SpannerMonkey(smce)

Re repulsor things, As it something very few are ever likely to try, I'd never expect any time investment especially as you say the system is after all fairly esoteric. Asking the question saved me a lot of frustration retrying something that's not ever going to work. The last suggested solution is pretty much how i did it before except they had suspension, (and the tiniest bit of sideways friction,as hovercraft are not truly friction free ) , and have a couple of, lets call them stock repulsors as it sounds better than invisible wheels, (including LoFi's original mk2 repulsor) that i use for messing around, at least it's only six in one i want. Regarding that minimum set up , I read in the git page that WCs (wheelColliders) will work placed, if I understand it without needing , as you say, all the other modules, is this a simple case of making the WC a child of that which you want to mobilise and creating a basic cfg with a KSPWheelBase driving the WC:s? Or am i oversimplifying it? ( I'm at a point in the week when simple is good ) Cheers

I'll pm you a copy, i have two, one with tr2l type straight up and down suspension and a bigger one with the whole lookAT set up and constraints, mind you once you see how easy it actually is to do. you'll be able to work out all the suspension gubbins, it's just like any other KF wheel just lots more sets ( not forgetting the 700 line, no empties cfg ) oooo Brilliant, if that works, as well as everything else does that'll be a first, well rb did have it working for 30 seconds or so but to make it really work is very cool, now where did i stash those ancient rb bogies still with the tracks on....... ..Adding wheels through model node , it'll take a while to fully appreciate what can be done with that. These arbitrarily placed wheels, what is their format, a WC and the bare minimum of transforms that let the collider know where everything supposed to be? or a full part meshes an all etc? While I'm here, back in days gone by it was possible to rig a group or replusors into one model as I've done with wheels , and have them function as normal, been trying the very same thing with the latest versions and can't seem to hit the right arrangement to get them working as individuals or as a group. IS it possible or am I just burning hours? if i can't go with repulsors it'll be back on the invisible wheels (poor mans repulsors )

How do you mean a track chassis?, a chassis with tracks on both sides as delivered, like my 8x8 truck, wheels already built in sort of thing? For tracks I recall the great one saying that it's not possible to do with tracks, It's fiendishly fiddly with just 8 wheels , it'd be horrendous with twenty. But chassis you can put tracks on are plentiful, although i don't think thats what you want

IT could be i suppose , I've not done anything static wise for a month or so, some of the Laythe stuff is and the ship launches from Laythe there's a couple of those

Hi It's not even a thing. The modern BDA is concerned with planet bound and atmospheric combat. I'm also not aware of any moves by the team to make Space combat a thing or repair/create the space missile system, as it was never fully developed and will simply not function in a the current code environment of KSP. Could be wrong, but don't think I am

AT the very least least someone will need to see a copy of your KSP.log zipped not pasted.

HI it'll be released via SM Armory as I don't need another active thread, as for the when I don't know, there's many things I'd like to do and try out, some user preferences to be dealt with, etc etc As i mentioned to the testers the other day there's at least another couple of tanks , and at least one other truck to be added before any release, at the moment the combat balance is a little screwed SO yeah keep an eye on the SMA thread , And thanks for the interest

Hi may not be relevant but there was a decal mod floating around a while ago that had broken drag cubes resulting in planet sized drag from a tiny flag, enough to bring a sporty rovers speed down from 40m/s plus to less than 20 and struggling to maintain that.

Gentlemen RE both issue above, provide a zipped copy of your KSP.log , It's only by doing that, that the reason for your problem will be revealed, and likely a lot quicker than if we have to play a guessing game, which is what a bug problem without an associated log amounts to. Time taken to fix a problem when a log is supplied, providing it takes no change in the mod itself is maybe an hour of your time, without a log it can be days or weeks, Fixed an install for a guy on steam who hadn't played for a week and had a page of possible answers to his problem but not one request for a log, seeing the log had him up and running in 1/2 hour.

