SiliconPyro

What would be the most efficient way to create a topographic display is KSP? The idea is that it would appear as a fixed camera looking directly downward. The important information is going to be presented on top of the topo lines, I just want them as a background, but I want them to be real. For those who don't know, this is a topographic map: It occurred to me that I could generate a plane for each elevation increment, then LineRender wherever those planes intersect the terrain collider. Now just to figure out how to do that!

I love the way these look. Great work.

Okay, I get you. It would be nice if we had a little wheel specifically for this (and for rover wheelie bars ). That's a pretty good idea. I managed to get this one airborne just find once I moved the wheels forward, but on more complicated designs, that could really help. Thanks again, everyone.

What do you mean by 'shallow'?

I moved the rear landing gear to be vertical and much closer to COM. Now when I reach 55m/s I start nosing up gently and at around 90m/s it just lifts off the runway beautifully. I was worried about clipping an engine as I have done many times in the past, but a gentle takeoff worked wonderfully (partially thanks to the much improved SAS). Thanks for the advice, guys.

If I can get off the runway this thing makes orbit and comes home fine, but on the runway it wants to veer suddenly left at around 90m/s. Anyone know what could be causing it? Here's the craft file.

I did a probe Mun landing last night with a fixed camera and it looked shockingly similar. I only had Kerbal Engineer to tell me my altitude above terrain.

My buddy and I just started a fixed camera/IVA challenge. Basically just seeing what we can get done without using 3rd person. So that career is relatively fresh and I'm just going to keep it (assuming it doesn't break). I'm going to hop into sandbox and play with that RAPIER first though. It's just too cool.

As I walked toward my lander on Laythe, it leaped ten meters into the air and came down on its side, blasting itself into bits. That was the rescue craft.

Honestly, choosing between an orbiting science station and using the RAPIER to make a dirt simple SSTO spaceplane will be pretty challenging. I might just stare at KSC for half an hour trying to decide. Then I'll make an SSTO with the RAPIER, remember I can't fly to save my life, then launch a science lab into orbit.

During Kerbalkon the devs talked about three "currencies". Money, Reputation and Science. These are used for various purposes revolving mostly around the contract system that would give specific missions to complete.

That makes a lot of sense. Maybe additional modules could be added to the lab that's coming in 0.23 and would each require one additional Kerbal to crew them. So a full station ends up including the main lab and three more modules with whatever it takes to power it all, plus five total Kerbals for a full crew. A lab shouldn't just increase transmitted value though. It should increase the base value of an experiment because it's happening in a better facility in microgravity. So if you get a full lab up and running, you could repeat previous experiments, but with better results because of better equipment.

When flags were first introduced, I planted one at every opportunity. I was marking my territory all over the solar system. There isn't any real point to it though other than maybe marking a good landing spot or an easter egg. With reputation coming though, I think it would make sense that you should gain reputation every time you plant a flag in a biome in which you haven't previously planted a flag. Just like doing a goo experiment in a new biome, it seems to make sense. What do you guys think?

Thanks. From what I'm seeing, I think a raycast is the way to go since I can specify an offset from the craft's CoM. Glad to hear it won't be too taxing.

A fixed hull camera can give you some interesting views when things aren't going exactly as planned.

That's why I asked. There is a huge disparity there when you're lifting a light load.

Not just that, but how they relate to the science system, what values you'll get for various samples and tests. All that not only has to be implemented but also balanced so it is worth the trip, but isn't too easy to get those points. This will only get more complicated with other planets, where a surface sample returned to Kerbin should have increasing value whereas a flyby of someplace like Ike should have relatively little, since getting to Kerbin's surface from Ike orbit is pretty easy.

Are air breathing engines allowed and does it have to be a vertical takeoff?

You didn't specify platform or that it has to be 3D, so Simple Rockets qualifies.

Okay, is there a method for altitude above terrain? On THIS PAGE I only see altitude above sea level.

That sounds like what I want to do. I have some learning to do though.

Thanks, but I don't know how it would integrate with tweakables. I was thinking of having a few switches on the GUI to activate/deactivate it, change scan area, etc. Then, if a crapton of raycasts doesn't bog down framerate, there could be an "advanced" version later in the tech tree with more points scanned.

No point in keeping it a secret, I suppose. I want to make a terrain radar that is visible while in the cockpit for IVA landing. The idea is that each raycast would show up as a dot. Their size, relative to the size of the center dot that represents actual height above terrain, would increase or decrease. This would give the pilot an idea of the terrain's slope. A field of 25 would get the job done fine.

For the purposes of this plugin, it is essential that they run constantly, but the range would never need to be more than 500m. You could even get away with 100m. I think a slower refresh would be acceptable though, down to about five per second (per raycast). That's a bare minimum though.

Okay, thanks, Greys. I assume those update every tick as well, so adding my own probably should be too demanding. I think I can get by with only nine, but 25 would be ideal.