Jump to content

BureauJaeger

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    78

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BureauJaeger

  1. BureauJaeger
    You're right. I switched them back to grey. And made them smaller. Gotta love those B9 wings. I'm playing a slow going career game and yesterday did the GAP Mach 2 contract with that plane. Had to fly with nearly empty tanks for that last bit of speed and I almost ran out of fuel over the mountains. I'm surprised how well that glides with so little lift. Couldn't have been more perfect, fun times.
  2. BureauJaeger
    Right. No but I meant 'use' as in me making a fitting pair of textures, one with some kind of pattern, the other without, to choose in the VAB/SPH. Anyways, I'll try stuff out once you get the refreshed version out, see if I'll come up with something new and useful. Probably not for the main pack this time though to avoid unnecessary bloat, but a separate download perhaps. Hmm, it might also be useful to make versions of my textures for the procedural parts come to think of it, the tubes and the procedurals could then be used seamlessly side by side... Too bad I'm extremely lazy, so we'll see.
  3. BureauJaeger
    Yep, that's understandable. But then again that's not a huge limitation and the workaround would be to simply use different texture for joints in those cases. Would stuff like the style of stock airplane parts, with some panel edge lines running perpendicular and parallel to the main axis work ok now on the non-three-dimensional pieces?
  4. BureauJaeger
    Nice, that opens up possibilities for more specific repeatable patterns as well.
  5. BureauJaeger
    All right, good to hear! Yeah I think the small size works fine, I think the 5 meter piece was pretty much only one where the stretching got a bit too obvious.
  6. BureauJaeger
    I don't see it in the test rig but is the 45 degree bend a curve or a kink still? I'd reckon that one and the small 90 degree are the most important to have available as sharp angles. The larger kinked bends could then be put together piecemeal, theoretically anyway. But of course more variety, simpler usage and lower total part count is generally better. I like the curves as well, I can imagine they're useful for all sorts of non-obvious stuff, piping, wheel arches, floral arches for when Val gets married... BTW @DrunkenKerbalnaut I forgot to ask earlier when you were redoing the unwraps, do you need bigger versions of the solid color textures since they were smaller than the rest?
  7. BureauJaeger
    Man, that was fast. Looks cool! I'm gonna test it out later. (And try not to crash every third plane. Bad Starfighter joke right there.) A small texturing suggestion. What if you extend the dark stripe all the way down the nosecone without breaking up the shape, like many of the paintjobs were on the real thing? The simpler shape would give it even more old school look I think. Now, if only there was some appropriately retro looking radial intakes (hint, hint)... Edit: I tried it out. Look at those disgustingly large wings! I'm sure I can shave off some more...
  8. BureauJaeger
    Were you trying with alt+click by chance? That doesn't seem to work with the spawned in tourists. But the bracket key shortcuts work, at least for me.
  9. BureauJaeger
    YEEAAH BUOYYYY! I was having problems with this as well. One thing I noticed is that you have to stay in somewhat close proximity until the buoy has splashed down and even still I had to revert the mission a couple of times for the first buoy to get registered. I think I dropped them from 800 m with a parachute opening at 300 m or something like that, so I had to loiter for a bit before heading to the next one. There should be a popup message if the drop was successful. Also, are you using decouplers or docking ports for release, the latter seemed to work for me; I'm not sure if it matters but it was the only thing I changed in the buoys themselves between attempts.
  10. BureauJaeger
    @linuxgurugamer I think there's a problem in the RealPlume config for this. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't ":FOR[RealPlume]" cause MM to presume RP is installed even if it isn't? I just noticed some engine FX and sounds were missing and I suspect this being the culprit.
  11. BureauJaeger
    First of all nice to see this updated! I made this suggestion in the Airplane plus thread too but I think blackheart is moving on to bigger planes currently; if you're sticking with fighters, there's quite a lot of modern and futuristic cockpits now and a decent amount of WWII stuff too. I'd personally love to see something from the earlyish jet age, late 50s/60s, to bridge the gap between early prop planes and the late cold war favourites. Something like the F-104 or F-106 (which, fittingly, were operated by NASA until the nineties as well). On the other hand, if you'd prefer to do something more utilitarian, one thing I've noticed is that in the career game I'm still using the good ol' Clyde cockpit from SXT for every other plane (and pretty much helos too) because it seats six kerbals without any extra crew cabins. There's a lot of hauling around a small amount of passengers in GAP and Kerbin Side GAP, so it's just convenient; no need to transfer kerbals one by one between parts for example. For those early career small island hoppers something like an inline Piper Cherokee/Seneca with 4 to 6 passenger seats (and a separate nosecone for twin engine builds) could be very useful. Or rather a general mashup between some typical Pipers, Cessnas and Beechcrafts. (SXT does have the little Beechcraft Bonanza but it's only a single seater.) It could be suitable for all sorts of bush planes and seaplanes for the science gathering and rescue stuff too.
