PolecatEZ

I was a game designer for several years before management. I understood coding enough to know what was basically possible and what was not. I also understood texturing and art assets enough to know that artists needed to be periodically beaten or they would bloat their texture files to untenable sizes. That's the games industry for you though, 150-200 people working on a project, and about 1/4 of the managers ever actually knowing what is going on. You'd be shocked at the shear amount of waste that goes into your typical AAA game...the fans think its some great magic being made, when the miracle really lies in the fact that anything gets made at all given the chaos and politics. I purposely avoided learning programming until this point for 2 basic reasons - #1 I was already annoying enough imposing on the design team, I'm sure the programmers were happier being left alone. #2 Design done right, and management done right, are already massive skill sets, to pick up programming when I had perfectly good programmers to do my bidding would have been a waste. Anyways, settled on making a "core mod" project to make a teaser sampler of all the different good mods that are out. I'll post the full manifesto in the working section. Basic idea would be to gather together the best mods, strip them of all redundant parts, interconnect them where feasible using each other's modules, and then balance all parts to Squad's precedents. Sort of like the KSPX manifesto with much looser rules. Mod makers would have to do nothing except give permission, and Core users would be directed to get the "full version" or "realism balanced version" of whichever parts they like best. Hopefully most mod-makers would be on board, but many are very touchy about their stuff...especially the "realism" fans. This would also keep the resource thing from spiraling out of control and have a lot of other benefits to the lay user as well as future mod-makers. Anyways... Oh yeah, BTW, in one of the recent versions I downloaded, all torque had disappeared completely from pods, making stock aircraft un-flyable. I'll check again in a minute to see if that was fixed. ------ Yep, torque was wiped out. Even going very easy on the throttle you still can't get the mustang or sabre more than 30 meters without wobbling off the runway. Having Farram installed fixes the issue, but you should mention that users need this mod then to make your pods work.

Having your plugin installed breaks up mighty aircraft carriers, twisting them into wreckage upon load from a game save, as well as other wonkiness. Any way to make the environment loading less "violent"? Basically, Lazor.dll does not play nice with deployed InfiniteDice's carriers. Any time you come within loading range (as set by the settings thingy) or upon load of any game save, the physics engine causes them to crack up on the surface or teleport straight to the ocean floor. Without Lazors installed, Squads physics loads don't sink ships. Anyways, my dream of a fully functioning carrier, complete with missile-armed fighters, will need to wait.

Thanks for the quick way to pull stuff. It is a royal PitA though to figure out which things do what. I did get the tail rudder working great. I was also messing with a way to get theme aircraft without massive texture overload, so I was messing with adding flags to things like wings. The catch is that flags are rectangles, textures are square, so something gets skewed. The only solution would be for Squad and all future modmakers to start using a standard convention when modeling and assigning textures, and include "logo" areas as well as general "materials" to swap out in different channels. It would save sooooo much memory to just have a catalog of materials rather than individual 1-2mb textures for every freaking object in the game. Anyways, here is a shot that encapsulates a few different things going on: At least for now I can clean up some of the uglier stuff, as soon as I figure out how to rip apart the texture files...you can tell I'm new at this. I was a producer for several AAA game titles but never touched code or graphics before, just game design.

Before I asked here on the forums about the texture switcher, I thought I'd do it myself. If you just dig out the model target names out of the .mu file, it works for most things. I am, however, having trouble with wings. Eventually I figured out that if I just target parts, like "aileron" or "wing" then I get a partial switch off the swatch. Question is, how do I target the whole damned thing...especially the F-86 wings. Do you have a master list for your parts so I can add in the FSTextureSwitch code for everything, or is there an easier way to peak in .mu files to get what I need? The texture switcher, or something like it, is actually a pretty big deal...one step closer to the beauty that is the Spore creator...now all we need is dynamic sizing for parts. So, for starters, I've already switched out the default wing skin to what I want...but I still want to dynamically change it. You can also see the fuselage skin is a quick mockup to test the texture switcher. I basically have it already to varying degrees on all the cockpits and fuselage sections. Wings have proven to be a pain in the ass. But using "wing" as my target, this is what I get. If you give me the list, I'm more than willing to add it to all your parts. If you tell me how to rip it from the Squad stock parts, I'll do them also. I really want to see my fugly fighters turn into something beautiful. Cheers.

