iamaphazael

I went to the OP to confirm that there was a link to the spaceport page there, and it took me a minute to locate it, so I've edited to make it a little more prominent

Fuel usage aside, that wobble is something that I've been fighting with for a while. I was hoping that the new system for attachment nodes would help alleviate the problem, but I just tried redoing the Saturn parts with the new nodes and there appears to be no change. Looking at the thread for the 0.20 parttools, it seems that the new system isn't fully implemented yet, so it may still be that it will help in the future. If not, though, we're just going to have to deal with it.

Yikes! Maybe you should just take it easy for a while and focus on getting better. I hope it all clears up soon.

Wow. I take a couple of days off and the thread blows up! It's great to see so much enthusiasm about the pack. Becomming the definitive Apollo mod is definitely what we're going for here, and with the work that Razorcane has been doing lately, it's really starting to look like that's what it's going to end up being. (That new RCS block looks amazing!) As far as the LRV, it is definitely something that I want to include, and I've been thinking along the same lines as Gregrox suggested (some clever combination of decoupler, animation, and wheel modules), My intention is to get everything else finished first, and then tackle the rover. I have a conference to attend next week, then am driving cross country, so I'm going to be out of commission for a little while. I'll be trying to get some more work done today and tomorrow, primarily adding finishing touches to the models that Razorcane has completed, and also (time permitting), converting all the Saturn parts over to the new attachment node system to see if that makes them a little more rigid. After that, my end of the project will be on hold for a few weeks, so don't expect a whole lot to happen in the immediate future, but if Razorcane keeps showing off the incredible work he's doing, hopefully that will give you guys something to ogle over in the meantime, and also give me a reason to stop at every Denny's and Starbucks I find to check in on how things are going.

0.11? 0.12 maybe? I think I paid 8 bucks

May the force be with you. Please keep us posted on your progress

Eyeball licking: not even once. Just kidding. Sorry to hear that. I hope it clears up soon. Looking forward to seeing what you're able to come up with in your downtime. I'll be sending you some parts later today

Thanks. We also want to make these parts be as good as they can be, and since we're both working on them less than part time, it will take a while to finish. As Razorcane said, we both have a lot going on in our real lives at the moment, so doing this stuff must take a back-burner position. We are making steady progress, though, and we'll hopefully have a completed CSM by the time I'm out of commission for a little while, starting in two weeks. Thanks for being patient. It will be worth it, I promise

One way to do it is this: 1: Quicksave 2: Launch your ascent stage into orbit at the height your SM is at and circularize. Time how long it takes from the time you launch to the time you hit circular orbit. Also note how far downrange your ascent stage ends up once the circularization burn is complete (that is, hoiw far around the planet are you from where you started. 3: Quickload. 4: Watch your SM orbit a few times and time how long it takes to complete one orbit. Once you have that number, wait until the SM gets to that point where your ascent stage is going to end up and note what time it is. 5: Subtract the time it takes to get your ascent stage up from the time it takes to complete one orbit. Add the result to the current time. That's when you should launch. 6: When the time comes, launch your ascent stage and try to fly as close to the same profile as you did the first time. Don't worry at this point about rendezvousing. Just get your craft into a circular orbit at the right altitude. If you've done your math right, you should find that you end up in a similar orbit to your SM, reasonably close to it. Now, you can handle this just like any other rendezvous and make slight tweaks to your orbit to catch up or hang back. 7: ? 8: Profit

Yeah I would love it if we got to see betelgeuse go supernova. It would make for a spectacular nebula eventually, too! Barnard's star is also cool because it's moving so fast in relation to everything else around us My favorite is Algol, because it's the "Demon Star"

Yeah, I've noticed that. It's strange, because the ones we have now are based on the models from NASA's website. I guess whoever did those models was working from early designs or something, because I've seen concept art that shows an rcs block like the ones we have here. Razorcane, if you feel like remodelling that part, I can add the thrust vectors and make it functional fairly easily.

The box should be shaped like a rocket

I'll be doing the IVA's. They are going to be waiting until the command pod models are all completely set in stone before I do anything else with the interiors edit: Thanks for the offer of help. I'd probably take you up on it, except for the fact that I work in blender and Razorcane works in 3dsmax, and I think adding a third program.format into the mix would be more of a pain than anything else. On the other hand, I would like to add a lunar rover to the pack at some point. If you felt like starting to model that, I could always add it in later on.

Yeah, unfortunately. I'm going to be attending a conference for a week, then I'm going to be driving across the country, which will take close to a week. Then, it'll take a little while for me to get set back up at the place I'll be staying for the summer before I'm able to get back to work. So, like I said, I'll try to get as much done before then as possible.

