[1.3.x] SETI, Unmanned before Manned [Patreon]

Lord Aurelius · April 2, 2015

@5thHorseman, Yemo

Thanks for the table tips for the signature, I've got it sorted out now.

Also, FreeThinker posted some code for a basic microgravity kerbal health experiment for the hitchhiker on the stock science tweaks thread that looks like a nice addition.

Edited April 2, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

zilfondel · April 3, 2015

I've got a strange issue with tweakable parts after installing SETI. Specifically, my solid rocket booster (first level) produces a different amount of thrust and TWR before I launch and revert to fly it a second time. The delta-V goes from ~1,900 m/s and 1.6+ TWR to 1,500 m/s and 1.16 TWR, with no change to the craft itself. Although I have no experience with tweakable parts and SETI before, I find this behavior very odd.

Any thoughts? Obviously I have a ton of mods installed, but I figure its something with tweakable parts that is causing it. And its not just a misreported KER value, as the craft itself on the first launch accelerates like a bat out of hell, and once I revert and fly it a second time, performs much differently (slower, less thrust).

Lord Aurelius · April 3, 2015

@zilfondel

I think I remember seeing a post awhile back with similar issues, I think the root cause was with a bug in procedural parts. With that first level booster, when you first place it the default size is actually larger than what you're supposed to be able to build at that point, it could be an issue of procedural parts not checking its limits until the reload at which point it sees that you're not supposed to be able to build a rocket with that much thrust yet so it nerfs the thrust. Try rebuilding the rocket, making sure to adjust some of the procedural parts parameters on the booster so it updates its limits correctly.

zilfondel · April 3, 2015

@zilfondel
I think I remember seeing a post awhile back with similar issues, I think the root cause was with a bug in procedural parts. With that first level booster, when you first place it the default size is actually larger than what you're supposed to be able to build at that point, it could be an issue of procedural parts not checking its limits until the reload at which point it sees that you're not supposed to be able to build a rocket with that much thrust yet so it nerfs the thrust. Try rebuilding the rocket, making sure to adjust some of the procedural parts parameters on the booster so it updates its limits correctly.

I'm actually seeing that issue as well, but if I change anything at all with the part, it performs differently the first time vs reverting. Then when I exit out of the VAB and fly it again, its overpowered.

This is preventing me from getting Jeremiah to above 18 km, as I have killed him about 30 times in a row, as the TWR of the craft can vary from < 1 to > 2 on the same craft. Overheating, command pod or parachute explodes and coming down at 1+ km/s after testing a craft that perfectly makes it to 22 km and makes a soft landing during a test is a bit annoying!

Also, playing with Kerbal Construction Time makes this worse, as I have to simulate the rocket and then put it in a queue before I can fly it.

zilfondel · April 3, 2015

Ok, I think this may have had something to do with interactions between tweakscale and PP. I pulled tweakscale, as I actually meant to install tweakable everything instead.

jimos · April 3, 2015

I can't seem to get this to load the tech tree ive downloaded it through ckan and through kerbal mod admin and it doesn't wor, it worked yesterday before i had to remove the game and reinstall it but now it wont work at all, i see it loading seti in the module manage but when i get into the game i cant choose the tech tree

Edited April 3, 2015 by jimos

Yemo · April 3, 2015

@5thHorseman, Yemo
Thanks for the table tips for the signature, I've got it sorted out now.
Also, FreeThinker posted some code for a basic microgravity kerbal health experiment for the hitchhiker on the stock science tweaks thread that looks like a nice addition.

You are welcome, I ll take a look at the experiments!

I've got a strange issue with tweakable parts after installing SETI. Specifically, my solid rocket booster (first level) produces a different amount of thrust and TWR before I launch and revert to fly it a second time. The delta-V goes from ~1,900 m/s and 1.6+ TWR to 1,500 m/s and 1.16 TWR, with no change to the craft itself. Although I have no experience with tweakable parts and SETI before, I find this behavior very odd.
Any thoughts? Obviously I have a ton of mods installed, but I figure its something with tweakable parts that is causing it. And its not just a misreported KER value, as the craft itself on the first launch accelerates like a bat out of hell, and once I revert and fly it a second time, performs much differently (slower, less thrust).

As Lord Aurelius said, there is a minor issue with the first tech node restrictions. You have to rightclick on the SRB so that it conforms to the limits.

As you only have unrecoverable probes at that point, I figured it is not much of an issue, since you lose the first rocket anyway. And with basicRocketry, this issue should go away.

