totm june 2018 Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread

[kapteenipirk]

6 hours ago, EvenFlow said:

Please help. ;-;

Did the game by any chance crash when you clicked the save button.

If so, that means the craft file didn't save fully and is now corrupted (happened to me a few times before, so i know the feeling)

If you get lucky and the game saves enough of it, you might be able to save some chunks of it as subassemblies and add them to the new one (had to do that with my 1:1 An 225 witch got corrupted twice).

But, most of the time it's a lost cause.

[Servo]

4 hours ago, McFlyever said:

Hey Guys, theres a lot of incredible crafts in this thread, very cool!

 

I have a problem with an "mini-stock-VTOL-hinge" and i hope you can maybe help me (and thats the correct place for this). The big problem isn´t the hinge itself, rather the Docking Ports, they only dock one times (at first)! I was searching for a long time to fix the problem, but my ideas at the end. I don´t know, why it´s not working...

Here is the craft, if you want: https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.de/index.php?attachment/13252-tilt-rotor-mcfly-craft/

Docking ports have a minimum range that they need to reach before demagnetizing of between 1 and 1.25m. you're going to have to redesign the hinge so that it reaches that distance between ports. 

I've run into the same problem on a number of my craft (primarily my F-35 and my Harrier), check out my solutions if you want to get an idea how I work around it.

https://kerbalx.com/servo/AV-8B-Harrier-II

https://kerbalx.com/servo/F-35B-JSF

 

[McFlyever]

Mutch thanks @Servo i never heard before about the minimum range. I was so happy about this small hinge, now i am a bit sad, that doesn't work. I will try out your solutions and fix my problems. 

[Azimech]

12 hours ago, EvenFlow said:

I think I broke something.

After hitting about 1800 parts my game crashed as it sometimes does, but after firing up the game the craft refuses to load it up correctly so i'd be able to edit it. The load menu doesn't come down by itself and the place/move/rotate/change root menu is missing.

Please help. ;-;

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Sorry to read this. In the future, always build and save using version numbers. Example: LargeThing_Type7_0.1, LargeThing_Type7_0.2 etc.

For minor updates I can have numerous different craft files... AmazingSuperDuperThing_0.596. 

Make the craft available for download, some people might be able to repair a corrupt file.

[adsii1970]

Finally solved the problems on why my McDonald Douglas DC-10 replica rolled to the right after take-off. And it was one of those things that makes you feel totally stupid when you figure it out...

Here's the end result for the passenger version...

Spoiler

 

[Azimech]

@adsii1970 What caused the roll?

[adsii1970]

38 minutes ago, Azimech said:

@adsii1970 What caused the roll?

Like I told you... It is something dumb! I had the starboard wing tank full (thought since it was a mirror part, this would affect the port wing tank similarly) and didn't check the port wing tanks...

Edited February 10, 2018 by adsii1970

[Azimech]

2 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

Like I told you... I had the starboard wing tank full (thought since it was a mirror part, this would affect the port wing tank similarly) and didn't check the port wing tanks...

Curious ... this should affect both tanks in mirror placement.

[adsii1970]

7 minutes ago, Azimech said:

Curious ... this should affect both tanks in mirror placement.

Yup, it has in the past...

As I said, its something dumb...

Edited February 10, 2018 by adsii1970

[EvenFlow]

10 hours ago, Azimech said:

Sorry to read this. In the future, always build and save using version numbers. Example: LargeThing_Type7_0.1, LargeThing_Type7_0.2 etc.

For minor updates I can have numerous different craft files... AmazingSuperDuperThing_0.596. 

Make the craft available for download, some people might be able to repair a corrupt file.

Actually, I've gone for a full rebuild and backed up the save file about 10 Times during the building proces. The carrier is almost finished and I should be releasing it soon. Thank you for all the help. Lessons were learned. :v

[Majorjim!]

On 02/09/2018 at 11:39 AM, EvenFlow said:

Please help. ;-;

This is bad mate.. I think you lost that craft file.. Now, although there may not be anything we can do about this file you can stop this from ever happeneing again by saving the craft file twice each time you save. And save it OFTEN. Anytime you make a big change save it. Anytime the wind changes direction, save it.

EDIT: Seems @Azimech got there before me. Good to hear you are progressing with the rebuild, and yes, ALWAYS save at least twice. I havent lost a craft file for years now.

Edited February 10, 2018 by Majorjim!

[Castille7]

DeepCore7
(A Deep Water Submersible Drilling Rig Project)
Update: 02.10.2018

Sorry for the back to back updates, this project is too exciting! I have the second Rig on location at 849m between some islands. The next Rig will be positioned shown here on the map. Having the Rigs here is giving some really nice underwater views.

