datubaman

Wow, that's a pretty good looking tank. I do have a question, though. How do you keep flipping the tank over every time you try to turn it? I've tried using the big road wheels on my vehicles and every time I try to turn it it just goes all Peppy Hare on me. Also, how well does it do under fire?

Union Dynamics would like to announce that we have updated our catalog. And so, with this update, we are changing our status from Manufacturer to Company. For a list of the changes made in this update, see our last post. For those wondering about our armored vehicles, those will be taken care of in our next update.

I do apologize that it's taking me so long to get my stuff updated, but things got very hectic irl, i got a new computer, and then almost everything got deleted, but hopefully I will be able to release my newest aircraft today. In the meantime, I want to go over some of the changes to the Union Dynamics company catalog. Before I get into anything else, I want to go over some of the terminology I will be using. When I say something is retired, that means that I am removing it from my catalog and have no intention of reintroducing it later on. If I remove something from the catalog but plan on bringing it back in later on after some reworking, I will refer to it as pulled. Ok? Good, let's begin. To start us off, the sad news. Due to an incident whereupon the properties of Kerbin's atmosphere suddenly and inexplicably changed, things were very briefly thrown into chaos. Fortunately, very few of our products were affected, but a few were. First of all, the A-2 Inverse and the B-2 StormBreaker are both being retired from the catalog. The A-2 is being retired because of severe stability issues when turning at low altitudes. The B-2 is being retired because of several issues, mostly that, before the incident the B-2 was already very prone to having bombs explode inside the bomb bay and the incident only worsened the problem. Sad to see these two go, but we have to let them go. Also, for the mean-time, we will also be pulling the C-1 SkyLifter and the CS-1 Kalvin. The former will be discussed near the end and the latter is experiencing severe issues with the launcher due to the aforementioned incident. Next up, several aircraft currently in the catalog are going to be replaced with newer version. Some of these newer versions are simply the old versions with some of the new parts added on, and some of them are complete and total overhauls, starting from the ground up. So, these new versions are the A-1B, the B-1B, the B-3B Configurations 1 and 2, the F-1B, the F-2B, the F-3B, and the OR-1B. The A-1B is a complete overhaul of the A-1A, but the most important change is a significant increase to it's offensive armament. If you want to see how much ordinance you can carry on an aircraft, look no further. Most everything else is simply new parts and small tweaks. However, I really want to draw some attention to the B-3B for just a moment. The original B-3A SkyFortress was a complete and utter monstrosity of an aircraft. At 646 parts, it was a constant contest to see which would crash first; the aircraft or the game. The B-3B is a completely different animal. The Configuration 1, with the B-3A's original payload of 180 Mk.82 500lb bombs, now comes in at only 554 parts, a 92-part reduction. And the Configuration 2 goes even further. With a payload of 48 Mk.20 Cluster Bombs the part count is further reduced to 412, a whopping 234-part reduction from the B-3A. How 'bout them apples?! And finally, the good stuff. In the next update, we will be bringing in several new and exciting aircraft for all your military needs. First up, we have a new ground attack aircraft, the A-3 Venom. While the A-1 ThunderHammer is slow and methodical, the A-3 Venom is fast, albeit not as heavily armed. Secondly, we have two brand new transport aircraft, the C-2 Executive and the C-3 SkyBus. The C-2 Executive is just what the name implies. It is a small VIP transport that is meant to transport personnel from base to base in small jumps. The C-3 SkyBus is a large transport aircraft that was originally meant to be sold to airlines, but recent events shifted the focus of the project. It is capable of carrying 48 passengers for very long uninterrupted periods. Next, we have the E-1 SkyEye and the E-2 Growler. The E-1 SkyEye is an Airborne Warning and Command System (AWACS) and the E-2 is a dedicated Electronic Warfare Aircraft for jamming/intercepting/disrupting enemy communications and radar. Then we have two new recon aircraft, the OR-3 Gemini, a long range observation aircraft and by far the most unusual aircraft we've ever produced as it has 2 cockpits and 3 fuselages, and the OR-4 StarBlazer, a high-speed, high altitude spyplane that travels at speeds in excess of Mach 3. We'll also be adding in a true flying-wing style stealth bomber, the B-4 DarkStriker. And finally, we have two brand new fighter aircraft, the F/A-4 Excalibur and the F-5 Mustang (both pictured above). The F/A-4 is a multi-role fighter that is equipped to handle both air and ground targets, and the F-5 Mustang is a high-performance air superiority fighter with a mean streak. We hope that, when introduced, they come to serve as a backbone for your military forces. Now, you may have noticed that I have not talked about our most well-known products. Well then, those will be updated soon enough. The next update for the roster after this one will focus on our armored vehicles, as well as an update for the C-1 SkyLifter. That's all for now, until next time, may the skies be clear and the winds be favorable! Tuba Kerman. I just noticed that in the time it took me to type out this novel of a post that I could have actually gone ahead and updated everything. ...oops...