While there are issues with tweakscale and procedural parts, this is not one of them, as far as i know. SETI was balanced with tweakscale (and at least the other bold mods in the OP) in mind, so removing it might cause balancing problems later on.

For a more detailed support, please provide the version you are using (win/linux, 32bit/64bit?) and a screenshot of your GameData folder.

I can't seem to get this to load the tech tree ive downloaded it through ckan and through kerbal mod admin and it doesn't wor, it worked yesterday before i had to remove the game and reinstall it but now it wont work at all, i see it loading seti in the module manage but when i get into the game i cant choose the tech tree

CKAN had some problems recently, for a more detailed support, please provide the version you are using (win/linux, 32bit/64bit?) and a screenshot of your GameData folder.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Yemo

SwGustav · April 3, 2015

I think SETI-guide should be expanded with "common (technical) issues" or similiar FAQ.

And a mod suggestion

zilfondel · April 3, 2015

As Lord Aurelius said, there is a minor issue with the first tech node restrictions. You have to rightclick on the SRB so that it conforms to the limits.
As you only have unrecoverable probes at that point, I figured it is not much of an issue, since you lose the first rocket anyway. And with basicRocketry, this issue should go away.
While there are issues with tweakscale and procedural parts, this is not one of them, as far as i know. SETI was balanced with tweakscale (and at least the other bold mods in the OP) in mind, so removing it might cause balancing problems later on.
For a more detailed support, please provide the version you are using (win/linux, 32bit/64bit?) and a screenshot of your GameData folder.
CKAN had some problems recently, for a more detailed support, please provide the version you are using (win/linux, 32bit/64bit?) and a screenshot of your GameData folder.

*UPDATE* - issue is found to be caused by a bug with Procedural Parts' SRB interaction with Ferram's Kerbal ISP Difficulty Scaler. In particular, when launching a rocket the thrust of an SRB gets reset to the default max value, for whatever reason.

original post follows

---------------------------------

Thank you for your reply. I've taken a few more steps in trying to figure this out and solve it.

I have:

1) removed tweakscale

2) the latest round of mods I checked and installed by hand

3) created a brand new craft

4) ran it through a KCT "simulation" to record its performance

The craft consists of a parachute, procedural cylinder, aircraft cabin with Jeb in it, another cylinder below it, and a tiny, short procedural SRB below it with just a tiny bit of fuel.

Problem Summary:

I still cannot get my Kerbal up to 18km due to the ongoing issue I am having with thrust and burn times not matching what I see in the editor with KER - the rocket has a thrust 10 times higher than what I design for in the VAB, making it essentially totally uncontrollable and it burns through its fuel far too quickly. This means Jeb goes straight up, and comes straight down at too high of a speed to deploy a parachute. I need a slower ascent to transition to a more ballistic trajectory to glide down a little slower. I actually succeeded the first time I tested a rocket, but have been unable to recreate this flight despite dozens of test flights since then, all ending in impacting the surface at high speed.

In-editor - KER values:

thrust: 33.360 kN

TWR: 1.07

burn time: 1m 23s

And this is what happens when I launch my rocket [gfycat]

In-flight values

thrust: 312 kN

burn time: ~11-12 seconds

TWR: ?!?!

