Wobbly rockets - Now 1.09 - 2 metre parts, verniers, payload fairings, MUCH more

[feldopropane]

thanks for these extra parts !

[Yerbs]

This is a really nice pack, thanks.

I would like to add a few suggestions though that i think would benefit this pack and the game.

- A 4 socket to 4 socket coupler (for center rocket reinforcement)

- A single 1 to 1 coupler or mini fuel tanks the same thickness as your couplers to keep the rocket parts at the same level.

- 2, 3 to 3 couplers ( one in a row the other in the normal tri shape)

- A 4 socket to 1 (like the first one but for connecting to large parts)

- longer fuel tanks (double, triple or quad the size and do the same for weight, just in 1 model)

- if doable a thruster module to put more force on turning the rocket in the desired direction.

- a longer radial decoupler (like 2 connected with a beam maybe?) that would attach and keep things more ridged.

[Sunday Punch]

I'm glad you like the pack!

To clarify some points with your suggestions;

1. Not possible at the moment as far as I can tell (only one top node can be attached on a part)

2. You could use SAS modules, although I am making some small parts that would also serve for this

3. Not possible (see 1.)

4. Not possible (see 1.)

5. I don't really see the utility of this, you can stack the current tanks to get more fuel, longer tanks would just be more restrictive for no advantage (maybe a slightly more rigid rocket?)

6. Already complete, will be in new version of the pack

7. Might be possible, I will investigate.

Reinforcing couplers are easily the most requested part by the way, the planned Strut Connectors should address that issue.

[Psyckosama]

1. Not possible at the moment as far as I can tell (only one top node can be attached on a part)

Just have a part that is flat and has 4 nodes on both sides that fuel can flow through.

2. You could use SAS modules, although I am making some small parts that would also serve for this

They're close but a bit off in size..

3. Not possible (see 1.)

4. Not possible (see 1.)

Theoretically possible. See 1.

5. I don't really see the utility of this, you can stack the current tanks to get more fuel, longer tanks would just be more restrictive for no advantage (maybe a slightly more rigid rocket?)

Yeah.

6. Already complete, will be in new version of the pack

Nice....

[Yerbs]

I'm glad you like the pack!

To clarify some points with your suggestions;

1. Not possible at the moment as far as I can tell (only one top node can be attached on a part)

2. You could use SAS modules, although I am making some small parts that would also serve for this

3. Not possible (see 1.)

4. Not possible (see 1.)

5. I don't really see the utility of this, you can stack the current tanks to get more fuel, longer tanks would just be more restrictive for no advantage (maybe a slightly more rigid rocket?)

6. Already complete, will be in new version of the pack

7. Might be possible, I will investigate.

Reinforcing couplers are easily the most requested part by the way, the planned Strut Connectors should address that issue.

Thanks for the reply.

Could larger fuel tanks (instead of stacking) decrease the lag of the game when building huge rockets? like http://gyazo.com/7ab238d6623651772f592eb6865aa720.png

[Austupaio]

A bit, but really only a bit. Not enough to make them simply for that purpose.

[Sunday Punch]

Just have a part that is flat and has 4 nodes on both sides that fuel can flow through.

They're close but a bit off in size..

Theoretically possible. See 1.

Yeah.

Nice....

The thing is, only one of those 4 top nodes will actually connect to an adjacent part at any one time. Believe me, I'd love a reinforcing part like that (in fact it was the very first thing I tried to make for KSP) but it is not possible as far as I can tell. It's also the part I get the most requests about! If you like, you can try and make one; just copy the tricoupler or one of my couplers and add top nodes. If you can get it to work properly please let me know as I and the rest of the KSP community could certainly use such a part.

Also, I'm going to close this thread and open a new one in the new Projects and Releases section. See you all there!

edit: No I'm not because this thread has magically moved there! Thanks mods.

[Sunday Punch]

New version of my parts pack 8)

I'm going to have to come up with a name for this thing at some point.

New in this version are:

-An adorable little solid rocket motor that fits flush with other modules for smooth, sleek rockets

-RCS module that gives you more attitude control power. Torque is applied from its location so its position in the stack is important

-Added symmentry rules for the couplers and splitters

-Various fixes and tweaks

Sunday_Punchs_KSP_parts_v1_04.zip

[feanor]

Excellent!

Thanks so much for these packs.

Some ideas: Some science packs, solar panels + ion engines, perhaps some slender srb?

Anyway, thanks alot

[Austupaio]

How cute, prepare to be orkified, new part pack.

Thanks, Sunday.

P.S. never change the name. Ever.

[sirscott]

New version of my parts pack 8)

I'm going to have to come up with a name for this thing at some point.

New in this version are:

-An adorable little solid rocket motor that fits flush with other modules for smooth, sleek rockets

-RCS module that gives you more attitude control power. Torque is applied from its location so its position in the stack is important

-Added symmentry rules for the couplers and splitters

-Various fixes and tweaks

Sunday_Punchs_KSP_parts_v1_04.zip

Glorious Work!

