|
Mechjeb has an autodock module, and there are several mods that integrate / embed MJ in probe cores and command modules. Presumably that would work with existing ships, but I don't know which mod is best.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Vetitum posted:I did indeed run the DDS converter. This makes sense then, I'll run your fix when I get home. Thanks for the tip buddy! I've done it on normal. I returned from Minmus with a ton of fuel left over. If I remember I'll post a screenshot when I get home.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Speaking of MechJeb autodock, it’s really wasteful of RCS fuel, particularly when the RCS has large amounts of thrust. Using reaction wheels for attitude control and main engines for forward translation are easy improvements that I’m surprised haven’t been implemented yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
The space station is coming along nicely.  I'm starting to use this Apollo-style command/service module for drat near everything now, I've modified the design a bit to maximize delta-v and specific impulse at the cost of thrust and added a Universal Storage core so I can configure the loadout for different missions. This one's entirely filled with monopropellant, because it takes quite a bit of RCS thrust to move this big loving lab module. This is by far the heaviest object I've ever docked, and I still haven't unlocked the Mechjeb rendezvous and docking functionality, so I did it all manually.     You'll notice I have a different crew on the ship now; I decided to use the lab delivery mission to remove my first crew and embark my second crew, as the first crew had been on there for about three months by this point.    Nothing particularly interesting about this last image, except for the bright white dot directly above the Mun, which is the station's Iridium flare. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Fuzzysocksucker posted:Well this is going to help me with my predilection for building stupid large physics engine raping constructions. What are those really huge pieces you used as the main body of the station?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Motherfucker docking is annoying. Is there any mod to add autodocking that doesn't require sticking a part on? I already have pieces of a space station in orbit and have been trying to dock two of them for an hour and I'm done with this, it's not fun. Are you having more trouble matching the orbits of the pieces, or with the final approach and docking (getting the docking ports to line up)? If it's the latter, are you using the translation controls rather than your main engines and rotation? Assuming you have omni-directional RCS ports, you can use the IJKL keys to move horizontally and vertically without rotating, and the H and N keys to use the RCS jets to accelerate forward/back. You may already know all this, but I didn't the first time I tried to dock, and holy poo poo was it a pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Lansdowne posted:
You could cut the number of LV-909s in half by using one long transfer/landing stage with an inline long tank instead of a bunch of short tanks with their own engines. The design would be less tolerant towards landing on very steep slopes but there'd be much more fuel available.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
I'm probably trying to go for a full on landing far too early on in the career as the launchpad currently still has a 18 t limit, that design looks like it would weigh quite a bit more. Back to grinding more visual surveys it is for now!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Are there any mods that provide small aero parts? I'm talking fins and control surfaces like 1/4 to 1/10 the scale of the normal stuff. I have RLA Stockalike, which provides some smaller engines, tanks, and structural stuff, but no aero bits. Speaking of RLA, the monoprop tanks it adds have really inconsistent mass/volume/fuel capacity ratios. Am I missing something there or is this just a bug/mistake?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Vetitum posted:I did indeed run the DDS converter. This makes sense then, I'll run your fix when I get home. Thanks for the tip buddy! 30 parts isn't too bad for Mun and Minmus. Not going to make a multi-biome hopper (at least not for the Mun; might be able to hit 2-3 on minmus) but it's doable. Pod, single solar panel, antenna, 2x radial chutes, single temp gauge, 2x goo, 2x mat, 400 tank, 909, 4x legs for the lander. Then a decoupler, an 800 tank, and another 909 for a transfer stage. Another decoupler and a rocko-32 with a Skipper for orbital insertion, plus two SRBs and decouplers for the initial launch. That's 26 parts; add some parachutes for the rocko tank to get some cash back and you can even add an octo core onto the lander for SAS for an engie or scientist to get them some XP. It will definitely land on the Mun and return with gas left, and would probably be good for Minmus as well. If you put the mat labs radially you get a bit wider base for your landing legs. It's a bit tricky on slopes, admittedly, but not too bad. The only other fiddly bit is that you have to be conscious of your power; as long as you've got the panel facing the sun you're gold. Worst case you can use the engine at low power and gimbal your way to electricity, though that's less than ideal. If you sacrifice the rocko tank parachutes you'd have parts left to stick on another panel or a battery though. OAquinas fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Vetitum posted:I'm probably trying to go for a full on landing far too early on in the career as the launchpad currently still has a 18 t limit, that design looks like it would weigh quite a bit more. Back to grinding more visual surveys it is for now! Launchpad lvl 2 is the most important upgrade I think, since weight limits are what keep you from using cheap SRB's for all your LKO needs. I'm not sure if it's because I'm playing on moderate instead of normal, but it seems like your really don't need the reputation -> science strategy. I've got like 7000 science banked after stripping Minmus & about half the Mun, and the tech tree is filled out to the Research Complex lvl 2 limit, but I've only got about 2 mil out of the 4.7 mil funds to upgrade it. By the time I finally grind up the cash to upgrade it I'm going to be able to unlock every node at once, but have no money left to prototype the parts. I wish the Rep/Sci -> funds strategies weren't useless. They need something more like a 500 to 1 conversion ratio.