Neutrinovore

Dude, what...? How...? Is there anything you make that DOESN'T look ultra-cool?!? And in, what, like 2 days you did this? Well, maybe a week, but still. There are modders here who've worked for months or years and not even come close to creating something this good-looking! Wow. Anyway, I'll be downloading this as soon as I can. By the way, would you PLEASE at least consider making some cockpit/command pods? I know you've said you have no interest in that, but maybe you could model something and let someone else do the internals or whatever it is you don't like doing. It's just, with your art design and aesthetic style... I just think everything you make looks about a million times better than almost anything else available. From a visual design standpoint, the only parts I tend to use anymore are yours, ZZZ, and some B9 stuff, and as much LLL (Lack Luster Labs) parts as I can. Anyway, it's just a request. Perhaps something along the lines of the B9 M27 cockpit, but more... you. Just a thought. Actually, I think if you really put your mind to it you could create a parts pack to rival B9, certainly in quality if not quantity, but with the 'coolness quotient' of ZZZ. I know this isn't exactly the topic on hand, and if necessary I'll repost this on your own thread, Zed (heh), but I needed to let you know that I, and I'm sure most others, really dig your stuff. Neutrinovore out.

Well, there's the rub, eh? As I understand it, this mod uses IR parts (adjustable rails) to move the position of the ENGINE(s) to cause the center of thrust to pass through the center of mass, even as the CoM changes, dynamically. So, if you can't position RCS thrusters properly in the VAB (and believe me, I hear you on that, brother! It ALWAYS needs them to be RIGHT where I've already placed a wing or engine or something that I just can't relocate...), then this probably wouldn't solve your problem. Put another way, the engine/thruster must be able to at least GET TO the right place to start out with, got it? I'm not saying that it would never work for RCS placement, I just think that it may not be the solution you seek. I could be wrong. It happened once, I thought I'd made a mistake. ;P

Well, I use MechJeb, so I may not need it, but I've DL'd it and use it anyway. It's not a function of 'need', but of utility. Your plugin presents the pertinent information I need in an easy to read format, without having to have three different MJ windows open and cluttering up the screen. So thanks for making it, and I look forward to more good things from you in future, if you're so inclined.

Yes, apologies, I looked at your image link AFTER I posted that comment. Sorry.

Lol, I think she was referring to Titan, the moon of Saturn. But that graphic is pretty cool, shows just how big this mother is.

Okay, that'll work. I just didn't want to be locked in to one configuration, that's all. Actually, if you have several different cargo modules available, that will vastly increase gameplay options for everyone, yay! Hopefully we could see some screenshots of your WIPs, maybe?

No! With respect, I disagree, Mekan1k. I was hoping for doors at the sides of the bay that drop down to become ramps, so that one could drive on and off with a rover or mobile base. It looks like that would be possible on 2 sides, at least. This way you'll either have to have landing gear that are tall enough to clear your cargo, or they'll have to be extendable somehow. Either way, everything will have to be attached to the roof or walls of the bay, and that doesn't really work for me, I've been trying that with no satisfaction for the last month! I'd just like to drive up a nice wide ramp through a big wide door.

I know Tiron started this line of inquiry, but I'd like to add my 2 cents' worth. For myself, I would say that adding 20% more grip should be perfectly fine. I don't know that I'd want to go much more than that. Tiron may have a different view, however, so I'll defer to his preference.

I find that the RollKage wheels are the only ones that work on my rover designs, mainly because with every other wheel I've tried, be it stock or Wayland or TT Multiwheels (when I can even get those to work AT ALL), they have TOO MUCH grip, and no matter how low I get my center of mass, the rover will flip if I turn too sharply at high speed (on Kerbin), or will endo and then flip when I hit the brakes, or will wheelie and then flip when I accelerate, or will either get damaged or flat-out break off when driving off of the freakin' RUNWAY at 10 m/s! The RollKage wheels don't do any of those things, and they'll do 40 m/s on level ground on Kerbin. I'd prefer 50 m/s myself, but that's just me. Anyway, yes, I think that they could stand to have slightly more traction, but not so much more that it compromises their current forgiveness of sharp maneuvers. And DEFINITELY not if it causes any of the negative behavior listed above. I would also like to see more sizes and wheel styles, though, I don't know if you're working on anything like that. And the hover 'wheels' were pretty cool, but I don't really want to use rockets or jets or RCS to accelerate/brake/steer, so ultimately I found them kind of useless. If you could have them work like real wheels, i.e. accelerate, brake and steer normally, but still look and function like hoverpads with the variable height above ground, that would be totally cool. Just sayin', and I don't even know if that's possible. Here's what I envision: First, they'd look and sound like 'Matrix' hoverpads. One could set the height above ground to anywhere between .1 meter to, say, 5 meters. Maybe more, as much as 10 m, perhaps? Anyway, the higher you are above the ground, the more cushion or damping the 'suspension' provides, so you could be cranking along at maybe 100 m/s, and even over fairly rough terrain you'd have a nice smooth ride. But if you tried that at 1 m height, it'd be just like regular wheels, you'd be bouncing and jarring all over the place, and probably wreck. Anyway, you get the idea, I hope. Again, I don't know if any of this is even possible, I'm just wishing out loud, as it were. Back to topic, I think the wheels are pretty good the way they are, but agree that they could perhaps use a skoshie bit more traction. Neutrinovore out.

