nothke

Whenever you build a model, you should think about how to map it before you start. Especially if you have many repeating or hard-to-map-later surfaces. And it depends how do you want the texture to look like. If every fin needs to be different texture (I don't mean texture file, but I mean.. paint), you'd have to map each. If you want the fins to have same texture, do the mapping first and then array it. If the whole thing is one plain color, it really doesn't matter. If you want to do an occlusion map on plain color, auto unwrap is good. If you want to do an occlusion map on a texture, well.. then you'll have to think one more step further

Ok, this is difficult. Not really difficult but I don't know where to look. Things I need are pretty simple, but I don't know how to script them: 1. I just need to get it to show up all the time. 2. I need to place it in on a coordinate. I see that you make an object in relation to the runway, but how to just write in the coordinates? 3. How to add multiple objects and not just one and to draw the model.mu for eg. from folders inside PluginData/Buildings?

Ok, I've managed to get it working inside the PartModule and putting the name in cfg. But how do I make it part-independant? So that it shows up always without a part needed?

Ok, I understand. But I am new to scripting. How do I compile that script? Can I do it in Unity mono developer?

Is it possible? And how? I can't find any mods that add buildings. I would like to make a White Sands/Edwards/Mojave-type airport in the Kerbin desert.

Yes, if they are in approximately same orbit. But to change direction in orbit requires lots of ÃŽâ€V. ISS eg. orbital speed is 7800m/s

I agree with everything Nibb says! Future warfare is really 99% about information, and 1% about direct action. Everything is getting more and more distant and more and more automated. Hacking, making computer viruses, modifying systems to fail (Stuxnet), pinpointing exact locations of people in real time is future warfare... While direct action is really a total superiority, bullets will soon turn into guided missiles for taking out individual targets. Nanotechnology could make viruses that attack only specific DNA etc.. (read: Emerging Technologies) And don't forget that the warfare in last ~40 years is very asymmetric. Right now, US spends 4 times the money China spends on military, plus US has 10 the worlds top Universities, that's a huge advantage (I am not from US so I am not trying to be biased). So, the future of warfare is pretty boring!! That's why Starwars looked back on WW1 and WW2, those were the last wars when the forces were symmetric and there was lots of hand to hand combat. Starwars is not supposed to be realistic, it's trying to be FUN! (and I have nothing against that, I love Starwars!) That is also the reason why most war video games are set in WW2. NOW, there is another side to future warfare and that's that famous Einstein's quote "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." So, imagine if all the high tech stuff was obliterated in some major conflict, then forces would need to improvise with what they have left, and therefore, it might be interesting to see that! For example, there's a lot of space ships, but no mechjeb!! xD Now fight in orbit without it!

I remember that since I've learned about isolated systems in physics classes, I don't think I ever thought about if there are stationary points. I remember that simple example of a person walking inside the train. Relative to the ground , the person moves at 125kmh. but the train moves at 120kmh so he actually walks at 5kmh relative to the train. (taking into account he moves in the direction of the train). If he dropped a ball inside the train, the ball would fall just like it would while stationary, it wouldn't move in relation to the train, but it would move at 120kmh in relation to the ground. So everithing inside the train is an isolated system uninfluenced from the outside (ideally), and the train is a member in the Earth isolated system. That's how the astronauts move at 12000 km/h in orbit in relation to ground but look stationary in relation to spacecraft. So the whole universe is like a subsystem of subsystems of isolated systems. But that's not true, cause in reality there are no isolated systems, everything influences everything, but IS are just a simplification of how can we humans simplify the universe so we could look at it in relation to something And since the universe is expanding it is pointless to look for stationary points

It is not actually hard to transfer fuel in space if you have well designed mechanism.. The actual problem with fuel transfer in KSP that is unrealistic, is the breaking of Newton's third law.. Every action has a reaction. So, if you move fuel from one side of the ship to the other, you are moving the mass, therefore, the ship would react and move into the opposite way. Imagine you were on a small boat and you tried to jump to another boat, the boat you are jumping from would move back and most likely, if you have E in physics, you would splash in water in between the boats as a punishment. Now what you see in KSP would be as if the boat was nailed in stone, the ship doesn't move at all. Therefore, you can exploit this error like Scott Manley did in that fuel transfer video. IRL, fuel transfers would probably be slow cause you don't want to make ship jump around during transfers. The same reasons why robotic arms move so slow.

