Neutrinovore

While we're discussing updates to various Lionhead craft, I'd like to put in my 2 cents and urge continued work on the Icarus. I'd like to see better-looking yet less memory hogging textures (the game REALLY lags when the heatshield is attached, as an example); those neat drop pods you were working on, those looked really cool, and would make a good alternative to the H.O.M.E. system, which will be updated who knows when; and just more parts in general that fit with the design 'language' of the Icarus system. But, about the 'Command Pod' part... what's the deal with the huge ugly forward-protruding arm device thingies? Did I mention that they're ugly? What are they supposed to do, if anything? Alright, I think that covers what I had to say. Keep on keepin' on, Yogui. Thanks for all the cool stuff so far, and looking forward to future developments.

I can't remember, is 'Force Roll' an available option in the custom window editor? If so, I'll feel like a doofus for not thinking of it earlier. If not... well, it should be!

Me three!

Btw, that was the problem. On any engine that shows 'NaN' for thrust and/or TWR, you need to go into the config file. Somewhere in there will be a resource module, probably (but not always) for ElectricCharge, and it will read something like: RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge amount = 0 maximumAmount = 0 } Apologies if the nomenclature isn't correct, I'm doing this on my phone from memory. But it will be similar to what I've written above, if not exact. Okay, anyway, it's the 'maximumAmount = 0' call that's the killer here, as I understand it. You can simply change it to any positive number you want, and the problems in RCSBuildAid should go away. Also in MechJeb's 'Vessel Info' window, that had the same problem, btw. Or you can just delete the resource module altogether, that's usually what I do, I haven't noticed any problems so far. Hope this info helps.

Hello all. Alex, am I to understand that all of the new exterior lights can ONLY be activated from the IVA view? Because if so, I disagree with that. Mainly because I've never had a functioning interior since RPM came out. Most of the time I don't care because I don't really play using the IVA view very much, I just poke my head in sometimes to look around. But if I'm now REQUIRED to use RPM for basic functions like lights, instead of using action groups or right-click context menus, then that's a bummer for me. If I am supposed to be able to use action groups, than I wonder what might be wrong. Now, for some positive feedback. The new exterior looks fantastic. I wish you would branch out into making other parts of the same quality as the ALCOR pod, I find the game to be a bit lacking in really good looking parts like yours. Perhaps that horizontal hab module that everyone's been begging for? Anyway, keep up the great work. Just remember that there are some of us out here that would still like full NON-IVA functionality. Later.

Hello. I believe I have a solution to your problem, but you may not like me because it's a very simple fix. I just watched the video you posted. The landing gear isn't wobbling at all, nor is it buckling because of too much weight. The problem is that the rear landing gear are toed inwards very slightly. I know this because I myself have tried to mount gear to that same B9 fuselage piece, and had the exact same problem. There must be something about the shape of the model in that area to cause anything that is surface-attached to be aligned slightly towards the nose of the craft. Anyway, like I said, it's a simple fix. Try attaching the landing gear - you can go back to using the B9 parts if you want to, btw - to the wings instead of the fuselage. Anywhere that they're parallel with each other, and perpendicular to the ground, at least side to side. What I mean is, when you view your plane directly from the front or back, the gear should be straight up and down, no 'camber' at all. When viewed from the bottom, the gear bays MUST be totally parallel to each other, if they're not... well, you already know what happens. I hope this helps, Tassyr. I know it may mean compromising your design slightly, aesthetically, but form must follow function, yes? And you'll be much happier with a plane that doesn't do the 'Kerbal Shimmy' and can actually get into the air, anyway, right? Right. Good luck, friend. Later!

Have you double checked to make sure that you don't have an anti-virus or anti-malware program that's blocking it from downloading or installing properly? I know that some commercial anti-virus software can be kind of aggressive in that regard. Also, back in Windows Vista, the 'User Account Control' feature was making my life hell until I finally just totally disabled it. Anyway, just a few ideas, in case you haven't checked these things yet. Good luck, hope you get it figured out!

