SpannerMonkey(smce)

you cannot affect the draw time/lag by changing textures, it can only be changed by reducing the particle emission at source, the unity scene (about time you bit the bullet and got your head around unity)

??circular runway??

Hi, well the placement of the blades is fairly simple depending on the number of blades, even numbers are easier to set up than odd ones though. So simply create your prop spinner and one blade, center the spinner and the first blade on one of the axis x/y , Set up your modelling apps degree snap to whatever you want , I usually have mine set at 5, clone the first blade and attach it by linking to the hub, do not permanently attach it if you are using firespitter, then simply, in the case of four blades rotate the hub 90deg, if properly linked the first blade will rotate with the hub, clone the first blade again, attach to the hub and rotate 90deg again. Pretty basic stuff really, it gets a bit trickier with odd number a blades and you need to take a bit of extra care to make sure the center stays in the center. As for the blur its never as good as the Firespitter version and very much depends on frame rate, but it is passable, just being a matter of trial and error with anim speeds and cfg values

Certainly do that, it's how i've learned all the KSP stuff, try it and see what happens, and keep at it until it works. I'd imagine a lot of it will become clearer, like what the values refer to, as you do it

Hi the blade geometry apart from it's position on the hub is irrelevant, Things such as pitch and chord have no influence on how a propeller in KSP works because they do not function like propellers, yes they do accelerate the craft but it's not the blades that are doing it. Like all other KSP engines (aside from mod/stock turboshafts etc) they provide the acceleration and thrust via a thrust transform. The blades do all have to be the same size length etc and balanced around the hub , as an unbalanced mesh will cause vibration. In Firespitter the prop blur is achieved by a little bit of mesh switching, the model consists of usually engine body, prop spinner and prop blades, and a blur disc, In use when a certain RPM is reached the firespitter plugin switches off the visible blades and switches on the blur disc. You can use the stock animate throttle for prop simulation. and with the correct animation speeds, some form of automatic blur takes place. However I have used both methods recently and to get an accurate simulation of a propeller using the stock modules takes a good amount of fiddling. The firespitter method seems to be much closer to a real world behavior. and easier/quicker to set up For example using stock engine modules and animate throttle, when you shut the engine down it just stops dead, there's no, what Firespitter calls windmill time, a real prop will rotate a bit after shutdown and turboprops have a long spool down generally and only Firespitter ( There may be others ) does this properly

You'll find all the links required for a successful 122 installation in the last couple of pages of the IR rework thread

Hi there is a dev version of KJR that does work with Infernal Robotics. Normal KJR as you've seen locks IR joints. I'd advise visiting the IR thread as in the recent weeks there has been a lot of discussion and useful info regarding IR and KJR

Hi given how complicated the fairings are, I doubt it's a simple question in any way. It's certainly not something I'd recommend as a first attempt at KSP modding The first step would be to get a copy of the blender .MU exporter and extract one of the squad fairings, then you can find out how the hierarchy is assembled, and what mesh components you need in order for it to work. Then get a copy of sarbians debug stuff which would allow you to see how all the transforms and meshes are aligned in game ( the mu export can mess up the transform rotations) You could in theory at this point fix all the rotations to be the same as shown by debug stuff, pass the part through unity and it could possibly work. I've a suspicion that the fairings may also use procedural concave colliders, and that has some very strict rules on how meshes are assembled, in order for it to work at all, any loose edges or verts will break the collider generation It can sometimes help understanding if you use the squad example and try and get that to work, before starting on your own project.. Though having just looked at a cfg I can see it's a fairly complicated part, there are many cfg refs that are not used for anything else, so I'd imagine very few people know what the values pertain to. The large fairing itself consists of 12 meshes (individual models) and likely dozens of reference transforms .So not a ten minute project You really need somebody who has made procedural parts or knows intimately how the squad fairings are assembled , otherwise I suspect getting a similar part in game will be a fairly painful and drawn out process (if you don't understand any of the terms above perhaps an easier project should be considered, you'll need to be very familiar with KSP mod making in order to make this happen)

Hi the version of DMP and the version of mods you use on it are important, I'm not aware of any DMP for KSP 122 so any of those mods that are for 1.22 will need to be deleted. The message means that one or more of the plugins can't find the internally referenced unity DLL, probably because the mod/mods were not compiled against that particular version of Unity/KSP

HI,, if you have saved local copies of the ships then you should simply be able to copy the ships out of the saves/your-save-name folder/sph-vab and paste them into the new save on the new server

There is also a shell impact component and both values are combined. The physical impact can be demonstrated by firing any non cannon weapon at a loose part , you will find tough light parts are knocked around by the shell impact. I'll look into how it would work with BDA as I'd like to add another layer to the ship battle damage experience, Would be very nice to see visible damage before a vessel sinks

HI, just for reference BDA radar does not actually function in the manner you'd like, it can only detect craft that contain a certain part or module, It does not detect other craft, terrain or buildings. As Streetwind mentioned above, the closest current mod that provides the functions you want is indeed scansat, and that would form a better starting point for development than the BDA radar

