b0ss

No heavy-duty radial landing leg?

I have a feeling @Kottabos would love this

Wait a hot minute, I missed the party. What do you mean 1.85-meter parts?

Oh nah I thought it was cool and an interesting thing I hadn't thought of before. It seemed realistic to me and I liked that, but I wasn't 100% sure *why* it did. Thanks for all of your super fast responses. And a big thanks to you Nertea for making so many beautifully-made and useful part packs!

What's the rationale for making some solar panels un-retractable? (besides balancing)

Spacecraft are meant to be cramped! Otherwise they'd be too expensive to launch I do get what you're saying though. I just don't see the reason to make a whole new part. The stock Mk2 and Mk3 fuselage series is definitely lacking and the mods designed to remedy this aren't that good, but I feel like a re-shaped Science Jr. would be really, really low on the priority list of SQUAD, even when just looking at parts (where is my mk2 nosecone and mk3 inline cockpit!!!????).

Will anything break if I delete the "Parts" and "TweakScale" folders and remove xenon and structural from the resource config file?

reeeeee >:( Turning off angle snap and manually rotating everything is menial and feels too "hand-made" rather than precisely calculated like in real manufacturing. I'd rather have everything set to conform to a regular lattice, that'd make arrays of parts like engines and decouplers much less junky-looking (and -functioning) but that's just me. Although I'm sure many other players would agree. Again, too "hand-made". When I build a vehicle supposed to be worthy of at least intercontinental travel I want to feel like I'm following a carefully and mathematically designed blueprint, not like I'm carpentering in the 3rd century A.D.

Just tried it, the wing I used didn't even have to be vertical. Angle Snap seems to break all none-node attachments, stock or otherwise. Which is a shame because KSP magnifies my OCD haha

That sounds... very strange and convoluted i'll give it a shot though! :>

I've noticed that attaching parts radially to non-spherical/cylindrical structures in KSP is actually really difficult sometimes. This is most notable with wings and winglets: try attaching a battery pack or landing gear to the middle top of the wing with angle snap. It should be perfectly parallel to the surface, however move it just a few dozen centimeters to the right or left and now it's some 15 degrees tilted. I know that I'm going to get many responses saying that precise adjustment is possible with the relatively new translate and rotate tools but this seems so finnicky and headache inducing for something as simple as attaching stuff to wings. In my humble opinion I believe that it is ridiculous not to use a system where a child part's up vector is perpendicular to the surface it is being attached to. KSP's parts don't have *too* many polygons for this to work light on the CPU, right? EDIT: I meant when using angle snap. Whoops.

Aha. Say, will the ailerons and aileron-slots on the wings ever get attachment nodes? It's currently really difficult to place anything nicely into the slots, (or at least it has been for me )

Because some of us (or at least just me) like the service bay, and perfectionists such as myself get really bad OCD itch if anything's doing major clipping. especially into a fuel tank.

I imagine importing formulas used in KSP's aerospace simulation using data from a ship you're designing is pretty straightforward actually Honestly I really dislike this idea. It doesn't seem like it would be very wieldy or useful. If I'm allowed a little hyperbole I'd even say this would be financial suicide for SQUAD as maintaining something like this alongside the actual game just doesn't seem feasible at all to me.

Try Near Future Propulsion and Kerbal Atomics w/ fuel switcher mod

You can use a service bay and put a bunch of science components in it. NASA probably wouldn't develop a whole new science kit for a bigger fuselage, probably they'd just put a bunch of their existing designs into a big cargo bay; SQUAD wouldn't be any different Although if you really want one there might be a mod out there with such a thing.

Source post(s)? That's really sad honestly, they were so pretty and neat :c

Yeah, I meant to say for fuselage types other than J and H, sorry lol :S Also the front-mounted drone core seems to be missing for me, have I installed incorrectly? Also also, what happened to the cockpit docking ports? D:

Ah nvm, got it sorted. I'm using a different mod now

Yeah, just got around to installing it. @SpannerMonkey(smce), have I installed incorrectly or is it normal for the current version's parts to be phenomenally difficult to place properly? They seem to be missing some pretty essential attachment points... also I don't have much maritime knowledge but the submarine parts look a bit big to me?

Sandbox, I load up the VAB/SPH and I can't find the part anywhere, even though it's where it should be in the mod folder

Medium Mk2 nose cone isn't showing up for me in the game, anyone know how to fix this or experiencing similar issue?

Any plans or possibility of an inline drone core?

Download seems to have 404'd. Has this part been moved to a different mod?

Afraid I still don't understand, my bad. My original question was if this mod's rotation functionality extended to docking ports outside stock parts.