Talisar

The easiest way would be to install this mod by blackheart612

That video is too much awesome in one spot. I feel so much worse about my own creativity now

Along those lines: Giedi Prime Caladan Ix Salusa Secundus Tleilax ...and many more, just from the first of many, many books in the series

I don't see where he's changed the rules at all. In his first post he said: Which specifically states it can be used either on spent stages or on the stage your kerbals/science are on. For our purposes there is no real difference between an ullage motor and a retro rocket other than the direction it points.

The ones that I know of are TAC, ECLSS, and Ioncross. TAC can be found HERE (and is the one I personally use) I couldn't locate ECLSS using a quick search (even advanced...go figure) and I haven't heard much from Ioncross lately...it may be defunct for all I know.

Lol. The competitions are an awesome idea, and it's worth tuning in just to see what Snjo comes up with

The easiest way that I've found is to use the links from the threads for each individual mod here on the forums. Usually in the first post of the thread there are links to any other mods that you will require in order for them to function correctly. The search on the forum is pretty borked, and I've found that just using google search as Pursuedtank mentioned is more reliable if the post you are looking for isn't in the first few pages of the subforums. Failing all else, doing what you just did is the best solution. If you can't find a particular mod's thread, ask here and generally someone will be able to help you out

I've been giving these a playthrough, and I have to say I'm loving them! Not sure if this has been mentioned previously, but I'd suggest that you re-order the stack nodes in the TubeHub.cfg so that the node_stack_top and node_stack_bottom are the last two in the list. This will allow attaching the hub inline to other parts without having to rotate it first. Sorry if that's a repeat, I didn't see any comments about it on a quick skim through previous pages. Btw, I appreciate the bump for the Cargo Transportation Solutions They do work well together.

Glad you like it! I've been watching MKS with interest, I'm planning on including it on my next save. Progress on the updated textures and masses is going slowly. Too much RL going on.

Little shameless self promotion there, eh? Nothing wrong with that! Those are from my Spherical & Toroidal Tank pack (link in sig). I'm thinking that I'll end up splitting those off into their own download too.

I've taken up Majiir on his offer of mod hosting for my small efforts. It is much appreciated, and I hope the Community Mod Repository project takes off successfully.

Download links for the current version have been updated. Thanks go to Majiir for providing file hosting.

The download links for the current version have been updated. Many thanks to Majiir for providing hosting, and future updates will go there as well.

Yoink! I'll give it a shot

I'll check it again, but I've used the exact same workflow for all of my parts. Are you seeing duplicates on all the parts, or just the arches? I have parts planned for the future that I want to have surface attachable on that section at a 45 degree angle. True, and I'll keep that in mind. I haven't had any issues when I've done it, but to be sure I'll prioritize the collider simplification and do one more push before I finalize the finalization

I've double checked both my setup in 3ds and my unity setup, as well as re-exported from the beginning. There is only one set of colliders. I'm not sure why you are seeing 2, maybe it has something to do with however you are importing my files into blender? This is on purpose. This is a good point, I'll probably revisit that area. A good enough reason to look into it, not a good enough reason to just do it Setting up and using textures is (as I have repeatedly mentioned) a very weak area for me. This area is going to be worked on extensively I understand your reasoning behind this, but I disagree. The ulitmate size these are intended to be warrants the increased number of faces, at least on the visual mesh. Again, I know why you think this but I disagree. For both of those parts you indicated, I desired that small amount of 3d detail, and prefer the way it looks actually modeled rather than using normal maps to achieve it. I will likely be revisiting the colliders, but it won't be hard to keep them aligned. Not having them line up is one of my major pet peeves when building. As you see, the issues you've brought up are either things that I specifically wanted or are fairly easy to adjust. Nothing warranting a do-over by any means. In any case, what I mean by finalized is that I am not going to be adding any new parts, removing any parts, or making any changes to the current ones that will cause craft breaking issues. Anything further I do with this pack until release should mostly be pretty much under the hood. The reason for this is so that anyone who is interested in trying out the parts but holding off can do so without much fear of mucking up their saves.

Updated the main download to include the updated cargo bay and arch models. Also included the fully enclosed, cylindrical version of the arched trusses. This is likely to be the finalized "content" update to the pack, with further updates being aimed providing improved textures, balancing the masses of the parts so they make sense, and placing them intelligently in the tech tree. No promises, but future updates should not break craft.

