Sassenach

Members
  • Content count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

70 Excellent

About Sassenach

  • Rank
    Curious George
  1. My current career is currently based entirely around Mark IV launch vehicles (which is to say, if it takes off from the KSC, it lands at the KSC minus it's payload and fuel. Technically any space plane would do but time is more valuable than fuel so big is beautiful), I posted a picture of my first such earlier, but I've since iterated: It's capable of lofting a significant tonnage to orbit, my most recent mission has been to take 32,000 material kits to a low orbit space station (that I might find a loophole in my self-imposed limit) with about 1000dV left over. However here is what happened when I tried for 56,000 of the same: Which is not a complaint. This is to be expected of designing flimsy, load bearing joints even if they are aesthetically pleasing. Slowly falling apart on the runway without any explosions was just a comical means of failure. I've probably been pushing the bounds of credulity as it is.
  2. I'll likely make such eventually. Presently I'm working on something else, but simple geometry shouldn't be too ambitious so will probably be sooner rather than later.
  3. Well done with this.
  4. Right now they're just parts that sit on the terrain. I've considered fixed joint anchoring and noclip foundation parts as a possible solution (not sure if it is possible to have parts that clip through the ground but not other vessels), but right now that's a little beyond my current scope to be actively worked on.
  5. What people are managing to do with the few simple parts I've made rather exceeds my expectations. That looks very sophisticated. I'm sorry about the airlock thing. I think that it's a limitation of Ubiozur welding. Their forum thread: What sort of frame rate do you get?
  6. Fairly certain that's a comprehensive list.
  7. Whoops, looks like I had the wrong license on Spacedock. Hopefully not problematic, fixed now. For CLS the parts are configured on the part config itself rather then a patch document, as I did not foresee any likely reason why it would be necessary to switch modules up, and I see that I neglected to put a note indicating CTT support in the main. Is this problematic?
  8. Aye, I'm yet to make any industrial type parts, though they're likely coming. Probably in two stages: First, a basic decal version of the current functional cubes, then greebled up larger pieces. I could plausibly make the basic parts larger, I've just been enjoying trying to keep model/texture footprint as small as possible.
  9. It has occurred to me, looking at the command centre, that spacecraft parts on a cubic grid may have some merit. However my initial concept for these parts was to be made out of materials much easier to resource than rocket parts would require, thus a concrete analogue.Making parts light enough to be spaceship parts has the two concerns of it being difficult to build stable structures without tedious use of node blockers when designing and my own concern that it would be hard to balance my OG concrete parts against the new parts in the context of EPL/Ground Construction. I'm aiming to eventually make more detailed models for functional parts which will likely be larger than 2.5mx2.5m to either replace or supplement the stickered panel parts right now. I've considered larger basic parts as well for the sake of keeping part count down, but I'd like to avoid bloating the parts listings with many similar items. Most probably I'll have to have a look at making some IVAs then think about how I might best apply that to larger parts. Spacedock seems best, thank you. Should be most convenient for updating as well as it's just the one download link rather than a set of releases.
  10. I don't know, I'm not an engineer so I used this as an estimate. 12t seems about right. I'm not sure if KSP has an implicit scalar I'm not considering though, and given the way offworld construction mechanics work I've considered including swappable to build/to operate configs.
  11. Any Pathfinder config changes you feel appropriate shall be made, they're all neatly contained in a separate document for easy tracking.
  12. To the first, please do. To the second, they are not presently in the pipeline, but I should like to take a look eventually. Everything I've read suggests they're rather a pain, though, so I may put off learning how to do them and work on less daunting additions before I take a look.If @Angel-125 would like to make IVAs I'd be happy to incorporate them, I doubt I could make better. That said I should like to learn how to work them myself. I suspect what would be needed is a basic unwindowed cube 'command centre' for any functional part that has crew space, and an IVA for each windowed geometry piece.
  13. I'm happy to cooperate, if there is anything you should like from me.
  14. A very pleasant surprise, yes. Thank you @Kottabos. edit: That Terran Command Centre makes me very happy.
  15. Thank you very much.