Bonus Eventus

are you importing into unity or using the mu plugin?

@VITAS Here's a couple of suggestions: Only allow images through cloud platforms like imgur. Don't host images. Have thumbnail links that have titles of mods & text descriptions (not just titles and images) Give full control of the thumbnail image to mod authors (competition will naturally produce normative behavior, the good kind. This has worked on Youtube if you consider the partner channels) Have a slide show at the top of the main page which shows the newest mods (similar to Hulu or Netflix, but smaller more jumbotron sized) Underneath the slideshow have an endless amount of mod thumbs that stream in asymmetrically as you reach the bottom of the page similar to Google image search or Pinterest Example: When thumbnails are clicked load the mod page into a modal window (look through the bootstrap documentation under javascript) In modal window include a permalink to the mod page Take advantage of front-side databases (one hacky way of doing this is to store data in xml tags through a javascript library like jquery, then one can just traverse the xml to retrieve and populate data. There's also the option of using jquery data api)

Polycount and Youtube. If you're new to modeling consider Sketchup free version, export models as collada, import into Blender, export to unity. Sketchup makes terrible export models, they usually have duplicate polygons (two polygons overlapping in the same space) blender has some kind of cleanup function you can run, not sure what it is (not a blender user). These are the topics you'll need to cover/search for (most of them are covered on polycount in great detail: UV unwraping vertex normals UDIMS modular textures hard surface modeling subD modeling low poly modeling texture painting rigging particle simulation dynamics ambient occlusion normal mapping specular shading shader models mesh triangulation retopology texture baking When I was learning how to model (and still am), I was stuck searching for tutorials for my software package (Modo), but there weren't too many tutorials covering the things I wanted to learn as it applied to Modo. What I found out in time though, was that It's not that difficult to take the principles from one tutorial focused on texture baking for Maya and then search for the analogous methods for my software package of choice. However, there are loads of Blender tutorials. The hard part I've found is knowing what to search for.

@VITAS Is Spacedock using Bootstrap? This is what it looks like on a large screen (not 4k) in the latest version of chrome on Mac: The footer isn't sticking to the bottom (I'm assuming here) and there's hardly any margins on the left or right. The layout looks like what one would do for mobile. As I understand it Bootstrap makes it easy to switch layouts based on user metrics. Might want to reconsider your desktop views.

At lunch I did some thinking about the solar panels, and how I would approach animating the model as it is to make it fold similarly to this video from wikipedia. P3-P4_Truss_Unfolding.ogg I'm doubtful that I can do this without remodeling the whole design. The problem is in how I set up the rigging for the solar cells. There are 44 individual panels for each row of cells. 88 total. I rigged both rows of cells at the same time, by hand. That's too much work to get done before 1.05, not even sure I can squeeze it in to 1.1, however I was able to get the model with the new truss working properly before bed last night and this version is definitely as good as the last if not better. Another issue is determining the amount of ec per second. If we say that 1ec per second = 1kw ( @NathanKell ), then 100 ec per second is 10kw more than all of the iss solar panels output combined. It should be more like 22.5kw or 22.5 ec, and that's without dinging it for being 60 percent of the size. Which is counter intuitive, seeing as I'd be doubling the size and cutting the output down by more than 1/4. The Gigantor XL panels have a rate of 24 ec per second, and that's not changing any time soon. So if we ignore 1ec per second = 1kw and instead base if off of the surface area as a multiplier on ec (my math sucks) I'd guess it would be over 200 ec per second easily. I'm inclined to just keep it at 100 ec per second. Any thoughts?

I'll see what I can do, but every upgrade adds hours to 1.05's release (and also 1.1), however that's a great Idea! Side note, ran into problems last night with the truss. Because of the shader I was using (alpha cutoff) and the fact that I doubled the length of the truss, it is now practically invisible. I was unsure if this would happen, but it did. Sorry everyone, going to have to rework the truss. I made a model last night that seemed to work, and it made animating the truss much easier when I wasn't concerned with polygon reduction. God I love KSP 1.1! I'll be working hard to night, hopefully I won't have anymore unforeseen issues.

