Jump to content

ss8913

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,372

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ss8913

  1. ss8913
    I'll try it; It seems to only affect existing designs, not NEW designs, which kind of supports your theory about what happened, actually.
  2. ss8913
    hmm.. @FreeThinker something seems to be wrong with the "Winged Edge Radiator - Med" part in this release. Updated KSPIE today, loaded KSP.. loaded a ship that worked fine 2 days ago, and now in the editor it says that the mass is about 5 billion tons and the launch cost is 72 quintillion credits. The winged radiator parts are either showing up massive (like 100x the size of the VAB) or tiny (0.1 scale), and.. I'm perplexed. the behavior is definitely bad, but it's also inconsistent, and I can't find anything useful in the logs. Tweakscale hasn't been updated in the last 2 days, so it's not that... I haven't tried it with all my craft yet, since after trying it on 2, loading ships affected by this bug caused KSP to crash in an unrecoverable state, and I'm having to restart my PC to clean it up and re-launch.
  3. ss8913
    @FreeThinker - I realize that the AI Core is limited to 3.75m for balance reasons... would it be amiss to ask for one with the same overall mass and volume, but with a smaller diameter? ie, a 1.25m one that is longer, same weight, but.. 1.25m? also 2.5... I know I can edit the part.cfg and allow tweakscale to scale them now, but, for game balance reasons I'd think it better to have native versions, kind of like with the antimatter tanks? I love the AI core for scanner probes... but with the 3.75m limit, I have to make a really big spaceplane to deploy them, would rather have it in a smaller more compact size so I can fit them into cargo bays more easily.
  4. ss8913
    PSA: the build 691 mechjeb build works better with KSPIE than the official release. Mostly in that it understands the higher torque available from the KSPIE RCS and can actually make use of it. Landing guidance is still really really broken, but I think that has more to do with the graduated response of the KSPIE engines than anything else. I think.
  5. ss8913
    I'm a little conservative, but I usually manually open them around 700 just to be safe. Having it be a configurable option would solve the problem 100% and would make it compatible with any aero system since players could just tune it for what they're using.
  6. ss8913
    I'm noticing that the mach numbers don't always match up when the indicator goes from the %.2f format to the %.3f format. reproducible: fly a plane with the FAR window open (plane must be capable of at least 1.50M for this to show up). Accelerate to 1.50M and back down again, watch the mach number in the window. Other than that it seems like this is pretty darn good. It functions at least as well if not better than the official release for 1.1.3 did, with 1.1.3. Also of note, @linuxgurugamer 's new version of EVA parachutes, unlike the previous version of that mod, *does* work with FAR (previous version the chutes created no drag with FAR). I'm personally chasing down a parachute-opening-height issue, but in the meantime it works if you manually do the full chute deployment. Saved quite a few kerbals last night with it. Glad to see this compatibility is back and working.
  7. ss8913
    So... what configuration variable governs the altitude at which the chutes are FULLY deployed? A link to the source on github would also work, as I could figure it out myself that way.... and maybe submit a patch; I'm pretty convinced that this is a FAR compatibility issue, but I hear FAR is juuust about done, so.. happy to contribute something if I can.
  8. ss8913
    @FreeThinker any ideas on the compressedAir issue? There have been a couple of posts from me and at least one other person, they kind of got buried in all of the [also much appreciated posts/updates regarding beamed power, that's a really sophisticated system you've built here and it's great] but I and apparently some others are concerned about what that conversion slider does/how it is supposed to work, and the usability of compressedair in practice.