To whom it may concern, I just added your module to selected carrier parts from InfiniteDice, and also switched some of his resource system (SpareParts) and re-translated them for RocketParts. Do I have permission to release the parts mash-up from your side. I will leave filenames and folder structure intact for your proper credit. BTW, carrier decks make for completely awesome manufactories. Now if we could only get some way to fry an aircraft you don't want to re-translate it into RocketParts.

Oh np man, be sure to get the one in the carrier thread with the airplane on the deck also. Can't find it now, but it exists.

I finally abandoned the project due to just general bugginess which I won't blame on any one modmaker. For a glorious few hours, my dream was realized though...until I tried to save, or just randomly got eaten by the kraken, or sometimes it even just poofed and disappeared. The good though is that the Firespitter bomber makes a great dirigible body, the side opening doors for the carrier are perfect for airborne craft, and you only need 4 hexathingies to comfortably lift a carrier. Here's a few screenies: In the carrier thread I posted a few also from the previous trials...yes the arrest hook/wire thing works wonders for the very short air carrier decks. A few limitations: - Can't save over water, bad things happen. - Must be anchored to save - meaning land and takeoff also. Operation limited to 50m off the terrain. - VERY sensitive to weight shifts. I was constantly adjusting the buoyancy even with a 500 ton test weight and only moving a 3 ton aircraft around the deck. Computerized assist would be awesome. - Wonky carrier parts means that construction can't be mirrored. Kerbals still have freeze bug walking on deck, getting stuck in cracks between parts. - Stopping is a PAIN. It takes years to slow down from 50m/s. I used 12 air brakes from Firespitter mod and it cut the time in half, but still took forever. - Dropping anchor at >10m/s risks tearing the anchor off...then you're screwed. I started keeping spare anchors in storage. - Despite freezing the lift factor in order to save, the whole craft will eventually settle to the ground when you aren't looking. Don't stop over uneven terrain or you might fly your scout back to a nasty surprise. - Cool factor is still a 9.5...thank you makers of Firespitter, carrier parts, and Hooligan for making this happen. Cheers guys.

Apache Nose, Gyroscope, and all 4 cockpits for sure, I'll figure out some way to get them to you in the morning. I had them all cut and pasted into a message for you, but the system said no...5000 character limit. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nz7tsm9492ms6yy/ZsgAXFjjWH

Snjo, just wanted to let you know I've updated a lot of things about your mod pack. All the cockpits got put in line with the new torque system for starters. ASAS/SAS modules were redone according to new logic also. There were a few other miscellaneous fixes as well. I'll zip them up and send them to you tomorrow...tired for now. I couldn't find the module nor fix it to make the floaty landing gear retract...was it meant to?

You're lucky, my drops are starting at 500m. It actually doesn't damage the carrier much, but it does leave it flipped upside down when it gets out of the deep ocean.

Worked like a mother-effing charm. The Macross III is on shakeout trials now. Having some issues with the winches now, but I think it'll be ok. After 2 days of slamming my head on the keyboard, this is absolutely beautiful.

I've basically been pulling my hair out for two days trying to figure out why your blimps won't play nice with InfiniteDice's carrier parts. Just one time I actually got the airborne carrier deck to fly off into the ocean, anchor it, and was able to land a few test craft on it easily. However, after that NOTHING worked. Some kind of data is clogged somewhere that basically freezes my crafts when using more than one hecto. It basically locks up, goes up 1m/s but never comes down, and refuses to acknowledge that engines are firing no matter where I put them on the model. Here's some screenies from the successful ones... And then after that begins the fail: Basically everything just kind of locks up and freezes in mid air. All I get out of control responses is a very slooowwwwww rise, less than 1m/s. You can see in the pic I tried to sink it back down to earth and its just kind of frozen in mid air. When I put engines on it, even massive amounts of engines, it might spin in circles a bit, but there is no forward motion. So, want to try to figure out which is the issue...carrier parts or balloons?

My observation while testing this thing was that now you actually need control fins to compensate for missing torque. I see the zepto rockets above have no fins. You used to not need them, now you need them. There's a reason for control fins in real life. All old designs will need a bit of tweaking. The old ASAS and SAS modules now weigh a lot more, and are completely unnecessary on smaller craft now. Control surfaces (fins especially) are now necessary to compensate for changes in the torque system. Put some fins on your rockets.

It saves you fuel because the relay ship/shuttle is very small, while the cycler is very large and equipped for long trips. In real life, this is a massive "mass" difference, which translates to a lot of fuel savings for manned trips.

