|
Geirskogul posted:This all hurts my head. TOO MUCH. Even simpler. Here are legos. Go play and launch rockets. Some legos make other legos, some legos keep your Kerbals from starving to death. All of the legos fit together. Use none, some, or all of them. I made sure not to throw a Lincoln Log into the lego bucket by accident. (yes I know the plural of lego is lego, but I prefer calling more than one lego legos).
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
While MKS isn't overly complex, it is a little difficult to find documentation that describes what everything does and what you need. Your description is accurate of how it works, but finding that out by reading the stuff on the front page of MKS and what it links to is quite difficult.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 11:51
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:While MKS isn't overly complex, it is a little difficult to find documentation that describes what everything does and what you need. Your description is accurate of how it works, but finding that out by reading the stuff on the front page of MKS and what it links to is quite difficult. No debate. I've had more 'volunteers' to update it than I can shake a stick at, so it's due for an overhaul - will settle into that after I see what happens with 0.91 as that will impact documentation and I'd prefer not to do it again
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I'm sending mapping probes so a polar orbit actually works for me, but I feel like arriving equatorially would save me a ton of fuel or am I wrong about that? I would think I can aerobrake into orbit instead of having to burn off 4,000 m/s of velocity. All the planets with atmosphere in my game have it at the poles, too. I could be wrong, but here is how I see it. Arriving in an equatorial orbit: 1) Aerobrake into highly elliptical orbit 2) Adjust to polar at Ap. 3) Adjust Pe. 4) Adjust Ap. Arriving in a polar orbit: 1) Aerobrake into highly elliptical orbit 2) Adjust Pe. 3) Adjust Ap.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
RoverDude posted:No debate. I've had more 'volunteers' to update it than I can shake a stick at, so it's due for an overhaul - will settle into that after I see what happens with 0.91 as that will impact documentation and I'd prefer not to do it again If I can offer an unsolicited suggestion, the key thing would be to list what each mod does, what it connects to, what dependencies it uses/can use/ship with it, and what you will get with each extra bit you bolt on to any given mod. Stuff like needing EPL to get the EPL stuff in MKS to work would fall under that. Mostly I need to know what I need to download to get stuff working. Also MKS could probably use some internal documentation about what the bits do and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
Geirskogul posted:This all hurts my head. TOO MUCH. what could you possibly mean???  It's so simple!!!! nevermind that this picture appears nowhere in the wiki, and the flowchart that IS there does not matter in the slightest unless you install another mod entirely. if that's still too much for your feeble casual gamer mind, you can just play make pretend with them. RoverDude posted:No debate. I've had more 'volunteers' to update it than I can shake a stick at, so it's due for an overhaul - will settle into that after I see what happens with 0.91 as that will impact documentation and I'd prefer not to do it again Realtalk most of my frustration with this mod is the complete lack of meaningful documentation. Every bit of 'how to start your first base' is actually 'here's what you need if you have TAC installed'. The part that covers what comes natively with the mod has a nice group of links down at the bottom of the tutorial list, and every single one links back to the home page of the wiki. e: so the post isn't just bitching, i got another contract for a barebones Mun outpost so I chucked it down right on top of my extant one, stole the dregs of fuel left from the half dozen launches that built it, then blasted off back for Kerbin after planting a flag:   
ellie the beep fucked around with this message at 12:46 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:40
|
|
|
Edminster posted:what could you possibly mean??? That does translate to 'dig up all the stuff from the ground, then run it through a part to turn it into useful/expensive stuff.' MKS doesn't do anything without tac-ls or EPL, other than let you fill up tanks with stuff you can ship back to kerbin. How you set up your base is up to you because it's more or less entirely cosmetic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:All the planets with atmosphere in my game have it at the poles, too. Yeah, but getting into an orbit at all requires an absurd amount of fuel. I just went to Eve, and I had to slow down by 4,000 m/s just to be captured, and then burned even more to lower my periapsis into the atmosphere for the aerobraking. There has to be a way to aim better, the way I'm going now it's impossible to do interplanetary travel without a nuclear rocket because you could never carry enough fuel for the capture otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:46