A long long time ago, in our galaxy, right here beside us, before sun existed, the whole solar system was just this solar dust cloud (popularly called a nebula). And so, since all the matter attracts due to gravity, this cloud started to collapse into it's center (where the net gravity is strongest).. And so... Just like when you release the lid (is that the right English word?) in your bathtub, and the water starts spinning in one direction (direction is irrelevant and depends on circumstances), due to inter-molecular collisions, that is the same reason why that collapsing dust starts also spinning.. And in the same way the pizza guy makes the thin disc of dough by spinning it on the finger (lets imagine all pizzamakers do that), in this way the dust cloud forms a disc, In the mean time the dust compresses in the center so much that it is capable of sustaining fission (star), and the disc, due to "clearing up" of it's neighboring boulders become rocky planets. As for gas giants, these are gas clouds that didn't have enough mass to sustain fission. In reality, none of the planets have the same inclination, and that is mostly due to this "clearing up", or collisions with objects, that ultimately make planets. Scientist today think that moon was formed when a huge asteroid collided with Earth. That collision might've also changed inclination slightly. And that is exactly why the galaxy is a disc too just on a bigger scale. Sorry for bad English, but in short, that's it PS. And by "equatorial" you probably mean in-line with Earth's orbit around sun. It's not aligned with equator, neither is equator with the Earth's orbit around sound. Earth has 23 degrees axis tilt. The extreme case might be Uranus, whose axis tilt is 97 degrees, almost normal to the orbit towards the sun.. This is most probably also due to collisions and early formation And how do we know all this actually happened?? We look at other stars and nebulae and we see how they are forming.

To me, both of the programs are silly.. When I heard Constellation is canceled, I thought.. No way, all those R&D they've done is going down the drain? I have a feeling they will just rewrite some papers and resurrect the program.. What exactly happened. The only difference is the slightly different program and Shuttle derived launchers. ConsteSLSation xD But in my opinion the only guy who profits here is Elon Musk, and that guy has BALLS! He wants to make launchers that return to the launch complex and land... That is crazy! And not just crazy like "mad", but they'll actually do it! The government should give all the resources to him and combine Const.-SLS-Orion knowledge with SpaceX. Then they should build very reliable, reusable and cheap launchers. After that you can go anywhere you want

When I started following space missions, Mike Fincke was my favorite, but now it's gotta be Chris Hadfield.. I mean, they named a street and a high school by his name!

Some people just want to watch tax dollars burn. PS. I really had no idea there were THAT many failures!

