fairy

Did you name the part "model" in Unity? If you reference "model.mu" in the .cfg file and your part was named something else in Unity, the game won't know what to load. In the partTools section where you select "Model Name", "File URL" and "Texture Format", what did you put in the "Model Name" slot? The name you put there is the name you need to reference in "mesh = ....." section in the .cfg file. Also, if you named your engine nozzle "thrustTransform", make sure the nozzles orientation is -z. If not, the thrust will go straight up. Most people use a separate GameObject/Empty as a thrustTransform.

Thanks both of you guys, that was very helpful :)

[quote name='NecroBones']Originally, before the thermal system was added, the heat animations were only useful for engines. But yes, you can use that for anything that gets hot now. In fact, engines for the most part should [I]not[/I] use it anymore (except in a few special cases), and instead use "FXModuleAnimateThrottle".[/QUOTE] How does FXModuleAnimateThrottle work exactly, and how is it different from ModuleAnimateHeat? I've made a bunch of engines for my own use, but I'm unsure of how to go about the emissive engine nozzles. Is there a tutorial/explanation on FXModuleAnimateThrottle somewhere?

I just wanted to post a positive feedback on this tutorial, as it was super easy to use and it really worked like a charm. I spent the last hour or so re-doing colliders for my interstages, fairings and other parts that would otherwise behave destructively with convex colliders in 1.0.5. Now I just need to repeat the process a couple more times and then all my parts and launchers should be good to go with both 1.0.5 and 1.1. Thanks again Kartoffelkuchen :) Here, have some rep.

I am sad to see Kerbin Side and Kerbal Konstructs being no more. Looks like they had to stop updating it because of certain issues with 1.0.5. Unless 1.1 magically fixes these issues, we won't be getting any more updates from those two addons, which in turn means this project is pretty much dead in the water as well. So sad..

Wow that was fast! Congrats on the SpaceX pack release :) I'm going to have tonnes of fun with this.

Thank you Kartoffelkuchen :) Great tutorial, and easy to understand. Somebody should pin this and add it to the [URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/94638-Mod-Development-Links-Compilation-NOW-WITH-TABLE-OF-CONTENTS"]tutorial[/URL] section.

[quote name='DECQ']Yes,can say you have correctly transferred.)) As I recall was the name of the test aircraft, or foreign matter, I really forgot everything,will need to find information.[/QUOTE] I didn't translate anything, I remembered it from a short documentary I saw on Youtube once :)

Nice! :) Doesn't "Ptashka" mean "little bird" or something? If I recall correctly, I think Ptashka was the smallest of the orbiters.

[QUOTE=Glaran K'erman;2304691]Disagree, showed a complete lack of effort in his presentation. A very short amount of time spent browsing the add-on section would have produced a much better product than this. As I have said, kudos for sharing, but try again please.[/QUOTE] I agree. I feel this is a classic case of a person finally figuring out how editing a .cfg file works, or learns how to model a fuel tank in Blender and is over eager to share whatever it is that they made. I've seen so many people become overly proud of themselves after learning how to edit .cfg files and/or making sub-par models and hastily publishes it as a "mod". Having a 1x1.25 fuel tank contain double the amount fuel makes no sence in my opinion. If in real life an oil drum can hold x amount of gallons of oil, then there is no way to squize more than that into it. The same goes for the fuel tanks in the game. Their sizes are directly proportional to the amount of content that can fit within them. People really should spend more time researching the forum for Requested Mods before spending their time making mods that are quite frankly unnecessary.

[quote name='sashan']Stupid question, but what am I supposed to do with the files, how to install them?[/QUOTE] Simply drag and drop the content into the "Assets" folder

[quote name='Kartoffelkuchen']Well, you'll already need those convex-only colliders in 1.0.5. I can not recommend using randomly placed colliders, you should really make them have the shape of the fairing. I'll write up a tutorial on how to do this tomorrow, ok? ;)[/QUOTE] Yes I noticed, that is why I am not playing in 1.0.5. The new version didn't really excite me anyways, so I don't mind being stuck in 1.0.4. But with 1.1 right around the corner (probably), I want my colliders to work. I never plan on publishing any of my parts/mods, so if some colliders are a bit wonky, but still functional, that is fine by me. I don't play in stock, ever. I always play in RSS/RO with FAR and all the realism addons/mods, so having the fairings work in stock is none of my concern. But I would love a tutorial on how to make good convex colliders that will work in FAR.

