Rezolution

Members
  • Content Count

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

66 Excellent

About Rezolution

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

1,051 profile views
  1. I could not agree more. In fact, I actually said as much in my preface: My whole purpose was to see how one of those three channel 'copters would fly in Kerbal, given the same basic design. Turns out, they can be made to fly very similarly to their R/C counterparts (which, also, were never meant to be great helicopters; just cheap and easy to fly). Look, it is clear you have a very specific vision of the type of craft you feel should be included in this forum, to which my helicopter obviously does not belong. We simply have different opinions on that matter. At any rate, I did update the .craft file with a newer version that binds rear rotor rpm to pitch, rather than rpm and torque. I think I like the way it flies even better, so thank you for pointing out my oversight. Again, hope you all enjoy it. Cheers.
  2. That is a good idea. Probably should have just bound rpm. I did that on the main rotors, after all! I went through a lot of variations, so I think I just got lost in the weeds on that one. Easy enough to fix, however. Even still, the concept works. Ultimately, I had not seen anyone try this yet, so I thought I would. It actually flies alright. It was just never meant to compete with a real helicopter. I wasn't sure if you meant mine should be classified as "barely flyable." Seems a bit harsh. Maybe just not that useful? I will grant you that one. Then again, for the same reason one might argue that one of these isn't either. I guess it just depends on who's using it! Thanks again for your tip about the rotor/ rpm binding. I'll definitely change that.
  3. I suppose I should have put in a little more description. I actually did bind the tail rotor to the pitch axis. I hid the KAL-1000 inside the fuselage.The reason I use custom 1 to brake and toggle the rear rotor is due to the added lift generated from the free wheeling prop. You need to kill that quickly at low speeds in order to prevent a nose over. I suppose it may look simple, but it actually took quite some time to balance correctly as well as to tweak all of the motors and lifting surfaces. Additionally, although you can’t see it from the pictures, the main rotors are attached independently to a central I-Beam in order to prevent having to attach one motor to the other. This prevented me from having to use a free-spinning motor as a counterbalance. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks.
  4. Hi all. It has been a while since I posted a craft, but Breaking Ground has brought me back from another hiatus. Today I present the Vertitrace three bladed helicopter. Essentially, I wanted to see if I could implement an R/C three channel helicopter design with the new Breaking Ground parts. As in real life, it was never meant to represent the most efficient or advanced use of helicopter technology. Rather, I was mainly just curious to see how it would work in Kerbal. As such, it is not fast and has a few quirks, but overall the craft can be said to be flyable. If you choose to download and try it out, keep in mind the following: -Rear rotor is bound to pitch axis. -Custom 1 cuts power to and brakes the rear rotor. You must do this if you intend to enter into a hover and/or land the craft. -Custom 2 enables motors with 100% torque. Throttle controls RPM only on main rotors. It is more stable when two small reaction wheels are added to the lower railings (line of fuel tanks that connect to the landing skids), but I wanted to build something that did not need wheels in order to fly. Here is a link to the .craft file for any interested parties: Vertitrace Thanks for reading! Please let me know if you have any questions. *Update: Custom 1 no longer has effect. Rear rotor rpm is tied to pitch. Old version had rpm and torque tied to pitch.
  5. I know I am odd, but as a pilot in real life I enjoy designing and flying planes and SSTO spaceplanes. I also fly, whenever possible, entirely IVA, from the cockpit. To me, the joy of KSP is about the vessel creation itself, and getting to know the unique flying characteristics of each new aircraft. In other words, I like the act of piloting and flying for its own sake. Rockets certainly have their place in my stable, as well. However, I always find myself defaulting to conventional airplanes whenever I don’t have a specific space mission in mind. And, yes, I know that the physics of Kerbal don’t match true flight sims such FSX or X-Plane, but whenever I just want to slap a few parts together, firewall the throttle, and see what might happen, it’s hard to beat the fine balance between realism and fun that is KSP.
  6. Have the badges been sent out for this challenge? I haven't received a message yet and I just wanted to check. Thanks!
  7. So I decided to go a slightly different route. I thought it might be worth a few extra points if I were to land a conventional plane on the VAB roof; in other words, one that is not a VTOL in any form. After several different design attempts, this was the largest traditional plane I was able to make that I could land on top of the VAB. It weighs 41.63 tonnes and took me a few tries to finally stick the landing. As you can see, I had to use up the whole pad, but she's on there! Cheers!
  8. Here is my smallest entry to make it across: Cheers!
  9. That was perfect advice @Drew Kerman. Found the function in the spaces folder just you mentioned. Looks like this: MODULE { name = InternalSeat seatTransformName = Seat1 portraitCameraName = CockpitCam allowCrewHelmet = false kerbalEyeOffset = 0, 0.02, 0 I changed the Y value to .003 and I think that will work for me (at least on the MK1 cockpit. Haven't tried the others yet). Thanks again!
  10. Thanks guys! I was hoping there may be some function like this inside the config file somewhere. I'll take a look myself and see what I can find. Thanks for the info. I appreciate the help and please let me know if you think of anything else.
  11. As someone who likes flying aircraft/spaceplanes from inside the cockpit, I am not enjoying the higher IVA point of view since the release of 1.2. In order to keep the instrument panel in view, you have to angle the camera down quite a bit and zoom out to nearly max for all airplane cockpit types, which just feels awkward to me. So, here's my question. How difficult would it be to mod the .craft files in order to lower the default point of view in the cockpits? Where would one start? I wouldn't mind giving it a go, however I have never before modded anything in Kerbal and might need a little guidance. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!