  12. BureauJaeger
    @linuxgurugamer One bug found in the beta thus far, the the resources for KW1mtankL2 are messed up, oxidizer is sort of doubled and LF is missing.
  13. BureauJaeger
    I'm getting some error spam with the latest release when I go to the game settings, I think this happened in the graphics tab, which is a bit weird. Something to be concerned about? Full logs (Google drive). [EXC 00:39:04.490] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object WildBlueIndustries.WBIMainSettings.get_PayToReconfigure () WildBlueIndustries.WBIPathfinderSettingsMonitor.UpdateSettings () EventVoid.Fire () UnityEngine.Debug:LogException(Exception) EventVoid:Fire() KSP.UI.Screens.Settings.SettingsScreen:OnApply() UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update() [ERR 00:39:04.494] Exception handling event OnGameSettingsApplied in class WBISettingsMonitor:System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at WildBlueIndustries.WBIMainSettings.get_PayToReconfigure () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at WildBlueIndustries.WBISettingsMonitor.UpdateSettings () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at EventVoid.Fire () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 [EXC 00:39:04.496] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object WildBlueIndustries.WBIMainSettings.get_PayToReconfigure () WildBlueIndustries.WBISettingsMonitor.UpdateSettings () EventVoid.Fire () UnityEngine.Debug:LogException(Exception) EventVoid:Fire() KSP.UI.Screens.Settings.SettingsScreen:OnApply() UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update() [ERR 00:39:04.500] Exception handling event OnGameSettingsApplied in class WBIPathfinderSettingsMonitor:System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at WildBlueIndustries.WBIMainSettings.get_PayToReconfigure () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at WildBlueIndustries.WBIPathfinderSettingsMonitor.UpdateSettings () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at EventVoid.Fire () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 // this repeats
  14. BureauJaeger
    The part folder in the GitHub versions, yours and the original source, is actually different to the one in the Curse 2.0 download from the original thread for some reason. The latter seems to have the updated models, at least based on the texture names.
  15. BureauJaeger
    I've had this installed for a while and I did fly a couple of missions without any issues. Still, I'd like to see this properly updated. It's so nice to have more reasonable stuff to do with lower tech planes. I feel the rewards could use some tweaking, well, increasing mainly. If I have understood correctly the Kerbin Side bases have a recovery value associated with them, so you often get only half or so of the price of the plane back. I haven't really looked closely at the numbers but it seems the profits are quite low if you run the missions with more complex builds. I also have Strategia installed with pilot focus currently active and it boosts the rewards of the regular GAP but doesn't seem to touch the rewards on this mod. Having these be compatible would be great but I think it would have to be done on the contract side of things rather than Strategia itself. Perhaps something you could look into as well?
  16. BureauJaeger
    I just noticed the latter too. The bus mission basically completes instantly, the waypoints show up as visited once you load the tourists and you only need to drive to the admin building (edit: scratch that, the final waypoint was completed as well, I misremembered). Weird, it wasn't a long ago that I did this mission repeatedly without problems (oh, except the tourists spawning 140 m up in the air and exploding sometimes, which I guess may be related to the climber bug also), but that might have been in 1.2.1. Could this be a Waypoint Manager thing then?
  17. BureauJaeger
    Well that was a simpler solution than I'd expected. Thanks!
