Justin Kerbice

I guess you may find a clue here as it's quite hard to get an idea of any issue with so few data.

The surface of red area (unused space) is quite large, isn't it ? (colour are messed-up for some reason tex with alpha are bad on raw import in Gimp , it's also happen with stock tex, but that's not my point anyway) Circles could have been brake into 2 or 4 parts for a better packing leading to a better resolution of some areas. I don't know how blender works and how its export format works but UV seams are not directly related to smoothing/edge split (except in the worth 3D format of all: obsolete 3DS format which messed up a lot model by matching those 2 unrelated things) But this is not really a big deal after all.

Here it is, this attempt didn't show the movements that much, but you get the idea, by the way, it's not keyboard inputs, maybe SAS do this or the velocity vector get sick, don't know. http://www./watch/8dbca8ydjah69t2/aeris4a-2b.mp4 Also you can see the camera switch 180° when plane suffer from some severe control issue, which is quite eyes killing.

What ? Don't know, but it may be linked to the SAS which, by it's action, move the craft or parts of it, so the camera.

Here is my rating: computer style with these criteria: rules respect (the most important one, see below), model, texture, overall look, function, config file, packaging +1 when rated item is good, -1 otherwise Cpt. Kipard: 3 darkside: 0 StarVision: 0 Robotengineer: 3 Snjo: blackflagged (for those who are familiar with motorsports ) 3 parameters are rules's infringement Special bonus to Robotengineer as a beginner who still achieve a very descent job, despite a poor model and tex, and some missing sounds, but also poor packaging (lot's of "hidden" macos files remain in the archive, the ._ds_store things), choice of targa for tex is wise and there is a readme + config file is stripped for all useless comments common on stock parts. StarVision: the debris-free idea give you a bonus too, but config file which could have been better, the booster stage icon, choice of weird MBM tex cost you valuable points (it make sense if you make "I don't mind about space pollution design" rockets , but if lower stage are supposed to be kept in a way or another, burning it might not be appreciated that's much by engineers because extra-work needed on repairs). darkside: the bottom node is inside the model (too high), part description quite short, config file and packaging are where you loose points. The UV mapping on the other side is very good, very few surface unused. Cpt. Kipard: the tex is, as usual, very good, I like it a lot, perhaps UV may have been a bit better but I know how hard it could be, the short readme also is good, as short as it is. config file + the correct side to use is not very obvious, doing some trials is needed first to use your decoupler well cost you the points. Snjo: the usual "crazy modder" , the stage icon is booster, and quite mere packaging, config file which could have been a bit better and use of PNG which is not really the unity cup of tea cost you some points, anyway, not strictly following rules cost you all. In the other hand, the shape and idea, how your decoupler work, the fun inside, as well as model and quite the texture would have give you a bunch of points. More human style rating now (taking care only of the "player awareness" elements of parts): Cpt. Kipard: 2 darkside: 1 StarVision: 2 robotengineer: 1 Snjo: 2 As you can see, it's very close, which is a good sign for this friendly competition, and my final vote go to StarVision for his decoupler's efficiency. Robotengineer: keep going, learning path is tricky and full of ambushes, despair and disappointment can be on your way but we are all on the same vessel, and only the ones who stay in the fight may succeed. All others failed.

Good to see you still improve your mod and for the RPM: great thanks All those incoming improvements looks very great.

Is this supposed to be part of the challenge rules ? Or it's just guide free to follow or not ?

OK thanks. found me grumpy but here we don't have number of votes. Not better than forum polls after all.

I like the sarcastic tone, you're right (except for scroll lock key which might not easy to reach on some laptops/computer). Assuming things when programming is very bad ! GGRREEEEAAAATTT, thank you very much ! And thank for all your work on the updates. ADDON: the camera have hard time using stock Aeris 4A at full throttle with all 3 engines ON, SAS ON, on runway (without KJR) in 0.23, try this and see, the craft disassemble itself and wobble all around liek crazy and camera is completely mad. (how it was possible to play KSP < 0.23.5 without KJR anyway ? )

This poll service doesn't allow to see results (without voting I guess), too bad :/. And his time I'll vote, it's quite tight as it just tiny things which will make real differences (I don't talk about the models themselves of course)

I see what you mean. Do you believe I took a texture which was around almost randomly ! I will probably add such grass "flower power" launch pad tex as bonus Yes, to avoid to fall off the ground and because some holes and hills are not caped on sides.