|
|
|
Edminster posted:what could you possibly mean??? You should change your tagline to 'Vaginas, my subject - sand, my medium' - because you're acting like you have a serious sand->vagina issue. I mean, we get it. Docs are out of date. And stuff is hard. And 99% of the people who use this also use TAC-LS. You are harping on this point like a squirrel desperately trying to keep hold of the last nut on earth. And while OwlFancier raised the point in a reasonable way, you're just kinda a dick. Consistently. (edit) And I am not the only game in town. If your panties are in a bunch, fork it. Do your own cosmetics-only release with your own wiki (hell, there are at least half a dozen MKS forks lying around and someone did a cosmetics pack once). Seriously. It would be better than having you harp on this like... every single chance you get. My first wife was less of a harpy than this. (edit edit) And the reason I am irritated is because I have repeatedly acknowledged that the docs are out of date. And need to be fixed/updated. Again, I get it. But I do this stuff for fun and to give you guys and gals fun things to play with. Not to deal with the same old tired posts, because it's irritating as hell when the core issue at hand from this user has already been acknowledged. That horse isn't just out the barn door, it's down the road, in the next county, and already turned into glue sticks. RoverDude fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Yeah, but getting into an orbit at all requires an absurd amount of fuel. I just went to Eve, and I had to slow down by 4,000 m/s just to be captured, and then burned even more to lower my periapsis into the atmosphere for the aerobraking. There has to be a way to aim better, the way I'm going now it's impossible to do interplanetary travel without a nuclear rocket because you could never carry enough fuel for the capture otherwise. (prologue edit) I think you are (1) getting any encounter you can, (2) cruising to encounter, (3) burning like hell just after the encounter into a stable orbit. I did that when I started, too. If you have RCS: 1) Get an encounter with your main engine. 2) When you are far out/half way to your destination, line your craft up along your velocity vector and rotated so the navball shows brown down. 3) Enable RCS and SAS 4) Go to the map and zoom in on your encounter. 5) Click the flag for Pe at destination, it should keep the data up should your mouse drift off. 5) Tap RCS forward (default is H for normal flight), did your close approach shrink? If so, keep pressing until it start to get larger, reverse it to the smallest figure. 6) Tap RCS up (default is I, I think), closer? 7) Tap RCS right (L?), closer? This is how I fine tune such that my initial encounter IS my aerobrake maneuver. It removes the "burn like hell on encounter" and saves fuel. To help with map view, you can make a maneuver node just before the encounter and Tab over to view that (but then you have a new predicted path overlaying the numbers you are trying to see). Or, perhaps the better option, you can change your config file to display your encounter orbit in space around your destination right now, and you can Tab over to planet view. ee: If you don't have RCS, it will be gentle test burns at Prograde/Retrograde, Normal/Anti-Normal, Radial In/Out. Corky Romanovsky fucked around with this message at 13:15 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
If I could pester you with another question, RoverDude, one thing I haven't been able to find out yet is if there is an intended method of using the MK3 MKS parts, the big octagonal refinery parts? They don't really match up with the other MKS bits and I'm not sure how to connect them up, are they designed to interface with FTT parts? Even putting landing legs on them is difficult without the big legs in the karbonite pack. Same issue with the big drills too, I've yet to unlock anything that can really fit them properly short of building weird towers out of fuel tanks. Is there an intended setup that was in mind when they were designed? I haven't figured it out yet if so. Short of using the really big parts that I haven't unlocked due to not having 4 million bucks to upgrade the R&D center yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:i wonder what those guidance lightsticks taste like 0.1 Science Gained! MazeOfTzeentch posted:tuning sepratrons will be the death of me. Dat Korolev Cross, though...
