Bit Fiddler

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

88 Excellent

1 Follower

About Bit Fiddler

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

1343 profile views
  1. ok so I ran a clean install with only Airplane Plus and Kerbal Engineer. It still reports thrust as 3.5kN in KE rather than the 35kN reported by the part description. so not sure if this is a KE problem or an Airplane Plus issue. or if this is normal behavior and should just be ignored.
  2. oh are these optimized for FAR? maybe I need to look into that as I am not using FAR, but I know it makes the atmosphere less dense or something that allows faster airplanes.
  3. well not just speed it will not get off the ground. top speed is like 80kph this reminded me of another plane I made a few days back who's performance was very underwhelming. so I loaded it up and checked it out. again KE and in flight agree the thrust of this engine is about 1/10 of the rated value. this one will fly ok but it topped out around 100kph. I would have thought easy 300 to 400 or more. this should be a very fast fighter. I am beginning to wonder if some mod out there is doing a blanket nerf on engines. EDIT: I just swapped out the engine on the P-38 inspired aircraft for one rated at 60kN and while KE does not report 60 as I would have expected it does show the thrust at 45kN which is a far cry better than the 3.5kN I was getting off this mod's engines that were rated at 35kN. so this brings me back to the question are the engines in this mod somehow broken or is another mod altering them with MM or something to cause this?
  4. yes I have had this same question. I bind the 3 throttle modes to action groups and in flight I switch between them, but I see no difference in thrust or speed or anything. so I am not sure what exactly they are doing. also it seems the K1710 is somehow nerfed. the tooltip tells me it will produce 35nN yet Kerbal Engineer only shows 3.5kN and in flight the tool tip seems to agree with KE. and to back all this up this aircraft cant get off the ground. the craft only weighs about 8500kg as you can see. I would expect 2 engines of this size to have no problem getting this thing up to 200 - 300m/s maybe even faster.
  5. well that function can be done already by using procedural parts, if you do not do so now, I would check it out. I just tossed that in as an example, what would be more interesting to me even is to adjust the width of the tank and not the height so it becomes an oval shape. or on the wing parts you could adjust the length or width and not the thickness to get a better match for the shape you try to make (similar to the b9 procedural wing idea) but for other wings and, well, any part really. not sure if this type of model deformation is even possible however.
  6. can we get the adjustments like length and thickness etc. to accept text input? so in addition to clicking the slider along we can just enter the exact value we want? and secondly when ever I hit "J" on a control surface to edit the properties the control surface reverts all rotation I have done to it. so I have to adjust the size a bit, then re-rotate to see if it is correct, then hit "J" and dump rotation to adjust it a bit more, then re-rotate it to check size...
  7. is it possible to get TweakScale to only scale a part in 1 or 2 dimensions? so I can make a fuel tank longer but not change the diameter for instance.
  8. that would work too. it is just since the mod is already doing virtual camera shots it could just as easily do this without our having to rotate and setup the shots manually. I would however be just as happy with a way to get exact rotations and exact distance as you said.
  9. would it be possible to get a function button, that with a single click will take several screen shots to get all the views of the craft. such that we could paste them into gimp and create things like this... it could actually be a new "Page" on the controls I guess, that we could select the 6 views with checkboxes and then it would snap those selected views for us to work with. it would read the ortho graphic or perspective toggle that is already there to determine that aspect. and it would position the camera exactly centered on the COM, and at the exact same distance for each view. and secondly the "zoom" buttons that set the distance. if this would not just be clickies, but let us enter a number in a text field that would be great as well. this way I can set this distance at say 10M for every craft I photograph in this way, and it will make all the pictures be "in scale" to each other for every other craft.
  10. Oh yes thanks, this is exactly what I wanted. lol cattle car to the stars.
  11. ah doing both... the lights on the runway are exactly this mod. but since you were talking about the 3d models and how emissive works I was just asking some questions. the modeling I am doing is for something completely different. and in fact would have no emissive on it at all.
  12. so... I used the KT6-c to not make a v-22 and I have a few questions... every part on this plane is basically a fuel tank. the wings have fuel in them, every hull section other than the cargo ramp part are fuel tanks. the bulges on the side of the hull are saddle tanks full of fuel. all told this aircraft holds over 1K units of liquid fuel. yet the Isp on these engines is such that this will only run them for about 1 hour. my question is are these engines really this inefficient? or are the fuel tanks on this craft just very small volume wise. as in reality an airplane with this much fuel on it would fly for days. this much meaning this much of the aircraft dedicated to fuel, as each of these fuel tanks by over all volume may be only using something like 5% of the available volume for fuel. but ya... to get any sort of flight time on this airplane it needs to be so big the engines will no longer have enough thrust to lift it. so is it a problem with the engine Isp, or a problem with the design of these fuel tank parts? secondly in the action group setup I see 3 throttle options? "Hover" "Cargo" and "Normal". what are these and how do I use them? I attached them to action groups 1, 2, and 3, but I did not see any change when I pressed those buttons. and lastly could you maybe add the rotor folding function, so they fit inside my aircraft carrier better? the rotating wing would be cool too, but even just folding rotors would be great.
  13. hmm maybe tweakable everything, or maybe my tweak scale is broken. as I have no scale setting on the right click menu... this also ties in to I have been assuming for a while now that tweak scale has destroyed all my Reaction wheels in the game. as all of them are set to a max value of 1 and I am assuming tweak scale messed up the math on resize so maybe there is more to it. not sure if you meant tweak scale or tweakable everything but I have both installed and do not have any scale settings in the right click menu.
  14. ah so the texture does indeed control the emissive at leas to some degree. I still have to set up the material in the .obj file to be an emissive however? the emissive texture only controls how bright and the color of the emissive. I am used to making parts for games that to make a part emissive I just make a texture with an alpha channel to control brightness and a diffuse texture to control color. and indeed these are usually the same texture. you just add alpha to your diffuse texture to make it all in one go. I am just getting started in making 3d assets for KSP so I still have not figured out all the unity import stuff yet. but one day... lol if I ever decide to put in the time I will get it all sorted out.
  15. ah ok... that may work out. I wanted it to be modular in the fact that I was not tied to a pre made part but could build runways and taxi ways etc. on the fly in the editor and place the lights along the edge to make markers and animate them to do the chase pattern like the example. I will just have to look at it more and see what I come up with. it is too bad KSP does not use the texture to control emissive like other games do. it makes this sort of thing so much easier to just make a new texture and not have to deal with the underlying model.