Jump to content

Rho-Mu 34

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    56

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Rho-Mu 34

  1. Rho-Mu 34
    Speaking of the new MKS bits, do you plan to add them to MKS Lite?
  2. Rho-Mu 34
    "Ore burner" seems like good idea, as long as consumption vs output is properly balanced, as not to outclass small reactors and solar arrays. Given complex machinery involved it totally should be packed in 3000. + Regarding monoprop generator, wouldn't it be better to exchange battery capacity for ability to use monoprop AND LFO? Might want to bump efficiency a notch, since buckboard is noticeably larger than standard fuel cell, potentially permitting for more advanced gear that doesn't sacrifice function for compact size.
  3. Rho-Mu 34
    Re-downloaded and re-installed latest release several times, but for some reason new 1.25 inline drill just doesn't show up in parts menu.
  4. Rho-Mu 34
    Great mod indeed, Mk 2.5 definitely has potential. So how about wider cargo bay variant? That would be useful for payloads that do not justify usage of MK3, but still clipping through mk2 bays, like some satellites and rovers. I'd also suggest considering MK2.5 to 1.25 bi- and\or tricoupler at some point. Good luck with development, RaginCaucasian!
  5. Rho-Mu 34
    Amazing! I hope you'll consider adding RPM support sometime after initial release. And speaking of release , what's the overall progress?
  6. Rho-Mu 34
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't radiators on descent soak up more heat than they dissipate, contributing to heat buildup? I remember reading something like that in one of the threads discussing radiator usage on reentering spaceplanes, though that was during 1.0.4, so might be wrong about that. If that's the case, radiator wing segments isn't a good idea, especially since procedural wings are quite a bit more popular than wing segments.
  7. Rho-Mu 34
    If that's what you aiming at, maybe it would be better for 0.625 converter to be monoprop only? Because making it LFO only, even less efficient than 1.25 variant AND unable to produce monoprop makes no sense. Compact monoprop only ISRU module for probe/rcs remote refueling would definitely have it's own utility niche.
  8. Rho-Mu 34
    Now that you mention it, is there any plans for dedicated spaceplane radiators? Dunno about descent phase cooling, but shrouded extendable radiators for quick heat venting after ascent or for use with nuke (and similar high-temp) engines would be neat option to have.
  9. Rho-Mu 34
    Speaking of future projects. Raendy, do you plan to develop that space fighter from sketchfab? It definitely looks interesting.
  10. Rho-Mu 34
    Indeed there was pylon in the works, not sure if it was finished tho. @RoverDude Couple of suggestions regarding S.A.B.R.E. - Different lateral length variants of pylons, to enable simultaneous use of both engine pairs in level flight. - Enable radial attachment option. This would allow use with different frames, not just Karibou. - Own animation for switching engine positions trough action groups, e.g. aft thrust -> downward thrust. Bonus points for downward + tilt forwards for on descent braking, downward + tilt backwards for ascent. That would allow for some impressive lander designs.
  11. Rho-Mu 34
    While textures could use some more polishing, command pods still look very impressive! This mod is definitely off to a great start.
  12. Rho-Mu 34
    Are you sure about it? I've been thinking about asking mk2 patron saint, SuicidalInsanity, to take a look at available assets. And yeah, those landing gears are sweet. It would be shame to let them rust away like that.
  13. Rho-Mu 34
    Why, i do use this ramp extensively, hence the question about refresh. That is a good idea. Another thing i'd like to point out is short ramp itself - while unloading rovers isn't much of a problem, getting back in is hassle. Not to mention that short ramp spells host of problems with rover's wheel clearance vs landing gear height, and trying to get kerbal in (to secure cargo with KAS struts) is pretty damn tedious. So, all in all, while ramp works for the most part, it definitely needs overhaul. And speaking of mk3, could you also look into adding mk3 cargo bays without top doors? That would help greatly with building high-wing cargo planes,
  14. Rho-Mu 34
    Speaking of ramps, Lack, do you plan on refreshing mk3 front ramp? As useful as the stock aft cargo ramp is, frontal cargo deployment is valuable option.
  15. Rho-Mu 34
    Damn, that's unfortunate. Maybe you should release WIP assets? Stuff shown so far is pretty damn useful - somebody is bound to take interest in continuing development.
  16. Rho-Mu 34
    OPT mod had similar cockpit with exact same problem and, unless i'm missing something, K.Yeon haven't found way to fix it. Perhaps making docking shaft a separate part would be easiest solution. Oh and many-many-many thanks for your efforts! NFTech and Mk4 are some top-notch stuff.