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
Edminster posted:It's so simple!!!! We could always go back to what we were originally going to get:  Complexity is perfectly fine so long as it's intuitive and well documented. While MKS isn't the latter, it can still be addressed. RD, have you considered promoting a wiki site dedicated to MKS? That'd let the more dedicated get something put together as a stopgap until the official stuff is updated by you. I'm aware that Github has this functionality, but most of the KSP userbase isn't the sort to go poking around trying to figure out that interface. If there aren't already contracts that sort of guide your hand into base construction using the parts, there ought to be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
MazeOfTzeentch posted:tuning sepratrons will be the death of me. That looks like the same thing that happened to me when working on the SRB separation for my shuttle. Because of how they had to be angled they would bake the external tank and boom. it would disintegrate the piece of stack with everything underneath left intact just like that. A set of girders to protect the tank at the initial firing point might be enough to solve your problem without having to screw around to much with the separator engines themselves. Also seconding the love of that Korolev Cross. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:(prologue edit) I think you are (1) getting any encounter you can, (2) cruising to encounter, (3) burning like hell just after the encounter into a stable orbit. I did that when I started, too. Yep, that's exactly what I've been doing and your advice is just what I was looking for, thanks! I got into Duna orbit way easier this time, still have a ton of fuel. Might be able to use this same mapping satellite to at least survey Ike, maybe Dres too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Why does something like a local temperature scan have a low data transmission rate over an antenna? I can understand gaining less science when you don't bring a physical sample back, but why is there a penalty for sending a temperature from a distance? That just makes one-way probes and rovers much less attractive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Thanks for the explanations RoverDude, I think I got it now. I might just install the whole shebang--TAC-LS included--and give it all a go. Just know I'm gonna starve/freeze some poor kerbals to death though  ... though I'm gonna do all this in Sandbox, I think. Might be integrated with career just fine, sure, but I think I'm well done with the game-y part of the game, it's time for the 'loving around' part  (edit) oops, TAC-LS isn't in CKAN 
Ciaphas fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
pre: Volume in drive C has no label.
Volume Serial Number is 347F-6959
Directory of C:\Games\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\GameData
01/03/2015 09:10 AM <DIR> .
01/03/2015 09:10 AM <DIR> ..
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> 000_Toolbar
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> 000_USITools
12/28/2014 07:33 PM <DIR> ActiveTextureManagement
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> AviationLights
01/03/2015 09:07 AM <DIR> CC_Contracts
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> Chatterer
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> CoherentContracts
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> CollisionFX
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> CommunityResourcePack
01/03/2015 09:07 AM <DIR> ContractConfigurator
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> Contracts Window
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> DeadlyReentry
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> DistantObject
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> ExtraplanetaryLaunchpads
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> Firespitter
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> KAS
01/01/2015 05:50 PM <DIR> KerbalEngineer
01/03/2015 09:01 AM <DIR> KerbalJointReinforcement
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> KerbalStats
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> Kerbaltek
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> MagicSmokeIndustries
01/03/2015 09:10 AM 0 mods.txt
12/28/2014 06:37 PM 49,152 ModuleManager.2.5.6.dll
12/30/2014 06:35 PM 789,331 ModuleManager.ConfigCache
12/30/2014 06:35 PM 122 ModuleManager.ConfigSHA
12/28/2014 06:34 PM <DIR> NASAmission
12/28/2014 08:51 PM <DIR> NavBallDockingAlignmentIndicator
01/03/2015 09:01 AM <DIR> NavHud
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> NEAR
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> NothkeSerCom
12/28/2014 07:28 PM <DIR> PlanetShine
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> PreciseNode
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> ProceduralFairings
01/03/2015 09:05 AM <DIR> RCSBuildAid
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> Regolith
01/03/2015 09:07 AM <DIR> RemoteTech
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> SCANsat
12/28/2014 08:52 PM <DIR> ScienceAlert
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> ShipManifest
12/28/2014 06:34 PM <DIR> Squad
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> StationScience
01/02/2015 10:01 PM <DIR> StockBugFixModules
12/28/2014 07:28 PM <DIR> TextureReplacer
01/03/2015 09:10 AM <DIR> ThunderAerospace
12/28/2014 06:37 PM <DIR> TriggerTech
01/03/2015 09:07 AM <DIR> UmbraSpaceIndustries
01/03/2015 09:04 AM <DIR> WombatConversions
4 File(s) 838,605 bytes
45 Dir(s) 62,091,628,544 bytes free