  9. ss8913
    One more thing - well, kinda 2... I notice the MJ2 forum thread has been locked on Mar 20 (no idea why, can't find any info)... I notice that my framerates get progressively slower as I play KSP, and I find that in my logs, I find a ton of: [LOG 00:38:45.869] [MechJeb2] Exception in MechJebModuleStageStats.RunSimulation(): System.Exception: FuelFlowSimulation.SimulateStage reached max step count of 100 at MuMech.FuelFlowSimulation.SimulateStage (Single throttle, Double staticPressure, Double atmDensity, Double machNumber) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at MuMech.FuelFlowSimulation.SimulateAllStages (Single throttle, Double staticPressureKpa, Double atmDensity, Double machNumber) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at MuMech.MechJebModuleStageStats.RunSimulation (System.Object o) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 I know MJ2 has a lot of trouble with KSPIE's engines.. I'm not sure if the framerate hit is coming from something that MJ2 is doing or not doing, or if the problem is coming from the *logging*.. is there a way to turn off logging for a module? I'm thinking I may have to scrap MJ2 but that would make things very, very, very uncomfortable for me. I was hoping to open a discussion with Sarbian on how to get MJ2 to play nicer with KSPIE's engines, but... he may be gone now, I have no idea. Any help appreciated. Telling me to get bent, while not appreciated, wouldn't be completely unexpected, and I'd understand
  10. ss8913
    weird. I thought any reactor that produced ThermalPower could power a thermal engine. Why is that not true?
  11. ss8913
    hm. tried using a QSR as a thermal power source for a thermal engine (plasma or thermal ramjet)... it works, but the thermal power output of the QSR fluctuates up and down when the engine is throttled up, causing fluctuations in thrust and ISP. Why is this happening? I have plenty of power maintaining the QSR reaction, and it doesn't matter what power value i set the QSR to, it does this at any setting. I don't see anything obviously wrong, and only this reactor exhibits this behavior.. other thermal reactors deliver consistent power. Any ideas? I also notice wasteheat is building up a lot faster than in previous versions.. had to re-do some designs that were working OK a couple of days ago.
  12. ss8913
    not nearly fast enough, though. powering 1 or 2 ATILLA thrusters will eat through it faster than I can make it replenish it, and by eat it fast, I mean "just a few seconds of useful thrust".
  13. ss8913
    you also need enough generators... a 5m antimatter reactor and a 5m charged particle generator is usually enough to power even the biggest of warp drives.... to a point. If you're only going within the Kerbol system you're fine; if you have a mod pack like the really nice Trappist-1/Interstellar Adventures pack, and the stars are further away, you're going to want something that can push 250c for 100+ days, and for that you need the QSR (works well, IMO; I have a ~2000t starship that can push 250c for *years* using 2 QSRs and a really big heavy warp drive). @FreeThinker I'm having some trouble with tweakscaling these parts (latest tweakscale, latest KSPIE)... either the problem is new, the problem is worse now, or I've always had this problem and somehow didn't notice, but... for example the plasma nozzle... all else being equal, I get more thrust and dV out of a 3.5m engine compared to a 5m engine, assuming a 5m antimatter reactor. It's like the weight scales up more than the thrust does on this thing. Also if I just scale the part in place the numbers on it are *weird*. like the weight, dV calculations, thrust calculations, everything... if I remove the engine and reattach it, things go back to normal; I don't recall seeing this problem before, so not sure if it's new or not.
  14. ss8913
    That one I can help with.. you have to bind an action to the pod's "Eject Crew" function in VAB/SPH. You could bind the abort functionality to it if you wanted to. Also, the pods may not HAVE this functionality unless you apply the MM patch for all pods, which is done by changing the .cfg.patch file in the mod's folder to simply .cfg, and then restarting KSP.
  15. ss8913
    I have a problem which I think can be fixed by tweaking configs, but I need some advice on *how* I'm using this with the FAR dev build which is likely the source of the issue; different aero. I have the patch to add ejection to all command pods. I get a test plane up in the air, I push my action group button to eject them all.. they eject, parachute semi-deploys. Looks good! they slow down, etc... but the chute doesn't FULLY deploy until about 200m off the ground, and that is WAY too late. How do I fix it so the main chute opens sooner? I tried turning min pressure down to 0.00 or 0.01 (default is 0.04), that had little to no effect. Thanks in advance!