  17. Rho-Mu 34
    Awesome! Decent wings is something that would come in handy, and not just for OPT crafts. Btw, do you plan to include J inline docking port and drop bay sections in future updates?
  18. Rho-Mu 34
    Hey there, Eskandare! Any news on the MX-02 N. O. D. A. C. H. I. ?
  19. Rho-Mu 34
    While procedural wings do offer significant degree of versatility, they still lack some advantages of custom wings, such as complex shapes, smaller partcount as well as generally being less wobble-happy. Oh well, just my 2¢.
  20. Rho-Mu 34
    Finally got opportunity to try out new toys and have some feedback for you, Angel. Really glad you liked the idea of sturdier wheel option, and the new m1a2 do offer excellent planetside upgrade. They also have several issues - sharp turns at moderate-to-high speeds may kick the vehicle into the air. On one such occasion front right wheel caused Buffalo to do pretty impressive flip, end over end, which ended with aforementioned wheel damaged during landing. After attempting to fix damaged wheel, it ended up looking like this Now JetWing is AWESOME! Despite coding limitations you encountered it turned out pretty damn stable and easy to use. The only problem with it is difficulty in keeping it pointed upwards when on the ground, since kickstand seems completely useless at the moment. Is it possible to make JetWing kas-attachable to the ground? That would make assembly and fueling much easier. Also, flying around newly grown carbon-fibre wings reminded me about another vehicle that might fit well with Pathfinder: ATV or even some sort of space bike/trike. So Buffalo covers cargo and crew transportation, JetWing gives measure of aerial mobility, but there is still bit of a gap without nimble scout/light utility single(two?) seater vehicle, especially when bringing along entire Buffalo is not an option or simply excessive. Imagine monoprop fueled ATV-type vehicle controlled via command seat and maybe having platform for 1 container module - that would certainly help during base construction, or low-medium endurance barebones space bike for prospecting and sample gathering.
  21. Rho-Mu 34
    Both 'pits are nice in their own right and it would be shame to abandon pretty much completed part, along with much more aerodynamic-looking bulged K fuselage. Also, are there any plans to add service bays or service compartments? Adding entire cargo bay section for several small parts like RTG's is kinda wasteful.
  22. Rho-Mu 34
    Well, as long as they can be used to mount wings without major wobbling during maneuvers, adding saddletanks one-by-one is fair trade. Thanks again. Thought i might pitch couple ideas while we're at it - Linear movement RCS chine segment. Might be mistaking, but weren't they present at some point in this mod? - VTOL nuclear thermal jet. While newly added LFO VTOL engine is godsend for airless bodies, mk2 hull just doesn't hold enough rocket fuel to be all that useful in non-oxygenated atmospheres, so VTOL NTJ might be a good idea. - MK2 lateral tricoupler. Sort of like 3 half-length mk2 fuel tanks in single housing. Yes, it is possible to radially attach 2 more tanks to central hull, but dedicated hull section would mean less joints to break, less problems with symmetry and fuel crossfeed, smaller part count AND, optionally, more natural-looking model, rather than 3 tanks glued together.
  23. Rho-Mu 34
    That clears up things a bit, thanks. So what is the best way to attach non-symmetic saddletanks? You seem to use them without much problem in post #401.
  24. Rho-Mu 34
    Got several issues here Mk2 airlock endplate is missing textures Saddle tanks do not mirror properly, same thing with chines (mk1 mk2 mk3). Also, RC RCS chine segment are missing attachment nodes (unless that was intentional)
  25. Rho-Mu 34
    That seems to help somewhat, test base failed to destroy itself this time, but the problem with wobble still remains and i'm positive that similar base on Duna would still uproot itself at very least.. In fact, 99% of the time it's chukwagons and and haciendas tend to initiate the whole jump: once loaded with resources this modules sag under added weight and press against\clip through the ground, so perhaps this is the main problem. As far as i know, such sag and wobble come from weak attachment node, so strengthening those might help. Can confirm this, gradually slowing down timewarp helps noticeably. Which logs are you talking about? There were no crashes, so no usual log+dump. Containerised Ponderosa is no different from switchback, at least in my experience. Worst of all is Ponderosa -> Hacienda -> Chukwagon combo, as 2 modules without Saddle wobble like hell during loading or timewarp, and that's why i try to use Saddles as much as possible. It does help with wobble, but does noting against sagging.
×
×
  • Create New...