I remember this happening (spotlights shining through objects) many times in the past but have not noticed it recently. However I also had different settings back then, like shadows were disabled. Not sure if it is shadows or some other setting or just a change in the game but ....
To be honest I dunno how viable submarines are for this game since to make a real submergible vehicle you need ballast tanks (an ability to allow in varying amounts of sea water into the craft to stay neutrally buoyant at a certain depth). but I would suggest using a wing placed near the crafts center of mass, but configure them more like horizontal stabilizers on a plane. so as you are under propulsion you can essentially force large amounts of water up to keep the sub submerged.
It is always best to post the craft so other can examine it (like showing the mechanic your car rather then phoning them). However, are you making the canard from a fin? found out recently that does not work when making an aircraft rudder (based on a report). Try a wing with a control surface placed vertically or a structure panel.
“Press it 100 times for one unit!” Is this some kinda part resizing issue???? I dunno man I play on a PC and have these really nice part sizing sliders. If that’s even what above statement means.
What fuselage? You referring to the "Crew Compartment" and "Space Habitat"? Before these parts existed you'd have to use, most likely fuel tanks to make the main structure of a habitable structure. But fuel tanks can not accommodate Droonauts, but these can now!
Where's the confusion exactly? The fact that all fairings must start with a "fairing" base"? There is no real difference between a '"fairing base" and a "fairing" it's just that fairing base is the only fairing part that can actually attach to other rocket parts (the other two "fairing" and "faring nose cone" can only attach to other fairing parts).
If you want to get more detailed you can make the lower part of the LM housing from inlets (that will remain intact) and only the upper part from a fairing so they'll break away allowing clear removal of the LM. Might give more of a pleasing image to have part of the housing remain intact as you undergo LM docking and extraction.
You'll want an interstage on your upper most rocket stage! Attach the service module to that then disconnect the interstage from the SM so you can move it way above the rocket but keep it centered! Then attach a smaller diameter interstage inside the first interstage. That one you will attach the lunar module to and keep connected! after that you can move your SM & CM back down so it is just slightly above the LM then use parts connection tool to reattach it to the first wider interstage. Then all that's left is to carefully place and center a fairing base so that it covers up the space between the top of the wider interstage and the bottom of the SM structure! Of course there are other ways to go about it like using cargo bay doors like the Simple beast does but the process will be similar!
@t4zcomz C:\ .... users ....."user named folder".....AppData....LocalLow ..... Jundroo.... SimpleRockets2...... this will get you too where your saved game data is stored. The contract files are the located in the "career" then "default" then "Contracts" folder.
I had never flown a plane in this game until Carrier Mode came out so the whole flying experience to me was just a disaster! However I suspect the last two checkpoints (7 & 8) are/were intended to encourage the player to slow down to be able to hit them and then subsequently land on the runway. Does seem however Most Players do not do this and instead just weave an bob through them to a cartoonish landing!
Sometimes if you change a parameter (like on interstages, changing to Soyuz style then back to normal) this might trigger it's modifiers to the newer parts. At least that used to work for some parts they changed in the past!
It means they changed a lot of stuff on the parts (mass, price, etc). One example is: I noticed the interstages got quite a bit heavier! (the struts seem to be a bit lighter though) Anyhow career mode doesn't allow for these older parts I guess for balancing issues. It will also mess up a lot of stuff. I managed to get one of these craft launched somehow and the amount of fuel I needed to orbit Luna almost doubled throwing off my whole mission so. Beware!
@CloakPin DAMN IT THAT WORKED!!! I'm assuming you had DSC pad unlocked first. I had considered doing the same with my plane (didn't have DSC anything yet) after it couldn't set down gently enough but decided there was no way that was gonna pass. Wish I had now!
@LenatezSpaceAgencys Well you can still clone em and use them! Save it as a Sub-assembly. They won't work for transferring fuel but don't need em for that if you're just using them to connect something.
You should be able to just disconnect the fuel adapter (from ALL connection points in the parts connection window) then remove them using the move tool The engines they were connected too will remain in the same spot this way. Then just simply reconnect those engines to the "surface" of the fuel tank the adapter was connected too. You should fine the engines will operate normally and that the fuel adapter was never really needed.
Is it a configuration issue? I assume it’s a spaceplane that takes off from a runway a goes into orbit? Is the configures set to “plane” not “rocket”. I’m not sure how you’d sort that mess out for a space plane but maybe you need 2 chips/discs on the craft one set to plane when flying and another set to rocket for when in orbit.
