Jump to content

Bacon Labs - Stockalike Ariane & More - Dev Thread

_Augustus_

By _Augustus_
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

curtquarquesso

curtquarquesso

Posted
Posted
We are wanting to see a HTV with the Tantares mod pack, but it isn't going to happen, as it uses to much parts from the ATV that it's not worth the effort to edit the ATV parts to make it possible to make a HTV.

Never the less, it's a good start.

Plus, almost all the parts for it are already made. Refer to the Tantares thread for instructions. The 1.875m parts make it really easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
Posted (edited)
Na, not again _Augustus_. It's nice that you finally want to start modelling, or at least learning it. But isn't this a *way* too ambitious? I mean, you didn't even started to model. My well-meaned advise now would be: Concentrate now first on an easy part like a Fuel Tank, then, when you are a bit more familiar with it, making some more complicated things like an engine, and when you can get those things into KSP without any trouble, then you should be ready to maintain and work on something like this. Now, it's still too early for you.

BTW, an Ariane V and ATV you can find in the German Space Alliance Mod.

I agree with this.

This is designed to go with Tantares, it has an ATV. I have TheShadow1138 doing ESA parts.

Also, I just woke up after returning from a 12-hour drive home. I'll try to start this week, but I have vacation next week so I won't be home.

To be honest, I don't really see it having much to do with Tantares, aside from some vague notions of texture re-use (The textures are open source anyway).

Really wished you could have sent me a PM or just any kind of notification before starting this.

I've given it a bit of thought, but could you drop the name? I know this is a bit of a reversal on my part (Although you have changed the planned craft quite a lot).

I'm not sure why you would want to tie yourself to an already existing mod to be honest, especially if you're just learning to model. It'll be like trying to mod with a hand tied behind your back (Especially the using existing textures part).

Anyway, the Morpheus would be very nice to have and I do wish you luck with this, sorry to woofle.

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I agree with this.
I started this while I was on an emergency trip. I'm not good at early-warning systems, when I get ideas I just post. When I get ideas my blood sugar level is also very high (Certain amounts of sugar do the same thing for me as what small amounts of alcohol do for coders).

Also, someone already made an expansion for your mod, why do you like mine so much less?

And I came up with this during the car ride there. I thought:

Why doesn't Tantares have much in the way of American, ESA, and Chinese/Japanese launchers? I love the ATV, but I don't want to have to cobble a few mods' parts together for an Ariane 5. Also, what about the manned ATV? The Mk 1-2 doesn't have the same proportions as that pod. Furthermore, what happened to modern American vehicles? I don't see an Apollo, Orion, etc. in there.

And why is there no stockalike CMES mod? I love the idea of whatever that guy Borklund was doing, but it doesn't look like he's gonna be finished any time soon, nor focusing on entirely realistic spacecraft. Also, he hasn't even ported anything to Unity yet, or started texturing.

And I started the thread.

We do have actual work going on. Shadow hasn't given me much in the way of PM's either, but he is modelling, I'm sure.

(Thanks for the support for the Morpheus. I think that if they use it on Mars they'll have an LDSD mounted on top similar to a skycrane, so I may do that too. I won't be working on the Morpheus for 2 weeks or so, I have testing this week and then vacation, on which I will be in Texas.)

Edited by _Augustus_
Link to comment
Share on other sites
curtquarquesso

curtquarquesso

Posted
Posted

Also, someone already made an expansion for your mod, why do you like mine so much less?

The simple answer, is because your add-on doesn't exist yet. Passinglurker modeled, and textured his add-on, all in one swell-foop. I can't imagine authoring a parts mod without having basic modeling skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
Posted (edited)

Also, someone already made an expansion for your mod, why do you like mine so much less?

Tantares+ had parts ready from the get-go. Before releasing passinglurker got in touch with me, detailed what he had done already, what he planned to do and was a really nice chap all-round.

But you are here, no warning, trying to get other people to do all the work.

Much more importantly, the author listened to criticism. "Only positive comments" is just outright crazy.

I'm sorry, but, I just don't like it. At all.

/rant

Please, please, start small. I can tell you have a passion for this, but why fly before you can walk?

Just do a fuel tank to get the hang of things, then build up from there.