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Nevets posted:Launchpad lvl 2 is the most important upgrade I think, since weight limits are what keep you from using cheap SRB's for all your LKO needs. Agreed. Funds->Sci is ridic overpowered, but the reverse barely pays for an SRB on a good mission. Reputation policy is basically the same, pays a bit more reliably but still peanuts. On hard mode I've got a <30 part satellite design with a few K dv that I use to grind out a few sat contracts at a time, but even then it usually takes days to finish them all out due to extreme orbits. After 2 ingame weeks I've just now barely scraped together enough to upgrade the science building (and be able to do surface samples, fuel transfer, and get the fun toys in the next tech tier). Launchpad is the #1 upgrade to get though, absolutely. 18t is just nothing, especially when you're mired in the early tech tree. With later equipment you could gimmick together something that could go farther than Munar orbit, but it's hard to get to that point with that weight restriction. OAquinas fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Speaking of MechJeb autodock, it’s really wasteful of RCS fuel, particularly when the RCS has large amounts of thrust.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
RoverDude posted:Weird. Screenshot? Thanks, I updated SCANSat to the latest indev version. I can mouseover my SCANsat map for karbonite concentrations, now, but there's still no graphical display--when I select Karbonite under Resources, the map just loses contrast, as though it wants to draw something but there's nothing to draw.  (edit) here: https://gfycat.com/SoulfulOddballGoose Ciaphas fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
By default do you save money by chuting stages or do you need to mod the game? Just wondering, since that's kind of what SpaceX is trying tomorrow, albeit flying it, not chuting it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Velius posted:By default do you save money by chuting stages or do you need to mod the game? Just wondering, since that's kind of what SpaceX is trying tomorrow, albeit flying it, not chuting it. If it stays within the maximum distance before deletion then you can recover it, otherwise it gets auto-deleted and you lose it. Stage Recovery is a lot better but even it isn't perfect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Flying a nearly-empty booster back to landing in FAR is really fun, someday I will hit the launchpad but I'm happy with KSC honestly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Falken posted:Thanks to the Ubio Welding Mod (.90 version on that page), I took 40 parts, and melded them into one! Result. Are those RCS blocks in the image? The last time I used the welder mod any engines (including RCS) messed it up. The only things I could reliably make work were structural elements which is good for larger objects but it doesn't save vast amounts of parts. I think that's why he gave up on the development, getting fused parts to work bug free is very hard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Sgt. Anime Pederast posted:What are those really huge pieces you used as the main body of the station? They're lab modules and particle accelerator modules from station science. The particle accelerators are the banded looking ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
RoverDude posted:Weird. Screenshot? It looks like the LFO tank needs to be directly connected to the Fuel Refinery for it to work properly, or connected with a part that allows fuel crossfeed. This means any fuel refinery should have fuel storage as part of the craft, KAS pipes are not working for me here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Ratzap posted:Are those RCS blocks in the image? The last time I used the welder mod any engines (including RCS) messed it up. The only things I could reliably make work were structural elements which is good for larger objects but it doesn't save vast amounts of parts. I think that's why he gave up on the development, getting fused parts to work bug free is very hard. Also, Kujuman has made some mk3 cockpit internals. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/106249-Mk3-Cockpit-Internals-0-90-Not-a-Part
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Falken posted:Also, Kujuman has made some mk3 cockpit internals. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/106249-Mk3-Cockpit-Internals-0-90-Not-a-Part Wow, that looks like crap. I suppose it's better than the not-an-iva though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
I think he fired out an early build so people had a working cockpit. His other stuff is good quality
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
I might be missing something. Shouldn't a probe with an SAS Module be able to use SAS? I know probe core's have reaction wheels by default. They're great and all for turning the craft but its so difficult to control a tumble. Hitting T just gives me the error that I have no SAS module or pilot. Does the small inline reaction wheel not count as an SAS module?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