====================================

Technical Info

KSP version .90, 32 bit

OS: Windows 7, 64 bit

System RAM: 12 GB

KSP RAM usage: 3.6 GB

Mod List - snapshot of Gamedata folder


 Volume in drive C has no label.
 Volume Serial Number is AE2C-5BDB


 Directory of C:\Program Files (x86)\Kerbal Space Program 90\GameData


04/03/2015  12:32 PM    <DIR>          .
04/03/2015  12:32 PM    <DIR>          ..
04/01/2015  01:34 AM    <DIR>          000_Toolbar
12/24/2014  12:23 PM    <DIR>          000_USITools
03/27/2015  07:14 PM    <DIR>          0PinlineFairings
04/02/2015  12:51 PM    <DIR>          ActiveTextureManagement
01/28/2015  09:19 PM    <DIR>          AJE
12/25/2014  06:50 PM    <DIR>          AtomicAge
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          B9_Aerospace
04/01/2015  01:48 AM    <DIR>          WaypointManager
04/01/2015  01:32 PM    <DIR>          BahaSP
03/26/2015  12:43 PM    <DIR>          VerneTech
12/27/2014  07:21 PM    <DIR>          BetterBuoyancy
04/01/2014  11:39 PM    <DIR>          BoulderCo
01/16/2015  01:27 AM    <DIR>          Chatterer
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          CIT
04/01/2015  01:21 AM    <DIR>          CoherentContracts
01/18/2015  10:12 PM    <DIR>          CommunityResourcePack
04/01/2015  01:57 PM    <DIR>          CommunityTechTree
04/01/2015  01:34 AM    <DIR>          ContractConfigurator
04/01/2015  01:21 AM    <DIR>          ContractPacks
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          Contract_science_modifier
04/01/2015  03:29 PM    <DIR>          CrossFeedEnabler
04/02/2015  01:12 PM    <DIR>          CustomAsteroids
04/02/2015  04:02 PM    <DIR>          DDSLoader
03/31/2015  01:37 PM    <DIR>          DeadlyReentry
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          Diazo
03/27/2015  07:09 PM    <DIR>          UmbraSpaceIndustries
11/02/2014  08:55 AM    <DIR>          DistantObject
03/26/2015  01:13 PM    <DIR>          EditorExtensions
12/16/2014  12:42 PM    <DIR>          EnhancedNavBall
04/02/2015  12:50 PM    <DIR>          EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements
03/18/2015  02:36 PM    <DIR>          EvilCorp
04/01/2015  01:37 PM    <DIR>          FARuP
04/01/2015  01:57 PM    <DIR>          FerramAerospaceResearch
03/29/2015  04:58 PM    <DIR>          TriggerTech
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          Firespitter
04/01/2015  01:36 AM    <DIR>          FMRS
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          FreedomTex
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          KAS
04/01/2015  12:14 PM    <DIR>          KerbalConstructionTime
04/03/2015  11:25 AM    <DIR>          KerbalEngineer
04/01/2015  01:34 AM    <DIR>          KerbalFlightData
10/07/2014  02:09 AM    <DIR>          KerbalIspDifficultyScaler
02/06/2015  09:18 PM    <DIR>          KerbalMass
03/14/2015  10:51 AM    <DIR>          KIS
04/02/2015  04:02 PM    <DIR>          KittopiaSpace
02/28/2015  02:18 PM    <DIR>          Kopernicus
04/01/2015  03:49 PM    <DIR>          kOS
05/21/2014  03:26 AM    <DIR>          KSPTweaks
03/16/2015  11:05 AM    <DIR>          LLLTruckCab
03/26/2015  09:14 PM    <DIR>          Trans-Keptunian
03/29/2015  05:26 PM    <DIR>          TimeControl
04/01/2015  03:29 PM    <DIR>          ThunderAerospace
09/07/2014  07:40 PM    <DIR>          ModuleRCSFX
03/14/2015  03:49 PM    <DIR>          NASAmission
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          NavyFish
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          Nereid
09/18/2014  12:14 AM    <DIR>          OblivionAerospace
10/26/2014  01:24 PM    <DIR>          OLDD
04/02/2015  01:06 PM    <DIR>          OPM
04/01/2015  02:12 PM    <DIR>          Pilot Assistant
12/20/2014  10:00 AM    <DIR>          PlanetShine
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          ProceduralFairings
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          ProceduralParts
03/26/2015  01:13 PM    <DIR>          QuickScroll
03/31/2015  10:33 AM    <DIR>          RemoteTech
03/20/2015  04:43 PM    <DIR>          Rover Cabin
04/02/2015  01:08 PM    <DIR>          TextureReplacer
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          SETI
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          ShipManifest
03/23/2015  01:11 PM    <DIR>          SH_mods
03/31/2015  10:36 AM    <DIR>          SmartParts
04/01/2015  01:21 AM    <DIR>          spacetux
03/14/2015  03:50 PM    <DIR>          Squad
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          StockBugFixModules
04/01/2015  01:05 PM    <DIR>          SXT
04/01/2015  01:57 PM    <DIR>          TechManager
03/23/2015  01:11 PM    <DIR>          Yarbrough08
04/02/2015  11:23 PM               123 ModuleManager.ConfigSHA
04/02/2015  11:23 PM         2,102,237 ModuleManager.ConfigCache
04/03/2015  12:14 PM             2,716 toolbar-settings.dat
03/26/2015  09:14 PM            53,760 ModuleManager.2.5.13.dll
04/03/2015  12:14 PM               463 FinalFrontier.dat
04/03/2015  12:44 PM                 0 dir.txt
04/01/2015  05:25 PM             2,670 barometric vacuum science.cfg
04/01/2015  01:32 AM            22,016 BackgroundProcessing-0.4.0.1.dll
04/02/2015  11:41 PM                79 S.A.V.E.dat
               9 File(s)      2,184,064 bytes
              79 Dir(s)  25,202,737,152 bytes free

- - - Updated - - -

UPDATE!