Hi what have you tried,? I have a couple of ideas but don't want to be duplicating efforts.. One thing that has worked for me in a similar situation is to use the fixed washer but increase the joint spring and joint damping values, what this does is give the joint some freedom, you can (with tinkering) adjust it in such a way so that although it will be reasonably free to move it will want to self center, the fact that you will be moving will also help this effect. Plus i see you can set the limits on a fixed washer, I am unsure as to if the limits would apply to the spring and damping induced freedom though, Only one way to find out though

Hi, chaps, well the thing is.. although I like subs and have played around with them since 0.18 ( and still use the minisub I built back then) I have zero luck with large subs, I have a couple, but the thing is that they are cursed, cursed to call the kraken, They sort of worked in 1.05 but since then the situation has degenerated to a point that I just launch them to see if anything has changed in my game, that would stop them tearing themselves apart. rather than having the expectation of an undersea cruise I know it's likely to be over in minutes. Which is sad because among other things I like them, and I've spent an ungodly amount of hours trying to make it work (the bit of modding nobody sees) The only conclusion I can draw is that subs with real classic hull shapes, not like the current hotdog, wont work in KSP, I've been considering gluing one together in unity so the whole hull is in one part and see how that goes, but you need really 3 hull parts to a sub , minimum to make it trim friendly and usable So sadly no more subs for the foreseeable future, and because of the no subs there'll be no sub stuff development as i've nothing to reliable to test with, However as always in modding things change, i constantly learn new tricks, so who knows ,if i find a way to make them as reliable as surface ships Id be happy to give it another go

Hi, and thanks some great info there for me to digest , when I'm more awake, currently on the down slope of a little modding frenzy clearing the last large project away. Which means I can dedicate some time to learning the intricacies of aircraft mods, ( I make mods, but nothing in released stuff flies, I've never had an aircraft or rocket mod and it's been been a long time since i regularly went to space) nailing some of these outstanding bugs and getting this to where I'd be happy for Stryker to poke it with a stick, (damn clever chap btw, and the really smart stuff is never mentioned) Which I'm not right now, but even with all the time in the world I still find myself short on about two weeks per month I'll be in touch regard the mod and your changes

More than likely, plus there have been issues with mouse aim flight, see a post before yours regarding other spinning ships, which was tracked to MAF. AS i mentioned above the fact you've chosen to power it by other than the recommended methods means it's edge case and all bets are off. If you had a set of props on and it exhibited this behavior I'd spend as much time(hours) trying to work out why as I did with the last occurrence of spinning ships ALL the ships especially the ones I have added since taking over the mod are set up to use props and balanced accordingly. I never use anything but the props, the ships are not tested with 4 jet or any other type of engines fitted and I make no allowances in the design to cope with alternative propulsion because that is not how I want them used. ( you'll notice the distinct lack of jet or rocket engines in every screenshot posted before yours ) In my world, marine vessels move by means of propellers, moving them any other way apart from by sail (yeah ok at a push paddles too) is an alien totally scifi and unsupported method Just because the parts are large does not mean you can abandon normal KSP best practices and in some ways the penalties for getting it wrong are far worse than with a small craft When you call the kraken to something weighing several 1000 tonnes it's always going to be spectacular

Hi well I've no clue as to what you're problem is, ships aren't aircraft. Although it has been done in the past making them fly is not something I could care less about. Under normal circumstances using the recommended drive methods it would be very difficult to get a ship airborne. I see you've a least four engines and have manged to push it well over 100ms, again using the drives in the mod you'd be very lucky to see 40ms on a small ship and a good bit less on the large stuff As for making things FAR compatible, historically there's been no help from the dev, I've been here before btw, As for the parts there is nothing unusual in the models apart from the size, the colliders are as they should be, the masses are OK, ( there are prescribed limits set by unity the rules how heavy things can be and still have things attach to them securely) and if FAR can't deal with that there is not much i can do about it. I did test with previous versions of FAR and all seemed OK, but I'll need more info before i can make any judgements about what is really going on, and considerably more than can be gleaned from two out of context images

Well you could actually mention it in the relevant threads and I can investigate whats going on, there is nothing you can do in the cfg to change the aim point, the aim point is derives from the fire transform, though I'm at a loss as to what could cause them to aim incorrectly, If it remains unreported , as it has for so long, niether turret is new and yet nobody has mentioned it EVER! then it's unlikely to be fixed

This is likely due to the part masses involved, Its is recommended that you use KerbalJointReinforcement on any large vessels, KSP has problems with huge masses, and was never coded to cope with vessels weighing many thousands of tonnes

Your prop is on the wrong layer i think, which is why it stays put when the pod moves set the layer for your prop, as you want it visible to Kerbs and cameras on the Kerbals layer, Layer 16 If you don't have a layer for Kerbals create one and you will also need Layer 20 Internal Space if you are messing with IVAs

Yup definitely working and working well

Infernal robotics is the only real option but I believe there are some robotic type parts in the construction mod (video of IR powered arm below)

IS that a picture of your GameData folder? If so WHY have you got a GameData folder inside a Gamedata folder? And what is KSP mods, if they are other mods all put in one folder then most if not all will fail to work, all mods unless otherwise stated need to be placed in the GameData folder NOT in some other sub directory, Both of these things are likely to break every mod you have installed

https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/BDArmory/releases https://github.com/PapaJoesSoup/BDArmory/releases/download/v0.2.0.0/BDArmory.0.2.0.0_03262017.zip

There's no reason i can see that they cant have a radar module added