HI the usual solution is rudders, but there are rules, and different opinions, I make and maintain the parts for LBP and use a real world ish method, note that the partner mod SM marine has a lot of the QOL stuff for LBP. I lock the engine gimbals, never more than four drives, and never anything that's not a prop, those drives were made to work these ships, they are not a gimmick. Then two rudders never more ( bad physics effects can be experienced with more than two, and two is for the experienced or steady not sporty types ), pop over to SMM and grab the bow thruster module that's just been released, slap one each side of the bow and stern, they are self contained, powered by internally generated hydraulic oil, all you need is an EC supply, and pretty much everything in LBP will turn with that setup even the full size carrier . Big ships do not turn like motorboats and these are very big very heavy ships, and aside from planets some of the biggest things in KSP . You are more than welcome to ask questions like this on the LBP thread see link bottom of page , at least there others who have the same problem will be able to see some solutions, posted here, your comment and my reply will be lost in a week Cheers

There's also one of the part tools breakers in Tweakscale, tweakscale examples.cfg i think, and that too will break part tools the moment you link the project to the GameData, it's had me a good few times in the past too.

See this is what happens, I get out of the habit of lobbing great big generator modules in everything and once again I need to boost the juice, no biggy I'll just make some new generation equipment to suit , I shudder to think what it;s going to take to push the 50tonner

Hi, as above retested all the issue items in a new stock dev version and had no problems with over speed breakage , when scaled the issue returns to some extent, and you could intentionally break a track , but what is there I feel is allowable and it's nowhere near as instantaneous as in the full release, which makes it manageable, a tap on the brakes will bring it all back to something sensible. If you're driving your scaled tracks at 30ms expect some trouble, but below that it seems to be good SO you've already dealt with it pretty much. I will have to rethink my power policy though as larger tracks have a very large appetite for EC

Let me retest that with this new dev version, as that was using the the last proper release. But not necessarily caused by moving the craft with unapproved methods, simply forgetting to put the brakes on once wet and unloaded is enough, any steering input caused runaway breakage. I'm a little concerned that this may be noise though until I can recheck fully (next hour) To explain the gimbals it's easier if I show you the craft, the gimbals referred to are part or the outboard steering Just have to remember to put on the brakes , but this is the same as the water issue and needs the same recheck with the dev version The wheels that do it are stock size, never really found scaling wheels to work awesomely well, and I was just about to say the tracks are stock but they aren't as they're all tweaked size clones to suit half a dozen different vehicle types and hulls , and yes I could see scaling being an issue, but the tracks aren't wildly scaled up as all my stuff is Kerb sized , but again I may just be making noise until I've rechecked today, either way I'll report back shortly

Indeed they can and you can use them just like a normal Kerbin bound launch site, not had a problem yet , the large ship in the bottom most pic weighs 23000 tonne and if anything will wake the Kraken it's teleporting something that size across the galaxy

I second this thought if anything they should be more efficient when fully submerged, but we wont quibble over that well I wont ... then again there'd be some losses for the massive support brackets and associated drag that would likely nullify any submerged advantage. If i recall all that time ago the screw drives were quite effective for small rover marine travel with fairly decent propulsive force

Very true although tracks are unlikely to get airborne on Kerbin unless falling down a mountain so many will never notice , if used off world it becomes a real possibility, My experience with the KerbinDakar challenge showed me that high speed on wheels over Kerbin = airtime and recent local tests have borne out the suspicion that the current KPW over speed situation is less than ideal for rovers especially the sportier types. I don't want to turn off the damage of course as it's usually fine and a bit of a cop out as it skews every result thereafter.

Hi just curious as to how you 'll manage wheel and track speed for amphibious type vehicles, as it stands if you drive into the water with a suitable hull etc and engage propulsion, the simple effect of steering using gimbals causes the wheels/tracks to overspeed and fail, even with reduced damage effect. The same thing happens when moving vehicles with vessel mover while neglecting to apply the brakes first. Obviously all that concerns us is how it works in the water not how it works while being moved. Is there a reason that an over speed cap could not be applied? After all there's no way that even an unloaded track could have so little friction that it would allow a motor over speed, As i discovered to my cost years ago, it takes a lot more oomph to push something on tracks than it does to move the same mass with wheels (don't build overweight small tracked vehicles children) But back to the water thing, perhaps a check to see if wheel is immersed and reduce the power or apply an over speed cap. if i recall most paddle type tyres have an ideal speed rating for water use above which you just start to pump air, and aerating the water surrounding the wheel instead of providing traction, so maybe the speed cap makes more sense. I note in KF thread that you already require that a portion of the wheel to be above the surface, so you've probably nailed all this already Cheers