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

[Munbro Kerman]

Spoiler

So after watching the Falcon Heavy Live stream it inspired me to visit my own Falcon Heavy and bring it back up to standards. In the process, I also remade the Falcon 9. Using fairings as the body was both a good and bad idea, good because the regular fuel tanks didn't have the proper texture, and bad because I had to use a huge amount of fairings to make sure the yellow lines would show. This obviously made the game much slower, and harder to work on the rockets. But, after some hours of patience and building I present a 3/4 finished Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9.

(Yes I know, I did want to make custom landing legs, but that would increase the part count and it would be a nightmare to build the legs in the VAB. These legs are sufficient enough, fortunately.)

I'll be posting some updates in the future and eventually the craft files.

 

[Thor Wotansen]

I've been working on a modular system for making a stock warship to meet any requirement.  The idea is that you use the various modules to build up whatever warship you need in the moment, be that a fast attack frigate or a big support carrier.  I decided to go with LFO engines for TWR reasons, and this has led to most configurations having around 3,000m/s delta V, not ideal but not bad.  I have also tried to make the modules of a reasonable size to be launched by a conventional rocket with a 3.75m fairing.

A few of the modules, this is the Command, Fuel, Junction, and Engine modules respectively.

This puppy needed autostrut, something I was trying to avoid.  Sadly the docking ports don't really provide the rigidity they probably would IRL.  This ship has a TWR of 1.4ish thanks to the three engine modules.  My potato computer didn't like it, modular is bad for part counts, as is stock armor plating.  I suppose I could resort to part welding, but that is a less than ideal solution.

[Frozen_Heart]

Still doing more work on a proof of concept mothership. It's got several flaws which aren't worth fixing so it will never be a release worthy ship, but it has been valuable as a testbed for several features I've not tried with a capital ship before.

 

I've switched from LV-Ns to Vectors as the nukes have been nerfed so much they just aren't worth it anymore. Though it does take a slight dV hit the TWR is 1.4 allowing the ship to SSTO with a small payload. No launch vehicle needed! The rear end has been designed with landing in mind so it can set itself down on a planets surface to unload cargo directly. A huge rear cargo area allows considerable storage even without the external docking ports.

 

It was also designed to be entirely probe controlled and the crew is unable to fly the ship themselves. This has proven a huge mistake as i'm lazy at setting up comms networks.

 

[Azimech]

For the first time, Lowell is developing a line of electrical cars to try and compete with the emerging global market, but with low cost, low mass and low part count. Naturally, all stock parts. The name of the line: Transistar, a combination of transistor and star.

These cars come with six different trims, ranging from the Transistar 4 on the left for your grandma to do shopping and not much else. The Transistar 8 is next to it, it features 8 wheels for better acceleration and top speed. It also replaces the normal rear lights with a spoiler, standard on all trims except the "4". Next to the "8" is the Transistar 12 which has all the luxury available like a menacing intake, fog lights, brake lights and reversing lights, not to mention 12 wheels all clipped together to give it a potent acceleration and higher top speed. The ones with the big wheels are called Transistar Mosfet. These cars are perfect for off-roading due to the higher ride height. The Transistar Mosfet 4 has the same trim level as the Transistar 4 but with the menacing intake and has a higher top speed than the Transistar 12. Next to it you see the Transistar Mosfet 8, more power and more luxury. At the far right is the Transistar Mosfet 12, the fastest and most capable. This one has three times the fuel capacity and structural improvements to limit damage if rolled over. Not only that, it sports a lot of vernor engines to help it rotate upright in the unlikely occasion an accident would happen.

Part count & mass ranges between 64 parts and 1.95t for the Transistar 4 to 97 parts and 4.99t for the Transistar Mosfet 12.

 

Soon on KerbalX.

 

Lowell. A Petyrbolt brand.

Edited February 12, 2018 by Azimech

[Servo]

Had a bit of time, so I started on a new replica. Props (hehe) if you can name the plane, and more so if you can say what's wrong with it (besides that it's incomplete).

It got up to about 30m/s in reverse before I stopped testing. It runs on three SAS wheels and 4 RTGs so it could stand to be a bit stronger.

[Azimech]

29 minutes ago, Servo said:

 

Had a bit of time, so I started on a new replica. Props (hehe) if you can name the plane, and more so if you can say what's wrong with it (besides that it's incomplete).

 

It got up to about 30m/s in reverse before I stopped testing. It runs on three SAS wheels and 4 RTGs so it could stand to be a bit stronger.

Can't say I know the type. I do know there are other types of elevons that could be more suitable as propeller blades.

[qzgy]

42 minutes ago, Servo said:

if you can name the plane, and more so if you can say what's wrong with it (besides that it's incomplete).

P40? Hawker Typhoon? If its the P40, the intake is far to upfront. Also have double the number of blades as normal.

[EvenFlow]

11 hours ago, Servo said:

Had a bit of time, so I started on a new replica. Props (hehe) if you can name the plane, and more so if you can say what's wrong with it (besides that it's incomplete).