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:The worst part of stock aero, especially during the floppy craft era, was how hard it was to predict how a craft was going to behave or how it would respond to inputs. Making things a little more logical and predictable is a very good approach.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
0x0hShit posted:Also seconding the love of that Korolev Cross. Downloaded that radial decoupler fix and made some tweaks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1oIcKzhToY
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Enough mods, you think?  Modlist posted:Active Texture Management
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
MazeOfTzeentch posted:Downloaded that radial decoupler fix and made some tweaks Nicely done  
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Flagrant Abuse posted:Amateur. Were you able to get that EVE stuff working in 0.90 then? No matter what pack I try I just end up with white and red blobs for atmospheric objects 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Were you able to get that EVE stuff working in 0.90 then? No matter what pack I try I just end up with white and red blobs for atmospheric objects  I didn't have to do anything special that I can recall.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
I never made a rover before, so here's my first attempt. There are parachutes in case it has to land somewhere with an atmosphere, and engines to slow down the descent. It worked fine on Kerbin, so let's see how it runs on Mun next! Obviously there will be a rocket below it.   
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
So I've been playing this for a few days now and ran into something that is driving me nuts, I can't seem to load rocket designs in the hangar (and now from the launch pad as well as of today). I've re-installed the game once already and that didn't sort it out and no mods as well. I can still use the space plane hangar and such, but it's like the game doesn't even recognize the folder with the saved rocket designs. edit: in Science mode, if that makes a difference. edit: well, now the space plane hangar broke. edit: Huh, fixed it. Ended up having to delete the SPH/VAB folders in my save file and remake them from scratch. Something went oddly wrong there. Eminent Domain fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Success! My dumbass rover is now on the Mun. edit: Failure! My dumbass rover is being a dumbass rover. 
karl fungus fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Let's get some steam achievements happening... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Warbird posted:Complexity is perfectly fine so long as it's intuitive and well documented. While MKS isn't the latter, it can still be addressed. RD, have you considered promoting a wiki site dedicated to MKS? That'd let the more dedicated get something put together as a stopgap until the official stuff is updated by you. I'm aware that Github has this functionality, but most of the KSP userbase isn't the sort to go poking around trying to figure out that interface. If there aren't already contracts that sort of guide your hand into base construction using the parts, there ought to be. Yeah, actually, an MKS wiki that people can actually edit would be nice. Accurate part descriptions would be even better, but editing a wiki page is much lower overhead than cloning the repo and submitting a PR for most people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:To help with map view, you can make a maneuver node just before the encounter and Tab over to view that (but then you have a new predicted path overlaying the numbers you are trying to see). Or, perhaps the better option, you can change your config file to display your encounter orbit in space around your destination right now, and you can Tab over to planet view. Actually, a couple versions ago they made Stock do just that. Without needing to edit config files, if you tab your focus onto planet view, it'll show the encounter path relative to your destination. karl fungus posted:Failure! My dumbass rover is being a dumbass rover. Can't you right-click and manually drop those middle landing struts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
Psawhn posted:Can't you right-click and manually drop those middle landing struts? Yeah, the problem was that the rover kept flipping over, so I was trying various landing strut configurations to get it back on its wheels. Now I'm going to use a better rover design, with less top weight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
RoverDude posted:Check it out... super tiny rockets with payloads you have to carefully balance (as you have no guidance on these things)... avionics, batteries, and science. Also adding a 0.35m aerospike engine Thank you, RoverDude! I have started loving Sounding Rockets as the "model rocket simulator" inside my "cartoon rocket simulator", so I look forward to every new update. I'm glad to see you're using slightly slanted fins on your rocket. After watching real-world NASA sounding rockets, I noticed they use tiny thrusters just after launch to start them spinning, but this doesn't work as well in KSP. So I went with slanted fins, and they work reasonably well at helping keep the unguided rockets on track.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Is three satellites in geosynchronous orbit sufficient for 100% coverage around Kerbin under RemoteTech? If so, what antennas/dishes should I use (I'm guessing one 5Mm omni and one dish of some sort)? Do they have to be geostationary or is geosynchronous sufficient/better?