@DMNK99 think of it this way .... if you're driving forward, foot on the gas peddle, you're accelerating forward. take foot off the gas, your acceleration forward starts to decrease (what most call deceleration). eventually the car will just be coasting along at a constant speed (or velocity) that would be zero acceleration. But when the car begins to start sowing down (in forward velocity), That's now acceleration to the rear (still have a forward velocity that is decreasing, but rearward acceleration). Acceleration (and velocity) is a vector, always has a numeric unit, like 10 KPH, and a direction, forward/backward/up/down. And is never negative. At least that's the physics aspect of it.
@GEED it's still a part. just not in the parts list. I still have some old craft with em (just decretive detail) find an old craft with em and make a sub-assembly
Just lots of practice! My builds looked very simple and basic at first. only later after getting used to all the tools did I start to get more complex detailed designs! Might also help to download a look at other players builds for how to do stuff.
it's also my understanding that in the real world most of the reasons designers choose one fuel over another is logistical. The fact that you need more cryogenic facilities if you're using both LH2 and LOX. And then there's always those pesky hydrogen leaks that can take months to find and fix. And none of that is in the game so it's not applicable.
We'll the LH2 tanks are MASSIVE! That's what I have noticed when using it for a booster. But of course they're a lot lighter than RP-1 tanks even though the tanks nearly twice as big so. I think most of the difference between the fuels will be more noticeable when price is thing because without that who cares if your rocket is 40% bigger with LH2 then with RP-1. I use mostly RP-1 in my booster and almost exclusively LH2 in my upper stages.
Probably a heavily modified tinkered with engine that’s almost unrecognizable from anything in the game at this point? But if you want more specifics it might be worth downloading some of the SSTO craft already out there and examining what they use.
Craft mass will also make huge difference. Put one on a 500 kg. craft and you’ll see the apogee or perigee slowly ticking up a tenth of a kilometer. A significantly heavy craft you won’t notice anything for a while!
Just remember that in planet studio radius is given in meters (not kilometers)
And density can vary quite a bit depending on what the planet/moon is comprised of. Earth and Venus have density’s over 5 grams per cubic cm whereas the moon and mars have densities around 3.5 g/cm3. Ice moons mostly comprised of water (like Callisto or Triton) have even smaller densities of less then 2 g/cm3
Any controlling of a separate craft will have to be done using the Vizzy programming!
…….
However once you get beyond 10 kilometers of another craft no control is possible. Craft beyond that distance actuality despawn and do not exists (only exist as an invisible place holder).
Highest point in the orbit above planet/moon sea level, no?
……..
Pretty sure, for instance, if you place your apogee (or perigee) above Brigo’s giant Crater, it gives the height above “sea level” but you will still have 20-30 km above ground level.
Could be many reasons for this: would help to see the craft in question but….
……….
If you have a gyroscope in the craft, it will of course try to keep the heading locked during a burn. This will use battery power so you need to make sure you have enough battery (and a way to recharge it) so it does not run out. If the batteries were to run out of power in this situation the gyro will cease operating and a spin could ensue.
………..
Also sounds like maybe your center of thrust (CoT) and center of mass (CoM) might not be aligned well enough. When CoT and CoM are not aligned this will cause the craft to point a few degrees off from where it should be pointed during the burn (and lead to less accurate burns). It probibly is possible to have those two so out of line that even a gyro will not be able keep the craft pointed in a steady direction and the craft begins to tumble (or as previously stated if the gyro runs out of power) Agian we’d really need to see this craft to diagnose the issue but there’s a starting point.
@Pandariptor doesn’t really matter.
………
1. Because these ideas have already been suggested several times.
…….
2. The suggestions page was closed down some time ago because most of the suggestions (like this one) were just duplicate suggestions.
………..
You can still add a “suggestions” tag apparently, but that seems more for other players who are searching through forum posts then anything.
@SDNS well you’re gonna find a realistic design nearly impossible to duplicate anyhow! The Juno system is scaled differently than Earth’s! So if you try to replicate a real world rocket (same size, same mass, same amount of fuel, same fill in the blank) it’s going to over perform in the scaled back system …… and not be “realistic”. You’re going to have to make some compromises to make it look like it’s real life counterpart and perform similarly.
I don’t believe it has ever been stated what they’re made from! I’m guessing this is just a inquiry from curiosity since it really doesn’t matter, it’s not a property that can be changed.
There’s not really any point to having them in game right now is the problem. Main advantage to them is they are not cryogenic so do not boil off, but since that’s not models in the game …..
………….
