Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Beale

  1. This is totally my bad, the part did have a parachute during Dev, but it was too buggy due to constraints, so removed. The sample container is strong enough to survive any impact on a body with a thick atmosphere though, so you can go straight back to kerbin with it
  2. There is unfortunately no winning solution to deprecation, they all have drawbacks: Hard delete the parts breaks user's crafts. Produces bug reports. Leave old parts intact, but hide them (what the stock game does) bloats mod size on disk significantly, prolongs loading times (sometimes by a lot). Though hidden, they may still get used in new crafts (since there is nothing *obviously* wrong with them), making transitioning away from using them harder. Leave old parts mostly intact, but crush their texture and hide them reduces bloat and load times (but not entirely), but many users may perceive the crushed textures as a bug and report it. Crushing the textures is also a pretty tedious and slow process (granted, you could definitely automate it with a little python script or the like). Hide old parts, and delete their textures (what I've gone with) Parts are mostly invisible, and the bloat is minimised (most model files are tiny). But unaware users will perceive missing textures as a bug, if they are not aware they are deprecated. I think the removed textures is the lesser of all evils. Better solutions for deprecating things exist, but they're not built into KSP or supported by it, so would just lead to further headaches. If I could go back in time, I would probably write a script to replace all the part names with "DEPRECATED, DO NOT USE". You're right the, the VAB search is a bit crap, and really shouldn't show parts marked as "hidden".
  3. immensely cool, megalove! hoo hoo hoo hee hee hee. A shiny sphere, just in time for tea.
  4. Yeah as I mentioned above it was moved forward. I don't remember if SAR fix was done, but there was a recent patch, maybe it made it in.
  5. Yeah I am happy to support critical bugs etc, but any further "new" things for now no. Looking forward to modding KSP2 when it gets in a better state, until then I have other projects. Hope this helps,
  6. There is not much I can do here. Parallax terrain goes on a totally separate object layer setup. Anyone is welcome to create a "ParallaxNeptuneCamera" fork - but it would need to be a fork indeed IMO, as the rendering setup is quite different. Same as my response above.
  7. Tantares 25.1 For KSP Version 1.12.X https://github.com/Tantares/Tantares/releases/tag/v25.1 @benjee10has done an incredible (and from experience, difficult) job of making Zarya solar panels, with accurate scissor unfolding mechanism AND the ability to do a partial deployment, for accurate ISS recreation. Huge thanks to the guy! And give him your cheers. These are a new part. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/206472058228572162/1075851107382861855/screenshot499.png https://i.imgur.com/XxUltVH.jpeg (Images refuse to embed ) You can complete the ISS build with Habtech: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/133501-112x-habtech2-stockalike-iss-parts-026/ In other news I expect some will be waiting for news on the recent soyuz revamp, and I must say that development of this has moved to KSP 2. Sorry if you were waiting for this in KSP 1. But hopefully it will be more to show soon.
  8. Once it is in the game, yes. Many Thanks, Unfortunately we are out of time now, once this is released KSP 2 will be just around the corner in early access. For KSP2 tantares may be a little light at first. But slowly will be moving across the Soyuz first, with TKS maybe after that. If there are still any photos of the irl TKS / va in assembly always I would love to see them, pretty rare.
  9. [snip] I am not familiar with PH series sorry? oooh yeah... so it's proc fairings you have to bulge them out a little. but if you use SAF fairings they have a natural step to encapsulate these modules perfectly.
  10. Few little greebles over the old model, but a modest upgrade I may model a physical hatch, but at now I cannot promise this 100% (This is obviously a trash 2 minute quick test)
  11. Yeah no worries - this will be a drop in replacement for existing soyuz parts, in this case though all nodes, part names, etc are the same - so it *should* be a pain-free process Only think I would raise is that colour options will probably be different (Black and Green only), and also that they will be thermal blankets only.
  12. Unfortunately I do not have these old files. That old thing was terrible anyway, there is now: Thingy (progress will be slow)
  13. Cannot say my thanks enough for your continued work on Wings3D! This tool looks really great, thank you
  14. Amazing! thank you! And I linked it on the front Do you know what this means?
  15. Glad to know it works okay in 3.2 (I think the LK lander ill struggle a lot though?) Unfortunately I do not know of any up-to-date RT patches that will work. Fool tank
  16. This is a "Soyuz", it is an obscure spacecraft that never left the planning stages.
  17. No special engine for this. But, if you have Tantares SP, the Venera engine (I think it is called Opal?) is very close.
  18. It is just not possible to do this nicely with my skillset. Same parachute stays.
  • Create New...