Reiver

Members
  • Content Count

    136
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Good

About Reiver

  • Rank
    Great Old One
  1. Incredible. Simply incredible. Any plans to allow us to hook these things to Mk2 fuselages? I can see a Mk1 centre with razorback parts (especially intakes) on each side looking pretty dang sweet!
  2. Not to overdo the scope creep, but a few mechanics that could make mobile 'beacons' interesting: 1) They can have a mass limit (So bigger craft could require more extensive/heavier facilities for recovery) 2) They cannot recover themselves. Those two restrictions alone would grant a whole bunch of interesting implications. How much modeling is done in support of it, of course, is another question... but it would certainly seem like fun. Good luck!
  3. This is pretty fantastic, and I'm loving having a mobile launch platform to toodle around the oceans with A couple tiny thoughts: 1) Is there a reason the engines have to be separate from the base hull? Actually attaching them is a bit of a challenge. Unless you intend that the part will be reused a lot, is there anything stopping it from being integral to the hull? 2) Does anyone have/know of some kind of connector to use to grab the ship and not have it hit the ground when using HyperEdit etc for deployment? The timing can be awful tight.
  4. A flat runway, even if it's short and irregular on the edges, is a must-have. Else the grass is a better proposition. I would be pretty okay with it being wobbly (ie, the edges are not straight) though - but I'd still really prefer a setup where all the runways are properly straight and level (sans bumps); what you're paying for is /capability/, after all, and having the L2 and L3 runways significantly wider and longer would be perfectly sufficient. Especially if the L3 runway had a proper suite of landing lights.
  5. Thought #1: This is awesome. Thanks very much! Thought #2: Local translations of the 'famous figures' names in KSP sounds very much like it's a crowdsourcing task so you can grab the local flavor and jokes, even if you have to trust that nothing naughty gets slipped in. Thought #3: This whole dev article concept is brilliant. Especially if folks decide that more fundamental parts of KSP need editing too, like, oh, say... the technical implementation of wheels again.
  6. Oh my goodness, I'd been thinking of doing this exact mod! My thought for the skill tree was a little less... powerful... though. The idea being that they're less capable than any one Kerbal, thus ensuring you still care about sending a three-man pod to the moon (for that Pilot to land it, the Scientist to research it, and the Engineer to fix it, right?)... but can still be a slightly more versatile 'handyman' for rover work and, crucially, a cheaper source of personnel for life-support dependent bases: Simply rig up contracts that award them, tourist-style, and are satisfied by getting them to their destination! 0: Tourist with EVA and ability to 'work' for life support facilities (I'm not sure whether this is possible, but is probably worth checking with MKS and the like guys whether it's possible) - if you want them to be much use outside of a moonbase, you'll need to train 'em. 1: Vehicle control (sans SAS or other handy help): Basic controls for driving rovers, or piloting craft in a pinch, but you'll really want a pilot for the fiddly stuff. 2: Repair wheels: Now you can drive your Space Truck, it's time to maintain it. Articulated legs and the like remain the remit of Engineers; this is for the guy that needs to swap a tyre. 3: EVA Samples: You still need a Scientist if you want to maintain the kit in the back, but he can be trusted to dig 'em out. 4: Repair solar panels: Gettin' handy round the base. If a multiplier could be granted to working in Life Support mod Greenhouses, that'd be even better - but that, again, depends on talking to the Life Support guys. I wonder if UCS's homesickness rate can have a Colonist multiplier for willingness to stay around a long time? Colonists rapidly lose interest in going home would be... thematic. Whatcha think?
  7. Hmm. I was planning to use 1.2 to set up a shiny new martian colony. Does the new (to me) habitation rules mess that up big time? Or are there ways to still create semi-permanent staffings?
  8. Would you believe I had precisely this problem just last week? I was trying to get a little flying cargoplane to Eve; ended up having to use a decoupler. This, so very much!
  9. Okay. I'm pondering making a ModuleManager patch to convert the Food supplies from Litres to KerbalDays, the green marshmellow equivalent of man-hours. I'd need to divide the volumes of all resources by 16.2, multiply weight and cost by 16.2, and... the volume too, I guess?
  10. Loving that 1.25m cupola! Would there be any chance of it coming as a pure-blue version in future? As an aside (because the thread is huge), what had you settle on 16.2 Supplies per kerbal per day? I've been half tempted to refactor the supplies ratio (while keeping the ultimate capacities, weights, and costs in line with base balancing) so it's 1 supply per day per kerbal just to let the 'mental math' be easier - a radially mounted Supplies box is then ~6 kerbal-days worth, and you know this just by looking at it...
  11. He last visited over a year ago, so I wouldn't hold much breath in having him reappear any time soon. I think 1.1 broke a lot of these old legacy mods good and proper, and without modelling support I'm not at all sure we'll see them live again, unless there's a dedicated project to attempt such ventures...
  12. Given the somewhat tenuous status of this pack, does model changes mean 'doomed forever', or 'please stand by, we're just figuring this out'?
  13. Would tank indicators be generic, or fuel-specfic? Generic would be handy in unusual places - tracking food supplies, or ore content, as opposed to simply LFO.
  14. Anyone know if the lovely little landing legs on this mod will need rework for 1.1? I've only just now discovered an urgent and pressing need for the things in my latest adventures in rover construction.
  15. If you're looking for ideas on designs, I'd love to have a little pokey-up light as you see on the 100 charge radial battery as a standalone part. So you can slap your own indicator lights everywhere and have them thematically match. Also one that strobes - so you have a blinky button giving you a colour.