|
double nine posted:The second is that this satellite is flying higher than both its periapsis and apoapsis. What the hell??! I'm reading this as: Periapsis: 1,485,289 m Current Altitude: 1,486,349 m Apoapsis: 1,585,541 m Which seems to make sense. Or am I missing something?...
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
Do we have any confirmation that .24 (or future versions) will provide us the ability to transfer experiments from their respective parts without going EVA? I only ask because my last lander had the parts kinda buried and I couldn't get a Kerbal close enough to grab the data. e: I have the mod that lets you do it, but it doesn't render the right experiments unusable and so is kinda cheaty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
zxqv8 posted:e: I have the mod that lets you do it, but it doesn't render the right experiments unusable and so is kinda cheaty. Ship Manifest does properly render the experiments unusable and also lets you transfer kerbals and fuels, although the UI is a bit poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
Cheekio posted:Did you start with the probe core, or did you start with something else? I don't think the subassembly area will accept entire ships including the starting piece. That must be the problem, I was indeed starting with the probe core.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
In the previous thread there was a mech jeb ascent profile with FAR posted that worked great for me. I deleted my saves and can't remember the exact numbers for my new save, however, and now I can't find the post. If I remember correctly it started at 200m and ended at 70km and had a very hard turn. Does anyone remember it/have a link to the post?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
There is a guy working on a b9 expansion that has the option of replacing stock c7 parts: D12 aerotech
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
The Meat Dimension posted:I'm reading this as: Oh son of a dick. Don't play ksp when you're too fatigued, i guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
Garbo posted:In the previous thread there was a mech jeb ascent profile with FAR posted that worked great for me. I deleted my saves and can't remember the exact numbers for my new save, however, and now I can't find the post. If I remember correctly it started at 200m and ended at 70km and had a very hard turn. Does anyone remember it/have a link to the post? I set mine at 200m/70km with a 45% turn and it seems to work fine with most rockets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 09:01
|
|
|
Ratzap, Do you have Platinum? I need to pick your brains but don't want to poo poo up this thread unnecessarily. There's something I'm overlooking either to do with naming convention or file location and I'm not sure what.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
nimper posted:I set mine at 200m/70km with a 45% turn and it seems to work fine with most rockets. That causes my rockets to do flips at about 3km.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 10:01
|
|
|
Spookydonut posted:That causes my rockets to do flips at about 3km. Don't all FAR rockets do that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 10:04
|
|
|
Spookydonut posted:That causes my rockets to do flips at about 3km. Add fairings and make your rockets look more like dicks. Also add wings around the bottom to move the center of lift behind the center of mass.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 10:19
|
|
|
General_Failure posted:Ratzap, Do you have Platinum? I need to pick your brains but don't want to poo poo up this thread unnecessarily. There's something I'm overlooking either to do with naming convention or file location and I'm not sure what. have the conversation here, there is basically no documentation about modding so anything that you say here could be useful for someone later.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
nimper posted:Add fairings and make your rockets look more like dicks. Also add wings around the bottom to move the center of lift behind the center of mass. I'm using proc fairings, the thing is positively phallic. I've found about 80% turn shape causes no issues.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
Splode posted:have the conversation here, there is basically no documentation about modding so anything that you say here could be useful for someone later. If people are okay with that. I just feel kind of silly because my questions are kind of rudimentary. Any tutorials I've found are kind of vague and not too well written. I don't blame the writers though because technical documentation isn't for everyone. I know being taught it was dry as hell. I'm tired so I can't be specific right now but one thing I'm finding a little unclear is whether the .dll needs to share a name with the directory the mod is put in in GameData? Also whether a freshly compiled .dll yanked from "debug" (this kind of bothers me for reasons) can just be shoved in a Plugins directory in a directory I created in GameData for my experiments. I'll chuck this link here. It has potential but it gets vague in key areas which I'm finding frustrating. Ratzap provided some big pieces to the puzzle of getting the basics sorted and I didn't want to have to rely totally on that help. It's disjointed, vague about things like naming conventions and kind of trails off at a critical point. http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Creating_your_first_module Maybe I'm rear end backwards but what I'm having trouble with is working out the idiosyncrasies of the framework needed to get started. There's enough skeletons and mods with available source around to pull apart to work out the details of implementation. Or so it seems. Don't make me wrong, Internet. e: Have an image  It's the Kethane probe I sent to Minmus to make up for the lost scanner of the mining rig I sent out there. Not only is it compact but it utilizes a buttload of separatrons to deorbit the tanks when empty. General_Failure fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Apr 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
