Temeter Posted May 15, 2016 Share Posted May 15, 2016 You need to go in steeper. Usually capsule only use very little ablator, which mostly depends on how long you stay in atmosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanKell Posted May 15, 2016 Share Posted May 15, 2016 @Dawnstar Mercury had a negative perigee on reentry. 80km is a workable perigee for spaceplanes, not early capsules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsparkyc Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 On 5/14/2016 at 8:32 PM, rolls said: I'm having a problem with my craft always spinning clockwise with mechjeb and also the stock SAS, I've tried re-root but it seems the root node is offset for some reason. I've tried removing 90% of the craft but it always spins clockwise. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1428435/A%20full%20vehicle.craft This other vehicle crashes KSP immediately upon load that also used to work https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1428435/Mars%20Lander.craft I'm also having crashes inside the SPH editor however it doesn't make a crash log. Any ideas how to capture this? I'm also having an issue with it wanting to roll, even when I tell it not to roll, and it's always oscillating back and forth on both SAS modes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolls Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 27 minutes ago, rsparkyc said: I'm also having an issue with it wanting to roll, even when I tell it not to roll, and it's always oscillating back and forth on both SAS modes. I solved my issue. I had my joystick deadband set too low so it was getting user input even though I wasn't pressing anything. It is odd because it worked fine the day before, it just must have been borderline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsparkyc Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 42 minutes ago, rolls said: I solved my issue. I had my joystick deadband set too low so it was getting user input even though I wasn't pressing anything. It is odd because it worked fine the day before, it just must have been borderline. I don't have a joystick hooked up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbaratu Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 The kOS release that was put out tonight should address that infinitely growing mass bug that was making kOS unusable with RO: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warp11 Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 8 hours ago, Steven Mading said: The kOS release that was put out tonight should address that infinitely growing mass bug that was making kOS unusable with RO: Thank you for that, I was about to reinstall everything one at a time to find out what was going on and kOS would probably been one of the last things I checked. I thought it happened because of the Kerbal Counting thing. Great news, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Horizons Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Is there any chance we see support for the probes in RLA-Stockalike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Horizons Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Hey everyone. Is there any chance we see Ven's Revamp fully supportet? "FixedAntennas" might be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warp11 Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 (edited) Hello, I'm trying to make a really rough test flight config for the RD-275M, just so there's something there. I just copied the Test flight config from the RD-275 in RD253_Config.cfg, pasted it right underneath and then changed it to RD-275M and changed ratedBurnTime. It is kinda working, the engine did fail after an appropriate amount of time but the Test flight monitoring window keeps flickering between not recognizing the engine and the right data from it. Any ideas whats causing that? The file now looks like this after all the normal engine stuff: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs]:HAS[@CONFIG[RD-253]],!MODULE[TestFlightInterop]]:BEFORE[zTestFlight] { TESTFLIGHT { name = RD-253 ratedBurnTime = 148 ignitionReliabilityStart = 0.928 ignitionReliabilityEnd = 0.999 ignitionDynPresFailMultiplier = 0.1 cycleReliabilityStart = 0.928 cycleReliabilityEnd = 0.995 } } @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs]:HAS[@CONFIG[RD-275]],!MODULE[TestFlightInterop]]:BEFORE[zTestFlight] { TESTFLIGHT { name = RD-275 ratedBurnTime = 129 ignitionReliabilityStart = 0.928 ignitionReliabilityEnd = 0.998 ignitionDynPresFailMultiplier = 0.1 cycleReliabilityStart = 0.928 cycleReliabilityEnd = 0.998 techTransfer = RD-253:50 } } //this is what I added @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs]:HAS[@CONFIG[RD-275M]],!MODULE[TestFlightInterop]]:BEFORE[zTestFlight] { TESTFLIGHT { name = RD-275M ratedBurnTime = 167 ignitionReliabilityStart = 0.928 ignitionReliabilityEnd = 0.998 ignitionDynPresFailMultiplier = 0.1 cycleReliabilityStart = 0.928 cycleReliabilityEnd = 0.998 techTransfer = RD-253:50 } } Edited May 16, 2016 by Warp11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Temeter Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 (edited) @NathanKell Sorry to bug you again, but since you're the most active RO dev and this is a bit unusual: I've made new engine configs while fiddling with SSTU files, namely I took the AJ10-190 model, and created SXT style generic early/med/advanced AJ10 copies. Now that was originally more for myself, playing around with configs, but I think they might be useful to other people as well. Currently when playing RP-0, or searching for specific AJ10s, you often need to use SXT's AJ10s. Fine models, but a bit low res and you don't really have an alternative. On the other hand, SSTU's AJ10-190 is a slick, nice looking model with a small base and profiting by the mods multi-engine mounts. Also looks generic enough to stand for many different engines. Do you think they should be added to the