No Indev game becomes great without OC from its fans. I salute you sir

[CptRichardson]

Why do you need a name for this pack? They're all wibbly-wobbly, rickety-rockety rockets.

Of doom.

[Darkwing]

I've been using your pack nearly as long as KSP itself, and have enjoyed it thoroughly.

However, there are two 'bugs' with the new RCS modules that users should be aware of:

• 
  [li]As they are classified as command modules by the game, jettisoning them will kill your crew once they hit the surface.[/li]
  [li]They're also very 'wobbly' (it's in the name, I suppose) while steering with them.[/li]
  

Both are most likely properties of the the game, but especially the inability to jettison them is something to keep in mind when building.

[cd7890]

i love this

[lawine]

I'd love to install this, unfortunately the server the files are hosted on seems to time-out for me

I'll try again later.

[feldopropane]

hope this helps !

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=E39NXYLZ

[memy]

I've hit quite the bug. If an RCS is destroyed, the crew dies.

[windpoison]

Beautiful work, thank you. It's people like you hwo keep budding indie games going. Also the verification says GOKILL, so imma go grab a knife

[KaziArmada]

A small suggestion? Maybe add a part list to either the OP or to a small readme file inside the pack?

Other then that...Well, withoutthis I'd be having a lot more issues with building ships, I'll say that

[guerilla_gearhead]

Might just be me, but the parts seem a bit buggy with the new 0.8.4 release.

Attaching the RCS near the top will cause stages to go screwy further down the line at times (i.e I will jump from stage one to my last decoupler/parachute, might just be a bug in general however), and sometimes attaching things symmetrically to the large fuel tanks causes them to become 'unidentified' and break off on the pad more often than normal .

[Sunday Punch]

I've been using your pack nearly as long as KSP itself, and have enjoyed it thoroughly.

However, there are two 'bugs' with the new RCS modules that users should be aware of:

• 
  [li]As they are classified as command modules by the game, jettisoning them will kill your crew once they hit the surface.[/li]
  [li]They're also very 'wobbly' (it's in the name, I suppose) while steering with them.[/li]
  

Both are most likely properties of the the game, but especially the inability to jettison them is something to keep in mind when building.

I've hit quite the bug. If an RCS is destroyed, the crew dies.

Yep this is because the only module type that has RCS enabled is the command capsule. Of course this also means if it's destroyed, the crew dies. There's no way around this at the moment, sorry.

And the wobbliness is because the RCS modules apply torque just like the engines, they act from their position in the stack. You could reduce the wobbliness by reducing the torque settings in the part file but that would also obviously make them less effective.

I'll put a text file with descriptions of the parts in future releases, I promise

[vinniep]

Sunday Punch - little bug (maybe) here in 1.04.

The KSP-30 Solid Fuel Boosters are pretty insistent that they will not attach themselves to a radial decoupler. I saw one of your screenshots above with them attached, so perhaps it worked with an older version (will have to experiment later if I have time).

Even with that, though, a fantastic set - Thanks for your work.

[guerilla_gearhead]

Yep this is because the only module type that has RCS enabled is the command capsule. Of course this also means if it's destroyed, the crew dies. There's no way around this at the moment, sorry.

Found a temporary fix for this

Setting the crashTolerance parameter to 999 seems to have granted it immunity to every type of damage I've tried to do to it. I dropped it from several thousand meters at varying speeds and tried my best to vaporize it under the exhaust of several engines but at the end my little Kerbals are left grinning stupidly in the corner

[Sunday Punch]

Found a temporary fix for this

Setting the crashTolerance parameter to 999 seems to have granted it immunity to every type of damage I've tried to do to it. I dropped it from several thousand meters at varying speeds and tried my best to vaporize it under the exhaust of several engines but at the end my little Kerbals are left grinning stupidly in the corner

Ooh that could be a good workaround, thank you!

[Ezekiel]

Thanks for spending the time to make these awesome parts!

Ok, I have a request for two new parts (or maybe they could be combined as one?) that would be very essential to orbital flight. It would be an engine system and fuel tank that attaches to the back of the command pod. The fuel tank would be half the length of the normal tank and the engine could use the standard liquid engine model with a different skin (it would be nice if this was smaller, but that might be too much work). The engine would be very weak but the tank would have a lot of fuel. Just having the fuel tank and engine on the capsule would not provide enough thrust to lift it off the ground and only the engine or another fuel tank would be able to attach to the bottom of the fuel tank (so it's large tank size won't be exploited). Once you're in space this would make it easier to adjust the orbit, because it takes very little force to change the path of a stable orbit. It would also give players an easy way to de-orbit instead of just drifting if their rockets have run out of fuel. The names could have something like 'Nuclear...' or 'Orbital...' to explain the use. I'll probably try to tell Harvester about this too because I think it could really change the game.