KIS is Kerbal Inventory System, and it's made by the same guys that made Kerbal Attachment System, and in fact, you are now required to download KIS in order to get KAS to work. Also, no more Kethane. Go watch the last episode.

This may seem ironic considering my earlier post about ship designations, but I really think that, as far as munitions go, I think it would be best to allow people to come up with their own names for their own munitions. However, as far as classifying munitions, the method I use is simple. If it's guided, it's a missile, if it's not, it's a torpedo. On another note, my aircraft are almost ready to release. However, I won't be able to come on at all Sunday, so it won't be until Monday until I am able update my aircraft. However, I can tell you right off the bat that at least two of my aircraft are going to be retired, mostly due to the changes to the aero model. I will also be upgrading some of them as well (Those will be marked by having a "B" variant modifier added into their name). Also, HatBat, I had another thought. If you are going to do videos showcasing the different vehicles submitted here, I think that it would be kind of cool to actually have the people who designed them come on and speak about them. *winkwinknudgenudge*

Sorry, I didn't respond because I thought I would be updating my roster sooner. But, yes, I named it the E-1 SkyEye.

Quick question HatBat, have you decided on whether or not you are going to use Kerbinside? Also, on the subject of naming the operation, I think using a non-indicative name would be best, so: Operation Maelstrom. I also have several ideas for more operations, HatBat, and I will PM those with you within the next few days. Also, with the amount of RP I have been doing so far it might be a bit irrelevant, but up until now Union Dynamics has been a Manufacturer. However, I would like to change that, and wish to apply for Company status, which would become effective upon the next update of our roster.

GOOD NEWS! Somewhere along the line I had set aside a folder with almost all of my .craft files in it. While not all of them have all the changes I made on them, they are almost all still there. Except for the battleship, which makes me very, very sad. However, I will be able to get some of them up in the near future. However, I will have to be retired or pulled from the lineup due to the effects of the anomaly. I will probably be uploading my new aircraft within the next few days, which would also include the new B-model variants to several of my existing aircraft. I will then probably work on getting my tanks updated (again), and from there I will probably start working on that battleship (again). Also, Mobius, one of the new aircraft is an AWACS. You get three guesses as to what its name is. First two don't count.

I am in a panic right now because I accidentally deleted a very important save in game and I need to know if there is any way to recover it. It is NOT in the Recycle Bin and I am really at a loss as to what to do. I need to know, is there any way for me to recover it? I would also take this time to suggest that there should be a "recover deleted save" option in KSP, where all deleted saves are moved to a separate folder within the saves folder into which saves marked for deletion would go where they would spend at least 3 days in before being deleted permanently. Please, if I don't recover this save I will have essentially lost several months worth of work. Please help me.

Well this is freaking great. I was messing around with my saves, and it turns out I accidentally deleted the save with a whole bunch of the new ships that I had made, one of which was a functioning battleship. I would be using much stronger language but forum rules prevent me from doing so. It's just... GRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *Bashes head against a wall*

Eagle here. Got mine in 2010. Also a member of the Order of the Arrow.

Plane rescue come in handy? Just what I needed to hear. Well, have you ever heard of Operation Credible Sport? Well... Takeoff's easy, I'm just trying to figure out the landing sequence. EDIT: IT WORKS!

