MacLeod-Industries
-
Posts
108 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by MacLeod-Industries
-
-
25 minutes ago, Snark said:
Don't need to do rotate the texture per se; just rotate the whole darn model.
Something like this:
@PART[stackDecouplerMini] { MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/Utility/decouplerStackTR-2V/model rotation = 0, NNN, 0 } }...and replace the "NNN" above with some number of degrees (like "10" or "-15" or whatever the appropriate amount is). I think that ought to do the trick.
It's not a perfect solution, since it's rotating the actual model in addition to the texture, which means (for example) that if anyone radially attaches stuff to the decoupler itself, the alignment angles may be off, depending on what the angle turns out to be. However, I dunno about you, but I've never radially attached anything to a TR-2V, ever, so I doubt it'll come up.
Er...
I have radially attached speratrons...
XD
They made low mass orbiters amazingly easy.
-
3 hours ago, Alshain said:
Umm, all Kerbals are imperfect. Their eyes are different sizes, the right eye is always larger than the left. Did you not know this? I may not be doing you any favors by telling you rofl
QUICKLY BUILD MOAR PRISONS!!!!
-
11 hours ago, Alshain said:
You are assuming it is broken and not how it was intended. It's very Kerbal for things to be imperfect.
Well... when my Kerbals are imperfect...
I lock them in a space prison >:)
That is what happened to Jeb...
On another note... Why is the Rockomax decoupler so big? I almost always use the stack separator, just because it is much smaller.
18 hours ago, String Witch said:The texture is misaligned with the... whichever axis. Here's a picture.
What mods are you using? it looks like it adds some nice size 3 parts that are needed.
-
36 minutes ago, Ourworldalpha1 said:
if this is Modded to these Cancelled NASA programs
1:The NOVA Rockets
2:Gemini Moon Missions
3:Apollo Syle Venus and Mars missions-Eve fly-by and Duna landing
Cheers
LOL already tried that, unfortunately he roundup a comet and rode it to Kerbin like a BAD-ASS he IS
I was just looking at the NOVA rocket this morning... Nothing compared to my lunar rocket I am making... It lands a freaking rocket on the moon. Because we are drowning in tax money at MacLeod Industries
Honestly I am just going to leave it up to the people to decide whether they want major cancelled missions or not...
-
1 hour ago, WildLynx said:
Without ablator, just with insane heat resistance and small heat conductivity.
Ah ... that what NASA actually used! Strange, I thought they are not smart enough to invent it.
Sorry for bad humour. Or not? I demand a feature, that forces players to add 30000 thermal tiles manually, or else planes would buckle and melt at 300 C.
XD That would be hillarious...
Now we can really see how annoying the Space shuttle was!
-
The TR-2V Stack Decoupler has had it's texture offset for a while...
If you don't know what I mean, boot up your game and place one for yourself.
The arrow is not centered.
If you want it centered you must turn in one tick.
This has been bothering me for a while I just wanted to mention this.
-
Just now, String Witch said:
Hmm, maybe the inflatable heatshield would work, like if you don't deploy it, it's fairly pointy.
I was thinking the same thing...
Issues continued. Believe it or not, I found it to not be very aerodynamic.
Of course I used tweak scale to make it size a size 1 part... that could technically be an issue but I don't know.
-
On 6/30/2016 at 7:54 AM, String Witch said:
Have you tried using fairings as nosecones? They seem more heat-resistant than their max temp suggests, so they might work for a stock heatshield nosecone.
I have honestly tried it...
it blew up from overheating xD
It does not always work...Like I made a plane that gets into a suborbital flight and releases a sepertron probe to enter orbit.
It has to go REALLY fast to do that...
So fast the that nosecone won't work, so I added a heat shield instead. Now it slows down dramatically because it is not aerodynamic
-
Lets just say... my boosters had boosters...
Also it worked a Saturn V replica (only first 2 stages) attached upside down at the top and firing down at full thrust...
EDIT:
My biggest plane though was 3 columns of mk 3 plane parts going back maybe like 3 large cargo bays...I had a LOT of rapier engines powering the thing.
I have lost both however to time...
-
Pioneer 0-2 and Little joe completed. Sorry for the delay... I got bored for a little bit.
-
23 hours ago, WooDzor said:
OH NOOO WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!!
it's already past bedtime here:'(XD
On 6/23/2016 at 1:41 PM, pTrevTrevs said:You may be interested in this website: http://andegraf.com/rockets/us_early.htm.
It has orthographic views of pretty much every rocket you will need to fly, as well as Soviet, European, Japanese, Chinese, and Indian rockets.
Interested?!
You have just saved me hours of work! xDThank you!
-
5 hours ago, WooDzor said:
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/thorable.htm here's your rocket for the first 3 pioneer (launches and failures) I don't like Thor rockets though, with my KSP replicas they always seem to fall in between the 1 meter and 2.5 meter parts
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/pioer012.htm not the most interesting probe to shoot at the moon, but it was created by ninjas
Big Joe was similar to Little Joe, but this time they popped the boilerplate mercury capsule on top of an Atlas rocket to prove an ablative heat shield was needed for orbital missions. I assume you have LJ covered already? I'd be happy to do some googling for you.
Little Joe is fine. I was having issues with the Atlas D missile though...
Thank you for the links though, but my main issue is the other stages to the rocket.
-
BAD NEWS-
I am have hit a roadblock...
I might just really suck at researching, but I can't find any rocket plans for Pioneer 0-2 and Big Joe...
Ugh
If ANYONE can find any link that even helps the littlest that would be great...