When using FAR, I've found that the best way to use MJ for ascent is to hold vertical with SAS until 100-250m, depending on TWR. At that point, pitch over to 85 degrees, on whatever flight azimuth you want (typically 90). Then, depending again on TWR, 1000-2500m, go to ADV in Smart rear end, select surface_velocity forward, and then let that ride until about 24km. By that point, you should be down to about 30-40° pitch, if you timed your turns right. If you turned too late, you'll be lofting, and have more pitch. If you turned too early, you'll probably get bogged down in the atmosphere, pitching over too fast, and have to abort. At 24km or so, sometimes a little higher (this isn't critical) switch to orbit prograde and ride until your apoapsis is satisfactory. Ditch fairings at 35 km or so, I try to have first stage burnout just before then. Coast to Ap and circularize. As you can see it involves a bit of button mashing on Smart rear end, I typically configure all these modes before liftoff. Set surf to 85 pitch, and ADV to surface velocity forward before takeoff, that way it's just switch panel, click execute when you're ready. MazeOfTzeentch fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Apr 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
General_Failure posted:If people are okay with that. I just feel kind of silly because my questions are kind of rudimentary. Any tutorials I've found are kind of vague and not too well written. I don't blame the writers though because technical documentation isn't for everyone. I know being taught it was dry as hell. as far as I can tell, it does not matter what the DLL is named. people use subdirectories because it segments the plugins neatly. You can also have interdependent DLLs within a plugin and between plugins.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
General_Failure posted:Ratzap, Do you have Platinum? I need to pick your brains but don't want to poo poo up this thread unnecessarily. There's something I'm overlooking either to do with naming convention or file location and I'm not sure what. Nope but I'm the same name on steam (I assume you have a steam account), we can chat via that if you like. Or as Splode said, we can just do it here. Mono creates your new DLL as <project>\Temp\bin\Debug\Assembly-CSharp.dll by default. You can change that by going to Project-> Assembly-CSharp Options - for instance I tell it to create the DLL as Fusebox.dll, you can switch debug to prod here too. A KSP DLL can be called anything that doesn't conflict with another DLL, there also seems to be some kind of tie in between the namespace and the DLL file name. If you use KSP.IO to load/save configs, it automatically creates a subdirectory called PluginData\<dllname> in the folder your DLL is sitting in. So it makes sense to keep it tidy and put your stuff in a folder underneath GameData but it's relative so you can put it several layers deeper too if you fancy. Ah, that wiki page is very, very old and the example won't work. To output to KSPs log file you use Debug.Log("a string"); Looking at it again it's a PartModule override, meaning code associated with a part you create. That's different from a plugin, you can tell because there is no :MonoBehviour; and no KSPAddon stuff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
I just saw there's a new FAR version, 13.2: Update to Module Manager 2.0.3 Aerodynamically-induced structural failures will now be applied. Beware of high dynamic pressure Updated flight status section of Flight GUI to be somewhat more useful and handle more situations Added IAS and velocity in knots, mph and km/h to the airspeed settings Reduced supersonic and transonic drag to somewhat more reasonable levels Increased floating point precision to double; also gets better performance Note the bolded line - oh yeah, this is going to be good  Launch too fast and try to turn? Skreeech, crack, boom! heheAnd Sarbian wrote something to add all new researched stuff at once instead of having to click them all one by one, I could hug him. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78067-0-23-5-Research-Them-All-1-0-%28April-27%29
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
So, in my current game I realised I had quite a lot of science left to gather around the KSC. I felt like a change from rockets, and I've just unlocked some more varied parts, so I built this as a testbed:  And flew it to the island airstrip:  And, because I can, parked it in the hangar.  Next, I built the fully-SCIENCE-equipped version to fly to the mountains. It needed a bit more control authority I felt, so it also gained control surfaces.  It actually flies pretty well and can get up to about 110m/s at 6000m.  Unfortunately, the mountains aren't an easy place to land in the clouds!  Ah well, almost all my science instruments survived so it was still worth it. I am considering making a new version, but with rotating engine mounts (courtesy of Infernal Robotics). (Mods used are many, including FAR, B9 and Firespitter.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Is the physics engine capable of simulating quadcopters?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
It's capable of simulating anything if you can suspend your disbelief hard enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 18:13
|
|
|