It got up to about 30m/s in reverse before I stopped testing. It runs on three SAS wheels and 4 RTGs so it could stand to be a bit stronger.

Looks super nice. Six-bladed propeller makes me believe it is a more modern, non-WW2 propeller plane. Relatively narrow wings, that small intake under the prop hub and those two exhaust ports are also pretty distinctive. It looks like some small turboprop trainer, something along the lines of an Embraer Super Tucano or a Pilatus PC-9, probably the former due to the number of propeller blades.

And if it is a Super Tucano, then the wings look lovely, but the nose section could be made ever so slightly sleeker. It's hard to tell the proportions without looking at the rest of the fuselage though so I'll be waiting for updates!

[kapteenipirk]

@EvenFlow Glad to see you got the carrier back to shape.

 

Speaking of carriers, i taught id give a little update on whats going on with my navy.

I will soon release what i call the Grand Naval Rearmament program, and it's huge.

The list of stuff that will be included in it is:

3 carriers, a WWII style one, a modern one, and a more futuristic one.

2 Battleships. One will be a replacement for the old K.S.S Great White that broke due to an update.

2 WWII styled cruisers

1 modern multipurpose frigate.

1 Hydrofoil

2 Gunboats, a modern ASM (or cruise missiles in this case) carrying one and one PT boat.

6 carrier planes, replicas, kerbalized and custom.

2 Helicopters.

 

So, 9 ships and 8 aircraft in total.

I desided to back to the past to sort of say, as this time none of the new ships use my IR powered turrets, instead they have been made using the same stock with BD-armory guns style to make them a more shearable, simple, and functional (Autopilots lack of IR servo control would make naval duels a little one sided)

Tough there is one big difference this time, part counts are at an all time low this time around.

Especially with one of the carriers witch has around 500 parts while still being quite a bit bigger than the K.S.S Freedom.

Spoiler

In case you forgot or haven't seen what it looks like.

This one is special to me, as it was the first carrier i built with an included hangar deck and working aircraft elevator.

Because of those additions, it was also the first "proper carrier" i built.

It had 700-800 parts and while pretty innovative, was too small to be practical. The hangar was too narrow and wasn't tall enough to allow more proper planes to fit, like the one on the pick for example.

Unfortunately i had to use tweakscale to achieve that.

But fear not, as there is a non tweakscale low part alternative for a carrier in there as well that isn't your traditional carrier.

 

I'll try to get them uploaded this weekend.

 

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Powerful, reliable, and all wrapped up into a 1.25m form factor allowing drop in placement on any ship, the X8A K-Drive provides unlimited dV to any ship it can be attached to. It's currently in prototype form undergoing space and reliability trials. 

[Servo]

12 hours ago, EvenFlow said:

Looks super nice. Six-bladed propeller makes me believe it is a more modern, non-WW2 propeller plane. Relatively narrow wings, that small intake under the prop hub and those two exhaust ports are also pretty distinctive. It looks like some small turboprop trainer, something along the lines of an Embraer Super Tucano or a Pilatus PC-9, probably the former due to the number of propeller blades.

And if it is a Super Tucano, then the wings look lovely, but the nose section could be made ever so slightly sleeker. It's hard to tell the proportions without looking at the rest of the fuselage though so I'll be waiting for updates!

You are right about the Super Tucano - though it's going to be an experience to get my first prop plane off the ground. In case anyone has  problems with the "turboshaft" designation, I had initially built it as a turboshaft before deciding that I should try to build a simpler electric prop before adding jets.

Plus, I got a good start on this beauty...

 

[klond]

On 2/13/2018 at 10:49 AM, kapteenipirk said:

I will soon release what i call the Grand Naval Rearmament program,

 Can't wait!  Post lots of pics.

 

 >Update on the Mars Curiosity-type-suspension rover.  In my world I'm at version 2.3 here.  'Keeping copies everywhere like @Majorjim! said.  It's starting to take a long time to open my craft list.

 Couple of big problems here.  The geartrain is REALLY inefficient.  It's not really binding, it just requires a ton of torque to turn everything.  I got the battery meter open up there; I don't know if you can read it.  There's like 12 or so wheels stacked up just to get it to move.

 2nd big problem.  See the 2nd wheel doesn't touch down right away?  All the torque of the gears makes the suspension not work right.  If I add more power it gets so bad the wheels just flip over each other.  Could just be a design problem I caused.

 3rd, that much electricity x2 when I add the other side, I don't see that working out.  I'm gonna keep the suspension but convert to leg power I think.  I can maybe put the legs right on the wheels and ditch most of the geartrain (which is too bad, cuz it's kinda neat).  Wish me luck.

 Oh and I really like these wheels so they will probably be on the final, specially since they kinda sorta look like the Curiosity ones to me.

[Azimech]

@klond electricity shouldn't be a problem with enough fuel cells. The torque/geometry problem ... I guess you'll figure it out.