Jump to content

NecroBones

Members
  • Posts

    4,820
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by NecroBones

  1. Yep, I think some small adapters for the rose plate are certainly doable. I'll take a look at that too. Agreed on using the 55-circle as the basis. Because it's still a hex pattern throughout, 6-way symmetry should still play nicely with it. That means placing 7 engines in the UI to get to 42, and an 8th one if you want a 43rd engine in the center. The adapter's description text could even make a comment about it being the new and improved model, with a "bonus" 43rd slot. This of course necessitates some 10m tanks. Oh darn. Finally an excuse to add 10m parts. The good news is I already set aside some color-coding in the textures.
  2. Yeah, this is starting to sound like the best starting point will be some 10m tanks, and a 43-node thrust plate with 1.25m nodes. The nice thing about 10m, is that it's also the real world scale of the Saturn V, so a 5-way adapter for the E1 engines might be in order too.
  3. Yeah, it's a tough call. One of the things I'm having to contend with is that the 5m parts were the primary point of SpaceY, but it was parodying SpaceX's Falcon 9, which is 3.66m. Technically the stock 3.75m parts are wider than the real Falcon 9, so in a rare case for KSP and mods, SpaceY is actually bigger than the real thing. This is translating forward into this new rocket. As far as I know, the ITS is around 12m in diameter (I heard 14m speculated too). But if I were to make 3 concentric rings of 2.5m engine mounts, we're looking at something like 17.5m diameter. I could probably squish that down to 15m if the nodes are designed to clip 2.5m engines into each other (2.14m spacing). But I forget how wide I made the R1 engine bells. I'll have to check that. There's also that possibility of making prefab engine clusters, but what a royal pain it is to make big clusters. If I took that route, I'd probably split the underside of the rocket into 6 sections and make a cluster that can be mounted with 6x symmetry, but this is an ugly choice, I think. Also perhaps getting ahead of myself, SpaceY doesn't have 10m parts yet, let alone 15 or 17.5. These large parts probably belong in the Expanded pack, with 10m and 15m options. Wow. (still not the biggest thing I've made though, since the Sea Dragon was around 23m).
  4. Heh. Indeed. Actually I'm tempted to make the SpaceX ITS boosters in RSB, but SpaceY could use something too, of course. We have the R-series engines here, which are meant to be the parodies of the Raptor engines. But gosh, a 42-engine booster? That's insane, and right up SpaceY's alley. Yeah I can probably look at that. A linear port would be useful.
  5. Yep, I was thinking about that. The ITS looks particularly interesting, with its 42 Raptors.
  6. Cool, yeah, I'll keep some of them in mind. I'm not sure when I'll add new rockets yet. It's kinda time-consuming, and I get obsessed with it, so I've been enjoying a little break.
  7. Glad that worked. But yeah, the newest versions of SpaceY should still work with 1.1.2, as long as you're using the correct versions of other mods that it interacts with, such as ModuleManager.
  8. FYI, I expect my mods to still work in 1.2 without any significant changes. I haven't started testing yet though. One thing that I will probably need to add at some point, though not critical, is the auto-strutting nodes that the fairing bases have now in stock. I think I also need to add "ModuleDataTransmitter" and "ModuleKerbNetAccess" data to the probe cores. And maybe the landing leg sound effects in Lithobrake and MRS. I see some nice color-changer stuff in there for command pods too. Otherwise, my diff of the part CFGs isn't showing much to be concerned about.
  9. Yep, I expect all of my mods to work with 1.2 with little or no modification. Compatibility will hinge on the prerequisite mods, such as InterstellarFuelSwitch, ModuleManager, etc.
  10. Thanks @Laguna for sorting that one out, while I was away for the weekend.
  11. You could remove everything in the "Parts" folder except for "LaunchClamps". It's not sharing any textures or models on those, outside of that folder.
  12. I'm not sure I understand. Where are you seeing this? Screenshot?
  13. Oh man, so sorry to see you're leaving! Thanks so much for everything you've done. o7
  14. OK cool. Yeah, the shroud can't be scaled independently from the plate, not without splitting them into separate models or something. But playing with the MODEL Y should get you closer to what you're trying to do. They're under Specialized Construction, rather than with the tanks. These are the conical payload bays, in 5m and 3.75m. Otherwise there's the service bays, in Meta-materials.
  15. Just so I understand, the plan is to change the shroud length, in proportion to the diameter? OK cool. There's no limit enforced (that I'm aware of) for how much scaling you can do in the CFG. What you would probably need to do is alter the "MODEL { }" section's scale, and mess with the "Y" value. All of the attachment nodes would then need to be adjusted with the same multiplier on their Ys. That will of course change the length of the shroud AND the plate itself. Sadly I don't think there's a way currently to dynamically stretch the shroud by itself, based on the node positions. Otherwise, when changing just the "rescaleFactor" you shouldn't need to alter the nodes at all, since everything is scaling proportionately, including the nodes.
  16. Awesome, glad it all worked out. Not in-game, unless you want to turn down all sound effects. But there's probably a way to do it with an MM config. Like this perhaps? (untested) @PART[SYengine*]:FINAL { @EFFECTS { @running*,* { @AUDIO { // Cut volume in half @volume,*[1] *= 0.5 } } } }
  17. Do you mean just the transform (so it can be referenced with custom MM configs), or also include the engine config by default? Either way would be fairly straightforward to add.
  18. That's basically how it would have to be done-- That is, meshes designed for those textures, and then a bunch of MM rules to add them either to the active or deactivated configs based on whether the other mod is present. So it's not impossible, but it does increase the complexity (and to some degree the memory footprint of the meshes as well).
  19. If that's how we're playing, then I'll also invoke @Red Iron Crown. And @sal_vager.
×
×
  • Create New...