Splendid Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 theres a dll file in the kosmos pack. where do i put that file?its called 'MuMechLib.dll'That goes for the plugin folder, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asaman Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I have a slight problem with this pack. I have downloaded the Kosmos space station parts and Angara rocket parts, and extracted both of them to my parts folder. However, KSP does not show Kosmos Station parts for some reason =/Also, when I try to download one version of Kosmos Station parts (I think .rar one), it tells me that the archive is corrupt. Angara parts work without any problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC1062 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I tried making a mobile munbase, but I seemed to run into trouble whenever I attached multiple carts to the same structure. When you try to turn, the lack of a differential between the carts causes them to tear the base apart.Hmm, maybe now that C7 has unpowered landing gear . . .Tried the crab wheels?(Can\'t wait to see it... Assuming you show it... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normak Posted March 21, 2012 Author Share Posted March 21, 2012 There will be a small update to SSPP tomorrow and a slightly larger one to Angara tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Normak Posted March 21, 2012 Author Share Posted March 21, 2012 I have a slight problem with this pack. I have downloaded the Kosmos space station parts and Angara rocket parts, and extracted both of them to my parts folder. However, KSP does not show Kosmos Station parts for some reason =/Also, when I try to download one version of Kosmos Station parts (I think .rar one), it tells me that the archive is corrupt. Angara parts work without any problem.Check for the SSPP parts under the 'Useful and Scientific' section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asaman Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Check for the SSPP parts under the 'Useful and Scientific' section.Nope, it only shows Angara stuff =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabyalufix Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Tried the crab wheels?(Can\'t wait to see it... Assuming you show it... )Good call. Just for you, I\'m just gonna leave this here. An early version of The Muncrawler Mobile Munbase. It\'s going to be but one small part of the muntropolis I\'m working on.Edit: Serious question to CPPB and the Kosmos team: Why did you implement fuel types? A tank is a tank, what does it matter what\'s in it? All it does is force incompatibility with other mods. KSP is implicitly modular, why would you intentionally make things incompatible? It seems an odd decision.Why not just normalize fuel quantities by weight / form factor, and just presume that I fill my tanks with the correct fuel for the engine below it, and have the engines differ in fuel usage based on the normalized fuel quantities to simulate different fuel types? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Actually, the Kosmos maneuvering engines use normal RCS fuel, even the ones that are controlled by throttle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabyalufix Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 All the cool-looking Kosmos strutted fuel tanks have:'type = Pure LH2'The only engine I have found that uses this fuel is the 'Kosmos Expedition RD-0440 Engine', which is the long nerva engine.Once I realized what was happening, I just stripped out the offending lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I have a feeling that this is because the NERVA from Kosmos would be a massive cheat part otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOAST Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Ok, now don\'t cricify me for not having read all 24 pages, but I have a question;Knowing that there is no \'official\' means to dock in KSP, do the docking connectors provided in this pack, along with the plugin etc, actually allow for small multi-launch connection/rendezvous space station assembly? If so, which parts connects to which, or are they androgynous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigred2989 Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Parts for docking exist, but the act of docking is not possible at this time because it hasn\'t been put into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian858 Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Sorry if this is kind of a stupid question, or there is something I missed, but I cannot use certain parts as it states 'This part type isn\'t available in this version of KSP.'Is anybody else getting this? When I load the craft file though, those parts are there, but I still cannot use them from the part menu.I\'m running the latest version of KSP (purchased). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Make sure you\'ve installed the dll files. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian858 Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Fixed, forgot the DLL. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOAST Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Parts for docking exist, but the act of docking is not possible at this time because it hasn\'t been put into the game.Well, the question was implying as to whether plugins, or associated plugins, for this project had created a pseudo-docking system to accompany it along with the parts. But you have answered my question non-the-less. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I\'ve read a bit about MIR and found there\'s one module not modeled in this pack and used for docking the Space Shuttle. Could you take a look at modeling it, CBBP? It could come in handy when docking gets introduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabyalufix Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I have a feeling that this is because the NERVA from Kosmos would be a massive cheat part otherwise.Not really seeing how this makes it better. It just unrealistically restricts the engine to be unusable with anything but Kosmos tanks. If you normalize the fuel usage and fuel quantities, you should get functional equivalency. The engine weighs X, provides Y thrust and spends Z tons of fuel per minute. The internal 'fuel units' aren\'t actually important, since they cancel out of the equation, no?Is there a variable I\'m not seeing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardBoardBoxProcessor Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Not really seeing how this makes it better. It just unrealistically restricts the engine to be unusable with anything but Kosmos tanks. If you normalize the fuel usage and fuel quantities, you should get functional equivalency. The engine weighs X, provides Y thrust and spends Z tons of fuel per minute. The internal 'fuel units' aren\'t actually important, since they cancel out of the equation, no?Is there a variable I\'m not seeing?the KOSMOS fuel tanks actually have more fuel than normal per cubic meter and the engine is set to very low fuel. It is more to balance the tank parts than the engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabyalufix Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Still not sure I understand. In the config file there\'s a line which I think is trying to explain, but I can\'t figure out quite what it means:From the tank cfg:// fuel calc: volume of tank = pi * radius^2 * height = pi * 0.5^2 * 1.5 = pi * 0.5; quantity of fuel = 500; fuel per volume = fuel/volume = ~424 fuel-units per cubic meter then (fuel number/3) + fuel number) ((because of mono propellent) = 575 fuel per cubic meter. So you\'re saying it can store more fuel because it\'s a mono propellant? But the 'fuel unit' is completely internal, it doesn\'t affect anything on it\'s own except as a function of the paired engine. Why not just change the 'fuel unit' quantity in the tanks, and then modify the engine to match? That\'ll give you the same exact same functionality, with the added benefit that the tanks are universally compatible to the standard volume/fuel-unit ratios.I guess the problem there is that LH2 is lighter than H2/O2, so if you normalize with vanilla by volume, you\'ll get different values than if you normalize by mass.Maybe a plugin needs to get written that allows different fuels in the same tanks? The real annoying thing for me is I like to choose my tanks by form factor and appearance, because I like to build funky constructions. I don\'t like being hampered by restrictions like having to match tanks to engines. For one thing, I have 20 pages in my first tab . . . As for balance: NERVA engines are future tech. They will be better than the 1960-1970\'s apollo/mercury tech level that KSP appears to be based on. I mean, that\'s kinda the point, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardBoardBoxProcessor Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Nerva sort engines are older than Mercury. in fact the first nuclear rockets where simply nuclear ram jets developed for ICBMs before reliable long range rockets could be made. as for matching engines to tanks. i suppose. By why use something else? Nerva is a good engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabyalufix Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 To date, no nuclear thermal rocket has flown, although the NERVA NRX/EST and NRX/XE were built and tested with flight design componentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_thermal_rocketUnless you know something I don\'t. Source?Nerva is good, but the form factor doesn\'t really work well with landers (and it\'s shouldn\'t, really. It\'s not optimal for landers, it\'s for long-distance journeys). They\'re too long to fit under my muncrawler. I really like the look of those fuel tanks, but I can\'t use them as-is on my landers. The original muncrawler design was intended to be capable of 'bunny hops' using a set of low-power, low profile engines, for climbing steep mountains (like the edge of craters, in particular) and getting over bumps that would otherwise cause it to scrape bottom. It wasn\'t until I\'d landed the damn thing that I noticed that none of the engines worked (and I had already dropped the landing stage by this time. Shucks.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asmosdeus Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 My solar panels don\'t rotate to face the sun, in your pictures they do, however... How do I make them rotate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delt4 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 you can rotate solar panels with 0 and 9 and radiators with 8 and 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardBoardBoxProcessor Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 they where not nervas (the ram jets) and data on them is pretty rare. I saw a show on them on the discovery channel long ago before it started to suck. or maybe it was the military change when we had it. And I am not 100% sure they flew lol. ah here we go. Wiki has information on them now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts