sarkun

I think it looks a) pretty unique c) Kerbal so great!

I get it - I\'ve got a bit of the same problem - the design I envisioned is just not possible yet. One can wait for the KSP to develop or alter the design. I guess CBBP just doesn\'t compromise And that\'s a good thing

Haha, yeah, this is sooo James Bond-esque - nice job!

Uuuu pretty!

Okay, here\'s the updated fairing - To get it working reliably I had to ditch the base, it is now a surface attachable decoupler. Use 2x symmetry, connect to any 1m part. It is sadly rather wobbly when compared to the previous version, but I guess it\'s better to have a wobbly version rather a non-working one. I\'ll update the pack later, for now I\'m attaching it to this post.

I must say I don\'t envy you. And I\'ve gained a whole new level of respect for you for making your pack work after I\'ve tried this. I\'ve done some more experimenting with those node directions and I must say it\'s horribly frustrating - I can negate one rotation of the part, but if the part is rotated along two ax...es? axises? (what is plural from axis?) It just won\'t budge. I\'m 90% certain it should be doable, but just nothing works. 3 axis rotation is impossible to negate with just one 3d vector.

Yeah, the fairing sometimes refuses to work correctly - the trick I found to work is to first attach something else using symmetry - grab some part and attach it anywhere, then try the fairings. I\'ve got an idea that should fix the fairings once and for all and will release an update for the mod sometime this weekend.

Hey, you are my hero, don\'t give up! I\'ve done a shitload of work this week so I\'m taking a proper weekend off and will be working hard on my pack. The latest idea I have is to screw the node attachable control surfaces, make them dumb fixed winglets and try making the control surfaces separate - surface attachable parts. This will multiply the number of parts but is better than spending another day figuring how the $%^&%$ does the coordinate system in blender relate to the one in ksp.

Bah, but they can\'t be symmetrical if they\'re not straight... I think i could live with them not adding to roll - right now the roll forces of SAS seem so powerful anyway. Sadly it seems like the whole system is not yet ready for more complicated designs

If only it was so easy... the problem is that the part is not aligned with any axis (because I had to align the ctrlSrf with the x axis), so I cannot connect it at any simple angle. it is acutally rotated by ~120 degrees along the X and ~-108 deg along y axis. I\'m attaching the part if anyone\'s interested (with the blender file). The goal is to find out what parameters must a node on another part have to make this part be nicely aligned and pointing upwards - without rotating the part in blender! (cause It is easy to produce a part that looks but doesn\'t work as demonstrated few posts above.). I only have an hour or two a day to pour into this problem, but my new idea is to first try to get it aligned on one axis, then another and then try to sum the vectors and see how this goes.

No, I\'m staying away from rotation for now (Q & E), just WASD. But it seems like in general the winglets code is... unfinished

down/up - so yeah, it behaves as if it is a normal flat winglet attached to the wing. This is the approach I\'m trying now, however I have trouble figuring out how to reverse the part rotation - I know what is the UP vector of my part, but I can\'t figure out how to rotate the vector of the receiving node to make it point upwards - reversing the vector or setting them up so that they sum up to [0, 1, 0] does not wok, producing some odd results...

Okay, progress report: Using the method above, I was able to have a crazily rotated control surface rotate correctly (visually) in game: The black control surface on the stabilizer on the end of the right wing rotates correctly, even though it is rotated in every way from the x axis in blender. However, as demonstrated by the following two screenshots it does not work correctly (it assumes it is still aligned with the x axis I guess). Trying to steer left & right - the stock winglet is rotated, however the control surface on the stabilizer does not act. So while this approach should easily allow to have slanted control surfaces on the end of the wings, it fails if there are more rotations than just one. I\'m gonna continue to try with the node_stack rotation - however up until now I\'ve had rather limited progress - I think I know how it works, but just can\'t get consistent results.

I saw the thread you are mentioning, but it didn\'t end in any conclusion so I decided to give it a go myself. I\'ve got it set up as you say, but was unable to make any significant progress yesterday, will try again this evening. I\'ve noticed an interesting behavior on the ctrlSrf though that may be possible to exploit - if the part is rotated (as an object), its position is loaded into the game as it appears on the scene, but rotation is read along it\'s unmodified x axis - so with careful planning it should be entirely possible to have it rotate at any angle. The question is will the game interpret it correctly. (That\'s another problem I have - how to reliably test if the ctrl surface is working in the right direction :/)

Ah, that is possible, would account for the behavior and would be enough to specify any rotation for the part. This shouldn\'t be that hard to make sense of... Let\'s see what I remember from my math classes in high school

Do it!

I\'m making a rather odd-shaped winglet, so to comply with the align thine control surface with X axis requirement, I had to rotate the part by some odd angles - hoping to later adjust the note_stack properties to get it into the spot I want. However, it seems like the nodes can only have 3 settings: below zero, zero, above zero, snapping by 90 degrees. Namely: v node_stack_test0 = 1.25, 6.0, 0.0, 1.2, 0.0, 0.0 node_stack_test1 = 1.25, 4.0, 0.0, 0.3, 0.0, 0.0 node_stack_test2 = 1.25, 2.0, 0.0, 0.2, 0.0, 0.0 node_stack_test3 = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 0.1, 0.0, 0.0 ^ This nodes rotate the part exactly the same way, rotating the part 90 deg along the x axis. Is it possible to have more control? Is it a bug?

Awesome, awesome awesome textures.

Didn\'t know that. Cool stuff. Thanks Tosh!

This is a cool idea Make sure that you can attach stuff to the other side of droptanks too - like lander legs - this would make for a fine lander I think.

Can\'t have multiple, and can\'t overlap - is this a mistake or is there a way that a non-concave mesh could overlap with itself?

Basically: No. The best thing that is available is a flare thing - so it makes spotting things easier.

I have not even touched the flight characteristics of this one yet... I honestly have no idea how it will perform. What I have in my mind now is a setup that will allow a relatively controllable glide path from upper atmosphere with tanks empty, and a very high degree of maneuverability in orbit with quite powerful engines with high gimbal rate and rcs systems. I plan to model more than one middle section, so that there will be a choice between a cargo carrying version with very little main fuel, and one that will have lots of fuel but nothing else , and possibly more variants later. I imagine this craft as a cheap, reusable spacestation resupply vehicle - good payload for small size. The cockpit will also hold more than 3 Kerbals eventually. I\'m nearly halfway done with the separate parts. A preview may happen tomorrow.

It is indeed Teh awesome!

Done. Sorry about that. File updated. <grumble> Stupid finder zip utility <grumble>.