Kewl! The more I think about it, the more I think we REALLY need more VTOL specific engines like what's being developed here. When these are released, there will be a grand total of TWO choices for dedicated VTOL engines, these and the B9's. And the B9 ones are messed up now, IMO, because of their latest update adding too many variables to set in assembly, and then the engines rotating the wrong way when you go to launch. I just want engines that rotate 90 deg. down for vertical takeoff, then go to level for forward flight. And also maybe can be set at 15 degree increments in between, and that's it. Well, the fact that you've integrated landing feet into them is awesomely cool, too, saves on part count. Will these be available in multiple sizes? In your video you're using 1.25 meter fuselage parts. I think a larger version, with more thrust, obviously, would be great for even bigger ships, again like 'Prometheus'. Not that I'm obsessed with replicating that ship, but I would like to make something big enough to carry a fairly large amount of cargo. Keep up the great work, and I look forward to being able to try out your new parts!

Wow, I really like the VTOL engines with built in landing legs! I see you were inspired by 'Prometheus'. Which is cool, because the only thing I liked about that movie was the ship itself, lol. The only change I'd suggest is to have the legs extend just a little farther, so that the engine is slightly higher off the ground when landed, but that's just an aesthetics thing on my part. I will DEFINITELY use these when released, whether or not my above suggestion is followed. I use your existing engines whenever I can in my current designs already, so the VTOLs will fit right in. Plus, obviously, I'm looking forward to any other parts you're working on as well.

I'm sorry, but WHAT?!? I've checked out the translatron and I don't remember seeing anything even close to this function! And there wasn't anything ing the online manual either, I'm pretty sure.

Lol, 'Blocky Kerman'... Wow. I mean, wow. HUGE cargo bay! Nice! One should be able to fit an entire planetary exploration base in there, no problem. However, I hope that this won't affect the exterior shape too much as you seem to imply, there are plenty of flying boxes out there already. Just a reminder, be sure that all interior cargo surfaces are able to accept surface attachments, this way we can place docking ports or decouplers or whatever in there to secure cargo. Keep up the great work, looking forward to the Titan even more now!

For what it's worth, I'd like to see the Defiant next, complete with landing gear if possible. Or perhaps Voyager, also with landing gear. And cargo/shuttle bays on both too. Just sayin'. The Ford Anglia... okay, it's cute, but to me it doesn't fit this game at all. The Harry Potter series is about MAGIC, which has nothing to do with science or physics or rocketry whatsoever. At least with the TARDIS, that's based on science fiction, although I still fail to see the appeal of flying around in a rocket-propelled blue box, which makes no sense either. Anyway, all I'm saying is that I'd like to see you stick to making actual spaceships, that's all. All of the above are my opinions, worth what you paid for them.

I'm guessing 'yes', since the screenshots on page one show it taking off from Kerbin by itself and landing on Pol.

Lol, thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week. No applause, just throw money. ;P Cool, glad to hear about the docking port thing. I do still think that the top docking port should be hidden when not in use, if at all possible. Perhaps a neat iris animation, then having a clampotron sr. rise up to about 2 meters above the hull... easy for me to say, I know, I'm just brainstorming. I had also envisioned some standard size ports extending from the rim at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions, somewhat like the Millennium Falcon's airlocks. Except faired-in and covered when not extended as I said before. Finally, I agree with Kerba Fett that perhaps a more 'sci-fi-ish' engine glow and sound fx combo would fit this ship better. The new RLA linear aerospike engine has a nice blue emissive glow. And the hybrid ion engine mod has some nice engine effects too. I also agree, if you go this route, that a lack of smoke trail would be appropriate, however I like cool flame effects, so I think you should keep those. Ttyl, Neutrinovore out.

That'd be awesome, thank you! FYI, I play what I call 'sci-fi' style, which is to say I use the infinite fuel cheat, and I also usually edit the configs of the engines to greatly increase the thrust. But before I do that on the Titan (cool name, btw) I'll definitely use it 'as is' and give you my opinion. It'll be nice to not have to add a docking port or probe part to the top of the ship to have proper VTOL control, I like the way you think! And it's cool that it's big, I've been struggling to create a ship big enough to carry a decently sized rover internally without using so many parts that my frame rate can be measured with a sundial. My 'puter isn't really a high-end gaming rig, so it really starts to chug when I try to fly anything with much more than 100 parts or so... Anyway, Vlam (or would you prefer 'Mr. Ballas? ), looking forward to giving this a try. ... Just had a thought: Have you made any accommodation for docking? From the pics you've posted, I don't see any ready-made surfaces for attaching a docking port. A suggestion would be a panel or section of the hull that opens to reveal an extending docking port such as the one in the LLL pack, or the B9 unit, but extending farther, obviously. This would preserve the outward appearance and still give clearance for approaching a crowded space station docking port. Just an idea, worth what you paid for it.