If you just want the visual effect of using them I found it relatively least to change the exhaust properties of the engines in the “advanced properties” of the tinker panel. In fact that’s one parameter you can change that will still work in a career game.
@PeriodicAerospace well they planned to land back on the moon by 2025, so those “plans” keep changing. I was mostly curious as to weather or not anyone’s heard any good outline for when they realistically expect to do a lunar test landing of HLS (not general “early/mid/late insert year” projections).
————
I’ll start getting excited at that point (when the thing is actually on its way to the moon to see if it can land). Otherwise I’ve been hearing “return to the moon” date being tossed around since 2006.
@YaMomzBox420 yeah a year or so seems a bit optimistic given they still gotta build HLS and then refuel it in orbit 5-50 times before it can be on its way. As far as I know they don’t even have final design for the HLS yet……
—————
My best hopes are maybe 3-5 years …..
The good news might be: it sure looks like from the videos I’ve seen that SimplePlanes 2 they’re no working on might have mechanics for tank guns! They show bombs and missiles as well as a tank (but not the tank firing).
I remember this happening (spotlights shining through objects) many times in the past but have not noticed it recently. However I also had different settings back then, like shadows were disabled. Not sure if it is shadows or some other setting or just a change in the game but ....
+1 10 months agoR.I.P. that fuselage ... to pieces ....
+1 10 months agoHow big a payload! 30 tons … 50 tons
+1 10 months agoTo be honest I dunno how viable submarines are for this game since to make a real submergible vehicle you need ballast tanks (an ability to allow in varying amounts of sea water into the craft to stay neutrally buoyant at a certain depth). but I would suggest using a wing placed near the crafts center of mass, but configure them more like horizontal stabilizers on a plane. so as you are under propulsion you can essentially force large amounts of water up to keep the sub submerged.
+1 11 months agoIt is always best to post the craft so other can examine it (like showing the mechanic your car rather then phoning them). However, are you making the canard from a fin? found out recently that does not work when making an aircraft rudder (based on a report). Try a wing with a control surface placed vertically or a structure panel.
+1 11 months agoJust keep clear of the Ionizing sort ... Well not Dr. Manhattan but ... the rest of us
+1 11 months agoI’m right on your heals with 3100 hours in 22 months!!!
+1 11 months ago“Press it 100 times for one unit!” Is this some kinda part resizing issue???? I dunno man I play on a PC and have these really nice part sizing sliders. If that’s even what above statement means.
+1 11 months agoWhat fuselage? You referring to the "Crew Compartment" and "Space Habitat"? Before these parts existed you'd have to use, most likely fuel tanks to make the main structure of a habitable structure. But fuel tanks can not accommodate Droonauts, but these can now!
+1 11 months agoWhere's the confusion exactly? The fact that all fairings must start with a "fairing" base"? There is no real difference between a '"fairing base" and a "fairing" it's just that fairing base is the only fairing part that can actually attach to other rocket parts (the other two "fairing" and "faring nose cone" can only attach to other fairing parts).
+1 1.7 years agoIf you want to get more detailed you can make the lower part of the LM housing from inlets (that will remain intact) and only the upper part from a fairing so they'll break away allowing clear removal of the LM. Might give more of a pleasing image to have part of the housing remain intact as you undergo LM docking and extraction.
+1 1.7 years agoThe Scrunky rocket is a good example of the technique I described bellow.
https://www.simplerockets.com/c/Ry6Od5/Scrunkly
+1 1.7 years agoYou'll want an interstage on your upper most rocket stage! Attach the service module to that then disconnect the interstage from the SM so you can move it way above the rocket but keep it centered! Then attach a smaller diameter interstage inside the first interstage. That one you will attach the lunar module to and keep connected! after that you can move your SM & CM back down so it is just slightly above the LM then use parts connection tool to reattach it to the first wider interstage. Then all that's left is to carefully place and center a fairing base so that it covers up the space between the top of the wider interstage and the bottom of the SM structure! Of course there are other ways to go about it like using cargo bay doors like the Simple beast does but the process will be similar!
+1 1.7 years ago@t4zcomz C:\ .... users ....."user named folder".....AppData....LocalLow ..... Jundroo.... SimpleRockets2...... this will get you too where your saved game data is stored. The contract files are the located in the "career" then "default" then "Contracts" folder.
+1 1.7 years agoI had never flown a plane in this game until Carrier Mode came out so the whole flying experience to me was just a disaster! However I suspect the last two checkpoints (7 & 8) are/were intended to encourage the player to slow down to be able to hit them and then subsequently land on the runway. Does seem however Most Players do not do this and instead just weave an bob through them to a cartoonish landing!