So, I made a mistake with the the Solar Wings. When I was testing them last night, having opened the original FBX model file, I noticed that the length in meters was half what it was supposed to be. I don't know how that happened. Apologies peoples, I know some of you tried to point this out, but I was convinced I had the math right. Guess I should trust my eyes more :/ On the plus side, the 1.05 update is coming out tonight, and guess what's going to be included?

Thanks so much @NathanKell, I was completely stumped last night trying to figure out why gimballing wasn't working in 1.1 pre-release on a 9 nozzle engine. Now it works great. All I had to do to fix it was (for anyone interested) make a new gimbal transform in unity with x = 90. I then switched the children of the old gimbal transform to the new gimbal transform, and since unity has child compensation, everything ended up in the right place. Just know that prior to 1.1 you could have your gimbal transform in unity oriented to Y and now it must be oriented to z like thrustTransform as Nathan pointed out.

I haven't started the model yet, but I have done some experiments and research. You can expect the design to be cylindrical.

So, got pretty far last night, but not far enough. Still have to bigger out the 8 node definitions for the sides of the truss. The battery works though.

Here's an update on the new T202. The truss is basically done, I'm just working out the texture for the battery array (the batteries haven't been colored yet) . Here's the todo list for KP 1.05: finish cfgs for T202 fix behemoth engines for KSP 1.1 pre-release (The gimbal is broken at the moment) double check that everything is working in KSP 1.1 fix the orange penta coupler I wanted to at least have the beginnings of the T202 system for 1.05. Don't think I'll be able to get more than the battery module done for it, but whatever, it will contain most of the dev updates you've seen. Somethings aren't making the cut. The dev penta coupler and tri coupler are nixed, in favor of the new orange structural parts. the T202 variants like type D aren't done yet. Some of the parts still require rebalancing, but they're playable and stable. I have some really cool parts for the T202 in mind but most likely they'll have to wait till after 1.1, because they all require lots of animation. That's it for now. I'm hoping to get this update out tonight, meant to have it done yesterday, but life happened instead Don't forget to PM me if you want to be a beta tester!

On a different note. I'm looking for beta testers. Ideal candidates should be advanced KSP players, who understand how KSP's different systems work (thermodynamics, drag, resources, etc). Also should have a working knowledge of CFG editing. Not so much to design cfg's but to tinker around to identify bugs and try out their own ideas. Also would like to find people who feel confident they can give around 4 hours per week to beta testing. PM me if you're interested.

the ISS uses reaction wheels, but they're part of the integrated truss. So, my plan was to provide attitude control gyros for T202. I think adding monoprop storage would make sense. As for T404 I want to do something else less streamlined for attitude control. Not sure how that will work. As to other mods, I want to avoid doing that as much as possible. It really complicates the design process when you try to match other mod designs (a constantly moving target) and color schemes. However, this is where having obvious and different transitional parts can help. For example, going from a octagon to a square to another type of octagon. That's part of the reason I'm adding another bulkhead type T101.