Ok, on a hunch I removed Ferram's "Kerbal ISP Difficulty Scaler."

And it works now. So... guess I have to go complain to either Ferram or the Procedural Parts guys, eh?

Posted this on the ISP Difficulty Scaler thread, and may also post on the PP thread.

INDEED, this is a recognized bug regarding SRBs (and only SRBs?) on the Procedural Parts Github

Edited April 3, 2015 by zilfondel
found cause

Yemo · April 3, 2015

I think SETI-guide should be expanded with "common (technical) issues" or similiar FAQ.
And a mod suggestion

Yep, seems like a good idea with the FAQ, Not sure where to place it though, I have a feeling that the guide is not read by many of those who would profit from it.

About the mod suggestion: The capsule looks great, but I m not sure about the trunk and the solar panel problem. Maybe I just disable the trunk for now?

I also went back in the thread and found your post, where you recommended the Mk2 Essentials (they sounded familiar, but I forgot, sorry) and will take a look again at those mods.

Since I was not able to find a sufficient workaround for the TweakScale-ProceduralParts issue yet, which is absolutely required for KSPI extended support, I will probably release another 0.8.x update.

Also the IR plugin and model reworks made great progress with the newest releases and I will recommend that one in the OP from now on:

IR plugin rework: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/114014

IR model rework: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65365

Thank you for your reply. I've taken a few more steps in trying to figure this out and solve it.

I have:

1) removed tweakscale

2) the latest round of mods I checked and installed by hand

3) created a brand new craft

4) ran it through a KCT "simulation" to record its performance

The craft consists of a parachute, procedural cylinder, aircraft cabin with Jeb in it, another cylinder below it, and a tiny, short procedural SRB below it with just a tiny bit of fuel.

Problem Summary:

I still cannot get my Kerbal up to 18km due to the ongoing issue I am having with thrust and burn times not matching what I see in the editor with KER - the rocket has a thrust 10 times higher than what I design for in the VAB, making it essentially totally uncontrollable and it burns through its fuel far too quickly. This means Jeb goes straight up, and comes straight down at too high of a speed to deploy a parachute. I need a slower ascent to transition to a more ballistic trajectory to glide down a little slower. I actually succeeded the first time I tested a rocket, but have been unable to recreate this flight despite dozens of test flights since then, all ending in impacting the surface at high speed.

In-editor - KER values:

thrust: 33.360 kN

TWR: 1.07

burn time: 1m 23s

http://i.imgur.com/yjEUMbgl.png

And this is what happens when I launch my rocket [gfycat]

In-flight values

thrust: 312 kN

burn time: ~11-12 seconds

TWR: ?!?!