  16. ss8913
    I've always noticed that there is no water mine able on land on lathe. There are "hydrates" however which you can convert to water with the MKS agriculture helper part... but that does require crew.
  17. ss8913
    Does this iteration of this mod work with FAR, or only with stock aero? UPDATE: I tested it myself. YES, unlike previous versions of this mod, it DOES work with FAR (using latest FAR dev build). Awesome job!
  18. ss8913
    @linuxgurugamer I'm still having trouble with heading hold. If I'm in straight and level flight and turn on heading mode with 0 degrees plugged in, it keeps that heading.. but in previous KSPs/versions of this mod, I could plug in, say, 320 and it'd turn to head 320. Now if I change the heading it has.. unpredictable results, and it no longer seems to hold a heading or turn to one. I'm not sure why. ALL other modes of the autopilot including the landing/ILS guidance work exactly as expected. Just this one function. Is this just me? Others seeing this?
  19. ss8913
    This has been reported in the KSPIE thread as well. Not sure which mod needs the fix applied though, but at least we know it's in front of the right group of people
  20. ss8913
    @ferram4 - latest dev build I've noticed something.. every once in a while the mod just... doesn't work. Like I'll be on the runway with my FAR window open and the reynolds number is 0.00. This has happened in the past but only after having KSP running for a really long time. With the latest build it seems to be more unpredictable, but in the past the only way to solve it was to exit KSP entirely and restart; now it seems solve-able with, usually, a "revert to launch". Ignoring this has the expected effects; no lift, no drag, crash in the ocean. Anyone else observed this? I'm running a ton of other mods so it may be *my* setup specifically, so I'm asking if there are other corroborating data points out there...
  21. ss8913
    Me too although release date should be 2017 not 2016... ... in the thread title
  22. ss8913
    so about that compressed air thing... any ideas? am I using it wrong, is it broken, or is it just the wrong solution for what I'm trying to do?
  23. ss8913
    @FreeThinker - I tried the compressed air feature. here's my feedback: 1. I built a spaceplane with 2x 2.5m compressed air tanks set to '95' for the compressedAir <-> intakeAir slider (what is this supposed to do? I notice if i start the tanks empty, a positive value fills the tanks, a negative value does nothing, and likewise the '100' value does nothing. is that a bug?) 2. I put resistojet RCS in compressedAir mode, as well as 2 ATILLA thrusters for VTOL use, on compressedAir mode, balanced with TCA. 3. main propulsion is a conventional thermal ramjet nozzle attached to an antimatter reactor. 4. intakes are 2x heavy ram air intakes and 2x SABRE-M intakes which are .. a lot of intake for a plane this size. So I take off vertically using compressedAir for the ATILLA and the RCS thrusters for balance. It takes all of 10-15 seconds to run the compressedAir tanks dry trying to hover over the runway. The .. air compressors.. can't keep up with the draw. I'm not sure what to do; a huge craft with the tank size necessary to buffer the loss from the ATILLA wouldn't be a good use of this technology, IMO... I'm using these in the same way I used to use ATILLAs in atmospheric mode and it's... completely useless. Cooling them is hard enough, but feeding them air is apparently a losing battle. Not sure what to do; is this realistic? are there bugs involved? Not sure where to go with this.
  24. ss8913
    is this due to the difference between IntakeAir and IntakeAtm?
  25. ss8913
    I too am waiting for this.. I used to use ATILLA on atmospheric mode quite extensively, and that has been removed without a replacement the thermal turbojets kind of work but they take a long time to cycle up/down which makes hovering an issue of chasing the throttle a LOT... in closed cycle mode they don't do this, which I suppose makes sense... but I'm also curious as to why in atmospheric mode they cycle DOWN more slowly than they cycle UP. You'd think that closing the throttle would restrict airflow over the reactor and it wouldn't need to cycle down since without any intake airflow it doesn't matter how fast the N2 turbine (if it has one) is spinning since there's no input mass to eject, right? So I suppose @FreeThinker I kind of combined two issues in that paragraph.. lol.
×
×
  • Create New...