Yeah, those are leftovers from when I first made TAC's resources work with MFT, and it really hasn't been revisited closely since. That needs to be updated, but I've been putting it off until TAC's impending switch to SI. If you change the utilization lines for the waste resources to 0.78207 they should balance correctly. I'll ensure that is fixed in the next patch, and thanks for reminding me about it.

What blackheart says is correct. Unless you specify rescaleFactor=1 in the cfg file, KSP wil automatically apply a 1.25 rescaleFactor to your parts. I tend to make my models at the exact scale that I want them to be in KSP and then make sure I include rescaleFactor=1. One way that I plan node positions in 3ds is to ensure that my part origin is at 0,0,0 and then make a small sphere and move it to where I want the node to be. Then it's global coordinates will give you the right distances for the cfg, you'll just have to remember that +z in 3ds is actually +y in the KSP configs, etc. You can do the same basic thing in unity using an empty gameobject, but it's easier for me inside 3ds max.

I really like yours. It definitely stands out as original by not looking at all like any other submissions. The only major suggestion I would have for yours is some defining details on the top of it to make it stand out a little more. Lights or something like that. When I first saw it, I pictured it being an animated part in which the clasp-looking things on the sides unlatched and the top opened, allowing an antenna to extend.

My cue! And my usual disclaimer, please keep in mind that everything here is completely personal opinion, and should be treated as such. I like the simplicity of your design. I has a very utilitarian feel to it. As you mentioned, the texture could use some work (and as I constantly point out, I should be the last person saying that). For me, it seems a bit too symmetrical. Most of the components are centered vertically and equidistant from each other and the edges. The antenna helps a bit, but I would have shrunk the red button (light?) a bit and moved it to one side and then placed something on the other side. Keypads and batteries seem popular, but it could be something as simple as an access panel or sign added through texturing. There are also a lot of sharp, perpendicular edges, which adds to the symmetry. I should also mention that I seem to be offering a lot of criticism in this thread, especially for someone who has yet to make an entry in the contest. I'm hoping to spark some discussions and encourage others to offer feedback, but feel free to tell me to back off.

And that's the beauty of the process You've established that one of the things that I didn't like so much was a specific design decision on your part (and a good one). Stick with that. As for the other points that I mentioned (the overall size and texture detailing) if you think they may have merit, you can tweak it a bit. But absolutely try to get more feedback before you make major changes. Don't let any one person other than yourself dictate the direction you take with your part. This is supposed to be fun, after all.

I don't think it's bad at all, actually. About the only criticisms that I would put forward are that (and this is completely personal preference) that the proportions of the details are a bit large for my taste. I would have made the keypad and things a bit smaller compared to the overall size of the part. Also, I'd probably have made the part as a whole a little smaller as well, about 75% of the current size. The final thing I'd suggest is some weathering or small detail to the texture, to break it up from the flat gray a bit. That last point I have absolutely no room to criticize, however. My texturing is horrible

The only real part that I was disagreeing with was that it was off topic. While I personally agree with you that stock-alike is far overrated, I believe that it is something that should absolutely be considered when designing parts.

I disagree. One of the points of these contests by my understanding was to help people learn to make successful mods for KSP. In my experience, one of the very first posts you are going to see after any new part is posted is going to be either "I like the stock-alike look" or "could you make the texture more stock-alike". There is always going to be a large portion of people who want their parts to conform to a relatively unified aesthetic. The main problem is that "stock-alike" is very subjective. For example, from your own sig I would personally call your contribution to last week's contest very stockalike. Your universal docking ports fit nicely alongside stock parts as well. But anything from Simian Endeavors has a rather jarringly different aesthetic, and that will likely keep quite a few people from even downloading it. That's not to say they're not well done, or useful, just that they look very different. The same goes for your contribution this week. I actually really like the look of it, but paired with stock (and stock-alike) parts, it looks like it came from a different game. Personally, I'm not a big stickler for stock-alike parts. If something looks good, I'll probably download it and find a use for it. But a lot of people won't, and you have to keep your customer base (if you'll forgive the metaphor) in mind when designing, especially if you want it to have wide appeal.