blackheart612

Members
  • Content count

    2202
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1203 Excellent

About blackheart612

  • Rank
    Aerospace Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

2852 profile views
  1. @ethanwdp I've tested it hours after it was released. In fact, I'm working on improving parts right now. I've been playing around FS and I'm planning to improve the IVA props and Rotorwings for next update. Trust me, it's going to be easier than ever to fly a helicopter if I succeed in everything. The development is underway as I type. I'm still figuring out some technical stuff making it take a longer time. I'll update if something exciting happens.
  2. @Murican_Jeb The problem is it's not that I can't because of the file size, it's that I require me to have a custom sound for the engine. And also the fact that there are still a couple of pre-modern engines to use (7 total) while compared to the rotorwings has 5 as a set (meaning with the main + tail rotor), and the modern, despite having 8, has one as a vtol engine, and divided into prop and jets.
  3. @theonegalen It should be fine, not sure about the chair, as it should also move as the kerbal moves (which will make the back of the chair awkwardly spacious). Maybe I could move the kerbal view camera alone though, that I'm not sure, I'll see what I can do. @Murican_Jeb Certainly an interesting engine. I'm interested in adding more, but as it is, the pre-modern engine has a lot in its arsenal. If I'd have to add engines, I would like them to be way later when many parts are in already. Another issue is I'm addicted to adding engine sounds which adds to the file size, which is already bloated since I first released two parts. My upload time is getting longer and longer. @AccidentalDisassembly Keep in mind that colliders and meshes are different. And to keep the polygon count low, the colliders aren't the exactly the same as the mesh, but just a... well, kind of a circle around the proximity of the spinning blade. That's why it's like that upside down. Another thing, the part isn't animated, but the rotation is made possible due to module functioning. This helps in making mirrored parts move simultaneously instead of setting them per part. As far as I know, using animation instead make the animation play for the specific part instead. Example, if you set the right engine's clamping to a certain percent, the other part will be stuck until you also change that to the same amount as the right (or else you'll crash). In using the airbrake module, changing the left changes the right at the same time, vice versa. You can remove the braking action group in the action group tab, unless you're in career and don't have it yet.
  4. @theonegalen Well, the collider to click for the camera is basically in the kerbal's face. The problem is where the collider is is basically where the camera is. Therefore, if I put the collider in front of the dashboard, the camera is there too. I can remove it if you want though, the view from the cockpit seems clear enough compared to the zero cockpit anyway.
  5. @ethanwdp I don't even know why it's like that, but yeah, you have to do some hocus pocus to get their orientation right. Don't trust the CoT's direction. Also, that doesn't use FSEngine despite looking like a rotorwing. @Raptor22 Will happen most likely on next release, but it's planned @Micro753 Probably just forgotten one for chinookprop, others visually have no intakes and thus, are not supposed to have it. Just like the KP-12. @Skylon Technically that's possible, but that'll only help in redirecting the thrust in a specific angle, not controlling the craft, so it'll still be out of control. VTOLs are weird.
  6. @Micro753 I'm not a fan of using reaction wheels for stability but the bigger rotors need them so I slapped them in. Also for the KT6C because it seemed unstable whatever setup I try. FSCoolant from what I know are used for pairing with ElectricCharge, meaning that it's like the LF-Air Intake pair or LF-O pair. I don't have electric props so it's not there. Try it instead of IntakeAir, it would make much more sense and might fix the error. The information about air intake module is vague, some I did intentionally, and some I may have forgotten so it would help if this was more specific. This also goes for the error you encountered. @TMasterson5 Well, the next release will be indefinite due to me trying stuff out and testing. I'm not gonna release few parts shortly, that's for sure, I want releases to have a theme or feature packed at least. Just putting it out there if you're interested on how it's going to be. @Skylon It's pretty cute
  7. Nothing, it's a feature supposedly usable for main rotors too. Which maintains the vertical of the craft on where it exactly is. It's been a while since the function was working. I couldn't get the main rotor to have thrust with it so I used FSEngines instead. The control rotors just do their job passively so there's nothing else to do there.
  8. @kiwinanday Thanks a lot, never would have the time to do all that and record stuff. Will be a lot of help when tackling it if I decide to edit the curves in the future. @SparkyFox Thank you for your kind words. However, I'm hugely not confident about the way I unwrap my UVs. So it may look alright from the outside but the works are a struggle. There is definitely a more efficient way of doing things than how it currently is. I could never make it as tightly packed as a squad employee. Although another part of the UV problem is I keep the mesh low poly, often having the consequence of having to compromise for less efficient spread of UV for texturing. Also I don't think most of these parts would fit stock KSP. Edit: The UVs are especially more work for hollow parts! (Yep, I'm just complaining now )
  9. I'm speechless.
  10. @AccidentalDisassembly The Size 2 Hull has a mesh switch to have a ramp to the existing Size 2 Fuselages, as seen a few posts above. The module in the KT6C is airbrake module, the only way I know to be able to set the angle 0-90 degrees rather than just a flip animation. The node attach that I use is from KSP I think, at least I based it at that. It's hard to angle all these to mirror properly in SPH so I hope people understand that this is the consequence for it. The sentence before this is precisely why the gears and the KT6C is snapping to front everytime. It's how to get them to mirror properly, plus the front is always up front, so it's a good enough compromised. ( @MadmanMorton and @DarkOwl57 ) So if the mirror doesn't work properly, that's the problem. Also, it's the new scatterer. It's so good that I'll post this everywhere:
  11. Release 15 So this was an early release so there might be some issues, if there are, just tell 'em here and I'll see what I can do. I wanted to squeeze a release out already as I was out for a while. I almost forgot what I added before I took a break! Here's the formal changelog, also on the OP. Do note that I haven't updated the parts list in the zip yet because I forgot... Added Round-Deluxe Winglet Added Mk0 Tail Connector* Added Mk0 Tail Connector Short* Added Mk0 Junior Liquid Fuel Fuselage* Added Structural Hull S2 (2 Variants)** Added Size 2 Cargo Ramp** Added Size 2 Cargo Bay CRG-15** Added KS-H1 Fixed Landing Gear, a landing gear for biplane designs Added KS-V1 Fixed Landing Gear, a landing gear for helicopter designs (based on UH-60) *can be attached and clipped halfway radially and be used as a creative razorback. **sized 2.5m set for cargo management, like Mk3, but fits with existing parts -- Fixed issue where Tiger engine was hard to select Node added for the Half Mk2 Adapter for reasons unknown, it's now possible to add a boom behind the cockpit Smoothed performance curves for early engines and gave a boost for them (now quite more powerful and can handle a little higher AoA) Weight variations are now a thing in early engines, paired with the smoother curves and performance changes mentioned ---- The beautiful Kerbin shore Valentina flying an early era plane. The part Elevon 0 was bugged here while I was testing things. ---- @TMasterson5 Also I haven't added your logos yet due to wanting to release early @kiwinanday
  12. @kiwinanday Behind the scenes, there were no changes on configs though, I still don't have a full grasp on the power situation. I wouldn't mind some examples so that I could work around it. Also, finished the texturing of the Size 2 cargo parts. The only unfit part for this is the cargo bay, which has a different line design due to its mechanism. Here's most of the parts' exterior texture connected to existing parts.
  13. @kiwinanday There are no fix for curves if you're referring to what I was telling before regarding the early engines. I did boost their power output in current dev version but I merely smoothed most of the curves and still are originally Tanner's with changes on weight variation and power. So far the pre-modern engines still hold up better than the early engines so it's still usable and you can still wing it under dire circumstances. Unlike early engines which will basically stall you every time. Also, I almost deleted my current dev version due to testing and ran out of disk space, permanently deleting what was supposed to be in the bin. Thanks to notepad still open, the parts that are added and modified didn't need to be redone as it was still using it, leading the parts folder not to be deleted. So I just copied the deleted files from previous versions. Hopefully nothing was removed. At this point, that's quite a handful of parts for me to check with all the stuff going on.
  14. @qromodynmc That'll be 10,000 @ethanwdp I have no defense. I'm guilty for wanting the FSEngine modules, made it work and managed to get me trapped there somehow. The sounds and everything else are matched for FSEngine, put simply. I cross my fingers for people who are generous enough to dabble to FS if they know coding. Technically, with much hard work though, I could bring them back to normal engines. But what really matters is I like the FSEngine RPM. It's what sets my turboshafts away from my props. I made them unique. That's why its my fault it's like that... (Also, I reported your post due to seeing 2 duplicates on my side, upon refresh, it was gone so I don't know what just happened) -- Anyway, more on the update side. -- Bill viewing the entirety of the hull, entering through the passenger Air Ramp in the front. -- Further detailing: As stated in the picture, the already released Size Parts mix in with the new ones. The texture are early and not yet final for the exterior. However the interior you see will most likely be the release texture. The Size 2 Hull is a mesh switch so that it's possible to just adapt it to the existing Fuselage in the interior. Due to the fact that S2 Fuselages are a copied idea from Mk1's, it still has texture clipping/z-fighting on the inside. (ridiculously intended feature which might be fixed in the future) However, the newer parts are based of the idea of Mk3 cargo parts, and have no such issue.