Good news, and thanks for responding to my request. I can wait. I'm not really playing with weapons right now anyway, but I probably will sometime in the future. But I won't let you forget. As soon as you release v1 I'll start pestering you for my lead-computing gunsight, lol. I must say, I'm quite intrigued by that tank turret you showed a few days ago. I'm hoping that the ammunition will be up to modern specs. That is high velocity ( ~2km/s at the muzzle), very accurate (if aimed accurately, of course), and very destructive. Anyway, thanks again, ID. Looking forward to whatever you come up with next. Later!

I'm very much in favor of this idea. I avoid using stock parts SPECIFICALLY because I can't stand the way they look! Look at any real space vehicle launched since... well, ever. Shuttle external fuel tank aside, how much orange have you seen? Or black and yellow diagonal warning stripes? Yeah, not much at all. I mean, they didn't really WANT the shuttle tank to be orange, remember that it was painted white for the first several flights. It was only because they realized that the paint weighed something like 800 pounds that they decided to leave it unpainted. So yes, please, I would definitely use a texture replacement pack for ALL of Squad's parts, if you felt so inclined, lol. But to start with the engines and fuel tanks is the best course of action, IMO, because those are the ugliest of the stock parts. And it wouldn't really matter if they 'exactly match' KW Rocketry's textures or not, just as long as they look better than the stock parts. But yes, KW and AIES would be very good targets to aim for, style-wise. I hope you keep working on this, Blackheart, so I'll look forward to further developments. Later.

Dammit, you're right. I even originally said Korea, but then changed it for some brainless reason. Anyway, thanks for the correction. Derp!

Heh, yeah, I bet it started to get crowded in your RAM cards too!

Oh, jeez, here we go again...

Here's something I'd like to see, regarding weapons in the game: A Lead-Computing Gunsight. Even F-86 pilots had these in Viet Nam. For those who are unaware, here's how it would work in-game (I imagine). You would be flying a plane - or driving a rover or tank, I suppose - with some kind of projectile weapon mounted on it. Select a target that you want to destroy. An aimpoint or crosshair, something showing where your weapon is currently aimed, and an aiming reticle, showing you where to aim your gun so that the bullets strike the target, appear. It doesn't aim for you, or do anything automatically, other than constantly re-compute the location of the aiming reticle. All you have to do (and it isn't really as easy as it sounds) is maneuver your air/spacecraft (or slew and elevate your turret, as the case may be) so that the weapon's sights or crosshair is pointed at the aiming reticle, and fire. Also, if there is no target selected when the Gunsight is active, the aiming reticle should display the current impact point of your rounds if you were to fire. This would allow, for instance, much more accurate strafing of multiple ground targets. Of course, if your gun is aimed at an object or surface that is too far away, i.e. out of the range of the gun or 2km I would think, whichever is more applicable, then the aiming reticle would stay coincident with the gun's sight/crosshair/aiming method. This should still satisfy the <Skillful> requirement, InfiniteDice, but also make it a bit more likely to hit one's target. Now, keep in mind, all of the above is simply a request/brainstorm that I'm throwing out. I don't know if any of it is actually possible to do, or implement in-game. Like I said, it's just something I'd like to see. Ideally (to me), it would be an independent component, able to be used with any weapons system that fires projectiles with ballistic trajectories. Meaning guns, artillery/tank shells, etc. Which is exactly what this mod is about, that's why I'm mentioning it here. Funny how that works out. So, that's my idea. For what it's worth. Later!

Btw, I noticed this little comment before, but I wanted to clarify: Are you saying that the next update will have landing legs with shock absorbers? If so, awesome!!

Lol, yeah, well, I didn't. But the Dry CoM marker still appears for me, so that's what I used. Someone was saying on another thread that this glitch is caused by having a module in a part that has a resource with a maximum value of zero. Like when engines generate electricity, but don't store it. I haven't been able to check this out yet, however.

