un-docking. VERY MINOR weird glitch with the tracking solar panels pm tje mew station parts. Every time I come back to the scene they "Re-aquire" their sun pointing as if they have been out of proper alignment for days... Even if I only JUST left the scene for 5 seconds. I will try again with my new station once I get the next 3 launches up (later tonight.) Currently my station is running on the DOS attached as built panels and a few stocks ones.
  14. Ok, Let me start with a Complete list of mods (PER AVC, a few extras not listed and sorry I don't know how to hide this in the new forum) KSP: 1.1.3 (Win64) - Unity: 5.2.4f1 - OS: Windows 10 (10.0.0) 64bit Toolbar - 1.7.12 USI Tools - 0.7.4 B9 Part Switch - 1.4.3 B9 Aerospace Procedural Parts - 0.40.7 Community Resource Pack - 0.5.4 Contract Reward Modifier - 1.0.2.3 DMagic Orbital Science - 1.3.0.2 CapCom Mission Control On The Go - 1.0.2.4 Contract Parser - 1.0.4 Contracts Window Plus - 1.0.6.4 Progress Parser - 1.0.5 Ferram Aerospace Research - 0.15.7.2 Firespitter - 7.3 JSIAdvTransparentPods - 0.1.7 RasterPropMonitor - 0.27 Kerbal Engineer Redux - 1.1.1 Kerbal Joint Reinforcement - 3.2 HyperEdit - 1.5.2.1 KSP-AVC Plugin - 1.1.6.1 ModularFlightIntegrator - 1.1.6 Docking Port Alignment Indicator - 6.4 NearFutureElectrical - 0.7.7 NearFuturePropulsion - 0.7.4 NearFutureSolar - 0.6.2 NearFutureSpacecraft - 0.5.1 PlanetShine - 0.2.5 QuickSearch - 3.0.2 RCS Build Aid - 0.8.1 RealChute - 1.4.1.1 RealPlume - Stock - 0.10.9 SafeChute - 2.0 SCANsat - 1.1.6.3 SpaceY Lifters - 1.13.1 SSTULabs - 0.5.32.121 StageRecovery - 1.6.4 TAC Fuel Balancer - 2.8 Kerbal Alarm Clock - 3.7.1 Transfer Window Planner - 1.5.1 TweakScale - 2.2.13 USI Survivability Pack - 0.5.4 Waypoint Manager - 2.5.3 Yeah, a lot of mods and obviously happy to run X64 again! Not listed are: FASA 6.0 Prerelease with some alternate cfgs for the Gemini chutes (RealChute compatability.) and a lot of additional PARTS mods (Airplane Plus, My cfgs for Soviet Engines (.64 scale in size and thrust in line with other RW engines at .64 scale and a few others.) SSTU specific parts involved with not undocking. ANY SC-GEN-DP-1P dock that has already attempted an undock from either another SC-GEN-DP-1P or from the DOS Docking hub (small.) None of the parts I have added to the station AFTER reporting this issue (as a TEST I launched the LARGE DOS multiport adapter with a HAB/LAB module and another TUG with the same docking port above... All of those I did not try to undock. I exited the game completely, launched a new KSP itterationand was able to undock..... only these parts I never attempted to undock before. If I gave you the save file I would have to send you about 40 CFG files for parts that I have altered the CFGs on (Specifically FASA fuel tanks and engines, that I have used as part of the Station structure.) Given me finding this today I think I can trace the issue. When I first tried to undock, I had crew on board and connected Living space mod installed. Note that CLS is now un-installed. New items un-dock freely. Old pre CLS mod removal parts will not undock. Every part I have tried to undock has a Probe core or a crew station with a pilot..... http://imgur.com/a/FHajg I am using HyperEdit to land the disfunctional space station. You can see the Bad weld between the two Solar arrays (closest to KSP in this view, the second one bends up,) All of the non DOS Colored ports are the SC-GEN-DP-1P 1.25m ports. The Back Left and Right (in this view) sections each have a single weld. The HAB side has a perfect weld, I was more patient. The Solar array side has about a 5 degree to the right and 7 degree up bend at this angle.
  15. I think in part the issue is that it took a lot of time (probably 20 or 30 seconds for the parts that welded correctly) to "meld together." Since I was using MechJeb's docking assistant that may have had a part to play in the issue. Port size was "Stock" 2.5m Since my first post I have been having an issue with UNDOCKING things that were on the station the last time I launched. I have to basically scrap my whole station due to the SSTU docking ports not undocking. I placed one module Front to back which is blocking off ports (Angular obstruction) I have Hyperedit but have not used it to Oribit any of the items on the station. I DID have to use it to land one of my tugs that I used at the Station. It was in danger of crashing into KSP (Failed chute no power to maneuver.) Is this Hyperedit shenanigans?