  18. BureauJaeger
    For some reason I can't get this to work, the button doesn't appear; neither in stock nor blizzy's toolbar. According to the logs it's trying to find what I presume is the config file but the PluginData directory doesn't exist. Is there a bug or is it just my mod soup messing something up? Here's the full output log: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByJYJ0DSaacASnRuMDJtdjlyZGc/view?usp=sharing
  19. BureauJaeger
    The rover hype is real. I tend to use the yellow truck from SXT for the early career science collecting around the KSC because it's quick to slap together and can convert fuel to EC, and I think this could be a perfect alternative for that, but even easier. @DrunkenKerbalnaut if you're tweaking this further I'd suggest getting rid of the prefab roll bar to give the flatbed a bit more space. I mean it can always be built with the structural tubes if needed. Also the thin metal parts, the wheel arches and whatnots, could use some thickening, they look a bit flimsy in game. Here's a quick and dirty test with the yellow truck wheels and some Buffalo chassis pieces under the bodywork. Those fit perfectly btw. And with square headlights. Because it was acceptable in the 80s. Oh and I definitely need to retexture this to match those wheels. Construction yellow is the new black.
  20. BureauJaeger
    Superb work again. The wing pieces are a useful addition, especially for career games as the procedurals open up quite late in the tech tree (CTT). And I like stitching wings from tweakscaled pieces anyway. I'd love to see some elliptical wing tips to round off the set, pun intended.
  21. BureauJaeger
    @Mynhardt Kitshoff Did you manage to get it? The Astronaut Complex biome recognition can be a bit wonky sometimes, I've had the same problem occasionally. Try driving the rover right next to the wall so it actually touches the building, see if that helps. Specifically, the wall on the VAB side of the building has worked for me usually. Also, you don't need to complete those in a single run, so if it bugs out you can recover the completed experiments and relaunch the rover again to try and fulfill the remaining one.
  22. BureauJaeger
    Yes, maybe. On the other hand I do quite like that it gives the drones a unique capability and purpose. Alternatively, what if you limit the experiment to be only valid in flight or in space and rule out 'landed', or 'splashed down' for that matter. Would that be a better solution? Or worse? Or possible at all?
  23. BureauJaeger
    Cool! What I meant by that is seeing as the drone cockpits are the only ones capable of performing the electronic report right now, it can be challenging to complete some of the randomized field research missions when you need to bring one of those to fulfill the experiment. They are big parts after all, compared to regular science experiments at least. Basically not an insurmountable challenge but a somewhat limiting thing.
  24. BureauJaeger
    I moved the Tucano to an earlier tech tree node to have it available in my early career game, slapped together a rough lookalike of the real plane, and I just fell in love with the result. Instantly one of the nicest flying things I have. Not too overpowered either, max speed with a good amount of fuel was "only" a bit over 150 m/s, which by chance seems to be on par with the real Super Tucano. Awesome stuff! My SXT Bonanza-lookalike now has a serious contender for the barnstorming missions. This doesn't have any IVA yet, right? Any plans or even a possible ETA for that one, @martinezfg11? I'd love to see this one fleshed out. If you're doing more tweaks while maintaining, @Wolfair corp., I have a couple of tech tree suggestions: move the Tucano to Aviation or Aerodynamics and push the Hornet to Supersonic perhaps, the latter looks quite out of place amongst mostly prop plane stuff. The drones too become available quite early on compared to how advanced they are, and since they use the Mk2 cross section, maybe put them in a later node too, Specialized Control for example. Also, I got the science gathering mission asking for the new electronic reports around the KSC. I'm not sure if that's intended behaviour or not but that requirement might become problematic in some other instance. It's probably fine though. I just went ahead and built a rover with a scaled down Falken.
  25. BureauJaeger
    @blackheart612 Looking good as always, I really appreciate all the effort you put into texturing these things. I know you prefer to stay away from extra dependencies, but somebody's gonna ask anyway, any chance there'll be a version with all the RPM/ASET/what-have-you jazz in the future? For an idea for the inline cockpit, how about one that goes from 0,625 to 1,25? Throw in a couple of different looking nosecones for modularity. Personally, I'd love to see one that resembles something from the late 50s to 60s, Starfighter/Delta Dagger/Mirage III/Draken/Mig-23 -type; pretty small and slightly angular canopy that sits quite deep in the fuselage. I feel that's a relatively untapped era so far when it comes to airplane parts. Just a thought. By the way @qromodynmc are you aware of the Aviation Cockpits? It has some modern cockpits, dual-seaters too, the IVAs are relatively simplistic but otherwise they are pretty nice and sit decently well with stock parts.
×
×
  • Create New...