Jump to content

[0.23] World Space 0.5a4


Recommended Posts

Well, I planned to inform you of this problem, but got bogged down by exams and university buraucracy. The CSM can manouver, but only because it has reaction wheels. It doesn't maneuver like the real CSM, and I've seem the RCS occasionally reverse on similarly configured parts (inline RCS are bad news, generally speaking). I can send you LES schematics if you want: http://georgesrockets.com/Scale/DATA/Joe_GIFs/LittleJoe-FAI-1-39.5.gif

It's for the Little Joe, which is the rocket that was used to test the Apollo LES system, but all important parts are the same.

Oh, and Unity can take lots of polygons and lots of separate models. APS blocks, retros and ullage motors are very important for mods like Engine Ignitor, which make it harder to ignite an engine without them. Right now, the rocket is much too simple.

Let's see you do a better job then, instead of just complaining about everything hes done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm asking about is a change in design philosophy. While I'm no modeler, it's not modeling that is the problem here - the models are all there, with some exceptions. The problem is how they are connected together, too many parts are fused into one model, which generally is not a good approach. I could make the APS and the retrorockets (a trivial task, really), but I don't have disk space to install Unity to rig them (and time to learn Unity rigging; I've tried it, it's a horrible program). I could probably configure the whole rocket if I had properly divided models. I could add EI and advanced gimbal support. It's not hard, KSP can handle such complexity just fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon01

engines and tanks merged for several reasons, firstly to connections of less than heavy rocket so it more stable and less susceptible to deformation. Secondly, the more parts, the harder Unity adequately assume physics. Because of this, I see no reason to make a team of 100 rocket parts. Rocket need for only one purpose, to bring something into orbit and all. So disassembling the rocket engines for tanks and I will not. I am open to critics. And I take critics adequately. But the requirements do me alone because that this is what I want, I will ignore

Edited by Lovad
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bug Report,

When deploying the parachute this shiftes the command pod several KM's and crashes the craft. Onboard antenna does not work as a communication array. Other than that I have not found any other problems so far, lovely models as usual.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, the parachute bug is intermitent, second use of the capsule no problems.

Bug with a parachute but it is already a problem in the game. antenna still connected to the science, it will be in the future will be like Apollo still fine tuning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really like the green chutes, but could you put small "deployment chutes" on top?

Parachute pulling mean? Do not think that they need, though see what I can come up with. A green simply because the texture is not imposed

Wow- looks great! Can you make cool IVA's too? I hate it if I must fly a great looking Mod Rocket with a boring STOCK IVA...

Yes original cockpits will to be added later.

I don't think they are supposed to look that way :P it has no textures

You're right, no more texture. I think the evening laid out some screenshots from the test

Link to post
Share on other sites

When using the apollo service module I have trouble rotating for LM extraction. The RCS fires as if it is trying to translate side to side rather than rotate. I think it does this because the rcs is one single part along with the service module. Would it be possible to have the RCS be it's own separate part in the next update?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it possible to attach some sort of lander into the apollo decoupler/fairing? It seems as though there's only room for the CSM up top. An attachment node for some sort of lander payload, even a KSP-stock one, would be very nice.

It is a place holder so you can launch the CSM , Besides I don't think the Sat B1 launched the whole Apollo Space craft, only the CSM.(someone correct me if i'm wrong)

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...