Tosh

Yep, it really needs you to get yourself used to it . But... I've never heard of easy-to-use 3D software... No, you did not : scale's not 1. Open Transform panel in 3D View (<N> key) and notice the scales for wheels and anchors are negative, which effectively inverts their axes directions! Refer to Section 1 on how to reset the scale to 1 -- and do it for all the objects in your file.After doing that, you may find some normals inverted (in order to see that you may want to tick Textured Solid switch in Display section of Transform panel). I hope you already know how to flip normals' directions And the last thing: I highly recommend placing both anchors at zero X, to make the gear physically symmetrical. In such a case, the craft having two gears at its sides won't fall sideways. After applying these three fixes, the gear operates just fine.

Locked on starter's request.

Don\'t. Ever. Do. This. Again.Kidding DYJ wrote about airlocks only (BTW how did he manage to know that? ???). For ladders, we need to know proper tag names. And as for modelling internals spaces (is it what PropTools are for?) -- there\'s no information at all.

...and what\'s about some info on using PropTools? : And ladders, pleeeeease :-X

I posted the entire part file, so it has the part.cfg included. Please help me, I tried capitalizing, getting rid of spaces, etc stuff mentioned on how to solve this problem, and it doesn\'t work. // --- node definitions --- node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.7940, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0 node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.4735, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0 Last digit in node definition determines the size of attachment node -- 'big' (value of 1) or 'small' (value of 0). It\'s integer, not floating-point value.

Too bad.Bad still better than 'Neverâ„¢'

Well, yeah, questions regarding 'when the new game version will be released???' are strictly prohibited; but there\'s currently no rule applies to questioning PartTools version And I\'d like to know it too

Nope Is it accurately to the South?

I nearly fainted as I got out of my house yesterday. And it was only +35°C... Darn it, I must be Inuit.

Noooo, not Minmus again! And not with SRBs 8)

v0.16 sucks: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=17584.0Gotta wait for next KSP release (and pray for that bug is fixed!) before I start to make textures Now that we have SPH -- and there\'s no sense in updating that Drone =P. Any plane can be made to fly on its own.Though it can still be of some use in KSP demo.

There must be no node_collider object in Unity. Instead, you pick the main object in Hierarchy panel, then choose Component->Physics->Mesh Collider, and assign your node_collider\'s mesh to it in the Inspector panel. Also be sure to tick the Convex switch.

Just a lil\' teaser Yep, they\'re for v0.16. With wheels, brakes, rescaleFactor and stuff.

Wha... Where did they get it? I want one too ???

Boss cried: 'Oh, where is the program we must have?!' And fired one programmer, and then there were 0xFF Congratulations ;D

Open engine\'s part.cfg and change rotorBlur parameter to 1. Works fine, even with an old-school prop (BTW that one\'s FTW! 8) It\'s my favorite one). That may be quite an easy fix. 0.16 has new rescaleFactor CFG parameter (which defaults to 1.25 or something); so the all the \'blurred\' rotors created by MuMechLib.dll plugin should be scaled accordingly. UPD. Hell, yeah. This lil\' baby can float in the air even at 40m/s 8)

Should questions to game devs relating game mechanics (e.g. 'what\'s the model for air drag in KSP?') go to General Discussion section?

Yep, that\'s what I\'d agree with (and that should be given higher priority than IVA, since 0.16 will most likely have no pod crew configuration -- see Nova\'s blog). NovaPunch 1.75m parts are ofc made to mimic Titan II -- but they resemble their original only slightly.

Thanks, I\'ll take a look. Sorry... WUT? Just how many configurations Appolo had? ???And -- Appolo allowed for much greater flight control (in KSP\'s sense, of course) than Gemini did. Up to arbitrarily choosing the landing site (that\'s what KSP players generally do ).

I did the research, I\'m aware of Agenda as well as of group flights and EVAs. But -- I still insist that Gemini was not 'truly pilotable' in the sense that KSP puts into this word. The crew could perform some maneuvers planned before the flight (e.g. target a given transmitter at the given frequency, and try to approach it as close as possible...) -- but could not pilot the craft at their discretion, as Appolo crew did (remember that 'Houston, we\'ve had a problem' transmission, and what happened afterwards?) And, talking about IVAs, crew was still tied to their chairs firmly during an entire flight (except for EVA time, ofc) =P UPD. Nice work with re-creating Gemini. I think I\'ll account for your cameras and thrusters placement when updating the pack. If I ever make me doing so =P

Modelling pod\'s interior is quite an amount of job. And what for? To switch to IVA view just once and see there\'s not much to do here? :Also remember that crew had very little control on the flight itself. Most of those dials and buttons you see in the photo controlled radio transmissions (not implemented in KSP), life support (the same), and equipment tests ( :). Only orientation, transition and stage separation controls might make some sense. A little sense, given that you can barely see something through that windows))) Man, it\'s not Appolo. It just took off, made a couple of maneuvers, and landed

I\'d like to look at IVA implementation before answering that.Also keep in mind that, unlike KSP pods, Gemini had crew of 2. I wonder will modders be able to configure crew capacity in 0.16 release? UPD. And, uh, are you aware just what Gemini pod was? A cramped capsule with two seats and two tiny windows (really tiny, I mean it); crewmen were unable even to leave their seats without opening pod hatches first. I doubt that could make an interesting IVA experience...

Do you mean the objects\' relationship hierarchy? It\'s a simple flat list:BTW can your 'C4D' (whatever the heck it is) import .DAE files? If it can, then you may just open one of those included in the package and look how is it arranged.

Change attachRules parameter to // attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision attachRules = 1,0,1,1,0

You\'re missing 'v0.15 Compatibility Note' in the opening post.Yeah, pontoons are really difficult to attach in the spacePlane Hangar. No fix is available at this moment .