+1 1.7 years agoyes it's a common issue. the "collision boxes" for those containers is very funky! Thicker parts can help ensure that this does not occur.
+1 1.7 years agoYeah I hate the new locations but it's only cause I got so used to where they were!
+1 1.7 years agoSometimes if you change a parameter (like on interstages, changing to Soyuz style then back to normal) this might trigger it's modifiers to the newer parts. At least that used to work for some parts they changed in the past!
+1 1.7 years agoIt means they changed a lot of stuff on the parts (mass, price, etc). One example is: I noticed the interstages got quite a bit heavier! (the struts seem to be a bit lighter though) Anyhow career mode doesn't allow for these older parts I guess for balancing issues. It will also mess up a lot of stuff. I managed to get one of these craft launched somehow and the amount of fuel I needed to orbit Luna almost doubled throwing off my whole mission so. Beware!
+1 1.7 years ago@CloakPin DAMN IT THAT WORKED!!! I'm assuming you had DSC pad unlocked first. I had considered doing the same with my plane (didn't have DSC anything yet) after it couldn't set down gently enough but decided there was no way that was gonna pass. Wish I had now!
+1 1.7 years ago@LenatezSpaceAgencys Well you can still clone em and use them! Save it as a Sub-assembly. They won't work for transferring fuel but don't need em for that if you're just using them to connect something.
+1 1.7 years agoYuri: My god it's full of stars.
+1 1.7 years agoLol you tried to take them into space in a 747 cabin!!!!
+1 1.7 years agoYou should be able to just disconnect the fuel adapter (from ALL connection points in the parts connection window) then remove them using the move tool The engines they were connected too will remain in the same spot this way. Then just simply reconnect those engines to the "surface" of the fuel tank the adapter was connected too. You should fine the engines will operate normally and that the fuel adapter was never really needed.
+1 1.7 years agoIs it a configuration issue? I assume it’s a spaceplane that takes off from a runway a goes into orbit? Is the configures set to “plane” not “rocket”. I’m not sure how you’d sort that mess out for a space plane but maybe you need 2 chips/discs on the craft one set to plane when flying and another set to rocket for when in orbit.
+1 1.8 years agohttps://imgur.com/a/5Z0mYRJ
This player just landed along the mountain side!
+1 1.8 years agoThere will be custom careers that can be played with other systems eventually, but they’re not quite there yet!
+1 1.8 years ago@DMNK99 think of it this way .... if you're driving forward, foot on the gas peddle, you're accelerating forward. take foot off the gas, your acceleration forward starts to decrease (what most call deceleration). eventually the car will just be coasting along at a constant speed (or velocity) that would be zero acceleration. But when the car begins to start sowing down (in forward velocity), That's now acceleration to the rear (still have a forward velocity that is decreasing, but rearward acceleration). Acceleration (and velocity) is a vector, always has a numeric unit, like 10 KPH, and a direction, forward/backward/up/down. And is never negative. At least that's the physics aspect of it.
+1 1.8 years agois this the heliosyncronous orbit mission? launch from Ali Pad at a heading of about 192 degrees. that should get close enough to 100 degrees.
+1 1.8 years ago@GEED it's still a part. just not in the parts list. I still have some old craft with em (just decretive detail) find an old craft with em and make a sub-assembly
+1 1.8 years agoJust lots of practice! My builds looked very simple and basic at first. only later after getting used to all the tools did I start to get more complex detailed designs! Might also help to download a look at other players builds for how to do stuff.
+1 1.8 years agoit's also my understanding that in the real world most of the reasons designers choose one fuel over another is logistical. The fact that you need more cryogenic facilities if you're using both LH2 and LOX. And then there's always those pesky hydrogen leaks that can take months to find and fix. And none of that is in the game so it's not applicable.
+1 1.8 years agoWe'll the LH2 tanks are MASSIVE! That's what I have noticed when using it for a booster. But of course they're a lot lighter than RP-1 tanks even though the tanks nearly twice as big so. I think most of the difference between the fuels will be more noticeable when price is thing because without that who cares if your rocket is 40% bigger with LH2 then with RP-1. I use mostly RP-1 in my booster and almost exclusively LH2 in my upper stages.
+1 1.8 years agoProbably a heavily modified tinkered with engine that’s almost unrecognizable from anything in the game at this point? But if you want more specifics it might be worth downloading some of the SSTO craft already out there and examining what they use.