  16. Um, Paraglider for the Gemini Space Capsule anyone? How about Inflatable wings? Awesome Modlett Concept @linuxgurugamer
  17. First, I know this is an EARLY release of the station parts but I wanted to share my experience with a few of the parts. The Welding Docking ports are neat as well as long needed, but have minor issues. If there is no docking port autopilot, the docking ship can drift away while you switch perspective to the target, activate it's clamp then switch back. If the port should be armed BEFORE attempting to dock, then maybe should change the text to read "Ready to Dock" instead of "Armed." Since Armed implies the explosion (Weld) is NEXT. If nothing else, maybe a "Bug check" to make certain the ports are lined up and connected before performing the weld? As a docking ship, when I target the docking port it asks me to re-name ports and until I am very close (less than 500m as the crow flies,) I am unable to actually select the docking port and then declare it my target until I am closer than 500m. I had a Stock docking port on the station and could select it as my target from further away. I built a Tinkertoy station with predominantly SSTU, FASA and Stock parts. Even with the miss-aligned welds (my two Solar panel spars array is bent and twisted slightly out of alignment,) this is by far the best, most functional station I have been able to build. And that is with a patch work look due to the no textures. I have not launched any of the pre-built habitats yet but the DOS docking modules work great given the caveat above. Even with the bent weld the two Solar Panel spars I joined with the welding docking port do not collide with each other and are as rigid as anything can hope to be in a game where wobbliness is a requirement. They even stayed rigid under asymetrical thrust. Something other parts were unable to withstand.
  18. @Starwaster I have tried this with my own games and gave up. Mind you this was pre 113 (1.05 and 1,1,1) As soon as the rocket touches down had has zero VERTICAL speed the chutes cut, I have Diazo's Vertical Velocity control installed and can clearly see the Vertical speed is 0m/s at time of cut and then as the rocket falls I still see 0m/s on the display. But my Rockets are still moving as they tip over. It appears that KSP is reporting the Vertical velocity of the LOWEST part to Real Chute or atleast Diazo's VVC. Since I don't routinely land large rockets with chutes it wasn't a big enough issue for me (Staged Recovery to the Rescue.) Maybe I am missing some key piece of functionality here but there seems to be several related stay deployed on ground issues currently. EG I can not perform the primary RealChute Contracts (Test xxx Chute landed/Splashed down at Kerbin.) But Like I said that could be a known "Feature" or by Design and I just don't know about it.
  19. BEST NEW ENGINE EVER! A Rotary engine that actually Rotates! With 1.1.3 I am primarily a Rocket jockey but maybe this engine will allow slow enough flight not to totally break the landing gears PS, Eindecker here I come!
  20. With the exception of the afor mentioned issues caused by How Real Chute interacts with FASA 6.0, I see no "stability" issues with @raidernick's 6.0 Prerelease. IE 5.94 and 6.0PR (So long as you delete the RealChute MM file for FASA) work the same. Mind you I have not been flying Saturn I/II/Vs yet as I play almost exclusively career and I got side-tracked in my testing after the Parachute kerfuffle.
  21. And you won't be-able to until either one of the mod makers out there working on their own custom wheel collider system get theirs up and running (and the FASA mod is made compatible with it) OR SQUAD finishes the new (again) Wheel Collider in Stock.
  22. Thanks for the quick reply. I agree 100% you should not have to configure your parts for another Tech Tree other than stock. I was just shocked to be getting the parts in line with Moderately advanced space parts. Makes me wish I was good at making graphics so I could make my own Tech Tree....
  23. I actually did that and it didn't help. However a clean install with the same mods seems to have fixed the issue. I don't know what was causing the duplicates but I had 6 of each pod, a new duplicate for each time I started the save game.) I am messing arround with CKAN and while it is not real easy to use (I am sorry I can manually install faster and more reliably.) It DID make it easy for me to scrag the entire install and start from scratch. Yep confirmed it works. I do notice that the Capsule seems to be un-stable when in free-fall. Leaning towards the Parachute. Any chance of a COM offset for the Parachute so that it lines up with the center of the Pod? I lost a couple experiments that were attached on that side of the pod due to aeroforces. I am Using FAR (if that is causing it I do not know. First time since .25 I have used FAR.)
  24. Since I also came to ask about the nodal placement, I will change my question to; What Tech Tree are you using? In the Stock Tech Tree,I am flying Redstone analog rockets in Tech Tree level 2-3. Saturn I Analogs at 5-6. Assuming you are using Stock Tech Tree. That would put the V-1710/V-1650 Analogs in line with the Pratt and Whitney J-58 (SR-71) Or the General Electric J93 (B-70 Valkyrie) And yes before you say it, the Stock Tech tree sucks. But that is what most of the mod users are still using, and I have not seen a good tech Tree mod that fits the Human History of flight (everyone seems to me to gets too focused in ONE facet of flight.) I final thought. We get the Junkers Jumo 004B engine (Juno 04) at Node 3.
  25. Cool, Interesting pods, but I keep getting duplicate entries in my career for the pods. Did you change the folder structure or rename parts?? This has been since the July 5th update.
×
×
  • Create New...