Edit: After a chat with _Augustus_, I do feel rather harsh. With a little better understanding, I think he does deserve a little more encouragement, but my points still stand.

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShadow1138

TheShadow1138

Posted
Posted

I have indeed been making models. The Ariane 5 (without the payload fairing) is in-game and flies. The engines gimbal, and have emissive animations. Here are some images of the rocket in-game:

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I have modeled the payload fairing, but hit a snag on the export, where it triangulated itself closed. I think it might be due to how thin the fairing wall is, or how I closed that side of the model. I have a part that could be used as a fairing base if procedural fairings are desired, I guess it could be made to work, but I'd have to look into it to be certain.

The textures do look better with a higher graphics setting, but texturing is not what I would call my forté. Let me know what you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I have indeed been making models. The Ariane 5 (without the payload fairing) is in-game and flies. The engines gimbal, and have emissive animations. Here are some images of the rocket in-game:

http://imgur.com/a/eleDJ

I have modeled the payload fairing, but hit a snag on the export, where it triangulated itself closed. I think it might be due to how thin the fairing wall is, or how I closed that side of the model. I have a part that could be used as a fairing base if procedural fairings are desired, I guess it could be made to work, but I'd have to look into it to be certain.

The textures do look better with a higher graphics setting, but texturing is not what I would call my forté. Let me know what you think.

I could probably tweak the textures a little if they're not encrypted mbm's or whatever. And fairings probably aren't required if you can't get them working, procedural fairings is in almost everyone's GameData.

Wow, that looks awesome though! Could I be pm'ed a download?

And does the upper stage have a built-in probe core or something? :P.

Edited by _Augustus_
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShadow1138

TheShadow1138

Posted
Posted
I could probably tweak the textures a little if they're not encrypted mbm's or whatever. And fairings probably aren't required if you can't get them working, procedural fairings is in almost everyone's GameData.

I figured that Procedural Fairings would probably be preferred, especially with stock procedural fairings coming with 1.0. I did export the textures in MBM, but it wouldn't be a problem to export them in another format from Unity, or just upload the PNG files that I put in Unity, though it might be easier to just re-export from Unity in a different format.

Wow, that looks awesome though! Could I be pm'ed a download?

I'll PM you a download as soon as I get it uploaded

And does the upper stage have a built-in probe core or something? :P.

No, the upper stage doesn't have n integrated probe core, that's just one of the stock probe cores with a battery on top for testing. The engine is integrated into the upper stage though, and with the configs I threw together I had it show up in the engines tab. The configs also currently name the parts as Ariane 5 parts, thought he core stage engine is listed as "Vulcain 2", so its at the end of the engines part list in the VAB.

I also would call the SRBs finicky when it comes to correct placement. I don't have much experience with surface attach parts so I'm not sure if its a config file issue, or something I messed up in Unity. If anyone out there has any pointers I'd appreciate it greatly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
Posted
I figured that Procedural Fairings would probably be preferred, especially with stock procedural fairings coming with 1.0. I did export the textures in MBM, but it wouldn't be a problem to export them in another format from Unity, or just upload the PNG files that I put in Unity, though it might be easier to just re-export from Unity in a different format.

I'll PM you a download as soon as I get it uploaded

No, the upper stage doesn't have n integrated probe core, that's just one of the stock probe cores with a battery on top for testing. The engine is integrated into the upper stage though, and with the configs I threw together I had it show up in the engines tab. The configs also currently name the parts as Ariane 5 parts, thought he core stage engine is listed as "Vulcain 2", so its at the end of the engines part list in the VAB.

I also would call the SRBs finicky when it comes to correct placement. I don't have much experience with surface attach parts so I'm not sure if its a config file issue, or something I messed up in Unity. If anyone out there has any pointers I'd appreciate it greatly.

Could you post the config file? It's likely the radial node has a wrong position defined.

Really nice Ariane!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I figured that Procedural Fairings would probably be preferred, especially with stock procedural fairings coming with 1.0. I did export the textures in MBM, but it wouldn't be a problem to export them in another format from Unity, or just upload the PNG files that I put in Unity, though it might be easier to just re-export from Unity in a different format.