This is a very interesting subject for me. First off, I am NOT religious. I never had any connection to religion before my 18s, cause I was brought up in a post-socialist country and my parents or my surroundings look at religion in a "churches are nice buildings" way. however I have deep respect for religious people, and I have been visiting a religious camp every year for at least a week. It has cleared up many things in the way I think about the world. And through all my reflection in the camp about religion, faith, etc. , if I cut the story short, I can say that, if someone is religious or not is really the matter of how you were brought up by your parents and/or surroundings. I have found much much more understanding with religious people then I have ever been with non-religious, and they completely understand why they are religious and why they chose to believe.. Just like me, I chose not to, but I perfectly understand both sides Now science and faith are for me 2 different subjects. Science is really about finding HOW things are happening, the technical approach, while faith is about WHY do things happen, the meaning. Bible is not supposed to be a technical book that says world is created literally in 7 days, IT IS JUST A STORY!!! Also don't forget that the book was written 2000 years ago, for people who lived then, who didn't know about "the internets" xD. How many times I've got into a discussion WITH RELIGIOUS PEOPLE about why does God prefer Abel who grows crops over Cain who eats meat, then they go like "God tells us to be vegetarians". Nooooo, that's just a story! It's the story about sin, about not being able to accept defeat, not being able to forgive, about how jealousy is destructive, a wonderful story about life which could help us face similar situations in our life. I mean, God could've said, draw me a painting and one would paint red, and one black, and God picks red cause he simply prefers red xD In some cases, these misunderstands create fanatics who are also responsible for wars, people strong in faith are not responsible for wars I mean, Bible is a great book, so many wonderful stories with a message, but that's it, it's a fairy tale, a good book. Les Miserables is a good book too, although there is no official religion that supports it. And IMO, if you ask does God exists?, ask yourself.. When you don't want to be hungry, what do you do? You look for food to eat/replenish energy. When you don't want to be thirsty? You look for water to drink. And when you don't want to be confused... You look for meaning! We humans love giving meaning to everything cause we are "dying" in curiosity and we need to give meaning to anything chaotic.. And the inability to understand existence or death is why we have created God, perhaps two biggest problems for our sanity, and then you find comfort in god cause you have finally found meaning of life. And over time, it turns into "religion" as a social institution, cause we find even more comfort when we see other people believe the same thing.

Yes, but in my case, the top of the pod was unattachable (heat shield was on top) and I designed the whole ship to looked sleek and sexy =) But then I had to create a 2-truss structure on the hull to just be able to place docking port/probe. And that is just absolutelly silly. It would be still better to have some sort of invert button.. I mean, I can fly it no problem, but mechjeb can't

I have a problem! When I place my pod upside down on the rocket, mechjeb is impossible to use, especially ascent AP cause he thinks that the rocket should go other way.. Pro-retro grade is also inverted.. To go around this problem I need to make a probe pointed up and select "control from here". It would be great if there was "invert controls" option in AAP! Is there a way to do it right now that I don't see or not?

Pozdrav iz Zrenjanina! Nisam ni znao da ima ovoliko naÅ¡ih da nisam video ovaj post sa naslovne strane foruma xD Svega 2 nedelje igram KSP, ali brzo sam nauÄÂio sve poÅ¡to sam igrao Orbiter par godina unazad pa sam znao kako funkcionuÅ¡e fizika, orbite i deltaV matematika, a i obožavam sve u vezi svemira... InaÄÂe sam moder (3d i teksture) tako da ćete uskoro videti nekoliko sitnih modova, a možda se i prikljuÄÂim nekim grupama poÅ¡to vidim da dosta odliÄÂnih modova ima dosta loÅ¡e ili neapdejtovane modele. =) U KSP sam na poÄÂetku poÄÂeo izgradnju velike stanice sliÄÂne ISS, i zavrÅ¡io je za par dana (prekinuo poÅ¡to je poÄÂelo da laguje previÅ¡e), i razmenjivao sam posadu sliÄÂno Soyuzovim expeditionima (Neki Kerbali su leteli dvaput). Spustio se na Mun (iliti.. Musec??), ali nisam imao dovoljno benzina da se vratim pa sad pripremam spasilaÄÂku misiju, posle toga pravim permanentnu bazu na Minmusu, a posle beyond. Mada prestajem da igram poÅ¡to sam zauzet u RL. Prva dva dana nisam instalirao modove, ali onda sam ubacio mechjeb, i ne mislim uopÅ¡te da je previÅ¡e lako ili da je loÅ¡. Pre ga gledam kao skraćivanje vremena i omogućava mi da se fokusiram na skapanje i optimizovanje letelica (ili surfovanju po netu xD) nego na lansiranje i letenje. Pogotovo na dosadno hvatanje taÄÂkica po navball-u. Zato smart A.S.S skraćuje muke sa prograde, retrograde i ostalim jednostavnim funkcijama. A opet imaÅ¡ kontrolu poÅ¡to možeÅ¡ da iskljuÄÂiÅ¡ kad oćeÅ¡. Ovaj novi c9 airplane pack rastura! OdliÄÂni su cargo bayevi, može se napraviti odliÄÂan Å¡atl da nosi 2m module, a ja ih trenutno koristim za prototip "Ä‘ubretara" zvanog DEDER vehicle iliti Debris Deorbiting Robotic vehicle za uklanjanje smeća iz orbite =). Probao sam nova punch i kw rocketry ali neÅ¡to mi ima previÅ¡e delova pa sam obrisao gomilu koja mi ne treba. Edit: e da, odliÄÂan je i ovaj Deadly Reentry, baÅ¡ pravi dodatni izazov, moraÅ¡ da stavljaÅ¡ termalnu zaÅ¡titu, da se snabdevaÅ¡ usporavajućim padobranima i da gaÄ‘aÅ¡ ulazak u atmos pod Å¡to manjim uglom =) A i divota je gledati kad namerno oboriÅ¡ stanicu =), Å¡teta Å¡to nema nekih boljih trajnijih efekata da ostavlja trag kao meteor u ÄŒeljabinsku xD