Vetitum posted:I did indeed run the DDS converter. This makes sense then, I'll run your fix when I get home. Thanks for the tip buddy! I'm on Normal. The first is early in the tech tree, but includes a thermometer, solar panel and battery. Kinda dumb looking but they got the job done. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:I might be missing something. Shouldn't a probe with an SAS Module be able to use SAS? I know probe core's have reaction wheels by default. They're great and all for turning the craft but its so difficult to control a tumble. Hitting T just gives me the error that I have no SAS module or pilot. Does the small inline reaction wheel not count as an SAS module? Not all probe cores have reaction wheels and not all probe cores have SAS. Some have none, some have either, some have both. Which one are you using?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
They changed SAS from being innate to pod, probe cores, and reaction wheels (what you're probably calling "SAS modules") to being a thing in advanced probe cores and the pilot class Kerbals. Reaction wheels enable you to turn around using electricity, but do not inherently stabilize your ship.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:Not all probe cores have reaction wheels and not all probe cores have SAS. Some have none, some have either, some have both. Which one are you using? Stayputnick combined with a small inline reaction wheel. If there isn't a way to do it then early game probes are going to be such a huge pain for a while. OAquinas posted:They changed SAS from being innate to pod, probe cores, and reaction wheels (what you're probably calling "SAS modules") to being a thing in advanced probe cores and the pilot class Kerbals. Reaction wheels enable you to turn around using electricity, but do not inherently stabilize your ship. But i don't see anything in game or on the wiki about which ones do or don't have the capability.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Stayputnick combined with a small inline reaction wheel. If there isn't a way to do it then early game probes are going to be such a huge pain for a while. Right click the parts. It says there if it has SAS features, and if it has reaction wheels. The Stayputnik has neither. It's pretty useless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Stayputnick combined with a small inline reaction wheel. If there isn't a way to do it then early game probes are going to be such a huge pain for a while. Stayputnik lacks any SAS whatsoever. OCTO has "stabilization" and I think later cores have other options ("prograde" "retrograde" etc) So, basically OCTO or later is what you want. It's quite handy for slapping onto a pod if you want to take an engineer (the guys who can repair legs, repack chutes, etc) or scientists (boosts science returns) on a mission instead of a pilot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
Hey, I'm still making that KSP music video I mentioned in the last thread - if people wanna toss craft files at me (I have a bunch of mods like KW and procedural stuff and so on, but no B9) I'd be happy to see if I can stick a couple in it. Anyone up for it? I'll put you in the credits. Rovers, stations, ships, it's all good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:Stayputnik lacks any SAS whatsoever. OCTO has "stabilization" and I think later cores have other options ("prograde" "retrograde" etc) Weirdly enough, this currently often makes it better to use “worse” cores for many things, simply because you will be absolutely sure that when you give focus to the craft, its SAS will not be in some unpredictable/forgotten mode and start to sway the whole thing out of alignment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
SAS is the logic part, that does everything it can to keep you pointed in a particular direction. The reaction wheel is the part that allows the ship to turn (with or without SAS) without needing RCS. SAS is useless without any kind of reaction wheel or RCS but capsules and probe cores can have small reaction wheels built in so you may not need to add a separate part for it. The standalone reaction wheel parts increase the amount of force available for turning (with or without SAS). If you have a biggish rocket that is having trouble staying pointed in one direction then adding reaction wheels may help.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
On the other hand too much available torque can make the poor ship very very jittery under SAS, and difficult to control entirely in atmo under FAR/NEAR. Learned that lesson many a time 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
I just had an idea... Hey Maxmaps! Can we get a tweakable strength on reaction wheels, like how engines can have a tweakable max thrust?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Tweakable aircraft landing gear heights would be a dream.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Tweakable aircraft landing gear heights would be a dream. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99660-0-25-Adjustable-Landing-Gear-v1-0-4%28doors-fixed%29-Nov-14 Works in 0.90, and is in CKAN. A must-have.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
The year's starting pretty strong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:The year's starting pretty strong. Cool rich people who play with spaceships also play spaceships with little green men. Send them an ultra light weight Jeb bobble head for their cockpit. (for luck?)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
I don't imagine he has much free time for games. May be more PR than anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 04:03
|
|