Toontoonizer

Thank you! This did indeed resolve it. I'm not too interested in RP-1 at the moment but it seems the easiest way to install RO.

Hi all, Wondering if someone can help: 1. Fresh KSP install - KSP version 1.12.3.3173 + both DLCs 2. RP-1 Express install from instructions in this thread using CKAN. Nothing else installed mod wise. 3. Start new sandbox game 4. Go into the aircraft hangar and there are no Mk.2 plane fuselages available or other Mk.2 parts apart from the Cockpits. I've tried this with two fresh installs. The Mk.2 parts are there prior to installing RP-1 Express but disappear after it. Everything else seems to be in working order - is this a bug or just my install?

sooo maybe it needs bigger/more wings, but a large wingspan is not in the design spec ..but outside of that what if i just wanted a higher idle speed? maybe....why not? i've seen crazier things done in Kerbal. Plus around 500-1000m/s its quite maneuverable and stable..so why not? I call it a HVIC - high velocity interdiction craft.

it is just about aerodynamically sane...it is capable of a stable Mach 3.5, but has a fairly small wing area. Going straight at 200m/s is okay-ish but maneuvers are a no go...the plane needs to travel at a higher velocity to generate enough lift to be stable for maneuvers. I have no problem with waiting but i'm running on 1.2.2 (for realism overhaul) and i doubt the 1.2.2 version will be updated so was hoping for a config patch.

Hi all, @Papa_Joe@jrodriguez@SpannerMonkey(smce)@gomker@TheDog@DoctorDavinci Love this - i'm trying to get the AI pilot to fly my plane but the maximum idle speed is too low. Is there a way to increase the idle speed? The relevant field is in BDArmory/BDArmory/Control/BDModulePilotAI.cs on github. Unfortunately, i have no idea of how to make patches. when the plane reaches the min altitude it slows to 200m/s and that is too slow. thanks for your help in advance

@DoctorDavinci This mod looks great! Is it compatible with KSP 1.2.2?

Thank you @HebaruSan - I had a look at the link you sent. Sadly, it was 60% gibberish - i might need to read up on some unity coding (or just general unity tutorials tbh). In terms of a collider - i don't think the greebles would need a collider - they are primarily aesthetic. Although for larger greeble pieces it may be useful? Or if greebles are given functionality (i.e. cooling units?) Ah yes, thats very interesting. I imagine that for most greeble parts (aside from wires, pipes, tubes and other things that are derived from primary shapes) mesh swapping would be needed. I will have a look there also! @wasml thank you! will have a gander. @White Owl Yup - hopefully it actually becomes something

@fengist Thanks for taking the time to respond! really appreciate it. I will definitely check out the beginners part modding tutorial - i have no doubt this will not be an easy ride especially as i have minimal to no modding experience but hey you gotta challenge yourself right. Yes - i did think that truly procedurally generated things will be very difficult (if not impossible) but at the least having greebles that are highly customisable would be as acceptable to me. I am thinking of something along the lines of the procedural parts mod with configurable tanks, wings, nose cones etc. For example, you could have a wiring that could be customisable in length, width, whether it is a bundled wire, what kind of bundle (flat/honeycomb/cylindrical), is it a bend, if so what is the bend angle, is it a junction, etc. Or for just innocuous looking bits and bobs with customisable sizes etc. Yes - i thought as much also. I am comfortable with modelling so no issues there. Its more trying to understand how the modelling and customisable parts come together. So, lets say I have a vent and one of the parameters is the number of blades on the fan - would i need to have a model of the fan that corresponds to every option available on the number of blades and simply changing the numbers swaps out the mesh? Just things like that I would like to understand. I understand the argument - but our modern systems are more than capable of handling some greebles even if they add a few thousand polygons - for users whose systems can't handle it, they don't have to use it. Plus, for me, aesthetics and detail is important. I actually find that alot of the engine models available are too sparsely detailed for my liking. Where is the mass of tubing and piping? the various mechanical components that make the machinery itself beautiful Sure you could argue Kerbal was not intended for that - but thats what modding is for. For me the aesthetics is worth it, it adds to the immersion. I dont envisage the greebles having any aerodynamic impact so it would just be a rendering impact rather than a physics one. Thanks for replying again! I'm going to have to set out some time this weekend to start reading and experimenting. I'm hoping i can get some input into the procedural/configurable elements from somebody because totally clueless about that haha.