Hi. It's actually sorta done, just a bit (lies! IT'S VERY ) glitchy which is why nobody's seen it along with a load of iffy stuff i wont even share with the poor testers, when i get it sorted I'll drop it in. It was suggested a long while ago by v8jester I think, I really like making the stuff more versatile so it's a done deal really.

On the list, unsurprisingly, if you have big boats you need little boats to look after them etc, there's a tonne of eye candy stuff that could be added along the same lines, if IR and KAS play nice together (as one part) i fancy working davits/boat lifts. but yeah they'll appear slowly

Tis a funny thing what you find while waiting for a game to update, especially bearing in mind whats already posted above, 4 hours ago posted by sal on steam The link is the same as the just not yet one , admittedly it's ancient but given the general acceptance around here that KSP wont have MP anytime soon it seems a bit odd to be stating something seemingly a little different on Steam For my part I've enjoyed some MP games and hated others. so although it'd be neat to share a game or a station build with others, it not being available or even really possible in real time will never be a show stopper for me. now I'm in trouble

Hi it''s not really normal, though i was unaware of any debug option that writes log messages on the loading screen, i do know of a mod that does, Exception detector , and it looks very much as you describe. That said the missing module will be just that , and a mod of some type is looking for it's other parts, in some mods there are add on parts that you don't need but will produce that little error if they are not installed. A look at your KSP.log would show exactly whats going on and what could not be found

@HardZiin03 A quick search of the forum will show you that mod packs, that is, a collection of other mod makers works distributed by a third party( that'll be you btw). are extremely unpopular with KSP mod developers and the forum users in general has shown no love for such creation. It puts an unnecessary burden of support on the mod creator as your mod collection may not perform in the most awesome manner on another machine, leading to erroneous bug reports. I actually can't recall in 5 years of using this forum anyone ever making it past the "here is my modpack" stage before finding out that they're as welcome as the drugs squad at a rave . But far more importantly. any mod that is released or displays itself on the forum is licensed, some very restrictively and some not so much, but in general you can take it as read that if you don't actually have written permission (provable) to distribute a mod from it's creator then you simply can't do it A recommended mod list is fine but a mod pack is definitely not. If you want to actually make a mod you wont find a more helpful bunch than you have here, there are literally hundreds of tutorials to help you on your way, it'll be a lot more welcomed than repackaging something you have little or no right to

@V8jester@XOC2008All very doable and fits in with the improvement plan for the next update, which will not be anytime soon btw for anyone one else reading.(However as testers you guys will see them soonish) Other projects, as you know, currently occupy the work and head space. As for the nodes issues, malfuncs are simply wrong, the nodes on the supers haven't changed apart from size since Laythe created them. Med hull b's nodes are right for the hull as it was set up, but the others aren't , as the hulls are incorrectly rotated to start with. The med hull needs a birthday all around I've had a play with mesh As i've mentioned before it's a lot easier to make parts than deal with all the little issues of already created parts, in some ways it's a very onerous task, and sometimes just simply work and not fun at all. I'll get through them all eventually, just don't hold your breath. Too many irons in too many fires

Hi wow slow reply must stick a follow back on this thread, anyway what looks like is happening in your pic is exactly the same problem i have. In that the whole object rotates, Instead of the hinge part rotating around the fixed mesh. Now here's the odd thing if i create two cylinders in unity and slap together a rudimentary rotatron , then drop both object under a game object, give it cfg load it up and it works perfectly, base stays still and the spinny bit spins. now the models imported from elsewhere have exactly the same hierarchy and parenting and yet as yours do, when loaded , they rotate the whole model instead of rotating around the named fixed mesh. Once again with this I'm missing something obviously, but apart from part names and where they came from they are hierarchically identical. Sticking at it here, if you manged to sort it out let me know how , and what the obvious error is