RO configs? It's probably unusual to add completely new engines, but I always felt there was lack of more generic AJ10 engines in RO, and SSTU might be a very good candidate to add some. Edited May 16, 2016 by Temeter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrybold Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 guys i just burned up in the atmosphere using the first capsule. went for initial 60k perigee from LEO. ablator was fine but i just heated up and exploded around 80k. didnt change any configs yet...should i? PS: just want to make sure to thank you for all your great work again @NathanKell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsparkyc Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Does anyone know why the 1kN thruster has 3 attachment points? There's one at each end of the engine, and then a 3rd (bigger) one floating above the engine. What would I utilize that attachment port for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 1 hour ago, rsparkyc said: Does anyone know why the 1kN thruster has 3 attachment points? There's one at each end of the engine, and then a 3rd (bigger) one floating above the engine. What would I utilize that attachment port for? Sounds like one that you would use in place of the one at the bottom of the engine. An interstage's top node would attach there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Temeter Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, rsparkyc said: Does anyone know why the 1kN thruster has 3 attachment points? There's one at each end of the engine, and then a 3rd (bigger) one floating above the engine. What would I utilize that attachment port for? Ven stock revamp has upper attachment points which add an engine base, e.g. when you want to use 0.625m engines on 1.25m stacks. Might be that you still get these nodes - but not bases - when not using VSR. Edited May 17, 2016 by Temeter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsparkyc Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 42 minutes ago, Temeter said: Ven stock revamp has upper attachment points which add an engine base, e.g. when you want to use 0.625m engines on 1.25m stacks. Might be that you still get these nodes - but not bases - when not using VSR. I've seen those on some engines, but noticed that the upper attachment point was like 10 meters up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theysen Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 59 minutes ago, rsparkyc said: I've seen those on some engines, but noticed that the upper attachment point was like 10 meters up Relict from new VSR revamp where he made custom tank butts appearing when attaching on the upper most node. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolys_ Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 It's the the time of the question who appeared of nowhere ! It's possible to include the SSTU mod at RO ? their commands pods are se useful ! (Sorry if my english is bad, i'm french) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstnj Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) Question about SRB's in RO TWR is very low (.25 or lower)...what am I doing wrong? Im in career mode, about 1.5k science in, and the booster spans almost 3/4ths of my rocket. Edited May 18, 2016 by jstnj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsparkyc Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) Anyone have much luck using crafts from previous versions? I'm trying to launch the same rocket as I did here (https://youtu.be/B1RMaTW6IDM?t=15m25s), but when I put the rocket on the pad, it shows about half the deltaV it had in 1.0.5 (and performs like it has half the deltaV). If I go back to the VAB, it shows the new, reduced DeltaV number. If I try to adjust the utilization in the tank, many of the game controls freeze up. EDIT: It looks like it has to do with the fins I'm using. Doing some testing, it looks like the fins (both B9 and just the basic fin) are using up a lot more mass than in earlier versions, causing the problem. Take a look at this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pAozWC8BKac429Mfmb0o7a4OuZ3kOcNYLEzQQodE0-k/edit?usp=sharing The short version is this: it looks like for 3 basic fins, the mass of the fins went from .055t to .075t between versions (noticible, but not horrible). For the B9 wings however (which I made really small), the mass went from .002t to 0.152t (extremely noticeable). Edited May 18, 2016 by rsparkyc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub3350 Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) Are there any "RO approved" parts packs currently out that represent SpaceX or SLS? Better yet RO and RP-0 approved? Edited May 18, 2016 by jdub3350 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epsonik Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) the Space Launch System Part Pack has an RO config, and I'm pretty sure someone made a config for KK's Launcher Pack Edited May 18, 2016 by epsonik adding links Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub3350 Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 31 minutes ago, epsonik said: the Space Launch System Part Pack has an RO config, and I'm pretty sure someone made a config for KK's Launcher Pack Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirusKing Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 What are the specific configs for Remote tech? Is the mk1 antenna supposed to get coverage all the way out by the moon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorfulmoose Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 On 5/10/2016 at 10:25 PM, frisch said: I don't see it on Ckan, where is the easiest place to get it? thanks I'm having the same issue...partially. I've got CKAN installed on Mac and Windows machines, and the Mac sees RO just fine. Windows not so much. Can anyone shed some light on this? It's a little frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts