Lupi

reread the post again; you have to hit "cut chute" if i read it right

Everyone getting so upset over the notion of a dab is making me want to suggest the fortnite dances as idle animations, or easter eggs. I want to watch the people who get upset over the things other people enjoy pull their hair out, and see the world burn Spyro did it.

...what base? we're looking at the same engine, right?

As far as i can gather, all of the revamps have to fit into the same dimensions as the original parts. So, the mk2 landercan is the same size now as before, the sparks, adapters, the pods, rockomax tanks, 1.25m tanks, anything. Making the poodle longer wasn't an option in keeping with that.

A few things to note: An engine is generally determined by the amt of turbopump assemblies/power packs that make it go, not the amount of combustion chambers/nozzles. It's why things like the RD-107, RD-170, RD-180, and so on were single engines despite having multple chambers. (As for why i'm only naming russian engines here, well, the US figured out big chambers (F1 and such) where Russia figured out more chambers. Different means to the same end.) As such, the poodle is still one singular engine, as such, just with dual chambers. More topically, russian upper stage engines like the RD-0110 and RD-0124 had four chambers. In addition, from what i was able to read and even more relevant to the subject matter, the RD-0124 does not individually actuate its nozzles for gimbal; it uses a structure much like the Poodle does here, where the whole frame is manipulated by those struts. While I agree roll control might be neat, engines like the Poodle do really exist and it's not wildly infeasible for an engine like this to lack roll. Most upper stages and landers (at least, the ones I can cook up) would have reaction controls anyway, and we also have the torque wheels to play with. Agreed here, though there's also an argument to be made for preserving 'character.' Like, I would love if they added the 4-way symmetry.... thingies, back to the Rockomax Brand Adapter in some way, as well as grey variants for the flat ones. I was trying to think up an idea for a rounded tankbutt shroud for the new Poodle as both a callback to the old mode's curviness, and because then it would look like a centaur tankbutt kinda. That, and it'd also probably satisfy the people who want a shrouded variant/boattail/what have you? Problem is, the poodle is really squat. with this i just mean the hemispherical part, i can add the greebles myself if i wanna put batteries, monoprop tnaks, cubesat storage, etc back there.

In regard to compact variants, I'd direct you guys here: As for roll control, if you look at the model, the gimbal hardware is for the assembly as a whole, with those hydraulic/pneumatic/whatever struts connecting the ring to the engine assembly, so probably no individual roll control on the nozzles.

That might be a trick of the backgrounds. My picture from the wiki is on a white background, where the preview is a dark blue. Of course, i haven't taken an eyedropper to it to see, but it looks right.

It looks like the nozzles are based on the Cheetah from Making History, which is itself based on the LR-91 as Roverdude linked literally as i was typing this: Which i suppose makes sense, and adds more consistency to the kerbal family of engines. It seems like it's bein' panned a lot, so I'm curious. What other styles of nozzle might you guys suggest for this thing?

As for aircraft expansions? NASA was founded from the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Since its inception and even before, it pursued experimental aircraft alongside the military, including weird lifting bodies, the x-15, the hl-20... they're landing a helicopter on mars, creating solar electric aircraft... it was NASA research that concluded that adding winglets to airliners would substantially increase their efficiency. You can't just say "NASA hasn't done it, there's no room for kerbal to do it" without being grossly short-sighted and omitting a great number of the things NASA has worked on, past the shuttle. That first A? Aeronautics, buckos. This is largely just being brought up to refute a lot of the points people were making in bad faith about the merit of one. I have no strong feelings about getting one, one way or the other. Propellers, fuel or electric or otherwise, would be NICE, but between mods and stock bearings, they're vaguely doable without an expansion.

Hi! Time for another assembly of thoughts: First: This is a crude mockup, as most of mine will be, but the rockomax brand adapter 02 had all those ridges to help break up a very simple texture and add detail where there was none. Now that the revamp is giving it detail, the ridges might be a bit excessive. I kinda used clone stamp to thanos-snap half of them out of existence. I think cutting half of them out would preserve the spirit of the part while also bringing it up to new standards. Second: Would there be a way to add the external greebles back to the conical Rockomax Brand Adapter? Or at least, do something with the part's texture and normals to allude to them? I feel like omitting them, or any symbolic representation of them, falls away from "preserving the spirit of the part" like these other adapters have. Third: Can all of these adapters have plane white for structural or aircraft use? The black stripe is nice and all, but solid white is always a good option to bring to the table. Maybe even, for the flat ones, a grey variant for backwards compatibility to make sure my ships don't look radically different once 1.6 drops. a classical texture variant for the flat adapters (i always called 'em pizza plates, the rockomax adapter 02 and fl-a5) would be a nice offering! Fourth: I'm really glad the lander-can got shored up, those windows look a lot nicer now! You guys even rounded the corners! Going with the addition of a node to the back, would nodes on the sides be considered? They could be used for rover things in the butter stick variant, or used to node attach things within the service bays on the full side.

Wow! I like it, a lot. Super marked improvement over the original, and it puts the variant system to good use! I can think of all sorts of uses for the bare version, and I'm sure that if this is a direct replacement, it'll still look great on stuff I've already got out there! This is great! I really dig it.

If coding timers for file loading/file transfer was easy, microsoft would've figured it out ages ago. Kerbal has to load the entire game into memory at the beginning as a result of how the game and the engine are designed. Also, concur - make sure the model is updated so the narrow end is 2.5m exactly (it wasn't before, because the other tanks had lips and it was made with that in mind) - hollow variant and/or fueled variant would be cool. i mean i've always clipped fuel tanks into it but y'know, if we're revamping it anyway - MAYBE make a variant that has a service bay with doors? That would be a cool use of the internal volume. - i will always advocate for a plain white/plane white version of each part that gets new skins. -if we can't use mesh switching to make it hollow or fueled or a service bay since it's already using the variant system for paintjobs, maybe just permanently make it hollow, or a fuel tank, or whatever you choose. - also the inside textures seem excessively dark. - solid orange foam version so we can make the current version of SLS? These parts were all added in 0.23.5 as part of the Asteroid Redirect Mission partnership with NASA, based on SLS as proposed then, with the saturn-like paint scheme used to sell it to Congress. Now SLS is showing its true orange color.

Man, that crackle gives the engines so much life! Brings back those memories of seeing some in person!

oooh! this is a nice little thing! makes those launch site icons super useful!

This to a tee. Strong, strong agreement here. Civil suggestion and constructive talk did a lot more to get those tanks and SRBs changed in 1.5 than yelling did.

The rovemate revamp didn't really, and the TKR couplers seemed fairly well received. The problem some people are having with the windows stems from an understanding of how aircraft and spacecraft that have to maintain cabin pressure work. Straight up corners in the windows are a weakness that will often lead to catastrophic faults (look at airliner windows ,and how they're always rounded). This problem was discovered by the british at the beginning of the jet age, when the Comet kept explosively decompressing in flight. Speaking of the LEM... Rounded corners! Its windows were rounded too! The second problem people are having is a bit more of a subjective one, where they feel like the window frames seem flimsy at that width. While it's not solid, it certainly looks like the cabin took inspiration from the SEV, which had beefy window frames. With that in mind, I sorta tried to mock this up earlier today, really only meant to put it in a few discord servers for a lark, but I might as well share it here. I basically just doubled the thickness of all the frame pieces, except the center. I widened that one out symmetrically. Even without rounding the corners, and despite the crudity of my photoshop, i think it's a noted improvement. The third problem is basically what Snark just said, fears that the lower windows aren't angled enough to have decent downward visibility. But, like he also said, we don't know that yet. We haven't seen an IVA yet, so it's all guessing. Perhaps the kerbals will be very close to the window, or sitting up above it a bit so they can look down into them better. Anyway that's a ramble and a half. It was probably unnecessary given Snark just said basically same thing, but shorter. But i already had this typed up, so I dunno.

if that were the case, the de havilland comet wouldn't have had so many window blowouts, though?

It's a lander pod with no downward visibility. Not a very good lander, in that case. Other than that, it looks alright? the new hatch is weird. Also... you guys said "it has service bays." Are these doors, then? Do they open/close like on the other service bays? Do they occlude their contents?

Sweet! I'm happy to see these parts finally getting some love! Yeah, a sort-of consequence of the game being cobbled together from 5 years' worth of artists with different visions coming and going, and sometimes mods like KSPX being folded in is that the game's "art style" was "jumbled mess" for a while. But now, with the revamp, we're getting stuff that's a lot more cohesive, and will be a lot nicer to put together! I won't have to do nearly as much kludging with my builds!

They look pretty nice! Will the 1.25m bicoupler, and the 2.5m versions of all these couplers be getting the same treatment? I don't see why they wouldn't, I'm just asking so someone else doesn't.

RE: playing other installs through steam: Rightclick the game on steam, hit "properties" and then click the Launch Options button. then, type the following: "<path of ksp_x64.exe>" %command% where the path of ksp_x64 sends it to your non-steamapps/common install for example: "C:\Users\Lupi\Documents\KSP version backups\KSP 1.4.5\KSP_x64.exe" %command% would tell steam to launch the executable in my 1.4.5 backup folder, as opposed to the one in steamapps/common/kerbal space program Steam can't write to this folder, so if any updates come through, they will only be applied to the steam install. This way, you still get overlay and steam services, without launching the steam copy of the game. Also, yeah, what this guy said. We can't say for certain if that could be the case.

I still mourn the loss of 3d pinball space cadet, and all the old CD-ROM games i played as a kid that don't work (or don't work well) on modern windows because they were 16-bit.

KER is very terrible for garbage collection, it dumps a lot of memory into garbage to keep all those bits of display info fed and updated. You might wanna try basic deltav or basic orbit instead and see if that improves things.

Yeah, that's the real reason this is great. Don't have to hunt down the tanks you want to use as much.

Before 1.5, if you clicked on the resources tab up top, hit the checkbox to pin a resource, it would show what tanks had (or could have) that resource, but you couldn't do anything with it, even if you pinned the tanks' info dispalys. Now you can pin those displays and transfer fuel while using them, rather than manually having to pan your camera to be able to rightclick on every tank you want to transfer fuel around.