+1 2.1 years agoCraft mass will also make huge difference. Put one on a 500 kg. craft and you’ll see the apogee or perigee slowly ticking up a tenth of a kilometer. A significantly heavy craft you won’t notice anything for a while!
+1 2.1 years agoThat little blue plume shooting out the back is trying to tell you how much he sucks!
+1 2.1 years agoI got 4/3 times Pi times radius cubed ...... but they actually have spherical volume calculators online if you serch for em!
+1 2.1 years agoJust remember that in planet studio radius is given in meters (not kilometers)
+1 2.1 years agoAnd density can vary quite a bit depending on what the planet/moon is comprised of. Earth and Venus have density’s over 5 grams per cubic cm whereas the moon and mars have densities around 3.5 g/cm3. Ice moons mostly comprised of water (like Callisto or Triton) have even smaller densities of less then 2 g/cm3
from everything I've see that just simply isn't modeled in the game. They used some visual tricky to make Urados look as though it's tilted.
+1 2.6 years agoAny controlling of a separate craft will have to be done using the Vizzy programming!
11 hours ago…….
However once you get beyond 10 kilometers of another craft no control is possible. Craft beyond that distance actuality despawn and do not exists (only exist as an invisible place holder).
@Pedro is it not calculated as: highest point of a craft's orbit above a planet's/moon's sea level?
13 days agoHighest point in the orbit above planet/moon sea level, no?
14 days ago……..
Pretty sure, for instance, if you place your apogee (or perigee) above Brigo’s giant Crater, it gives the height above “sea level” but you will still have 20-30 km above ground level.
Could be many reasons for this: would help to see the craft in question but….
15 days ago……….
If you have a gyroscope in the craft, it will of course try to keep the heading locked during a burn. This will use battery power so you need to make sure you have enough battery (and a way to recharge it) so it does not run out. If the batteries were to run out of power in this situation the gyro will cease operating and a spin could ensue.
………..
Also sounds like maybe your center of thrust (CoT) and center of mass (CoM) might not be aligned well enough. When CoT and CoM are not aligned this will cause the craft to point a few degrees off from where it should be pointed during the burn (and lead to less accurate burns). It probibly is possible to have those two so out of line that even a gyro will not be able keep the craft pointed in a steady direction and the craft begins to tumble (or as previously stated if the gyro runs out of power) Agian we’d really need to see this craft to diagnose the issue but there’s a starting point.
@Pandariptor doesn’t really matter.
20 days ago………
1. Because these ideas have already been suggested several times.
…….
2. The suggestions page was closed down some time ago because most of the suggestions (like this one) were just duplicate suggestions.
………..
You can still add a “suggestions” tag apparently, but that seems more for other players who are searching through forum posts then anything.
@SDNS well you’re gonna find a realistic design nearly impossible to duplicate anyhow! The Juno system is scaled differently than Earth’s! So if you try to replicate a real world rocket (same size, same mass, same amount of fuel, same fill in the blank) it’s going to over perform in the scaled back system …… and not be “realistic”. You’re going to have to make some compromises to make it look like it’s real life counterpart and perform similarly.
20 days agoI don’t believe it has ever been stated what they’re made from! I’m guessing this is just a inquiry from curiosity since it really doesn’t matter, it’s not a property that can be changed.
21 days agoThere’s not really any point to having them in game right now is the problem. Main advantage to them is they are not cryogenic so do not boil off, but since that’s not models in the game …..
21 days ago………….
If you just want the visual effect of using them I found it relatively least to change the exhaust properties of the engines in the “advanced properties” of the tinker panel. In fact that’s one parameter you can change that will still work in a career game.
@PeriodicAerospace well they planned to land back on the moon by 2025, so those “plans” keep changing. I was mostly curious as to weather or not anyone’s heard any good outline for when they realistically expect to do a lunar test landing of HLS (not general “early/mid/late insert year” projections).
one month ago————
I’ll start getting excited at that point (when the thing is actually on its way to the moon to see if it can land). Otherwise I’ve been hearing “return to the moon” date being tossed around since 2006.
@YaMomzBox420 yeah a year or so seems a bit optimistic given they still gotta build HLS and then refuel it in orbit 5-50 times before it can be on its way. As far as I know they don’t even have final design for the HLS yet……
one month ago—————
My best hopes are maybe 3-5 years …..
The good news might be: it sure looks like from the videos I’ve seen that SimplePlanes 2 they’re no working on might have mechanics for tank guns! They show bombs and missiles as well as a tank (but not the tank firing).
one month ago