Probably not until Thursday of this week. Then I'll try to get a bunch done Thurs and Friday, and some the following week, then I'm out of commission again for a few weeks as I'll be travelling, so I'll try to get as much done as I can before I leave. By the way, that punch list looks pretty good. It'll be nice to start checking things off the list

Thanks for the support! I've definitely noticed that behavior on the landing legs. I've tried a bunch of different setups, and they've all had the same problem to a greater or lesser degree. I've also noticed that even the stock legs do it a little bit (although for them you need to give them a little push to get it started). Next time I sit down to work on this, I'm going to start playing around with the new attachment node types that were introduced with 0.20 and see if they will help (also keeping fingers crossed that it will be a cure for the Saturn tank wobble too).

1. No. You don't. Neither a "kidney bean orbit" nor a "horseshoe orbit" is the same as being in a circular orbit around a fixed, invisible point. The SOI around the lagrange point is a bad, bad approximation. Not to mention all the stupidity that would ensue from passing through that soi. 3. The 3 body restricted problem still does not have a closed form solution, which means that timewarp is either not possible, or timewarp is possible, but a ship's motion is affected by what warp level you are at, neither of which is acceptable

The wikipedia page lists the ultimate fates of all of the Lunar Modules that were produced. One of them is in solar orbit. A few were left in lunar orbit and eventually decayed and crashed. Most of them were "intentionally crashed into the lunar surface". They must have had some sort of flight program to automatically deorbit them after they separated from the CSM, because it wouldn't have made sense to waste the fuel to bring the whole LM/CSM assembly into an impact trajectory then bring the CSM back out again. Thanks for that link, bang_coi. I haven't had a chance to really play around with it, but it looks very cool

All it does is orient the navball and its icons so that they are correct with respect to whatever part you selected, mostly to make docking less confusing. So, for instance, if you have a docking port mounted at the "bottom" of your ship, or if you're using one of those inline ones where the port comes out the side, clicking on that part and selecting "control from here" will reorient the navball so that it's reflecting where that particular part is pointed, rather than where the main command pod is pointing. Also, the rcs translation controls will now work with respect to the new part, so if you press "i", for instance, your rcs will thrust in whatever direction that docking port is facing

Yeah, all you need is the free version of the Unity editor from their website (http://unity3d.com/unity/download/). Any version in the 4.x.x series should be fine. You'll also need a copy of the KSP part tools scripts to export parts from Unity into the .mu files for the game to use. The version I've been using is here (http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/files/ksp-parttools-18.zip). There is a new version for 0.20, but it looks like people are having some trouble with it, so I haven't switched over our parts to it yet. Unless they stop working with the game (which I don't expect them to anytime soon), I'll hold off on converting them over until I've had a chance to play around with the new parttools. If you want to get Unity for yourself, there are a couple of tutorials on the forums that show the full process to import a model in, then export a part back out. I can try to write up a set of concise instructions for you too. The Unity editor itself is not particularly intuitive, so it's nice to have something to work from. I'll try to write something up this weekend.

I'm pretty sure I put a diffuse shader on the docking ring base. I'll recheck next time I have Unity open. As far as the pod goes, I've probably got the reflectivity turned up too high on the command pod. Also, Unity allows you to pick what color the shininess is. For the command pod, I picked the light grey from the texture. On the docking ring cap, I left it at the default, which is why the cap looks darker in the image. Looks like I'll just stick to the default. It seems to look better that way.

I wasn't going to put anything up yet, because I'm not finished importing Razorcane's models into the game yet (as you can see, I need to tweak the shader on the parachute cap to make it match the rest of the CM, and there are some other issues too that I need to deal with), but here's a little preview:

You got me all excited there for a minute. I was hoping that I'd be able to child a transform to a mesh that gets animated and have the attachment node move. Are there any plans to add this sort of functionality, or is it just not possible due to Unity limitations?

I think that "one of the most famous computer games ever" might be a little bit of an overstatement; it's certainly one of the most popular games right now, but whether it has enough staying power to become a true classic remains to be seen. But to the question, I really like the idea of it, and I've enjoyed it the couple of times I've played around with it, but the camera bob makes me really nauseous, so I can only play for about ten minutes at a time.

Thanks for the compliment! Yeah, we're definitely going to turn down both the rcs and the pod torque on the LM. We'll probably try to release a new version once all the CSM models are done, and that new update will also have a bunch of cfg tweaks.