Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 139

Thread: [0.21.1] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.3.7)

  1. #61

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    Seconded
    "The wreckage flew better than anything we built on purpose."

  2. #62
    Spacecraft Engineer TerranCmdr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    147

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    This is without a doubt the most impressive/amazing addon I have ever seen. Hands down. Excellent work sir.

  3. #63
    Rocketeer Menecroth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Arvada, CO, United States
    Posts
    44

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    [quote author=Max Grant link=topic=14164.msg219421#msg219421 date=1339863759]
    WOW, I only knew about this because Menecroth is my bro -- and posted pics on FB. Now must try!

    My question is, when docking is implemented, do we then get a refinery.part?
    [/quote]

    Max! Good to see you, my dear brother! And yeah, I have to agree it\'d be fun to drag the refinery around the star system. Maybe, as the game evolves it could actually serve some purpose? Hopefully, there will never be an LV-426 to land on... I\'d really rather avoid all that trouble. ;)
    Also, someone a couple posts up suggested that the builder of this mod create a Firefly class transport. I wholeheartedly agree as that would be sauce which is awesome.

    -Menecroth
    Don't talk to me like I just fell off the turnip wagon. Ha! No... that was days ago!

  4. #64

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    I agree. A Firefly would be just awesome.
    Warning: Poster may or may not contain large amounts of volatile insanity. Handle with care.

  5. #65
    Spacecraft Engineer
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Posts
    217

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    Will you do this for us? Oh wonderful mod maker?

  6. #66

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    Cool mod and awesome title scene on that video

  7. #67

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)


    I know it will be a bit 'too big' or even useless...

    Please...

    Sulaco.


  8. #68

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    Quote Originally Posted by CleverWalrus View Post
    I know it will be a bit 'too big' or even useless...

    Please...

    Sulaco.

    [spoiler]
    [/spoiler]

    Seconded...that thing is just sweet. make sure it launches rotated 90 degrees x axis so it dont hit the tower lol.
    [img width=800 height=150]http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w466/Nicholas_Rockwood/Myforumsig.jpg[/img]

  9. #69

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    Awesome craft, pretty detailed too. Not sure if its just me or not, but mechjeb really does not seem to like this thing in either of the available take off positions or in orbit, no idea why. However, the ship is pretty easy to fly by hand considering its size so autopilot isn\'t really needed.

  10. #70
    Bottle Rocketeer jcogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    15

    Re: [0.15+] Alien Nostromo (ver. 1.1)

    Okay, here is the deal. I am not opposed to doing a Firefly. I quite like the design as it is visually interesting and has a lot of little articulated bits that I would like to try to incorporate into a mod. My big issue is with the physics of it. KSP is a physics based game, and center of mass plays a huge role in the handling of a spacecraft. Anyone who has tried to build an asymmetrical rocket has found this out. In general the net thrust vector of the engines must pass through the center of mass of the rocket or the engines will apply torque and the rocket will rotate. Due to this idea the Firefly has a definitive location for its center of mass. It needs to be positioned very accurately to maintain balanced flight, especially since the engines need to swivel for landing. Looking at a profile of a Firefly reveals the problem with the design in regards to this balance:
    [spoiler] [/spoiler]
    Notice that the visual distribution of mass is balanced on the rear half of the craft, but the front of the craft has most of its mass distributed above the center of mass. This makes it very hard to balance, as any mass that you add to the rear-bottom to balance the front-top will require the front to have more mass to balance the added weight to the rear, causing a horribly vicious cycle.
    Compare to the Nostromo:
    [spoiler][/spoiler]
    Notice how the visual mass is more evenly distributed around the center of mass.
    There are a few things that can be done to cheat it, but it will still be difficult to balance. When I have time I will attempt to do a quick mockup and run it through my mass solver.
    I do ask that the community to be patient as my free time is dwindling. Most of the Nostromo was done while I was on break from work, and I am back on a new project with more responsibilities, so updates will likely be slow.

    @SquirrelMachine - As mentioned a few posts ago, I designed the Nostromo without taking into account the mechjeb plugin. There are a few modifications that can be made to the part.cfg files to make it somewhat workable with mechjeb, as mentioned in previous posts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •