drinkiorew.blogg.se - Ksp coupling crossfeed

#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED HOW TO#
#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED INSTALL#
#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED SOFTWARE#
#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED CODE#

I think the primary reason they are thinking of such legs is the need to avoid them sitting on the outside thus complicating heatshielding immensely. Surely enough refinement of the landing control algorithms negates the need for physical safety margins.Īnonymous Mon Mar 30 05:36:44 2020 No.

#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED CODE#

Why make your landing legs bulky and whatnot when you can just code away the problem. >heavy(!), robust legs, that take up roomīoth are options. If it does they lose it, if it survives they save a bit of time later.Īnonymous Mon Mar 30 05:28:46 2020 No.

#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED INSTALL#

Basically, everything extra not needed for the upcoming test they install now is a gamble on whether it pops or not. I guess they went for some nig-rig that's just good enough for now instead of actual legs. There were some leg-like contraptions spotted delivered to site not long ago, but these look nothing like that. These thingies seem to flip over so if there are any crush cores, they are on top when folded. It seems too small for landing leg to me, likely the clamps to hold Starship on launch pad.Īnonymous Mon Mar 30 05:24:37 2020 No. To me they look too stubby and have no obvious crush core section. The current theory is that there are folding legs tucked under the skirt (circled) How do they short hop the SN3? Are they going to pull the legs off starhopper?Īnonymous Mon Mar 30 03:20:39 2020 No.

#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED SOFTWARE#

No software can be better than the dude that wrote it./sfg/ Space Flight General Anonymous Mon Mar 30 02:58:41 2020 No.

And now, some of his friends is slandering my Add'Ons.

You need to cope with this type of bad behaviour.

Less conveniency on diagnosing problems using the logs.

No risk of having your reports rejected by using non Official versions of something.

Obviously, you can use the Official Module Manager from Forum. If you are willing to risk your SAS, you can downloaded it from my github:

Some Add'On authors may dismiss your bug reports by using a non "official" Module Manager.

To tell you the true, I'm the only one supporting this stunt.

It's not supported by most of the Add'On authors.

1.2.2 are currently in Technology Demonstration.

It works on every KSP Version from 1.3.0 to the latest.

Some fixes from small annoyances or bugs, as long they don't break compatibility with the upstream.

Slightly faster, mainly on systems with less memory available and a lot of patches.

This is my personal fork of Module Manager, aiming to fix some non functional bugs while keeping compatibility with the original Module Manager. Option I : Module Manager /L Experimental You have two options, each one with advantages and drawbacks. Please choose one fork and remove the other(s). So, if you got this message, you installed MM /L Experimental and also the Canonical MM, and this is hairy to say the least. However, this had the side effect of preventing this tool to easily detect when more than one copy of Module Manager is present - what is a problem if you choose to experiment with the /L Experimental fork. "There're conflicting Module Manager versions on your instalment!"įrom KSP 1.12.0 and forward, multiple assemblies with the same name are not a problem anymore, as KSP will elect the Assembly with the biggest FILEVERSION and ignore the others. This was diagnosed on TweakScale's thread. There's no other solution available but to manually DELETE all redundant copies of Module Manager, leaving only one on the GameData. This caused some problems to TweakScale at least once. Unfortunately, from KSP 1.8.0 and above a fatal bug is affecting Module Manager when more then one MM dll is installed on your system, what renders Module Manager choosing to use the oldest version to be used.

"There're more than one Module Manager on this KSP instalment!" Oukey, you need to install Module Manager! :) See the "How-To" below. "There's no Module Manager on this KSP instalment!" Well, somehow you managed to have installed more than one copy of this tool itself!Ĭheck GameData/ for DLLs with the name "ModuleManagerWatchDog" on it and delete all of them - but the newest one. There're more than one MM Watch Dog on this KSP instalment! Please add "KSP:ModuleManagerWatchDog" as the subject of the email, or my email filter will not detect your email and I may miss it.

#KSP COUPLING CROSSFEED HOW TO#

If you need help about how to fix your system, drop me a message on Forum or send me a email using the address support at lisias dot net. This is a troubleshooting list to help you on fixing your instalment.