Jump to content

[1.2.2] TestFlight - v1.8.0 - 01 May 2017 - Bring Flight Testing to KSP!

Agathorn

By Agathorn
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

M4ssler

M4ssler

Posted
Posted (edited)

Good evening,

what i´m doing wrong? If i start a test flight or a build rocket i become du (data unit), if i go back and show the info of the part it had 0.00/10000.00 all the time.

The R&D buttom told me that i can manage engineering teams and i can start research program from the vab. How do i do that. i try to understand the quick giude and the test flight wiki, but that doesn´t help me. I have no buttons to right click at the parts. just show test flight info with middle mouse button.

Maybe someone other can do please.

edit: i go back to version 1.6.0.3 and there i have the r&D button at the parts by rightklick on it. and it works (why not in 1.7?)

Edited by M4ssler
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jarraya

jarraya

Posted
Posted (edited)

Seems the problem is more complicated than this. Please ignore!

_________

Edit: Seems I get some errors with KCT with RP-0 installed.

------

This is a great mod! However I am having a problem that the mod introduces a small pause into the action every few seconds. I've narrowed it down to this mod, as when I uninstall it the gameplay is restored to normal.

I'm running RSS, Realism Overhaul and RP-0.

Any help appreciated!

Edited by jarraya
New information
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TranceaddicT

TranceaddicT

Posted
Posted

I'm having a little problem with TestFlight.  It seems that information provided in the VAB is being repeated.

This is happens in all my installs; including this clean install with ONLY TestFlight and ModuleManager installed.

HpQPwhyHpQPwhy.png

 

Also,  did you remove the R&D functionality?  I no longer have this option available within the VAB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Buisson

Buisson

Posted
Posted

Hello

May I suggest the idea of introducing a new feature that would involve a possible mishap on the launchpad before launching a new launch vehicle ?

This, however,  might need some kind of other feature like a stageable fueling. :huh:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
nablabla

nablabla

Posted
Posted

Hi, I found a potential problem:
I am using test flight in realism overhault(RP-0)

I added some "Castor" solid rocket boosters,. They have a rated burn time of 30s and a burn time of 30s.

They are too strong, so I reduced the thrust to 50%, the burn time goes up to 60s, but the rated burn time stays the same (30s).

As a result the boosters fail all the time. I would expect that lower thrust boosters are less expodifyable.

 

best regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Sandworm

Sandworm

Posted
Posted (edited)

I just tried. No, testflight doesn't seem to work under 1.2.  Agathorn hasn't been around in months.  Is there an alternative with the same functionality?

 

I'm attempting a recompile myself, but that has never ended well for me before.

Edited by Sandworm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
razark

razark

Posted
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Sandworm said:

Is there an alternative with the same functionality?

There are a couple with similar failures.  One of them does random failures from launch up to a certain altitude, so you can have launch failures, but nothing happens on orbit.

Nothing I've seen simulates the research and decreasing failure rate, though.

 

See here:

 

Edited by razark
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
John FX

John FX

Posted
Posted

Hello, just came from another thread where someone mentioned pushing engines past 100%, as is possible in real life. My first thought was the mod which already has failures and upgrading of engines so I would like to ask for a feature.

I reckon it would be really cool to be able to push engines past 100% to reduce burn time and increase thrust with penalties of reliability, fuel economy, and overheating. The RD-191 for example can throttle down to 30% but also throttle up to 105% for short durations. IIRC the SSME was regularly throttled up to 104.5% after `data from flights` showed it to be safe with 109% possible for emergencies although that was not thought reliable.

What do people think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TranceaddicT

TranceaddicT

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, John FX said:

IIRC the SSME was regularly throttled up to 104.5% after `data from flights` showed it to be safe with 109% possible for emergencies although that was not thought reliable.

I don't know about the RD-191, but the SSMEs are throttleable to 109% not because they are over-driving the engines.  It's because of design enhancements made over the course of the years.  The original SSMEs are based on the RS-25.  Over the years, there have been the RS-25A, B, C and (bloody) D.  With the A upgrade, instead of re-writing everything for a new thrust value of 100%.  NASA decided to keep the old everything the same and change the engine output to greater than 100%.  Also, he D can actually be pushed to 111% in the event of an emergency.

"Specifying power levels over 100% may seem nonsensical, but there was a logic behind it. The 100% level does not mean the maximum physical power level attainable, rather it was a specification decided on during engine development—the expected rated power level. When later studies indicated the engine could operate safely at levels above 100%, these higher levels became standard. Maintaining the original relationship of power level to physical thrust helps reduce confusion, as it created an unvarying fixed relationship so that test data (or operational data from past or future missions) can be easily compared. If the power level was increased, and that new value was said to be 100%, then all previous data and documentation would either require changing, or cross-checking against what physical thrust corresponded to 100% power level on that date."

History of Liquid Rocket Engine Development in the United States 1955-1980 (California Liquid Rocket Propulsion History Colloquium, Aas Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, Astronautical Society Series, Vol 13) by Stephen E. Doyle

Edited by TranceaddicT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
razark

razark

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

So I'm a bit interested in this mod, specifically in getting it updated to 1.2.1

That makes, what, three different failure mods you're working on?  I think you just hate Kerbals and want to kill them off faster!

 

3 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Would there be interest in helping me test this?

While I would be interested, I cannot commit to being a reliable tester for you.  Hopefully someone with the time will be able to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
razark

razark

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, razark said:

...three different failure mods you're working on?

Is there any possibility you might look into creating a Unified Failure Mod in the future, bringing together aspects of all three?

I like TestFlight's increasing reliability as you increase flight time, but I also like Launch Failure's focus on launch time only, and not having to worry about coming back to find all the fuel has leaked out of my ship, and it's now stuck in orbit.  I haven't tried Dang It to see how it plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
razark

razark

Posted
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Two of the three, yes.

Frankly, add on a Launch Failure style "stop checking at X altitude", and I think I could be happy.  Although, Dang It allows for repairs, IIRC, so it might be more bearable than this one.

And I must say, I'm impressed with the number of mods you've taken on.  I hope you don't get burnt out on it all.

Edited by razark
Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...