====================================

Technical Info

KSP version .90, 32 bit

OS: Windows 7, 64 bit

System RAM: 12 GB

KSP RAM usage: 3.6 GB

Mod List - snapshot of Gamedata folder


 Volume in drive C has no label.
 Volume Serial Number is AE2C-5BDB


 Directory of C:\Program Files (x86)\Kerbal Space Program 90\GameData


04/03/2015  12:32 PM    <DIR>          .
04/03/2015  12:32 PM    <DIR>          ..
04/01/2015  01:34 AM    <DIR>          000_Toolbar
12/24/2014  12:23 PM    <DIR>          000_USITools
03/27/2015  07:14 PM    <DIR>          0PinlineFairings
04/02/2015  12:51 PM    <DIR>          ActiveTextureManagement
01/28/2015  09:19 PM    <DIR>          AJE
12/25/2014  06:50 PM    <DIR>          AtomicAge
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          B9_Aerospace
04/01/2015  01:48 AM    <DIR>          WaypointManager
04/01/2015  01:32 PM    <DIR>          BahaSP
03/26/2015  12:43 PM    <DIR>          VerneTech
12/27/2014  07:21 PM    <DIR>          BetterBuoyancy
04/01/2014  11:39 PM    <DIR>          BoulderCo
01/16/2015  01:27 AM    <DIR>          Chatterer
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          CIT
04/01/2015  01:21 AM    <DIR>          CoherentContracts
01/18/2015  10:12 PM    <DIR>          CommunityResourcePack
04/01/2015  01:57 PM    <DIR>          CommunityTechTree
04/01/2015  01:34 AM    <DIR>          ContractConfigurator
04/01/2015  01:21 AM    <DIR>          ContractPacks
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          Contract_science_modifier
04/01/2015  03:29 PM    <DIR>          CrossFeedEnabler
04/02/2015  01:12 PM    <DIR>          CustomAsteroids
04/02/2015  04:02 PM    <DIR>          DDSLoader
03/31/2015  01:37 PM    <DIR>          DeadlyReentry
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          Diazo
03/27/2015  07:09 PM    <DIR>          UmbraSpaceIndustries
11/02/2014  08:55 AM    <DIR>          DistantObject
03/26/2015  01:13 PM    <DIR>          EditorExtensions
12/16/2014  12:42 PM    <DIR>          EnhancedNavBall
04/02/2015  12:50 PM    <DIR>          EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements
03/18/2015  02:36 PM    <DIR>          EvilCorp
04/01/2015  01:37 PM    <DIR>          FARuP
04/01/2015  01:57 PM    <DIR>          FerramAerospaceResearch
03/29/2015  04:58 PM    <DIR>          TriggerTech
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          Firespitter
04/01/2015  01:36 AM    <DIR>          FMRS
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          FreedomTex
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          KAS
04/01/2015  12:14 PM    <DIR>          KerbalConstructionTime
04/03/2015  11:25 AM    <DIR>          KerbalEngineer
04/01/2015  01:34 AM    <DIR>          KerbalFlightData
10/07/2014  02:09 AM    <DIR>          KerbalIspDifficultyScaler
02/06/2015  09:18 PM    <DIR>          KerbalMass
03/14/2015  10:51 AM    <DIR>          KIS
04/02/2015  04:02 PM    <DIR>          KittopiaSpace
02/28/2015  02:18 PM    <DIR>          Kopernicus
04/01/2015  03:49 PM    <DIR>          kOS
05/21/2014  03:26 AM    <DIR>          KSPTweaks
03/16/2015  11:05 AM    <DIR>          LLLTruckCab
03/26/2015  09:14 PM    <DIR>          Trans-Keptunian
03/29/2015  05:26 PM    <DIR>          TimeControl
04/01/2015  03:29 PM    <DIR>          ThunderAerospace
09/07/2014  07:40 PM    <DIR>          ModuleRCSFX
03/14/2015  03:49 PM    <DIR>          NASAmission
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          NavyFish
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          Nereid
09/18/2014  12:14 AM    <DIR>          OblivionAerospace
10/26/2014  01:24 PM    <DIR>          OLDD
04/02/2015  01:06 PM    <DIR>          OPM
04/01/2015  02:12 PM    <DIR>          Pilot Assistant
12/20/2014  10:00 AM    <DIR>          PlanetShine
04/01/2015  01:36 PM    <DIR>          ProceduralFairings
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          ProceduralParts
03/26/2015  01:13 PM    <DIR>          QuickScroll
03/31/2015  10:33 AM    <DIR>          RemoteTech
03/20/2015  04:43 PM    <DIR>          Rover Cabin
04/02/2015  01:08 PM    <DIR>          TextureReplacer
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          SETI
04/01/2015  02:53 PM    <DIR>          ShipManifest
03/23/2015  01:11 PM    <DIR>          SH_mods
03/31/2015  10:36 AM    <DIR>          SmartParts
04/01/2015  01:21 AM    <DIR>          spacetux
03/14/2015  03:50 PM    <DIR>          Squad
04/01/2015  01:32 AM    <DIR>          StockBugFixModules
04/01/2015  01:05 PM    <DIR>          SXT
04/01/2015  01:57 PM    <DIR>          TechManager
03/23/2015  01:11 PM    <DIR>          Yarbrough08
04/02/2015  11:23 PM               123 ModuleManager.ConfigSHA
04/02/2015  11:23 PM         2,102,237 ModuleManager.ConfigCache
04/03/2015  12:14 PM             2,716 toolbar-settings.dat
03/26/2015  09:14 PM            53,760 ModuleManager.2.5.13.dll
04/03/2015  12:14 PM               463 FinalFrontier.dat
04/03/2015  12:44 PM                 0 dir.txt
04/01/2015  05:25 PM             2,670 barometric vacuum science.cfg
04/01/2015  01:32 AM            22,016 BackgroundProcessing-0.4.0.1.dll
04/02/2015  11:41 PM                79 S.A.V.E.dat
               9 File(s)      2,184,064 bytes
              79 Dir(s)  25,202,737,152 bytes free

- - - Updated - - -

UPDATE!

Ok, on a hunch I removed Ferram's "Kerbal ISP Difficulty Scaler."

And it works now. So... guess I have to go complain to either Ferram or the Procedural Parts guys, eh?

I have no knowledge of the Kerbal ISP Difficulty Scaler, but I will keep that in mind if someone else reports the issue, thank you!

Also, your problem with coming in too fast for parachutes is based on the shape of your rocket. It is too aerodynamic when going down. You can solve that by puttin a decoupler below the cockpit and discard the bottom.