1. I'm having an issue with the autopilot and guard mode not attacking ground targets even though there is still a functioning weapon on the aircraft. This is mostly happening with guns and bombs, but occasionally just happens out of the blue, such as when the target is directly below the aircraft. 2. Could you make it so that when an aircraft has guns that are oriented perpendicular-or at the very least, not in line with-the direction of motion that the aircraft will try pointing the gun towards the target instead of its nose and execute a pylon turn around the target? 3. Did you see my post concerning ECM Pods? Any thoughts? 4. Chaff?

*Roleplay mode engaged* To Hatbat Kerman, CEO of HKA, Is there any idea how many HKA personnel were on site when the KSC was captured? Also, for the sake of data and personnel security, is HKA planning any operations to rescue said personnel? Because we have several aircraft just now entering production that would be of great help if you should need them. Also, may we offer some advice? I assume that you have plenty of files stored at KSC? It may be in your best interest to take the opportunity to retrieve or destroy them during the aforementioned operation if it is to be carried out, which if it is must be done as soon as possible. In other news, though, we going to be updating our catalog soon. Sadly, we don't have our promised capitol ships ready yet, but we are offering updated and improved versions of many of our products as well as some brand new ones as mentioned previously. Would you like us to send you a catalog when it comes out? Anyways, we hope that your situation improves. All of our hearts are with you. Hail probe. From Tuba Kerman, CEO of Union Dynamics *Roleplay mode disengaged* Anyways, I have a question. Can we use the Mk3 mini expansion? I reeeeeeeeeeeally like the look of the airline cockpit it has in it and think it would look great as a cockpit for some of my larger aircraft.

I guess I should have provided pictures...oops... This is the AN/ALQ-99 And this is the AN/ALQ-131

Hey, Baha, I had an idea for the ECM Pods. As for the ECM Pods to include, you should use the AN/ALQ-99 and the AN/ALQ-131. Now, both of them would work differently. The AN/ALQ-131 would work kind of like the flares do now, in that it is used to break the locks of incoming missiles. The difference is that it can be used repeatedly and it consumes electrical power. Also, unlike flares, the AN/ALQ-131 would also build up heat, very much like a gun would so that, even though it can be used infinitely, you cannot spam it (this also would apply to the AN/ALQ-99). Also, when the ECM Pod is active, However, on important thing to be stated is that the AN/ALQ-131 can only break the locks of missiles targeting the aircraft carrying it. It cannot break the lock of a missile targeting an ally. That's where the AN/ALQ-99 comes in. The AN/ALQ-99 however, is different. While the AN/ALQ-131 is meant to be used as a defensive measure, the AN/ALQ-99 is meant to be used as an offensive measure. The AN/ALQ-99 would function more like a turret in many respects. For one, it would be directional. The ECM Pod has to be facing its target in order to work. Secondly, it can target anything. It can not only target missiles fired at friendlies, it can also target the vehicle that launched them. It can actually be used to temporarily disable the guard mode of an enemy vehicle. It can also target communication devices and prevent them from transmitting data. Also, unlike the AN/ALQ-131, the AN/ALQ-99 generates its own power via a fan in the front of the pod. If this seems OP, don't worry, there are quite a few drawbacks. For one, they're enormous! Secondly, the AN/ALQ-99 isn't always successful. IRL, the AN/ALQ-99 has some very serious reliability issues iirc. Third, the electrical power provided by the AN/ALQ-99 can only be generated while the vehicle is moving, and is proportional to the speed at which the vehicle is moving, which isn't going to be very fast because it also limits the top speed of the vehicle because of how much drag it produces. There could be other ways to balance this thing out, but those will come with testing. Anyways, that's how I would like to see the ECM pods work. By the way, good luck getting any info on these things. It is a real pain.