Its not a particularly hard thing for the game to do, the problem is you have to do all the math and timing by hand to make it work. So far, nobody has released a mod that calculates waypoints for starting up your Aldrin cycler.

You can actually plant a flag on Jool as well. It doesn't last more than a few hours though for some reason, it will just randomly disappear later.

Dude, you're doing it wrong. All those intakes are useless at high altitudes. You need the blue glowy ones, those work up high. The big scoops, turbines, and nacelles currently serve no useful purpose other than aesthetics. With a 3:1 or 4:1 Intake:Engine ratio and carefully reducing your throttle, you should be able to keep the engines active well into the 30-32km range. Also, you seem a bit over-engined - make the last engine a single rear engine in the center, this should also protect you from flameouts.

Your lift also effects your angle of attack, not just takeoff, so it is important all the way into the start of the upper atmosphere. Your angle of attack then plays into a few things, such as fuel economy and climb speed. Having plenty of lift makes the difference between an SSTO getting to 30km in 3-4 minutes vs. 20 minutes.

Yes. Landing gear shows in VAB/SPH as having .5 tons each. Once you spawn on the runway, they are weightless or nearly so.

There's an entirely separate space center somewhere in the mountains due west of KSC. Also, Crater Island has really good scenery (just land on the highest plateau, roll off the edge into the ocean to take off again.)

I'd love your permission to add these to the Kerbalife Catalogue when I update it to complement the Elephant (180 to 220 tons) and Mammoth (240 to 500 tons) series. I see another naturalist has taken an interest in organic design

My general rules for aircraft and SSTO design: Wing Count = 1 "lift unit" per 2 tons for a high altitude screamer, 4 units per ton for low altitude glider. This does not include flaps. Changing angles on the wings will throw this off, do so with caution. At around 5000m check your angle of attack (angle difference between your pro-grade and your nose) at level flight. If you're at full throttle, this should be no more than 5-10 degrees. If the gap is bigger, you need more wing. Wing Placement = Always place so Center of Mass is overlapping Center of Lift, just forward of it (the two spheres should touch, with the CoM in front) - when you get better at design you can loosen this rule up a bit. Landing Gear Placement = Place the rear wheel set centered on the center of mass so the back wheel is just barely behind the CoM. If the plane tips over backward on the runway, bump the rear gears backward just a hair in the SPH and try again. Shania gave another great tip about the forward gear placement. Pro-tip: These do NOT count for your weight outside of the SPH, on the runway they are weightless. Turbojets = For SSTO you want 1 per 10 tons. For atmospheric aircraft, 1 per 15-20 tons is sufficient (thought more is always better, speed rocks!). Rockets = For SSTO aircraft, provided you followed the other rules, you want 60-75 kN of thrust (about 1 LV-909 or NIRVA) per 10 tons. Using LV-30's or Toroidals you can use 1 per 30 tons max. Round up. Rocket Fuel = At the time you flip on your rockets, you'll want about 1200 dV bare minimum to make orbit and subsequently de-orbit. 1600 dV is a safer amount for SSTO noobs. More dV lets you do more things. Intakes = For a moderately challenging SSTO, 4 intakes per engine is good. Fewer make for greater challenge, more makes for it being too easy. Do not waste time with anything other than Ramjets for SSTO. For Atmospheric Fighters, use any intake you want, 1 intake of any type per engine is sufficient. If you follow these principles, you cannot make a bad airplane, ever. It will take off and fly every time. Nearly every common problem can be traced to one of the items above. Check out my cataloge below for some examples.

It was very friendly sarcasm, as far as I'm concerned the "mass to orbit" number is probably the only useful metric for now while everything is sandbox. Efficiency is just bragging rights. Low part count is helpful insofar as the final stage can be kept ~120 parts or less, as dropping stages rapidly lowers the part count. I'd like to build a master catalogue of lifters with a whole range of 20-320 tons. There's currently a gap between the Zenith and Mammoth series (180-240 tons), and a small gap before the Zenith series.

One easy way to see its theoretical max capacity is to install either Mechjeb or Engineer. - Pull up the Delta-v listing by stages. - Add mass to the payload (doesn't matter what, fuel tanks are easiest) until all "carrying stages" total ~4700 dV. - Pull off those carrying stages and look at the mass number of your payload. If you're feeling feisty, you can test it then, but at least we'll have some idea.

I divided delivered payload by full stock weight of the launch vehicle without the payload.