You also might want to take a look at the SETI-craft files provided within the manual download. The SETI High Altitude Rocket looks very much like your craft, but with the added decoupler and different TWR/deltaV based on whether you choose the minMods or FAR+partMods variant.

You can actually take a look at its FAR values in the second post of this thread, which contains the SETI Guide.

zilfondel · April 3, 2015

I have no knowledge of the Kerbal ISP Difficulty Scaler, but I will keep that in mind if someone else reports the issue, thank you!
Also, your problem with coming in too fast for parachutes is based on the shape of your rocket. It is too aerodynamic when going down. You can solve that by puttin a decoupler below the cockpit and discard the bottom.
You also might want to take a look at the SETI-craft files provided within the manual download. The SETI High Altitude Rocket looks very much like your craft, but with the added decoupler and different TWR/deltaV based on whether you choose the minMods or FAR+partMods variant.
You can actually take a look at its FAR values in the second post of this thread, which contains the SETI Guide.

Apparently you can avoid the issue entirely and still use KIDS if you simply disable the KIDS option for "thrust scales with ISP."

Lord Aurelius · April 3, 2015

I was randomly watching KSP videos on youtube and saw the Kerbal Foundries mod, it has a nice selection of stockalike parts for future updates. I especially like the repulsorlift drives, that would go well with KSP interstellar for late tech tree stuff.

Also, I seem to remember seeing something awhile back (could be my imagination) about integrating RoverDude's Freight Transport Technologies. Is that still happening? I like the idea of those ducted electric fans.

Edit: I think it was actually the USI Exploration Pack that I was thinking of.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

zilfondel · April 4, 2015

Hey guys, just wanted to say that this mod is really awesome. Finally nailed my first successful manned suborbital flight, Jeb came away a veritable hero.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

It was quite the epic flight, especially flying it from the IVA perspective with a joystick and throttle control. The descent reminded me of the X-15, although I didn't have to land on a runway. I forgot to collect my crew report, but oh well.

Anyway, so far this mod is 10/10 - its like playing a total conversion for KSP. Keep up the good work!

Edited April 4, 2015 by zilfondel

Lord Aurelius · April 4, 2015

@zilfondel

Congrats on your successful flight. Even if you're used to stock, with a full maxmods install (which I assume you're playing with given the toolbar in those screenshots) the game is completely different and can take awhile to get used to, especially with procedural parts, FAR and DRE.

Looking forward to an account of your first successful manned mun landing. It's always interesting for me to see all the different approaches people take for the same task in this game (it's part of what makes it so great). I usually end up with overbuilt Saturn 5 style rockets that are unnecessarily complex, I think I might try for a minimalist, single-kerbal approach this evening...

Lord Aurelius · April 4, 2015

I had a little fun building a low-tech manned mun mission this evening:

Warning: 1080p screenshots ahead

The biggest annoyance at this low tech level is the low limit on the procedural tank diameter (1.25m at this point) which inflates the part count and results in the interesting upper stage. The 20m height limit in the level 2 VAB was also an issue, right now the rocket is barely under it. Still, I managed to get a working Mun lander. It has all the science experiments available at that point (barometer/thermometer combo, magnometer, 2 science bays) and has plenty of life support and fuel cell resources for extended missions.

SwGustav · April 4, 2015

About the mod suggestion: The capsule looks great, but I m not sure about the trunk and the solar panel problem. Maybe I just disable the trunk for now?

Yeah, that sounds alright, I actually wanted to propose it too.

Also, I seem to remember seeing something awhile back (could be my imagination) about integrating RoverDude's Freight Transport Technologies. Is that still happening? I like the idea of those ducted electric fans.
Edit: I think it was actually the USI Exploration Pack that I was thinking of.

Yemo said they both were gonna be supported after Karbonite, but nothing so far and they're not even in development list..? Guessing it's because of Interstellar, still would be nice to hear about them

Yemo · April 4, 2015

Apparently you can avoid the issue entirely and still use KIDS if you simply disable the KIDS option for "thrust scales with ISP."

Good to know, I ll write it in the OP, thank you.

I was randomly watching KSP videos on youtube and saw the Kerbal Foundries mod, it has a nice selection of stockalike parts for future updates. I especially like the repulsorlift drives, that would go well with KSP interstellar for late tech tree stuff.
Also, I seem to remember seeing something awhile back (could be my imagination) about integrating RoverDude's Freight Transport Technologies. Is that still happening? I like the idea of those ducted electric fans.
Edit: I think it was actually the USI Exploration Pack that I was thinking of.

