Jump to content

NiL

Members
  • Posts

    168
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

130 Excellent

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • About me
    Space frog
  • Location
    Kharkiv, Ukraine

Recent Profile Visitors

3,365 profile views
  1. Seconding that, crafts look absolutely stunning. I would love to use decals more myself, but don't have skills, patience or creativity to make good ones myself.
  2. https://imgur.com/a/wSx8zYd Managed to remove z fighting along with all other variants, as a proof of concept
  3. Since we got the modern texture variant on Apollo CM, could a version without chute assembly or with an adapted one be added, please? Top of the capsule itself (not counting the chute assembly) is already 1.25m more or less, and the assembly is modeled as one part, so it is as easy as deleting that very part and adding an endcap. Reasoning behind this request is very simple - presently, 1.25m ports (both stock and modded), or even 0.937m ports cannot be used without looking goofy and oversized, the protruding "tunnel" gets in the way, and original Apollo docking system doesn't always fit a modern playthrough. I have tried removing the chute assembly on my own in Blender, and the capsule looks fabulous with a combined parachute+1.25m docking port piece from ExtraDockingPorts mod, one can fit a LES on it. Unfortunately, the addon I use for importing .mu files into Blender (the standard and afaik only KSP importer addon) messes up textures and materials, creating z-figthing all over the capsule. Maybe the variant could be included in the extras folder, if it doesn't fit any real life prototypes or ETS designs, but it just makes so much sense for a modern capsule to use a modern docking port, and it's just such a simple modification for anyone with Unity.
  4. Well, I'm certainly using them now Can't believe I missed Sterling release, I waited for it since who knows how long ago. Thank you for all your beautiful work!
  5. I personally think it's better to release resistojets and tanks as an update. Those little things look so cute!
  6. Absolutely love the concept and the mod, the models and concept drawings/pics look so good! As for resistojets - maybe arkjet mode could be incorporated as an upgrade/mode on resistojects, having higher isp and thrust at the cost of consuming more power? Adding them as a separate part seems unnessesary, they wouldn't be unique enough from a gameplay perspective, both RJ and AJ would be multi-fuel electric engines. Or maybe you could have smaller RJ thrusters and bigger AJ ones. NF solid fuel RCS were useful as a self-contained option to add to your satellite (without adding monoprop tanks), if electric thermal thrusters would have integrated fuel tanks, they could be a more attractive option considering they look multidirectional on your pic. Or they could use the fuel from engine's integrated tanks, but people might want to use them alone. As for fuel choices - water seems really interesting, but then it may be better to add custom small water tanks, because life support mod is a pretty substantial dependency to include, and not all of them even have water (maybe a small circular tank in addition to integrated ones?). Liquid fuel seems like a strange resource to use (assuming it's kerosene), but stock nuke uses it, so idk. Another interesting idea is cold gas thrusters, they are used extensively IRL and to my knowledge nobody has implemented them in KSP yet. Their tradeoff could be having higher thrust and not using electric charge, but having really low isp, use case - rocket stages, kickstages, tiny satellites that don't have much electric charge. IRL they mostly use nitrogen, which is a great propellant option from a gameplay standpoint - it can be used both for RJ and cold gas thrusters, but a more stockalike alternative may be to just use oxidiser: yes, lox is not an optimal choice for RJ, but has less uses than LF, and every rocket stage would have it no matter the propellant (so instead of having separate RCS parts or variants for LF/Ox, ch4/ox, lh2/ox one could just have RCS that uses OX). CG RCS could have two modes - high and low thrust. This way both cold gas and electric thermal sets would have two variants each (resistojets/arkjets, low-thrust CG/high-thrust CG), and the mod wouldn't be too overcomplicated. And nano-fuel tank could have options of holding either water or oxidiser, or just have water and for ox NFE's tiny tanks could be used. Or CG could be a mode for RJ thrusters. Of course, that's all my personal opition and/or suggestions, I don't know what your artistic vision for the mod is, I'm just throwing ideas/suggestions out in case something would sound interesting to you. Also, I know it's a lot of incoherent text, but have you thought about monoprop ion engines? They exist IRL, and also provide an interesting gameplay option.
  7. Do you happen to be inspired by the Aldebaran? https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/martin-antares-arcturus-and-aldebaran-rockets.41051/ https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/b9xdja/aldebaran_spacecraft_a_proposed_cargo_flying_boat/
  8. Yay! Also, are helicopter-type engine in plans? Uncexpectedly, may look nice on that cockpit, with a round stock nosecone would have a kind of stretched-nose Sikorsky H-34 vibe.
  9. A little rough, but looks like it was made with love.
  10. Yes, it's a purely cosmetic glitch with no effect on heating or aerodynamics. At least if we're talking about the same thing - https://imgur.com/gallery/gSuonBZ
  11. Had the same issue since forever, reported it in the thread, even got a response from Nertea. The advice was to up the graphics settings, I never tried it, because I did run a lot of mods and it wasn't worth it. I don't believe you can fix it in any other ways, it is not a mod conflict. Do you also have a similar issue with ReStock antennaes?
  12. Yes, it wasn't deployable. I actually found it (by going to old versions of NFS on Github) and made screenshots of the part with reference and examples of usage: https://imgur.com/gallery/rDQN979 . Apparently it was 3.75m, and 0.4m in that form-factor, scaling down to 0.2m in 2.5m form-factor. Not sure why it is so, considering the most popular 3.75m probe core (from ReStock+) is 0.5m, and the core is the only part that would really limit the height (https://imgur.com/gallery/h9vGkNM - sorry for not including it in the first post, I'm not good with Imgur). 0.2m would be convinient and consistent, I imagine (at least considering 0.2 fits both 1.25m and mk2 cores, and 0.4 is only for 2.5m). Two 0.2m strips could be used for 2.5m core (as in screenshots), and scaling it down to 1.25m with TweakScale would produce panels 0.1m in height, which could also be used in two rows. If you would make different parts for different profiles, maybe 0.4m for 2.5 and 3.75m and 0.2m for everything else could be used? But I'm not a modder, so, fully unironically, what do I know. Linear strip sounds very cool in itself by the way. As far as I know it hasn't been done before, and they could be used longitudinally on rockets and spaceplanes, on the edges on Mk1 lander can (with TweakScale), on vertical stabilizers of drones, on spaceplane wings, trusses etc.
×
×
  • Create New...