Jump to content

Joe 2.0

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Joe 2.0

  1. Joe 2.0
    Hey, so I'em encountering a problem where when I try and install Tantares LV, only the N1 shows up. Any suggestions?
  2. Joe 2.0
    I'm totally in support of a dedicated turbine part. It just makes sense, I mean, the Harrier (Most successful VTOL Aircraft) and the YAK-38 (A close second) have used a centrally located turbine redirecting thrust through nozzles, the main difference is KSP being that you can't vector the nozzles. So, yeah. separate Turbine part would be a boon to the game. Making multiple turbines would be even better, replacing the current jet engine parts, and repurposing the current nozzle parts as being secondary to the turbine. So, a high degree vectoring nozzle could be attached to any turbine, with different effects, and vice versa.
  3. Joe 2.0
    Hey, Beale. I know you're pretty set on keeping this pack from using dependencies, but since you already have Non-Androgynous Docking Ports but no reason for having them, here's something for you to look at: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79128 It supports making docking ports only able to dock to a port of the opposite gender, thereby making your active and passive ports actually serve a purpose.
  4. Joe 2.0
    You might actually be attaching it upside down. If I'm correct (and I might not be) the top of the parachute acts as a stack separator.
  5. Joe 2.0
    Just checked, no duplicated install. Just the one.
  6. Joe 2.0
    So, I'm currently having a problem where I cannot unlock parts in the R&D center after installing the mod, and parts that should be added by things like contracts are not showing up. Only happens after installing KAS. Anyone else have this happen?
  7. Joe 2.0
    Blackheart, You are awesome. I won't be using this capsule for landings much (not as a lander anyways. Maybe as an air-droppable Ker-bal stor- er, housing.) so a Service Module would get a ton of use.
  8. Joe 2.0
    [quote name='BananaDealer;1067744 @Joe 2.0' date='[/b'] Again, you're missing my point. The STS has a standard "bridge" cockpit design/layout. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/STSCPanel.jpg With panels on the dashboard and on the ceiling above the windows, much like any modern aircraft. As for the windows- the same applies to the shuttle's cockpit as it applies to a regular capsule (and any high-flying aircraft). Having a bubble-type layout would simply be impractical. I'm not sure why you're even arguing with me since we both share the same opinion- a "bridge" design for the IVA would be awesome.
  9. Joe 2.0
    Ah, but the caveat you're missing here is that this is not real life. This is a game, which in no way, shape, nor form models the stresses put on windows during re-entry. Hence, your argument is moot, and I'm still really excited to see this Capsule's IVA when completed. Addendum: If you're still set on ragging on the grid-windows, I present to you the windscreen of the Space Shuttle. It has the same number of windows (six) layed out in a curved line much as this capsule has, with another two atop: http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/iss_11_24/i12_028388.jpg. I might digress and say the midline of the Taurus' windows should have more space akin to the shuttle, but it's good As-is in my opinion.
  10. Joe 2.0
    So, I'm curious, do these come in 3.5 (3.75?) meter size to fit with the new stock tanks? You have no idea how amazing that would be if they did. Actualyl you probably do, but that's beside the point.
  11. Joe 2.0
    I'm not talking about the windows. Look at the control panels. They're set up like the 'dash' you were describing earlier, much more similar to an aircraft rather than a traditional capsule's 'Great Wall of Gauges' (or MFD's in this case). But, on the subject of the windows, I think they oughta be kept. They give the capsule a very unique feel and look to it, and it'll make the IVA that much more different and interesting, rather than just another Apollo/Mercury-throwback IVA. Simply put, it'll stand out, and I like it for that.
  12. Joe 2.0
    I have a feeling that this pod's going to have a Shuttle-esque IVA, so I'm not sure a Mk. 1-2 style IVA would work. Take for instance the Orion CEV's cockpit (http://collectspace.com/review/orion_interior01.jpg http://collectspace.com/review/orion_windows01.jpg), which shares more similarities with NASA's shuttle cockpit than any previous capsule. I personally think that this IVA will give us a great field of view for docking, and will allow for some beautiful views while underway on those crazy IVA-only missions in comparison to previous capsules.
  13. Joe 2.0
    Dowloaded this and took it for a little try-run with a jury rigged Orion-alike service module. Used Procedural fairings to cover up the thinner part of the service module, and the stock SLS as my lifter. It flies like a dream, lemme tell ya. I can't wait to see the IVA's for this baby.
×
×
  • Create New...