So, the leviathan panels are the kerbal equivalent of the ISS solar panels. This is a simple misconception. In terms of length, they are exactly the same size. I scaled them down to 60% to fit with the scale of the stock game, as a lot of other mods do. The reason they seem like the wrong size are because the T404 trusses are like three times the size of the ISS integrated truss. The equivalent of the ISS integrated truss would be closer to the T202 trusses. To be honest this wasn't the original intent when I started KP. I just wanted some large hollow structures to attach crafts to and took inspiration for the design only partly from the ISS truss. However, that changed as the mod progressed, leading to the T404 standardized version. To add to the variety of designs I added the T202 line which is simply half the diameter of a T404 segment. The intent at the time was to put most of the emphasis of the mod on T404. But recently, I have wanted to move away from that and instead move closer to the ISS truss system for various reasons that I'll explain shortly. For now I'll just say that I plan to narrow the purpose of T404 trusses to be what they were in the beginning of KP, serving as docking bays or shipyards. I plan to add more parts to T404 that increase its capacity to do just that. T202 will be much closer to the ISS truss system, but a little different. The ISS various truss segments like the S0 or P1 vary in diameter between 4.2 to 4.8 meters in diameter. So, at the low end that would transition in ksp to 2.5m to 2.88m at the high end. I could round up or down. I decided to round up. This way the established size of T202 (a 3.75m octagon) remains the same. T404 and T202 are octagons instead of hexagons to allow for 8 points of symmetry. It's my belief, that when you build with T202 parts the solar panels will feel just right. When you build with T404 I want you to feel like you're building something massive, and not just a scaled up version of T202. That said I want T404 to make the leviathan solar panels look average in size. That way you know you're building something BIG. I don't plan to scale up everything to that size, because I think the contrast will make for a better experience of scale. T202 won't be just an ISS replica part, however. I want to appropriate the thinking behind the design of the ISS. The ISS truss purpose is to be a structure and an unpressurized storage system. The other modules like Destiny or Unity are pressurized. So, we could say, unpressurized things on the ISS look angular, and pressurized things look round. So, I want to change things a bit going forward to reinforce that thinking. The CM1 then should be round (yeah, I know. However, the change won't be coming until after 1.1). There are people that really like perfectly symmetrical designs when they build, they also like when things perfectly match or align. I personally don't need things to match, but I'm not judging. I think contrast is interesting so I don't mind a square peg in a round hole. Kerbodyne Plus is informed greatly by my personal aesthetic. I like industrial structures like oil rigs and 1970s era hard sci-fi like Silent Running and Solaris. So, it's no surprise to me that I ended up making a mod that has a lot of emphasis on big clunky utilitarian forms. And, looking back on the progress so far, I think that is exactly what's cool about this mod. There aren't many mods that have a focus on structure. I want to go further with that. Hopefully you guys do too.

kp 1.05 will be out ASAP. In that version I plan to include the dev parts that I know are ready to be committed (which are most of them) some of the dev parts won't be included because I'm either going to upgrade them for 1.1 or I decided they were redundant. 1.1 will becoming soon (best guess is two weeks from today), I'm taking my time with the engines because they're important to the pack. I'm putting most of my effort into them.

Here's a sneak peek at the new T202 trusses. The modules will snap on to attach nodes to make it easy to mix and match.

KSP 1.1 pre-release is out. Please report bugs here or in the release thread. Kerbodyne Plus V1.05 will be out in the next couple of days to address some of these initial issues.

KSP 1.1 pre-release is out. Please report bugs here or in the dev thread. Kerbodyne Plus V1.05 will be out in the next couple of days to address some of these initial issues.

Ultimately, the way I would approach this is with particle effects. But, I'm not clear how to do that in the cfg, outside of engine fx. EDIT: OK, back to the original radiator plan. Going static and modular, for now. This is like tier one radiators and later you'll be able to unlock more advanced ones. Hopefully, if I'm clever enough, people will be able to make a wide range of radiator patterns. Myself I really dig the radiators that were supposed to be on the Discovery in 2001:

My original plan for the first round of radiators (for 1.1) was to include radiator parts very similar to the stock wings (as far as shapes and how they fit together) so one can design very large arrays of rigid radiators. Now I'm rethinking things...again

Take a look at this page at Atomic Rockets. It details what the exact problem is for spacecraft design, as well as the equations for determining the surface area of the radiators. LDRs are covered as well. They're really cool btw

Thanks for clearing that up FreeThinker. You've brought up an interesting point, yet again. I'll have to think about what to do there regarding priority.