-
12 hours ago, pTrevTrevs said:
Not all of them failed. I believe the early probes sent to the Moon had issues, but Pioneer 4 finally made a Lunar flyby in March , 1959. In addition to the Lunar Pioneers, there were probes meant to orbit the sun which were listed under the Pioneer Program, 4 out of 5 succeeded and continued to send data back to earth until the late 1990s. Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 were the first spacecraft to fly by Jupiter and Saturn, respectively, and the Pioneer Venus project sent an orbiter and several impactors to (oddly enough) Venus.
I meant the Thor-Able pioneer missions. Obviously 10 and 11 did very well.
"On October 11, 1958, Pioneer 1 became the first spacecraft launched by NASA, the newly formed space agency of the United States The flight was the second and most successful of the three Thor-Able space probes. "
-
24 minutes ago, MacLeod-Industries said:
I have been thinking about this for a long time. Probably going to use seperatrons to overheat the booster/wing to make it explode...
I haven't looked too much into this however.
Okay scratch that...
Both have pretty decent heat resistant...
Ugh
Well decouples should work then...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pioneer missions are HARD...
For one they all failed,
AND I can't find anything on the third stage.
Anyone know some good research websites?
-
24 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:
Can you replicate the way Columbia and Challenger were destroyed?
I have been thinking about this for a long time. Probably going to use seperatrons to overheat the booster/wing to make it explode...
I haven't looked too much into this however.
-
7 hours ago, WooDzor said:
Great! I will keep an eye on this thread! I love stock replicas..
And here: I made these for somebody else on the forum a couple of years ago.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9346020/KASA.png
Good luck!I was looking at that forum post the other day. Unfortunately most of the links were broken after the forum update
Thanks! I am considering using it in the game.
However I am still indecisive of whether I want the NASA logo or a KASA logo...
For this page though, I will probably keep the one that is currently in use.
Time will tell.
-
I DELIVER DANGIT
EXPLORER 1 PICS. 2-5 was basically the same rocket so I am not going to bother with them.
Proof I am actually doing crap with this project.
-
1 hour ago, pTrevTrevs said:
I've been asking this question myself since I bought the game, back in 0.20.
You could use the Outer Planets Mod, although it really depends on just how stock you want to go. OPM won't affect the parts used in the craft, and I think people will be able to run the save without it, and you eill be able to send Cassini and Voyager to the proper planets.
I am really trying to go for pure stock but might make it outer planet compatibly...
I dunno. It is still a long way away.
-
2 hours ago, Majorjim said:
You should have a look at this thread:
Mulbin was/is probably the best KSP builder I have ever seen on these forums and he made a lot of the rockets you will be making. Take a look and learn from the best!
He is not building anymore as he is making his own space game now and sim pit!
Oh boy.
I think this save will have a lot more crafts... but very similar rockets. The entire point of this save is to overwhelm people... xD
-
9 hours ago, Dfthu said:
So Moho=Mercury
Eve= Venus
Kerbin=Earth
Duna=Mars
Jool=Jupiter
Eeloo=Pluto
Whats about Neptune,Saturn and Uranus?
Cassini orbits Saturn, the Voyager probes flew by Neptune and Uranus.If I remember correctly.
........................................................................................................................................................
Crap.
I will probably just make it a Jool flyby
New horizons should be fun though!
-
2 minutes ago, pTrevTrevs said:
Ah, I see. This does seem easier than flying the mission, but you will need to fly the intended mission at least once to confirm that it works.
Again, pray for help.
Yeah, but I don't mind.
I was getting a little bored with KSP anyways, because I lacked Ideas xD
Now I have something to work on!
-
5 minutes ago, pTrevTrevs said:
wait... are you actually going to fly the missions or just put the satellites in orbit with Hyperedit or put the rockets on the pad for people who download the save to fly the missions themselves? This is sort of confusing, and it seems like any of these options would involve an enormous load of work if you tried to do every single mission ever launched by NASA.
To reinforce my claim, here is a list of every NASA mission in alphabetical order. Note that each entry may contain multiple missions (for example, there is only one entry for "Apollo"). Because of this I think it would be safe to say that there are at least twice as many missions as there are entries in this list.
No no no...
It will be an enormous amount of work though.
I am basically building every rocket and plane ever used by NASA and putting it in one save. You can load the rocket, and launch it and complete the mission. They are sorted by date launched.
EDIT: This is meant to be finished over a long period of time. Of course, I will release a save after I feel like there is enough material, probably around 20-30 rockets.
-
5 minutes ago, pTrevTrevs said:
Don't worry, once you have a carrier plane to launch it from the X-15 is easy to do. I did it myself about two years ago, using someone else's B-52.
I think doing every single Explorer flight is going to get boring, both for you and your audience, so I would only do one, maaaybe two or three of the most important ones. I would also skip unimportant flights that are essentially repeats of previous ones to keep it exciting and interesting.
Why not? I just have to copy and paste the rocket half the time... and then make minor tweaks
You do realize it is a save file you will download... right?
Are kerbals more or less advanced than humans?
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
Well...
There is no easy answer for this question.
Kerbals are more advanced than us in some things, but in other things, such as solid rocket boosters, we have better tech...
They can travel to any planet, but their solar system is tiny so we can't really count that...
Overall I would say they are generally more advanced because a lot of their tech is based on future ideas we have. The RAPIER engine for example is based of the UK's SABRE engine, that isn't supposed to be even used until like 2020 I think.
Maybe if NASA, (and everyone else too) has 4% of the federal budget again we would be better than them
Or devs were just realized there were more important things to put in the game then cities and taking off helmets in Kerbin...