Ah yes - i do have remotetech installed - but this is strange as i have full control of my craft and can fly it remotely. The state "No Comms" as referenced by that code doesnt appear AFAIK. i'll check again tonight - but this has been very helpful, thank you @fatcargo!!!

Hi all, I've been wanted to have greebles in Kerbal for a long time now. For those who don't know what im talking about, greebles are non-functional (or functional if you so wish) parts of spaceships/vessels/objects that provide detail and a sense of mechanics. A google search of "greeble" will give you an idea, but we're talking about tubes, pipes, heat exchanges, and any other manner of bit bobs. Now i understand that not all types of greebling would be suited to procedural generation - but im thinking along the lines of procedural tubing or piping that you can place on a craft by clicking its path, adjusting bend types and angle, textures, shape etc. I am happy to have a go at this myself - my only hindrance is coding. As in, i have very minimal experience of this. And modding - not done that either. I can model in 3d software - so what i want to ask of the community is outside of the resources available in the stickies, where can i start to learn about creating this kind of mod? And even better would anyone be willing/have the time to help out or just help me understand what needs to be done?

@Diazo or anyone else, i've been using AGX for a long time without issue but yesterday after building a new craft in the SPH the action groups do not work when trying to use them. The AGX window shows the text "NO GO" in red writing whenever i try to execute an action group. The groups i had set up were for the toggling of the main engine cluster, a group for the toggling of the secondary engine clusters and another group to toggle the shutters on a shroud. Happy to provide more info if necessary - im running 1.2.2 x64 with a whole bunch of mods (62 to be precise) but ive never experienced an issue before. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated.

So...re-seating the RAM has not caused the issue to go. Instead the time between crashes is now a lot longer ~1-2 hours but will still crash. The error log references the same memory access violation at address fffffffffb1. Anyone have any ideas? Is this just a unity 64bit bug?

I've solved the issue. Removed, cleaned and reinserted my RAM sticks into the empty RAM slots. (2x8GB DDR3 Dual Channel) EDIT: I thought this solved the issue but see newest post below. Given I passed memtest with 0 issues I was pretty sure it wasn't a RAM issue. But turned out it was. After checking the logs, the same memory address was being referenced in the access violation (ffffffb1 if anyone is interested but the number of 'f's might not be accurate). This made me inclined to think it was a hardware issue. Hope this helps anyone else having similar issues.

Ahhh ok. Will the update be available for 1.2.2 by any chance?

Hi there @allista - this is a really interesting mod but i am having a lot of trouble getting it to work - so i have one main question: Is this compatible with RO and FAR? The reason i ask is that i am trying to use this with RO and FAR (installed this mod through CKAN and running 1.2.2 of kerbal - i am not sure what version CKAN installed but will check when i get home) but it simply cannot hover a craft in a stable fashion. Using the video you created above, i set up a simple MK2 drone with VTOL engines and a main engine. If i set it to hover between 0-80m above ground it can get there fine. trying to set it to hover at anything above that and crazy stuff starts to happen: the front of the craft fires upwards suddenly and the craft flips over on its self, crashes and explodes if i increment the hover height very slowly, it will get there without flipping but then will start destabilising and what happens after that is anyone's guess because anything could happen. If i do get it to a stable(ish) hover above 100m then at some point, completely randomly one engine, or a group of engines will be set to unbalanced thrust and the craft will crash and explode. This will happen without warning and for no apparent reason. I have tried many different combinations of craft but the result is always the same. Obviously if this isnt compatible with FAR and RO (and 1.2.2) then that would explain things. Thank you in advance!