Me likey! I'd be happy to volunteer my services as a play tester. No, seriously. For what it's worth, I helped Lack, of LLL - LackLuster Labs - with his recent parts expansion. Me and several others, not trying to bogart anything. Anyway, glad to see someone working on sci-fi oriented stuff, it looks like Devo of Wayland Corp. is calling it quits, at least temporarily. This looks like a great design, and if you can incorporate all the features listed above, with animations and everything, well that would just be awesome.

A suggestion: If at all possible, the mapping software should be able to 'play nice' with other mods, i.e. one should be able to find a set of coordinates on this map, such as those of an anomaly, and carry them over to another part of the game like the MechJeb landing guidance module. Also, the ability to overlay map data from this mod directly onto the globe on the map screen would be awesome. Just a few ideas, but I have no idea how to implement these things, I'm a player, not a modder.

Yes, for some reason Mr. Lack doesn't update the original post, no idea why, and I've not had the opportunity to ask. In any event, the latest version - 0.10.4.1 - is found on page 70 of this thread. Have fun, this parts pack is seriously cool, IMHO.

AH HAH! Thank you, I didn't know that about the staging thing! When I build a VTOL, I leave all the engines in one stage and activate/deactivate them with action groups, so I never discovered that feature. Excellent! Yes, I can see that that would be a problem. I play 'Sci-Fi' style, if you will, infinite fuel and such, so I don't really even put fuel tanks on my ships anymore, or if I do it's strictly for structural or cosmetic purposes, and it's either empty (via edited configs) or I don't care how much it weighs, and anyway my ship won't change weight or CoM during flight. So I just ignore the dry CoM indicator if I get it. And as I said before, this system isn't totally perfect for me, and I can see where it would be even less so for others, I was just trying to give some tips to Acealeam regarding the thrust vector indicator. Hmmm... now that you mention it, your comment about parts that have no mass in flight clears up some things for me. Sometimes I set up my thrust vectors as balanced in the SPH, and then when I try to VTO the ship nosedives or pitches up uncontrollably anyway... well, like I said, that 'splains that. Thanks, m4v, you've once again proved the adage that we all do indeed learn something new every day, lol! Happy rocketry everyone, Neutrinovore out.

Dude, it's cool, life happens. And as other people have mentioned, you guys work on these mods for free and simply because you want to, so it's not like you're on a schedule, or beholden to anyone other than yourself. Thanks for working as hard as you do, and we'll look forward to new stuff whenever it's ready for YOU to release it. It's all good.

Well, that's what I thought I would have to do too, but you really don't. First, in answer to you question, no, you can't have the Build Aid 'ignore' certain engines, at least I haven't discovered how to. - Aside to the dev, that'd be a helpful feature, no? - But here's what I do: When designing my VTOL craft, I decide ahead of time roughly where I want the center of mass to be, usually somewhere centered on the length of the ship. I get the structure the way I like it, and then place ALL the engines where I want them to be, keeping in mind that any vertical engines need to be approximately the same distance from the CoM, of course. At this point the actual CoM is probably way off, usually way to far to the rear. So I start trimming the craft by adding weight where necessary, usually in the form of rtgs or fuel or monoprop or whatever. Counterweights, whatever you need to get the CoM back to roughly where you want it. Now you'll press 'P' with the CoM indicator on and you'll have a big red circle arrow. At this point you should have pretty much everything on the ship you want, landing gear, ladders, antennae and other assorted greebles, but NO RCS thrusters yet. YET. Now, start adjusting your counterweight(s) and/or engines up & down or back & forth as necessary until you get the red circle-arrow to disappear. Yes, it will show that your overall thrust vector is angled way forward and up, and yes, that's the direction you'd go if you had all your engines on at once, but even if you only have one set (either VTOL or forward thrust) active it won't matter, because your center of thrust will still be aligned with your center of mass, get it? It took me a while to trust this, but it really does work. Oh, and if you're using rotating VTOL engines like the B9 ones, or the new MSI Rotatrons, you can use the same technique, you'll just have to manually rotate the engines in the editor, just make sure that you've got no red circle in BOTH orientations. Finally, once your engines are balanced, add your RCS thrusters last, and balance those as usual. Their weight will probably alter the thrust vector slightly, I usually have to go back and forth a few times to get everything balanced out. The system isn't entirely perfect, I guess because there's still room inside the yellow CoM marker to have a very slight imbalance, but this plugin sure helps you get a lot closer a lot faster than without it. Phew, sorry for the long-winded post. Again, I hope this helps.

The current version already includes this feature. Just activate the CoM indicator then press the 'P' key, it will display thrust vectors of all engines on your ship, and how they affect rotation. Hit 'P' again to turn off, and of course your RCS translation controls will still work. Hope this helps. Btw, since this feature has been added, I've found balancing my VTOLs to be MUCH easier!

That's cool, you can make the engines however you like, I can always just edit the config. In fact, I suggest making the engines 'balanced' for those who like that kind of thing.