From what research I did last night, I think the medium nuclear reactor should be a fast cooled fission reactor (probably sodium). Found this paper from NASA as well, detailing megawatt class reactors. I think a brayton cycle gas turbine would fit well with a fast cooled reactor. @FreeThinker for IE how do you think about electric charge and electric charge per second? In this thread @cantab suggested 1 ec = 1 kj, which seems pretty good to me. I want to recalibrate the electric input/output of all the parts in Kerbodyne Plus before 1.1

The problem with nautical reactors for space is that, the sub acts as a heat sink, so they don't need much in the way of cooling. I suppose that's where the giant radiators would come in. With the large spherical reactor I was working on the thought was for this to be an upgrade to a lower tere generator, to be coupled to a fusion drive. I don't think the fusion drive will make it into v1.1, mostly because I want to get some general feedback first from a stable release. The thought is to have a tech tree progression for carreer mode that works something like this: 1st tere plasma engine/1st tere power plant ---->2nd tere plasma engine/2nd tere power plant. Items in green are parts I still need to finish before 1.1. Those in orange may or may not make it in time. T202 upgrade (redesigned from the ground up—more options, including hollow versions,service modules, and modular utility parts—think scanners, fuel tanks, batteries, data servers, comms ) A large custom strut that's way stronger than a normal strut (ATM this part is super buggy) A new line of 3.75 and 7.5 round crew modules (Again think ISS. Probably won't get to the IVAs for these) New adapter that allows for perpendicular attachment of the T202 to 3.75 and 7.5 round modules. Orange structural truss that's 15m long (squarish profile) Stationary radiators (I want to add some foldable ones but I'm holding off on that for now) Mid sized nuclear reactor (not sure if it will be T202 or 3.75 round) Plasma Engine (not sure if it will be T202 or 3.75 round) Redesigned docking ports (t202, t204, 3.75, 7.5) (I will definitely get the T404 and T202 in, not sure about the others) NRAX Converter Atomated Science Lab T404 and T202 Control Moment Gyroscopes (SAS) 7.5 round fairing Exterior lights Some parts that I'm considering but which might not be made at all: Modular ISS Quest style airlock with eventual IVA (want to make this surface attachable, but not sure that it's possible) Smaller solar panels Exterior Kerbal seats Electric RCS Ablative shields and shadow shields (7.5, 3.75, and super huge) 2nd stage 3.75 and 7.5 round chemical rocket engine for Assent/Dissent Vehicles 7.5 service module

Quick Update: KP 1.1 won't be out till sometime in April. I have several parts I'm working on, and a lot of them require me to do quite a bit of research. Learned a lot this week about plasma engines. As far as I understand there are two problems with scaling plasma engines. Exhaust velocity directly correlates to energy. In some designs it's 1:1 (1 newton per watt). So a plasma engine might have high ISP but it's electric power to thrust ain't so good. The other issue is that as the power goes, up so does the temp, that's why plasma engines tend to erode as thrust increases. These two issues have been the bane of VASIMR's development. But, there's more. As the power goes up so does the mass of the generator payload. To get to 200kn of thrust would take 200kw of power. That's more power than all of the power generation of the ISS combined, adding a lot of weight to the dry mass of the craft, which in turn reduces isp. But wait, there's more! There's also the problem of maintaining high thrust density or rather the surface area of the exhaust port. If you just make it bigger, the exhaust velocity goes down and so does ISP. So you end up in a weird engineering loop where you try to increase one thing but then have to compensate for a bunch of other consequences of that change, blablabalbablabla. This is why Robert Zubrin is in favor of chemical rockets to get to Mars over VASIMR. However, some awesome scientists from the plasma lab at Princeton have been working on a Lithium Lorentz Force Accelerator. Here is an excerpt from their paper found here. That's good man, that's real good. But, it doesnt' solve the power generator problem. The Li LFA doesn't become adequately efficient until fed over 30 kilowatts. That's a lot of power. Still have to find a low mass, high power generator. PS: Thanks for all the awesome feedback guys!