Thank you very much. I like your "Go to target" suggestion, mostly because it's only a hop, skip, and a jump away from Kerbals being able to call in airstrikes. Also, that's a pretty easy fix, just have it do a speed check before it opens the cargo bays so that if it is above a certain speed it won't open the bays. It'll just display a message saying "Speed too high, Cannot open bays" And also, here's more things to add to the autopilot. 1. Missions- Pulling from the quoted suggestion by tetryds, and going from my own suggestion that it is in reference to, I want to be able to give the autopilot missions. I want to tell the autopilot, "Hey, see that bomber? Don't let it die" or "Hey, see that area over there? Go destroy everything in that area." or "HOLY CRAP! INCOMING FIGHTERS! KILL THEM! KILL THEM!" 2. RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!- Another thing, when things are going unfavorably for it, (it sustains heavy damage, it's low on fuel and ammo, it just fired all of it's missiles and all of them missed, etc.) that the autopilot will try and disengage. When things aren't going well for it, I want the autopilot try try and run away. In connection to the above suggestion, the autopilot will also try and retreat if it fails in it's mission, depending on what that mission is. (This idea came to me when I pit two fighters against each other, and they proceeded to trash every single missile shot and ended up in a gun battle that only ended because one of them ran out of fuel.)

Ok, a few features that need to be added to BDA. 1. A Jettison Command- I would like to be able to jettison bombs and missiles through either action groups or through the Weapons Manager. This is already somewhat possible by setting an action group that fires everything at once, but this is extremely dangerous for obvious reasons. I want to, essentially, be able to drop certain, or all my weapons without actually firing them or arming them. I would also like to see two different kinds of jettison commands, "Jettison All Air-to-Ground" and "Jettison All". 2. Guard Mode Opens/Closes Bay Doors- I would like to see this as a feature of guard mode that, when there are missiles or other weapons held inside of a cargo bay that guard mode would automatically open and close those bomb bay doors when those weapons are selected. 3.ECM Pods- Another kind of countermeasures. Jams the radars of incoming missiles. Can be used infinitely but uses a literal metric crap ton of electrical power, so it can't be used fequently. 4.Improved functionality. for the autopilot- I have to say, I am very impressed by the AI. Bravo, good sir! However, there are a few things I would like to add to it. First off is to the ability to tell the Autopilot, "Hey, you see that place over there? Go fly there." This is something that would make staging massive air battles so much easier. Second, I would like to be able to set the Autopilot to a sort of "Standby" mode where, instead of immediately taking off, it would stay put on the ground until an enemy fighter comes nearby, whereupon it would take off and intercept. Also, better ground collision prevention would be nice. That's all I can think of at the moment. I'll come back later with more.

I think it is due to *dramatic pause* THE KRAKEN!!!

For aircraft, the designation system that I use is a modified version of the 1962 United States Tri-Service aircraft designation system, but feel free to use a different kind of designation system.

Also, I'm having issues with the way bombs drop. I have a large, super-heavy bomber that has two bomb bays, one forward and one aft. Each one carries 90 bombs each. The problem is in the order in which BDArmory decides to drop them. Currently it will drop almost half the bombs in the aft bomb bay before it decides to drop any from the forward bomb bay ( it will occasionally drop, like, maybe two to six from the front before it continues dropping them out of the back again). This causes me problems if I don't drop all my bombs in one pass as I will be left with a rear bomb bay that is almost half empty, a forward bomb bay that is almost completely full, and a bomber that is now getting very front heavy. Is there any way to make them drop in a more uniform pattern instead of the way that it does now?

