K3-Chris

Trust me the names are right, I don't make those kinds of mistakes, I copied the names.

Ok I hear you guys, a lot of requests for a 1m cockpit, but I'm pretty busy atm with a long list of tasks I'd rather do first, but I realized the Mk2 cockpit is pretty much a 1m cockpit with a Mk2 rear end, took me less than 10mins to make the rear round and adjust the rest of the mesh to fit that somewhat: It's using all mk2 assets so it adds almost nothing to the game's RAM use (I tried to get fancy and use MODEL{} to give it it's own folder and point at the Mk2 assets but it's fighting me, so I resorted to putting the files into the Mk2 folder) I spent literally 90%+ of my time making this part on trying to get that MODEL{} part to work... Just extract:https://www.dropbox.com/s/v1q1g07t936a6t9/b9m1v2.rar?dl=0 into GameData to install. The .cfg is somewhere in between the B9 Mk2 and stock inline cockpit (price, mass, tech tree etc) , I didn't spend much time on it, I've tried it out, and it works: But consider this one unofficial/placeholder for now, which is why I'm not making it part of the B9 pack proper, we got higher standards than cut-and-shut jobs, later after I've made the S3 cockpit, HX cockpit, Mk5 cockpit and I have some spare time I can make a bespoke 1.25m cockpit.

Only area that seems applicable?

I can't find any good documentation on it, but even so I'm pretty sure I'm doing it right, and, it's not working most of the time. Log: PartLoader: Compiling Part 'B9_Aerospace/Parts/Cockpit_MK1/part/B9_Cockpit_MK1' (Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/d63dfc6385190b60/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 49) NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at PartLoader.ReplaceTextures (UnityEngine.GameObject model, System.Collections.Generic.List`1 textureNames, System.Collections.Generic.List`1 newTextures) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartLoader.CompileModel (.UrlConfig cfg, .ConfigNode partCfg, Single scaleFactor) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartLoader.ParsePart (.UrlConfig urlConfig, .ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at PartLoader+ .MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 (Filename: Line: -1) relevant part of .cfg: MODEL { model = B9_Aerospace/Parts/Cockpit_MK1/model texture = model_cockpit_mk2 , B9_Aerospace/Parts/Cockpit_MK2/model_cockpit_mk2 texture = model_cockpit_mk2_emissive , B9_Aerospace/Parts/Cockpit_MK2/model_cockpit_mk2_emissive } The paths are correct, the filenames are correct both sides the , the model works, I get a white part if the game loads which it does if I don't have the textures unity puts in the folder, if they're there game crashes on loading the part. I don't get it, and I'm not sure how much longer I want to bash my skull against this brick wall. This isn't the first time I've had completely unexplained to me failure of MODEL{texture}

Oh, *eggonface*

Did you attach stuff to all nodes? FAR penalizes unused nodes, it sees it as a flat front/rear surface that causes a lot of drag.

Aren't the top center ones exhausting onto the other 4?

Would it be possible to make the alternate resource menu not overlay the stock toolbar stuff like contracts etc? A bit annoying having to close the alternate resource panel to see your contracts, currencies, completed contracts etc.

The Mk2 is inline seating.

Small jets are cool and all, but they have almost no utility, B9 lets you build spaceplanes that can be used to save funds in career by delivering payloads to orbit in a re-usable fashion.a 1.25m cargo bay is quiet pointless, could only fit a 0.65m payload. Mk2 makes pretty nice looking fighter jets imo, Halderman stock craft proves that I think.

This mod confuses me, the premise sounds really nice from reading the OP, but all I get is missions to put satellites in incredibly specific and arbitrary orbits complete with longitude of the Ap/Pe etc, even a kerbostarionary orbit has a very long list of requirements including specific Ap and Pe that aren't the same, to get geostationary you just need a 6h orbital period, how high or low your nodes are doesn't matter, but if you want it somewhat neat, why not just make it 0 inc identical Ap and Pe? I thought this mod was meant to expand on the lack-luster stock contract offerings not require you to make very precise orbits you can't accomplish without external tools or mods.

Can I suggest making KW style PP fuel tank textures?

Not a bug, KSP always defaults you to the first airlock on a part, which is the one on the roof in this case, if you want to use a specific airlock use the context menu on the airlock, hover the door you want to use, left click when it says "crew hatch" and pick the kerbal you want to EVA.

Usually safer to delete old install first, but normally it shouldn't be necessary.

How much ram you have doesn't matter, there isn't a x64 version of KSP for Macs, get Active Texture Management.

Wouldn't that necessitate a very different design and possibly quite a lot more mass? And frankly it says turbojet on the box.

Well ideally there would be no reason to use them, they don't fit B9 visually, I have a feeling people only used them because they're so OP and didn't want to bother using the more realistic B9 engines, planes that carry cargo to space doesn't have jets that give them > 1TWR, If you want more than 1 TWR you need your plane to look like a fighter plane, just cockpit and enough fuel and wings to work. Idea was never to make the stock turbo jets some kind of upgrade over the B9 ones, if they're on different tech nodes that might seem the case, but B9's jets were meant to replace stock ones.

That angle/animation isn't final, just a test, and you don't have to use the nose animation, it's for people that want that concord experience. Hopefully we can get multi-angle and multi-stage animation working, ideally we want at least 3 modes, visor and nose up (supersonic flight), visor down, nose either up or down very little (subsonic flight, taxi on runway) visor and nose down (landing) could also go back to nose only down a bit or not at all like subsonic mode just before touchdown while landing if your have short landing gear.

Old doesn't have an IVA and will never have an IVA, so no, they also serve the same purpose. The old model does look a bit better in some ways I agree but (no offense) bac9 didn't really think about the IVA when he made I assume, neither mode has usable visibility, kerbals have huge heads with eyes about in the vertical center, put a kerbal's head touching the inside of the ceiling and their sight-line in the old model is well bellow the window, meaning they're looking up at the window, and sky beyond it, similar to the front mk2 seat or S3 (I got ideas for improving front visibility in both of those), but even worse angle and even smaller window, making the non-retracted cockpit mode pretty redundant.

Here is a video of my S3 "V2" blockout test model: WIP B9 S3 re-haul, old model doesn't afford the kerbal inside any visibility, new version allows the kerbals a lot better visibility and they actually fit inside. External texture is the old S3 texture for now, interior had no texture for now, this is just a test for positioning and geometry and IVA visibility etc, completely non-final, but should give some ideas of where it's going. Normals are auto-generated thus hideous, and I'm not sure where that light is coming from...

IMO FAR should do that nerf to jets, it cuts back jets a bit but not nearly far enough, leave NEAR with less balanced engines for softies. Also FAR/NEAR makes "nerfed" jets more playable, you don't need crazy thrust to fly with FAR/NEAR while you do in stock.

Yeah you can obviously remove the fix, and use the incredibly OP stock jets, we don't judge you, promise. It's problematic to make one, main problem is that kerbal are completely unoptimized, the more you add to an IVA the lower your FPS drops, yes FPS isn't that important in IVA but it's still not ideal, I tried 24 kerbals on 2 floors in the 6m S2 crew tank, really doesn't work, dropped it to 12 with fuel on the bottom floor and no ladders and access holes. I think if I make a HL CT I'd need to make it 2m long and again use the bottom half for fuel, and have 2 floors on top for crew, with a total of 4 windows, 2 either side, one per floor, can fit 10-12 kerbals across those 2 floors nicely.

That sounds bugged, probably some installation error.

We've gotten tired of seeing all B9 part planes with stock engines "because they're better" when they're actually just incredibly overpowered, stock turbojets are just silly.

Yeah everything should work fine.