I've landed on the Mun three times now. The first time, I didn't cancel out my sideways momentum enough, and tumbled over in the landing. The next two times, I came down beautifully, gracefully, carefully, straight down... onto the side of a hill, and promptly fell over again. "gently caress it," says I, "I'll try Minmus instead."  Looks good so far.  poo poo... not again. For a precarious few seconds, I was balanced on one strut while SAS kept me level, with the other two struts in the air. Fearing the worst, I disabled SAS for a moment, then re-enabled it once all the struts touched down... then finally disabled it again. I stayed upright, but I wondered if the added weight of a Kerbal climbing down the ladder would tip me over.  Well how about that! I'm still upright! Hooray!  Did he just bump into the... wait, poo poo.    poo poo  It's good that he looks happy, because the lander fell directly onto the side with the ladder. I can't get back in to even try to ramp off the hill into orbit (not that that's gone well when I've tried it before). Welcome to your new home, you dopey green bastard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Is the physics engine capable of simulating quadcopters? If you mean "is it capable of simulating 4 fixed thrust points" then yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
TACD posted:It's good that he looks happy, because the lander fell directly onto the side with the ladder. I can't get back in to even try to ramp off the hill into orbit (not that that's gone well when I've tried it before). Welcome to your new home, you dopey green bastard. Try flexing the landing gear in/out a few times and see if you can get the ship to roll over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
If it's minimus the gravity is so low you may be able to just push it until the hatch is visible again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
PDP-1 posted:Try flexing the landing gear in/out a few times and see if you can get the ship to roll over.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Spookydonut posted:That causes my rockets to do flips at about 3km. Try setting an acceleration limit if using Mechjeb or eyeball your G forces. 25m/s2 seems to help for certain bordeline cases and is likely more fuel efficient besides. (My rationale is that going a bit slower lessens the aerodynamic shear forces you inevitably get when turning.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:He can't get in so he can't control it.. Unless you can retract/extend landing gear via the context menu on EVA? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
You're just not hitting it with enough velocity!
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
I'm sure it will surprise nobody to learn that my tilt-quadrotor designs have been... unsuccessful so far. Anyone ever done this successfully? I can fly forwards fine, I can reach about 200m/s, but I cannot successfully land. Or turn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:He can't get in so he can't control it.. Unless you can retract/extend landing gear via the context menu on EVA? Yep! Plus as mentioned he can probably roll it manually. Before you try ramping it to orbit, try to SAS yourself upright. You should be able to at least angle it enough to avoid needing to ramp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Brovine posted:Anyone ever done this successfully? I can fly forwards fine, I can reach about 200m/s, but I cannot successfully land. Or turn. Have you been making sure the CoM and CoT are lined up vertically? I used that and SAS initially, with TAC fuel balancer and that multiple-engine-throttle-mod whose name I cannot remember for the life of me for longer flights. ... I think my next challenge is to make a Duna VTOL. Think "Last Days on Mars" without the terrible movie part of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
If you want more stability on landing use four struts instead of three struts. The extra weight is negligible and it makes landing a ton easier. An asteroid spawned with just the right trajectory to get sucked into Kerbin's SOI, so I've got a Class C rock in a 35Mx250km orbit. I haven't built a rocket big enough to adjust it into a less elliptical orbit yet but I've taken surface samples! Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Apr 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Sent four identical mini landers to biome scum Minmus and return. Forgot parachutes. First one crashed trying a powered landing after a steep reentry, second landed hard but mostly intact, third I sent an unmanned probe up to carry KAS containers with pipe ends and radial chutes to, refueled, and landed successfully. Also fitted a spare chute to the probe and returned it, too. Great fun!
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
shovelbum posted:Sent four identical mini landers to biome scum Minmus and return. Forgot parachutes. First one crashed trying a powered landing after a steep reentry, second landed hard but mostly intact, third I sent an unmanned probe up to carry KAS containers with pipe ends and radial chutes to, refueled, and landed successfully. Also fitted a spare chute to the probe and returned it, too. Great fun! Pretty sure Minmus has no atmosphere, so you parachutes would not have done anything
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
LunarShadow posted:Pretty sure Minmus has no atmosphere, so you parachutes would not have done anything Kerbin does, though! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
LunarShadow posted:Pretty sure Minmus has no atmosphere, so you parachutes would not have done anything They're for the return portion
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
pik_d posted:They're for the return portion Right, duh.  Way he phrased made me think he meant he crashed on Minmus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
LunarShadow posted:Right, duh. But he said reentry
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 22:53
|
|