I m trying to balance the USI Exploration Pack, but one of the problems are the command pods. They only weigh 150kg, yet they provide all the functionality of a full cockpit at 1000kg. And they can be used for space flight although that would require a fully pressurized cockpit and life support. Especially since the kerbals take off their helmets...

Really not sure what to do about them, maybe increase the mass to something like 800kg? But that would make them far less useful.

Hey guys, just wanted to say that this mod is really awesome. Finally nailed my first successful manned suborbital flight, Jeb came away a veritable hero.
http://imgur.com/a/jIhHS
It was quite the epic flight, especially flying it from the IVA perspective with a joystick and throttle control. The descent reminded me of the X-15, although I didn't have to land on a runway. I forgot to collect my crew report, but oh well.
Anyway, so far this mod is 10/10 - its like playing a total conversion for KSP. Keep up the good work!

You are welcome!

From your screenshots I can see that you are not using Ven's Stock Revamp. I highly recommend it, since it not only provides better textures, but also new parts which, together with RLA Stockalike, greatly increase your options for building rockets. Especially the solar panel selection is increases, which is really helpful with Background Processing.

I had a little fun building a low-tech manned mun mission this evening:
Warning: 1080p screenshots ahead
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78894495/Lander.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78894495/Mun%20Rocket.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78894495/Tech%20Tree.jpg
The biggest annoyance at this low tech level is the low limit on the procedural tank diameter (1.25m at this point) which inflates the part count and results in the interesting upper stage. The 20m height limit in the level 2 VAB was also an issue, right now the rocket is barely under it. Still, I managed to get a working Mun lander. It has all the science experiments available at that point (barometer/thermometer combo, magnometer, 2 science bays) and has plenty of life support and fuel cell resources for extended missions.

Not sure how to deal with that diameter annoyance. Imho the 2.5m diameter is ok at heavyRocketry node, since it really is a great step forward and not too close to liquid fuel engine introduction itself.

Maybe a 1.875m diameter unlock before heavyRocketry? At least you could put a fillet tank on the lander and/or V2 shaped fuel tanks on the lower stages?

Personally I use the 1x3 or 1x4 adapters from generalConstruction for heavy early landers.

Yeah, that sounds alright, I actually wanted to propose it too.
Yemo said they both were gonna be supported after Karbonite, but nothing so far and they're not even in development list..? Guessing it's because of Interstellar, still would be nice to hear about them

Well, as I still do not have a viable solution for the TweakScale-ProceduralParts issue, and KSPIextended makes excessive use of TweakScale while SETI makes escessive use of ProceduralParts, there will be some more update(s) before 0.9...

Since I always forget to update the dev list, I only put major mods/modpacks in there.

But those 2 specifically might be in the next update if I can not find a TweakScale-ProceduralParts solution first...

Lord Aurelius · April 4, 2015

@Yemo

I like the idea of 1.875m earlier, the combination of the 1.25 diameter restriction and the lack of fuel lines early on means the only way to get larger stages at that point is to build vertically, but the low height limit for the level 2 VAB seriously limits how far I can build in that direction. Unfortunately, that height limit appears to be hard-coded and I haven't seen any mods to override it.

Edit: It could also be that I'm technically trying to launch a lot more than I should from a level 2 VAB and that my Mun mission is horribly inefficient.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

Yemo · April 4, 2015

@Yemo
I like the idea of 1.875m earlier, the combination of the 1.25 diameter restriction and the lack of fuel lines early on means the only way to get larger stages at that point is to build vertically, but the low height limit for the level 2 VAB seriously limits how far I can build in that direction. Unfortunately, that height limit appears to be hard-coded and I haven't seen any mods to override it.
Edit: It could also be that I'm technically trying to launch a lot more than I should from a level 2 VAB and that my Mun mission is horribly inefficient.

Might be, but I ll see if I can implement 1.875m diameter in the next update anyway. It is an odd diameter, because the adapters are not really useful for it and engines do not fit either, so it is not really a problem for general progression.

WARNING: SERIOUS Kerbal Inventory System BUG!

When KIS is installed, the mass of command parts is drastically increased.

Ablative Shielding and Monoprop are twice added to the mass of the command part, instead of only one time.

Thus eg a command part with a mass of 2 tons dry and 2.8 tons with monoprop and ablative shielding now has a mass of 2.8 tons dry and 3.6 tons wet.

This is a serious issue for ongoing missions as well as gameplay balance.