I like to jumble the letters willy nilly. Sometimes I say "S P K" and other times "K P S" or "K S P". However, I never ever say "Kerbal".

Thank you :) If I understand correctly, when using FAR, you don't necessarily need aerodynamic colliders, as long as the models themselves are aerodynamically sound? So when 1.1 comes around, I can just use a bunch of "randomly shaped" colliders for the fairings as long as they are convex? I don't play in stock atmo, so luckily I don't need to do anything about drag cubes.

I'm pretty new to this whole modding thing, but I have been having some success making different parts and a few somewhat decent-looking launchers for my personal use. Does anyone have any tips on how to deal with the whole "all parts must have convex colliders" issue? With 1.1 basically forcing us to use convex colliders, making good aerodynamic colliders seems like kind of a pain to do. I'm sure I can find a way around it, but I was wondering if there was anyone out there who had any brilliant ideas to make the whole ordeal a bit less painfull. I'm not 100% sure how FARs voxelization thing works, but as far as I know it basically prefers aerodynamic shapes for the colliders, no? Any and all suggestions is appreciated :)

Have not tried out the mod yet, but my guess is that you'll have to attach Energia to Buran, and not the other way around. But looking at the picture there seems to be a node on Energia where one could attach Buran.

I feel sorry for you man and I feel your pain. I quit playing 1.0.5 and went back to 1.0.4 because of the convex collider issue. I make a bunch of launchers and parts myself and refuse to go back and re-do anything just so that I can play in 1.0.5. Of course I might have to if I ever want to have the benefits of 1.1, but for now I'll keep playing 1.0.4. I'm not an official KSP modder, so luckily I can take my sweet time :) Having to make new custom colliders for the fairings is not something I am looking forward to. Especially making ones that will behave nicely with FAR now that FAR is voxel-based. Anyways, love your mod and keep up the great work. Hopefully your head won't explode because of these changes :P

Rule 2.4 section C. clearly states that all messages posted outside of the international section must be in english, so I'm fairly sure that applies here as well :)

I agree with Kartoffelkuchen. This is taken from the Forum Community Rules: [B]2.4 Language, placement spelling and grammar [LIST=a] [*]Users must make an effort to place a new thread in the right forum section. Posts deemed to be in an incorrect section will be moved to a proper one; [*]Users must attempt to use proper grammar and spelling in all messages. Txt-speak, 1337-speak and other exclusionary forms of speech are prohibited; and [*]All messages outside of the international sections [U]must be in English[/U]. [/LIST] [/B]

Sounds like typical noob-ish first-timer misstakes to me :P If the physics doesn't apply to the models, that would most likely be because you either didn't use convex colliders, or maybe you are trying to fly them in FAR without good aerodynamic colliders (FAR is voxel-based). If the model is not the same scale in-game as you modeled it in Blender, that could be the result of a few things. Maybe you forgot to change the scale in Blender export, maybe you changed it in Unity, maybe you forgot to specify the scale in the part's CFG file. Could be a few things. When it comes to textures, if you UV-unwrapped your model and applied the textures to the model in Blender, and everything looks good in Blender, all you need to do is to drop the .blend/fbx file and the texture(s) into unity and apply the texture to the model in Unity (remember to use the KSP shaders when applying the textures in Unity).

Maybe focus on finishing what you've already started instead of delving into yet another development? A Millennium Falcon seems kind of pointless in a game like KSP imo.

Is there a way to get our hands on the new part tools? I would love to test out the new shaders.

Seems like a somewhat unnecessary mod. Did you just learn how to mod and want to show off your parts, or are you simply adding more fuel to stock tanks? - - - Updated - - - This needs to be in the "Development" section

I see acuators, you planning on having them animating when gimballing? Model looks good

I take it you just imported this into the game? http://nasa3d.arc.nasa.gov/detail/eoss-rosetta Maybe changed the textures a tiny bit