StaticArcher

In regards to the unity-defined attach nodes... they work fine, just not the "size" parameter. Other than that... works fine so far. Surface attach and everything else is still defined the old way. @st3rv, I'd be more than happy to take any models you want and try to balance them the best I can, and write configs/do up the attach points. It's pretty easy for me, so sounds pretty mutually beneficial to me!

Ugh. Progress is slowing because I have -no idea- how to UV unwrap objects this complex. Adding more seams isn't working, but I'll keep trying!

I'd like to mention again that I literally just downloaded Blender last week, and haven't done 3d modelling before. So forgive my sloppiness. In the meantime, here's a little bit of work I've done in my sparse leisure time: The start of a bi-coupler with tail boom!

Edit: Replied again thinking my post was deleted. That's okay, it showed me DracovaXIV posted again! Yep, that was my thoughts exactly as far as the .mu importing goes. And yes, I saw that B9 uses normal maps, and I don't know how they work at -all-. It's a set of textures that apply a weight (or amount) of effect to a texture/model based on color, and I'm not exactly sure how they work either. But my textures are pure simpleness, and don't have that 2nd effect layer.

I used the new NODE format brought in by the new part-tools, so I can set up my attach points in unity rather than blender, so that's one reason why the configs are different. See this thread for details: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/36455-Partially-Solved-New-Node-System-Unable-to-get-it-working?highlight=node+size I'm also using the new (0.20+) version of the model loader. At least for that portion maybe I'll have to fall back to the old. And the UVs are... the same as the texture. Which I thought was always the case. Unless you're copying portions of the texture over to another portion (overlapping faces on the UV wrap), which I'm not advanced enough to use yet. AND apparently I'm completely stupid and uploaded the wrong asset folder. >.< Editing OP to fix that. EDIT: Apparently it was because I went from my 'working directory' (prototypes/Parts) and then changed the folder name to "StaticAwesome" without renaming the model path in the config. Changing that now. Can also confirm that everything else in the .cfg is fine, even if a bit sloppy and unconventional.

Oh, I can definitely help you out in regards to templates. You see, I'm using the stock parts as a template, by importing them into blender and doing my editing after that. I'm using this addon for blender, thanks to the wonderful user taniwha: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43513-Blender-mu-import-export-addon And my part won't show up, eh? That's.... disconcerting. I'll double check everything once I get home and see if I uploaded the wrong texture, wrong model, or wrong config. edit: And make sure you check my .cfg for how to rescale those parts to make them fit! edit2: Make sure you're checking "structural" because that's where I have them placed for now.

Oh, and also, to elaborate what I was saying in regards to the B9 versus Stock parts, here's an example: KSP Stock MK2 fuselage (left) attached to B9 fuselage (right): KSP Stock MK2 fuselage (left) attached to my prototype intake part (right):

@DracovaXIV: Definitely good points. I haven't imported the B9 parts yet, but I know it's -perfectly- aligned with the Stock (KSP) Mk2 fuselage, even BETTER than the B9 parts actually! Take a B9 part and put it up to the fuselage, and then take one of mine. You'll notice it looks like the B9 parts are sitting just a tad too low, and maybe a little undersized (.05 or so scale-wise). As far as spaceplane parts, I'll look into what needs done code-wise to add RCS parts, but I'm pretty sure it's just transforms and a little code. I'll definitely be using the Orbiter craft as inspiration, because YES, there needs to be tail ends like the XR2, the XR5, and the TX. Putting mounts inside a part shouldn't be too difficult, but it would be up to the player not to put high-gimbal parts in there, I think. I hadn't thought of making "filler" or "spackle" parts before, but that's actually not a terrible idea, except for that TERRIBLY UGLY texture overlap thing that happens. So the angles would have to be right, but I'll play with it. @Bazz: Exactly! The kind of parts I was looking at making, with a few new ideas I'll definitely take a poke at. I totally appreciate the ideas, they -will- be used. I'll take those suggestions to heart this weekend, and see what I can come up with. It took me less than an hour to make this simple part, and only another three to figure out how UV maps work. (It won't take me -THAT- long ever again, I hope!) I'll make some posts if I find some time before the weekend to get started. Thanks for the interest!