Sure. The markers will move in real time as you tweak the fuel levels in any given fuel tank. I know this because I was messing around with the new KSO mini-shuttle. The only way to get it to sit properly on its landing gear is when it's empty, or almost empty, of fuel. The CoM is behind the rear landing gear when full, but as I moved the fuel sliders I watched the marker move forward until it was well in front of the rear gear. Cheers, friend, and have fun.

Lol, too bad you don't have a video, I bet that was an epic collision!

Okay, one last try... I'm still eager to see this project completed, and hope all is well with you, Vlam. I remain hopeful, but that hope is waning. Later...?

Ahem, so, over on the Wayland release thread, Devo just mentioned that he has a "tonne" of landing legs ready to release, they're just waiting for the animator plugin to be finished. As I said over there, who do I have to kill to get this working so that we can get some new landing legs? I mean, words can't really describe how desperate I am for new landing legs! Lol,

Oh boy, who do I have to kill to get some new, GOOD landing legs? I mean, words cannot even describe how much I want new landing legs!

I'd like to chip in here and make some requests, Lack, since you're working on new stuff. Well, requests and/or ideas, anyway. 1. Regarding cargo bays: How about versions of all of the bays you already have, except the doors open in a more low-profile fashion, i.e. popping open slightly, and then the doors slide down INSIDE the bay, along the side walls. This would allow more freedom to attach parts to the outside surfaces, at the expense of a slight reduction in interior space. : 1a. Also, perhaps a selection of bays designed to open on the side (yes, I know, they can be rotated). I mean that instead of 2 doors that open wide, make it one single door that opens out to become a ramp (the inside face of the door being designed to be flat and smooth so as to function as a ramp), with the floor of the bay being on the 'side' where the hinge is. This would allow a ship to land, and then the bay door opens out to touch the ground so that a rover can drive directly in and out. I see this as being most useful in 2x2, 4x2, and 4x4 sized bays, with the door on the 4x2 being on the short '2' side. Ooh, for that matter, maybe some bays with a door/ramp on one END! Or, even better, just make a hinged door with extending ramp that can attach to the end of a current cargo bay or even the 'engine fairing' parts. Although, it would be better to have a dedicated part with a flat floor, IMO. Basically just a hull section without ends, a tube. Once again, I'm seeing this as being most useful in 2x2 and 4x2 sizes. 2. Also, I'm always looking for more and better cockpits and command pods. How about a new series of more sci-fi-ish parts, designed to look like SPACESHIP cockpits? Much like your first and second series of pods, but with some new and varied designs. Perhaps something for the 2x2 hull shape? Or maybe a new 4x2 horizontal design. Yes, there's the 4x2 Hog cockpit, but it's kind of... well, plain, and to me it really only looks good as a rover cockpit. And I don't mean just rescaling the smaller 2x1 and 1x1 parts, I could do that myself if I wanted to. Anyway, sorry if I seem demanding, I'm just trying to make my point. 3. Finally, we (I) can always use more adapter parts, especially now that you've introduced new hull sizes. 1x3, 1x4, 2x2, and apparently a 2x6 fuel tank that says in the description that it 'fits the 2x6 hull part', of which there is no such thing as far as I can tell. So, like I said, all sorts of adapters to blend all of these various new pieces/parts together would always be welcome. Okay, anyway, all of the above are requests, and/or food for thought, whichever you prefer. As always, I look forward to whatever you come up with next, my friend. Later, Lack.

@ Treveli and Stingray You might check to be sure that an anti-virus program isn't blocking MechJeb from running. I've heard that can happen sometimes. Just an idea.

Lol! Wow, nice base. Well good, I'm glad I was able to help.

Oh, okay, cool. I thought maybe I was missing something. I'm really looking forward to an update on this mod, it's the best rendition of the Dragon capsule available for KSP, IMHO. Keep up the excellent work, CBBP, and thanks so much for creating such great mods. Later!

So, is the download link on the OP updated to include these changes? It still says that the last update was 7/9/13. And the Spaceport download is dated 9/12/13. Just asking.