Could you be more specific please ?

Is it you give me the idea for this: WIP bigger launchpad, 200m wide, inside area "just" 60m wide (even bigger than both launchpads ) I just get to the limit with some big parts I'm working on, so I decide to create one.

Waiting Nothke to update his Kerbin City spawn point, I have added the Kerbin City International Airport launch site, no need to do 110 kms now to go there.

It's in fact the skybox of Kerbin or something like this (a texture use for the sky), I see it all the time by using my own UFO with the reflection plug-in by Starwaster. At least it's an harmless bug ! (+bonus, I also see a UFO-Mun travelling the same way) (is it the UFO season here ?)

Welcome to the so called "democracy" It could be really great to have some pseudo random solar systems and pitfalls can be avoided more or less easily with some boundaries (to avoiding a gaz giant close to its star for example). An API for that could be great but as they even not really support modding right now (allowing/tolerate it is more appropriate, according to actions taken til now, not words or promesses; don't believe me ? Did they give any API doc upon each releases for plug-in dev ? NO), it's more kind of dream. But devs do what they want even sometimes it's not easy to understand their motivations. Look at pidgin/gaim, they just shot themselves in the foot with audio/video support.

Great, this mod should not die. And thanks for your work . I remember having an annoying issue sometimes when big map is scaled down, the extend button is hidden by the map itself and can't be use, and after a while, big map was scaled back its default size fortunately (don't know why it's happened). Is this issue fixed (just make the scale button always on top) ? By the way, it may be just me but I don't see clearly the differences in "data indicators" on finding a good altitude in FAQ. The colors and blinking orange/green are not very obvious (low contrast between the two I guess), could it be possible to improve this ? (maybe another indicator after the percentage: ALT [LOW/HIGH/OK])

I guess zedelima suggest is Squad add some more stock planes which are replica of popular commercial airliners. But as they seems to be not really fond of such additional content (look the two poors scenarii they have added for the NASA mission) it's not for tomorrow !

Good. It could be a good idea to create a "map" of used keys by all up-to-date mods to avoid many/all of them use the same (example: Kerbtown and KAS use crtl-k), z is already use by vertical velocity as default key (bad choice by the way, due to common keyboard mappings). Any chance to have also the snap "togglable" ? (weird, was it already there in the initial release ? Camera doesn't allow any movement due to this user-killer snapping, it always go back to the default position, does it sounds to you not a big deal ? Try making a screenshot of your craft from different angles )

Looks like some weird collider issue, the best is to put the spawn point a few cms above the ground (10 or 50 for example). Also, in your model, spawnpoint need to be the direct child of the unity Gameobject, not the model, have you read the kerbtown manual ? It explains everything.

Here is a craft made mostly with Spaceplane Plus. Enjoy !

Look at the first post, it is. Bad idea, seriously bad idea, due to how static building/Kerbtown works (there is no orbital velocity, it is even not on a rail), for this kind of feature, you'll have to deal with extraplanetary launchpads mod.

@frizzank and all winners: may I suggest another rules for this contest: mandatory parts location inside GameData folder in order to gather all submissions in one single place (kind of KSP/GameData/openpartmod_weekX/), so it will be easier for all people who want to test and vote, then cleaning after if they want.

@Porkjet: thanks for the update . The mk2Cockpit_Standard tex is huge ! Do we hav to choose which plane mod we use ? (by the way, looking at B9 interim archive, I understand why the former mod needs so much memory, all targa files are uncompressed !)

You already can, see 1st post. This new launchpad will just offer another launch site.