Ciaphas fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
DUNA MISSION SUCCESS! My first interplanetary landing!    
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
karl fungus posted:DUNA MISSION SUCCESS! My first interplanetary landing! Nicely done! Chutes are a wonderful thing where they can be used, aren't they? Man, I haven't landed anything on anything outside the Kerbin system in forever. I put a RemoteTech comms satellite in orbit around Eve before the 0.90 but that's about it. Time to mount a mission to somewhere! or rescue some stranded Kerbals. Either one is good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Is three satellites in geosynchronous orbit sufficient for 100% coverage around Kerbin under RemoteTech? If so, what antennas/dishes should I use (I'm guessing one 5Mm omni and one dish of some sort)? Do they have to be geostationary or is geosynchronous sufficient/better? Geosynchronous is sufficient, which also allows for tundra orbits. Actually, you don't even need that, really, as long as your satellites provide as much coverage as you want, and as long as your SMA placement is precise enough that they don't bunch up. I like placing a DTS 45-degree dish and pointing it at Kerbin, as that can service any number of of ground and low-orbit craft and will also automatically connect to KSC. As for omni rangantennas, I actually use the "additive" option in the config file, with another option set so multiple omnis on one craft add 25% range. That way I can actually use omnis out in GKO before unlocking the R&D upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
My kerbin network is 4 sats with stock communotrons at an orbit of about 777km. It's been working out pretty well for me so far. Supposedly even at that orbit (according to the RT wiki) you only need 3 but it's really hard to sync them without hyperedit. E: They also have the 90Mm dishes on them for when I need to send up satellites for interplanetary comms. Fermented Tinal fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
karl fungus posted:Yeah, the problem was that the rover kept flipping over, so I was trying various landing strut configurations to get it back on its wheels. Now I'm going to use a better rover design, with less top weight. Just slap on a torque wheel and/or okto probe core for SAS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Warning about a feature of RemoteTech. Story time. I launched a rocket with a satellite payload. I switched from the rocket to the satellite using "]", deployed the panels and engaged the ion drive. The launcher, which I had thought to be empty fired up shortly after and smashed the satellite. What had happened is I had a manoeuvre node set on the launcher which I hadn't thought twice about because it ran out of juice during the previous manoeuvre. Or so I'd thought, So it looks like unfocussed vehicles in the magic sphere can still be influenced by RemoteTech commands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Is three satellites in geosynchronous orbit sufficient for 100% coverage around Kerbin under RemoteTech? If so, what antennas/dishes should I use (I'm guessing one 5Mm omni and one dish of some sort)? Do they have to be geostationary or is geosynchronous sufficient/better? They don't need to be geostationary, but I like to have at least one satellite in a geostationary orbit directly above the KSC as the core of my network, because it basically serves to extend the Space Center's line of sight over the horizon. The other two can just be geosynchronous; position the three of them right and you should pretty much never have comms blackouts in Kerbin's SOI. I like to have at least two dishes on each in addition to the omni. For a long-range relay for interplanetary missions, check out Molniya orbits. The short version is that a Molniya orbit is a very eccentric polar orbit - the periapsis is very low over the south pole, sometimes almost skimming the atmosphere, while the apoapsis over the north pole is very high, usually well above geosynchronous altitude. Since lower orbits are faster and higher orbits are slower, this means that a satellite in a Molniya orbit will spend much more time on the 'up' end of the orbit than it will on the 'down' end, which will minimize the amount of time it's blocked by Kerbin's shadow and give it better coverage for long-range comms. You need an existing satellite network in place to support it, but when you're ready to start sending probes outside of the Kerbin system, Molniya orbits are handy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 00:29
|
|