Lord Aurelius · April 4, 2015

@Yemo

Another thing I noticed while building that Mun lander, the modular girder segment is still quite heavy (.125t), especially compared to the procedural structural elements. A did a quick test and a procedural structural element about the same size and volume only weighs about 20kg. The girder should be heavier than the structural element due to the increased impact resistance, but not that much heavier.

smjjames · April 4, 2015

@Yemo
Another thing I noticed while building that Mun lander, the modular girder segment is still quite heavy (.125t), especially compared to the procedural structural elements. A did a quick test and a procedural structural element about the same size and volume only weighs about 20kg. The girder should be heavier than the structural element due to the increased impact resistance, but not that much heavier.

Hm, I think I'll look at some of my ships with and without KIS to see if theres any mass changes.

I looked at some of my unmanned (and thus no monoprop carrying command pods) ships and after being confused momentarily by MechJeb adding the weight of the clamps in flight, the only discrepancy that I found is what looks like a MJ rounding error from 366.426 to 366.425.

I don't use the modular girders on any of them (are you talking about the IR ones?) or use tweakscale, so what you're seeing is not from KIS.

EDOOT: Actually, I may have misunderstood your post as talking about a possible bug with KIS, if it isn't, then ignore this post, heh.

Edited April 4, 2015 by smjjames

Yemo · April 4, 2015

@Yemo
Another thing I noticed while building that Mun lander, the modular girder segment is still quite heavy (.125t), especially compared to the procedural structural elements. A did a quick test and a procedural structural element about the same size and volume only weighs about 20kg. The girder should be heavier than the structural element due to the increased impact resistance, but not that much heavier.

Hm, imho the 80m/s impact tolerance is absurd. What about setting the impact toleranced to 8m/s for non-landing parts? I m not sure I can set them lower for landing gear without serious gameplay problems, but at least the landing on girders instead of landing legs would stop.

Hm, I think I'll look at some of my ships with and without KIS to see if theres any mass changes.
I looked at some of my unmanned (and thus no monoprop carrying command pods) ships and after being confused momentarily by MechJeb adding the weight of the clamps in flight, the only discrepancy that I found is what looks like a MJ rounding error from 366.426 to 366.425.
I don't use the modular girders on any of them (are you talking about the IR ones?) or use tweakscale, so what you're seeing is not from KIS.

I think it is a general wet mass/dry mass issue with KIS.

Infernal Robotics Rework (plugin and models)

And while you mentioned IR, I will shift the IR support from standard InfernalRobotics to InfernalRobotics Plugin Rework and InfernalRobotics Model Rework. No SETI changes required, I ll just update the OP.

Lord Aurelius · April 4, 2015

@smjjames

I actually don't use KIS, I'm waiting for a stable version (especially after Yemo's major bug warning). I was pointing out a balance issue with that particular part.

@Yemo

That's a reasonable change as well. In that case, could we get some kind of fixed landing leg for early lander probes (maybe a rescaled I-beam with a rescaled structural plate welded on the end so you can reuse the stock models)? Part of the reason I use girders is because there's no fixed landing skid/leg/etc. and the aircraft landing gear look ridiculous, (but are actually the best option early in the game due to their low weight and durability, plus the built-in landing lights). I'm assuming you would rather not have players using aircraft landing gear on space probes, but right now it's the best available option early on, especially if you nerf the girders.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Lord Aurelius

Yemo · April 4, 2015

@smjjames
I actually don't use KIS, I'm waiting for a stable version (especially after Yemo's major bug warning). I was pointing out a balance issue with that particular part.
@Yemo
That's a reasonable change as well. In that case, could we get some kind of fixed landing leg for early lander probes (maybe a rescaled I-beam with a rescaled structural plate welded on the end so you can reuse the stock models)? Part of the reason I use girders is because there's no fixed landing skid/leg/etc. and the aircraft landing gear look ridiculous, (but are actually the best option early in the game due to their low weight and durability, plus the built-in landing lights). I'm assuming you would rather not have players using aircraft landing gear on space probes, but right now it's the best available option early on, especially if you nerf the girders.

Dr. Jet's Chop Shop has something like the Modular Girder Adapter but without the bottom plate. It is a very interesting mod pack, but I would need some time for support, especially due to the 2-axis solar panels (which are a very interesting concept and the original reason for me to look at that mod). There are quite a lot of other great parts in that pack...

For a simple core SETI fix, I could bring the LT-5 Micro Landing Legs to survivability, allowing for earlier probes.

SwGustav · April 4, 2015

Maybe remove Active Struts from suggestions? Since it's now basically comes with IR rework and its dev is halted

[1.3.x] SETI, Unmanned before Manned [Patreon]

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation