Jump to content

badboyz31

Members
  • Posts

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

5 Neutral

Profile Information

  • About me
    Rocketeer
  1. Well, you are not the only one. It seems like since update 1.7.0 and above has broke some of the toolbar-dependent mods.
  2. Well, the color used to be reproduced in KVV, although the actual coloring may not be accurate. I have much worse problem though. Currently on 1.7.2 and the KVV icon does not appear at all.
  3. bump it up, can't wait to see the aircraft carrier again.
  4. I get that too, but only for some aircraft which uses a lot of parts (I think, AI still having difficulty in controlling large aircraft with slow response) Isn't 20 km seems to be a bit far? In my experience, 10-11 km is the max to keep the system going. It could be the physics range limitation (as I recalled it have been mentioned by BahamutoD somewhere before)
  5. Did anyone here tried P.E.W.'s weaponry? these bombs are so sweet!! And off course, thanks to BDArmory. And if you want to, feel free to check out my aircraft and demo video:
  6. Thanks for the CVE addition. Anyway, I had a hilarious moment with it. I tried to land an Aeris when I realized how small the CVE is (approach velocity was about 50 m/s). The next moment I realized, the Aeris was already ditched nearby
  7. Killing kerbals with their own hands, why not. Thanks Lord Prometheus for the update. After testing the daisy cutter, I could destroy almost entire KSP complex with two of them. Maybe nuclear warheads goes next? Here's the quickly-made video about the BLU-82 (sorry for the low quality and glitches)
  8. Ah, I see. Okay then, it's time to modify my aircrafts to accomodate the new settings. I didn't follow the development posts before. Anyway, thanks mate . Anyway is there any chance in the future that elliptic wing model would be incorporated
  9. Hmm, yep I agree with you about the control surfaces (and thanks for the enlightenment). However, is there anything to explain why the physics of my aircraft changed after updating the B9PW to the latest version? I mean that I could notice the difference in the pitch moment required before and after updating. I don't mean the update if bad, but I am curious if the physics of lift calculation has changed between these versions. Anyway, is everything OK in my log above?
  10. Okay got it, will report back soon. Updated : Thanks mate The stiff rotate problem is fixed now (my bad of not deleting the old B9PW). The moment still feels heavier (compared to the last B9PW), and the drag also increased (but that could be just myself). I tried to change the horizontal stabilizer to the all moving control surface and the result is quite bizarre. Using the all moving control surface, my aircraft feels as agile as a fighter. To me it seems like the standard control surface have less control, but I am still not sure about it yet. And here's my latest log https://www.dropbox.com/s/mqt26adwrigouyh/output_log.txt?dl=0
  11. Okay here it is http://www.dropbox.com/s/mqt26adwrigouyh/output_log.txt?dl=0
  12. Ok, so here's the screenshot taken when I used the latest version of B9PW (it's unrealistic 100+ m/s on the runway and I am still kissing the ground) and these were when I still the fork B9PW (after reaching about 50 m/s I can rotate and slowly climb): The thing is, with the new B9PW, my aircraft does not have the same reaction (altough the location of CoL is does not change). I also think that the location of the CoL is somewhat misleading, I mean with that small horizontal stabilizer, the CoL moved that far. About the output_log.txt which part should I upload? The size of the text file is quite huge.
  13. Uh, I just want to ask if there is anything changed regarding the physics of B9PW. I previously built an aircraft using the B9PW-fork. The aircraft was nose heavy (aerodynamic center is quite far behind CoM) but it still responsive to pitch up control. But with the latest B9PW, my aircraft can't even pitch up to leave the runway. So far I have been using B9PW without FAR (as far as 0.90) and no such problem occured. Is FAR has become a must now for running B9PW?
  14. Please try updating your BDArmory version to 0.8.3 (latest as of now). The turret tilting bug disappeared right after updating. Maybe it was a compatibility issue. If you are not sure, try to use another installation of vanilla KSP (that is, without any mod) and add only BDArmory and SpannerBoomsticks just to make sure if it's working fine, and then add your mod one by one to figure out which could cause the trouble.
  15. Please be patient man, the upgrade from 0.90 to 1.0+ involves a lot of changes. I am also a basic KSP user so I don't know how long it might take, but even B9 mods are only partially updated and still in progress. So let the devs do what they do. Plus, we wouldn't know if the next update would pops out (there was a KSP dev post about experimental period of 1.0.3).
×
×
  • Create New...