Drag0nD3str0yer
-
Posts
11 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Drag0nD3str0yer
-
-
On 8/26/2022 at 10:57 PM, kelvin312 said:
I've found that changing the values for the springRatio and damperRatio in the cfg part files to the wheels fixed the issue- for the KS-16 Slant Landing gear I had it set to 60ish spring and 14 damper respectively, and it worked nicely again. I'm pretty sure the default values for the gears are way too small.
I will look into this more soon, cause if it can actually be fixed that easily, it would be significantly less of a headache to fix for the rest of the landing gear
-
Lisias has a repo with the most recent version, and I will link my fork where I am working on adding new parts (a handful of the parts added so far are incomplete or need fixing). As of now, there isn't a huge amount of communication on merging the various areas that have been worked on, but that should come eventually.
-
8 hours ago, Ruedii said:
Wheels seem to be working for me just fine.
At least the retractable one I tried (the small retractable.)
The KS-51 side retracting gear works fine for me too. The braking grip on it is a tad strong, but that's about it.
Less wheelbarrowing issues than around 1.9 when I last played KSP
I will note that I'm playing on Linux. Maybe they are only not working on Windows? This isn't a typical thing to behave differently on different platforms, though. It's not like it's a graphics issue.
I'll try checking the others later.The big issues that i've noticed is many of the landing gears spawn inside the ground when spawning in the plane, and a handful of the wheels have no grip and slide about, and the angled landing gear have a poorly set up suspension hierarchy
-
12 hours ago, Zmeya said:
Do people find Procedural wings hard to use? The only problems I've had with them have been bugs.
Not really, but having a simplified part could be useful for those that don't want to use procedural wings but still feel like the wing choices are lacking. I for one like Procedural wings, but I know people who don't want to use them cause they can be hard to get started with, and add a lot of complexity to handle in certain BDArmory competitions like Runway Project, which have less experienced players often not used to using proc wings.
12 hours ago, Zmeya said:Do people find Procedural wings hard to use? The only problems I've had with them have been bugs.
Unrelated, Im not aware of any mods that add hydrogen fueled jet engines, would be cool if a few were added in an optional file for those who use mods that add liquid hydrogen.I do like this idea, would make a nice selection of experimental/fictional parts, but probably makes more sense to focus on after existing bugs and parts that are useful to have are added. I'll definitely write that down though cause it could make for some really unique designs and cool concepts for planes
-
2 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:
Yes
Alright that might be useful... I had an idea of sorta taking the procedural armor code from BDA for Runway Project and adapting it to make a procedural wing panel that would be easier to use (and simpler) than proc wings, but still allow more custom wing shapes. That idea is not really high priority though so ima just keep it on the backburner.
-
8 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:
Since I'm not (yet) on that Discord server, I'll continue to post here.
Seems that you three have it mostly under control. I'll step back since I can't really contribute much, other than a standardized release packaging, if desired.
I'm available if needed for anything, also if you decide to need any modules coded, feel free to contact me
LGG
By modules do you mean like part modules like whats in the config files?
-
21 minutes ago, Lisias said:
I have problems on being available for chats due demands from day job. For me, the best way for communication on projects is the old and faithful Issue Tracker on GitHub (and now the Discussions).
Let me do the merge of everything into my repo, setup up the copyrights and notices accordingly, and then we reevaluate.
My repo have a huge advantage of having every release already commited in a nice git history - I can't say how this can be useful while locating bugs and mishaps that suddenly are discovered but not one knows since then.
Once we have a consolidated common base, and get something publishable, we reevaluate.
@Lisias Im good with relying on issue tracker and discussions on the github for primary communication, though i feel having a dedicated chat place for at least some side discussion can be useful. I will be continuing to use the discord @Concodroid mentioned for most of my discussion regarding work in progress stuff and ideas for what to work on next in terms of new parts, though I like the idea of getting the repository stuff figured out before we move to conversations about fixing old parts and adding new parts.
-
4 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:
That's fine, can you get me an invite there?
@linuxgurugamer If you still wanna join, heres the link: https://discord.gg/ZBJWTRnw
Most of any work myself and @Concodroid and Eclipse have done is kinda scattered in the #sugar channel in that discord.
-
35 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
I see a few ways:
- I could set up a new organization on Github to house the two repos and grant access to the participants
- I could just manage this using my own account
- You could manage it on your account
- or some other suggestion
I'm perfectly willing to curate the whole thing, I just don't want people thinking I'm swooping in to take credit for this. As curator, I'd control the merges and do the releases.
We could set up a new Discord for discussion, although I personally haven't found Discord to be that useful, or I could set up a private channel on Discord in my Discord server
I have a well-established release process, so doing the releases will be pretty easy for me
@Lisias@Concodroid @Drag0nD3str0yer your comments?
LGG
@linuxgurugamer Me, along with @Concodroid and the others that have been working with me have been using discord thus far, and a separate repo that I made, but I'm alright with any way that works for everyone else.
I dont really know why I made a fully seperate repo and didnt just fork AirplanePlus, but this is it rn if you wanna look at it (most updates are in the dev branch) https://github.com/Drag0nD3str0yer/AirplanePlusPlus
-
1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:
@Skalou I see you've already done pretty much what I was thinking of doing. Would you like to do this jointly?
@linuxgurugamerIve actually been also working on my own branch of AP+, more focused on adding new parts (primarily cockpits and control surfaces) if you got room for a 3rd person in the joint work on the mod.
[1.4.x-1.8.x] Airplane Plus - R26.4 (Fixed issues/Github is up to date) (Dec 21, 2019)
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
I was working on fixing the landing gear somewhat, but I'm super inexperienced with doing landing gear and didn't get anywhere. Luckily, SuicidalInsanity was nice enough to help out and got all the gear working.. If you want to test it, I'll provide a link to my fork of Lisias' repo with the fixed gear.
https://github.com/Drag0nD3str0yer/AirplanePlus (should just have to download the repo as a zip and then grab the gamedata from that)
I will point out that the fixes will be pushed to Lisias' repo eventually, so this is only a temporary place to find the fixed gear for now.