Also, for another order of business. I'm currently drawing up plans for some capital ships. However, looking at the Spooky Classification System, I noticed a huge problem with it that I just couldn't leave unaddressed. So, I am going to explain what the problem is and what I'm doing to correct it. The big problem with the Spooky Classification System is that it isn't descriptive enough. The purpose of having a designation system is to give an idea as to what sort of characteristics that ship has, and what its role is in the fleet. The Spooky Classification system bases its designations off of the vehicle's mass, which by itself isn't enough to give any idea as to what each ship is supposed to do. And while certain types of ships certainly do lend themselves to having greater masses than other ships, that isn't why they are designated as such. A battleship isn't designated as a battleship because of it's size, but because it is meant to slug it out with other ships. And to do that, it needs to have big guns and heavy armor, which then results in a big ship with more mass. The mass comes with the type, but it does not define it. The ship type tells us what the ship can do, not how big it is. There are a few other problems with it that stem from this. Namely that it manages to have both too many and too few ship types. For having only one descriptor that defines each ship type there are waaaay too many ship types in the Spooky Classification System. It's basically splitting hairs. Also, there is no variety in those ship types, because of the same thing. Only having one descriptor for ship types limits what kind of ships you can have. Also, it's way too strict, not giving players room to experiment with different designs. So, now that I have stated my reasoning, it's time that I gave you my replacement. I call it the Advanced Ship Designation System. Instead of giving distinct mass ranges, this system gives a set of basic features and characteristics for people use as guidelines when designing and categorizing their ships. It's also intended to be specific enough to give an idea of what it's supposed to do, but vague enough to allow for experimentation. So, without further ado, Ladies and gentlemen, I present... The Advanced Ship Designation System Note that this set is preliminary and will be expanded upon in the future. Destroyer Destroyers are escort ships meant to protect bigger capital ships from enemy fighter squadrons and other destroyers. They have very little in the form of anti-ship armament, but have plenty of anti-fighter missiles. They're also capable of performing reconnaissance missions, search and rescue, and escort duties. They must also be very quick and maneuverable so as to be able to quickly cut off incoming fighter attacks, so armor should be just light enough to protect it from debris. They must also be able to travel to other planets and fight there without any aid whatsoever. Destroyer Escort Destroyer Escorts are smaller than Destroyers. They are meant purely to assist Destroyers in engaging enemy fighters and have almost no anti-ship armament of their own, though that doesn't mean they can't carry any. Like Destroyers, Destroyer Escorts should be fast and maneuverable, capable of moving quickly to engage incoming fighter squadrons. They can also be used for the same missions as a Destroyer can Also must be capable of unassisted interplanetary travel. Cruiser Cruisers are the most versatile, flexible, and diverse of all ship types. More heavily armed and armored than Destroyers, but more maneuverable than Battleships, they are the backbone of any navy. They usually have a somewhat balanced mix of anti-fighter weaponry and anti-ship weaponry and are usually capable of filling multiple roles at once. They can assist the Battleships in engaging enemy ships or assist the destroyers in fending off enemy fighters. They can perform usually any type of mission, depending on the design. Must be capable of unaided interplanetary travel. Battleship The big boys with the big guns and the big armor. Battleships are meant to do one thing and one thing only: slug it out with enemy ships. They carry the biggest weapons in the fleet and have the most armor. They usually have very little as far as anti-fighter weaponry, being dependent on nearby escort ships such as Destroyers and Destroyer Escorts. They also aren't particularly mobile. However, their armor is usually sufficient against most hits it will take. May also sometimes carry a small contingent of fighters or landing/boarding craft. Must be capable of unaided interplanetary travel. Carrier Often times the heart of the fleet, Carriers provide fighter support for the rest of the ships, both defensively and offensively. Like Cruisers, Carriers can be very diverse in design. The key feature of a Carrier is that it has no offensive anti-ship armament of its own. It attacks entirely through the fighters it carries. The missions it is capable of carrying out depends greatly on the design of the carrier. Must be capable of unaided planetary travel. Monitor Monitors are interesting. They are designed to patrol and defend the area within a planet's orbit. They are not capable of unaided interplanetary travel, but they don't need to be. They are best used to defend space stations, satellites, or just keep tabs on enemy movements. As such, they should be well balanced in speed, armor, and firepower. Again, this is a work in progress, and more entries will be made shortly. And finally, sorry Spooky!

On the first order, yes the Oerlikon Millennium can shoot at 1000 rounds/min. CAN being the operative word. It CAN also shoot at a second, lower rate of fire of 200 rounds/min (Rapid Single Shot). which is how it is in the mod. The reason it shoots at the lower rate in the mod is for balancing reasons, as well as the fact that there are already several other super-fast firing guns in the mod and he really wanted to add a flak gun to the mod. *Snip* We are aware of these things, but they are the way they are for a reason. *Edit: Ninja'd*

*Roleplay mode engaged* We at Union Dynamics would like to know how many assets of ours were lost at KSC so we can set you up with some replacements. We've had reports that two of our units engaged the enemy aircraft but were destroyed. Also, we should be coming out with some new units within the next few days *Roleplay mode disengaged* Also, have you ever looked into using the Kerbal Konstructs and the Kerbin Side mods?

Alright, quick little tidbit here. Have you looked at adding Kerbal Inventory System to the list of acceptable mods? It's made by the same people who made KAS It adds quite a bit to the game. Plus it will be required to use KAS in future updates.