This is my -very- first part, and I've only just downloaded blender a few days ago, so keep criticisms very constructive please! In any case, I've noticed that even with the B9 Aerospace pack, there's just a lot missing from the MK2 size spaceplane area, so I'm going to try and fill this gap as best I can. I will be making a series of MK2 and possibly MK1 airplane parts. My first part is this loosely F22-Raptor inspired fuselage+intake combo. It has the same weight as a standard MK2 fuselage, and the exact same Intake properties as two of the KSP stock intakes. This is just coincidence, and has -absolutely- nothing to do with them being copied and pasted configs. In any case, I've got ideas of my own, but if anyone has anything that fits the whole "improve the MK1-2 spaceplane part set" theme, let me know! And if anyone would be so kind as to help me texture, that'd be appreciated, because I'm a crap artist. Apparently you have to have a license, but... if anyone wants to modify or steal these in any way, just keep it in the KSP forum, and shoot me a message so I can see what you did with it! And here's the download link, and a reserved post... JUST IN CASE. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-OqsRAALVzDME96Szc0TXhQeEU/edit?usp=sharing Updated: 19DEC2013 @03:40AM EST

Fair enough, and a good point. I was about to ask if I could use them and distribute my mod, but then my question just sort of answered itself upon stumbling through that line of reasoning. Thanks for helping me think, though!

But... I haven't done anything with any textures yet. I'm asking if I'm allowed to use their textures on my modded models to make parts. EDIT: And to clarify, I don't mean just using the whole texture, I just want to use the color/gradients and apply them to my parts, with a clone tool and the like.

It would really help a brand-new aspiring modder to be if they were, especially since I'm currently making a set of Mk2-compatible parts. Obviously I can't use them for other games or anything, just wondering if I can use them for KSP mods.

I am, and that looks perfect for what I need! I just need to line up the front and back edges at least somewhat. Thank you!

I don't need help modeling, or texturing (I'm terrible at both, but I'll work on it!). But I'd like to develop parts that meet the in-game standards, specifically the aircraft fuselages for now. So are there example or blank MK1 (or is that just a 1.25m circle?), MK2, etc fuselage models that I can start with so I can make sure the ends of my parts conform to these standards? I've tried searching the forum, and I've read all the tutorials, and have got the basics down. To start, I want to make a MK2 fuselage that contains intakes near the front (off to the sides, so as not to interfere with cockpit mounting), and square wing mounting points near the top of the middle of the fuselage, so those pesky wing edges aren't showing. Possibly want to expand this idea into wings with dedicated landing gear mounting points as well.

Oh! Sorry. Yeah, you know the "open link" buttons that bring up a webpage on your computer? Where it says "127.0.0.1:????" you'll replace the 127.0.0.1 portion (leaving the colon and port number to the right of the colon) with the IP address you gathered from the result of the command prompt. You'll enter that into your address bar on another device. Hope that helps!

Yeah Mushroomman, if you're on Windows that is. Press the windows key and R at the same time, which should bring up a run prompt. Then type "cmd.exe" into that box. Once you see a command prompt, type in "ipconfig" and that will bring up a bunch of IP addresses. You'll -MORE THAN LIKELY- be looking for a 192.168.(?).(?) address. It'll be the one listed as "IPv4 address", not the one listed as "Gateway" address. Hope that helps!

Well, Alexander, I\'ve used these, and think they\'re great! Most people don\'t want to mess with config files (I don\'t have this problem!), so if you need ideas... why don\'t you make three lights, such as these: Small: For aircraft! Medium: For landing! Large: For ILLUMINATING FROM ORBIT (or from high in the air, I guess =P ) Also, having a specific visual style on each would be awesome! Please consider making one that looks well with aircraft, too.

For those having problems with the orientation, try using SHIFT+ADSWQE keys to get the parts rotated -after- you have them in a good spot. It\'s different, but it does work. However, parts will probably need some physical mapping re-done now, since they were pretty much custom tailored for the old VAB. Progress isn\'t always easy!

+1 to amphibious, even if it\'s not bigtrak related! I could really use a landing platform, you know.

Works just fiiiiiiiine. No problems so far as I can see! Keep up the good work broskarooney.

Testing right v/12 right now, the lander deploys fine, and assembles correctly. Will attempt a kerbin landing now!

http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=8246.0 He\'s already got configurable keys. Just take a look at his source and figure that portion out.