This is a concept for developers I posted in the other post by Custard Donut (In Space). But it is indeed Kerbal Artwork =) Right.. There are few mistakes like "exploaded" and "tesbed", and English is not my first language so writing is not perfect, but I think I set the right tone.

In .cfg there is // --- node definitions --- // definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z node_stack_bottom = 0, -2.5, 0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0 Actually there's another hidden parameter, attachment size. If you add "2" at the end of the line the attachment size will change to 2, like this: node_stack_bottom = 0, -2.5, 0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 and this is how it looks in VAB: The part is much stronger with 2! Also note that the number is integer, so if you put "2.0" the game will crash, always write "2"

I agree, it would be nice to have in-style bi- and tri-couplers for engines. I am currently using inverted s2 intake to go from s2 wide to s2, which is ridiculous.. And those holes are perfect for fitting engines in! And I am currently using 2m adapter and NP tricoupler for engines Attachment points should be changed to "2" type (already said that)

I think it's a big problem with attachments.. Why are all attachments size 1? Most of the attachments need to be size 2. Trusses help just a bit, but I don't like using trusses much cause it ruins the sleek look and beauty of this mod!

OMG! Sorry sorry sorry about criticizing you! That's awesome!!! I didn't know you could do that... Now let's prepare for IVA only flights =)

Sorry but I have to give one big critique! When I saw the shots, I was like.. WOOOW I could stay in this cockpit forever and never get out.. And then I see... That I don't actually "SEE"! WHY CAN'T YOU SEE WHATS IN FRONT IN IVAs?? To me, that's the whole purpose of having cockpits.. Right? To actually see the runway you are landing on! Now it's so unenjoyable to have an IVA-only flight cause it would be instrument only.. The only solution is to lean the cockpit forward, which loses the whole fuselage smoothness. Here's Jeb trying to strech his neck to see anything... That's how a shuttle cockpit looks like: mk2 cockpit is perfect... But then, there's a huge navball blocking the view.. WHYYYYYYYY???? Oh, btw.. Everything else is amazing!

I'm out of my words.. But if I had them it, they would only say awesome awesome awesome! I think you just set a new benchmark for KSP modding xD

IT'S ALIIIIVE!!! THANK YOU VERY MUCH TIBERION!!! Got it working, it was the "legacy" type that was the MAIN problem (cause most tutorials show unity when the legacy was the only one), but still it didn't work even after that.. Weirdly enough, I just had to nudge the length frames slider and it worked! And I got it that it MUST show if you check "play automatically" and preview it in game screen (it didn't before nudging). Just you need to remember to uncheck "play automatically" before export Start and end GUI text work perfectly, as well =) I will post a video when I finish the mod =)