TheCardinal

What models will you create? Will you include that proof of concept (or even larger ones)? Ghost010 isn't the only one who has thought about the Thunderbirds (or more generally of the models used by Gerry Anderson).

It has been said over and over again: "Tracks cannot be made". I've never believed that and, judging by the video in the first post, you have succeeded in creating the impossible. (Ever thought about creating a perpetuum mobile?!) Well done!! I looked at the 'proof of concept'video twice now and it really looks and acts like a tracked vehicle. I presume you would have released it by now if all obstacles have been removed and all problems solved. What are the things which still need to be addressed?

You, Sir, are completely wrong or your definition of "aliens" differs completely from mine.

Thank you Bac9. I'll try it. (i completely overlooked the png files)

Is there a way whereby i can change the texture of a part?

You forgot to mention the most important part of it: you seldom win.

(Real) Life always has been highly overrated. Thanks for the heads up!

My apologies for not being more clear and my apologies for giving the impression of demanding an immidiate solution. I meant it as "I highly reccommend you to revise the errorhandling whenever you have the time and you feel like it". I have a very high opinion of your application and it is a pity the errorhandler acts up. It acts up whenever funny values are entered. It didn't happen with the above specified numbers (so much). The minimum diameter is set to 10 cm by the program whenever the entered value is below 10. No problem there. Then i tried setting the fuel amount to 22050. The default value apparently wasn't cleared and the value became larger than the program apparently could handle. THAT caused the crash. As far as i can determine the program first calculates the amount of oxidizer and then calculates the length of the part. The calculated length exceeds the maximum assignable value of parameter "Value" (it is probably declared as a double integer). My suggestion to you: Display an error message and reset all the values to the default values whenever such a overflow occurs. The most important crash message was: System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: The value of 6812935 isn't valid for Value. Value should be between 'Minimum' and 'Maximum'. Parameternaam: Value bij System.Windows.Forms.NumericUpDown.set_Value(Decimal value) bij KSP_PartGen.Form1.recalc() bij KSP_PartGen.Form1.timer1_Tick(Object sender, EventArgs e) bij System.Windows.Forms.Timer.OnTick(EventArgs e) bij System.Windows.Forms.Timer.TimerNativeWindow.WndProc(Message& m) bij System.Windows.Forms.NativeWindow.Callback(IntPtr hWnd, Int32 msg, IntPtr wparam, IntPtr lparam)

You need to grow up!

Some extra idea's: Multiple wheeled landing gears: double wheeled (normal aviationtype), triple wheeled (SR71 main landing gear), quadruple wheeled (C5A nose landinggear), four and six wheeled bogies. Rotating radar like parts.

As an approximation you could use: dimensions times 2 gives weight times 8 and thrust times 4. Presuming the same size of burncorridor is used at the start: taller -> more Thrust? Yes larger diameter -> longer burn time, yes but also more thrust when the same amount of fuel has been burnt as in the smaller SRB. In practice a different sized burncorridor will be needed to keep the thrust constant from start till the end. This will result in a higher thrust from start till burnout. Yes. If you could enter 3.5, it would assume centimeters and calculate a tank of over 30 kilometers long. At 3.5 meters (350 cm) it's just 29 meters which is quite normal. Lando, the part generator 2.1 crashes when incorrect values (such as withh this example) are given. You really need to revise the errorhandling in the part generator.

Place a docking port on the front and/or back wall of the cargobay and attach the cargo to that port. Decouple through a right click on the docking port an d choose Decouple.

I can understand that you don't want anymore discussion about the Hercules as it (currently) can't be done. It's a pity as the shape is so beautiful. Have you considered designing a troopcarrier with the same shape as the ...... but a lot smaller? (And i don't mean that as "design it now". It's just meant as a possible idea for in the future when you feel like designing flying stuff again.)

The eighteenth page in less than 24 hours .... wow! . I guess "the incident" has forced the release of this mod somewhat prematurely. (I'm not complaining about that!). . The designs are absolutely stunning and fitting for KSP. The B9 pack was good, the B9 R2 is even better. Thank you for sharing it with us (design illiterates).

I think you've misunderstood me. I was only talking about the possibility of changing the texture, not changing the model itself.

Hi Semni, i'm glad we can use the forum again. About the part: take the probe body and reduce the height bij half. Keep the shape inside of the trusses/struts as it is now. No need for animations, just a simple part. If the user is able to create the texture of the inside by himself, you have a magical part which can be used for several purposes. There are several useful mods which require a 'specialised' part, f.e. battery, reactor, RTG, instrumentpackage, SAS, ASAS etc.. Offcourse everybody can ask you to create a new part for every specialised function. It requires (a lot of) time and work. The endresult will be a large number of parts which will need support and maintenance. My reasoning was: Create a small part which every user can modify to his liking by changing the (inside) texture and the part.cfg. It will make the Tri-Hexagonal Structural Strut concept much more flexible. Take f.e. The BFT mod. All shapes are the same, the texture is slightly different (the color of a stripe), only the part.cfg's are different.

I don't see the mechjeb part among the pictures. Did you discontinue it? I would like to request a part half the height of the mechjeb part with a comparable inside. It would be really nice if one could modify the texture of the inside.

I fully support this suggestion. This is a mod you really need (for specialised tanks).

That is a somewhat silly question especially because of your reasoning. Both did what they were designed to do so both were as good (or bad) as the other. The fact that Russia achieved the orbit first has nothing to do with this comparison.

You have my vote (as soon as it is added to the poll)!

The Kliper is awesome! I still use the Weka spaceplane but it now has a brother next to it. Spasiba!

The FlashBack

How moderators finally won the "Count to 50 before a moderator posts" game.

You are ofcourse entitled to your opinion, but i don't agree with you. It DOES look good! This mod with the aluminium skins looks different from every other mod. If the OP changes the skins it will become 'just another' mod. If you don't like it, you can always create your own parts or look elsewhere.

I like it. If someone finishes this part i would appreciate it if it would be uploaded somewhere.