I'll PM you a download as soon as I get it uploaded

No, the upper stage doesn't have n integrated probe core, that's just one of the stock probe cores with a battery on top for testing. The engine is integrated into the upper stage though, and with the configs I threw together I had it show up in the engines tab. The configs also currently name the parts as Ariane 5 parts, thought he core stage engine is listed as "Vulcain 2", so its at the end of the engines part list in the VAB.

I also would call the SRBs finicky when it comes to correct placement. I don't have much experience with surface attach parts so I'm not sure if its a config file issue, or something I messed up in Unity. If anyone out there has any pointers I'd appreciate it greatly.

I can rename the parts myself, don't worry. If they're unbalanced I can fix that too.
Could you post the config file? It's likely the radial node has a wrong position defined.

Really nice Ariane!

I was gonna say that.

(Also, random note: How do you change the thing to say "Sentient Bread" or whatever? I forgot.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShadow1138

TheShadow1138

Posted
Posted

Here's the config for the SRBs. I just modified the config file from Frizzank's 5 segment Titan SRB, which may be the heart of my problem if its config related.

PART
{

// --- general parameters ---
name = A5SRB
module = Part
author = TheShadow1138

// --- asset parameters ---
MODEL
{
  model = Ariane5/Parts/A5SRB
}
rescaleFactor = 0.615

// --- node definitions ---
//node_stack_top = 0.0, 5.58, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
//node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -23.012, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1


 // --- FX definitions ---

//fx_exhaustFlame_yellow = 0.0, -1.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.25, running
//fx_exhaustLight_yellow = 0.0, -1.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, running
//fx_smokeTrail_medium = 0.0, 0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.25, running
//fx_exhaustSparks_yellow = 0.0, 0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.866, 0.5, running
//fx_exhaustSparks_yellow = 0.0, 0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.866, -0.5, running

// --- Sound FX definition ---

//sound_vent_medium = engage
//sound_rocket_spurts = running
//sound_Titan_srb = running
//sound_vent_soft = disengage
//sound_explosion_low = flameout

// --- editor parameters ---
TechRequired = veryHeavyRocketry
cost = 5000
category = Propulsion
subcategory = 0
title = Ariane 5 SRB
manufacturer = ShadowWorks
description = The Solid Rocket Booster for the Ariane 5 launcher.

// attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
attachRules = 0,1,0,1,0

// --- standard part parameters ---
mass = 5.75
dragModelType = default
maximum_drag = 0.4
minimum_drag = 0.2
angularDrag = 2
crashTolerance = 45
maxTemp = 6200

breakingForce = 150
breakingTorque = 150

stagingIcon = SOLID_BOOSTER

// --- solid booster parameters ---

EFFECTS
{
  running_closed
  {
    AUDIO
    {
      channel = Ship
      clip = sound_rocket_hard
      volume = 0.0 0.0
      volume = 1.0 1.0
      pitch = 0.0 0.2
      pitch = 1.0 1.0
      loop = true
    }
    PREFAB_PARTICLE
    {
      prefabName = fx_smokeTrail_veryLarge
      transformName = thrustTransform
      emission = 0.0 0.0
      emission = 0.05 0.0
      emission = 0.075 0.25
      emission = 1.0 1.25
      speed = 0.0 0.25
      speed = 1.0 1.0
      localOffset = 0, 0, 1
    }
    MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE
    {
      modelName = Squad/FX/ks25_Exhaust
      transformName = thrustTransform
      emission = 0.0 0.0
      emission = 0.05 0.0
      emission = 0.075 0.25
      emission = 1.0 1.25
      speed = 0.0 0.5
      speed = 1.0 1.2
	  localOffset = 0, 0, 20
    }

  }
  engage
  {
    AUDIO
    {
      channel = Ship
      clip = sound_vent_medium
      volume = 1.0
      pitch = 2.0
      loop = false
    }
  }
  flameout
  {
    PREFAB_PARTICLE
    {
      prefabName = fx_exhaustSparks_flameout_2
      transformName = thrustTransform
      oneShot = true
    }
    AUDIO
    {
      channel = Ship
      clip = sound_explosion_low
      volume = 1.0
      pitch = 2.0
      loop = false
    }
  }
}

MODULE
{
	name = ModuleEnginesFX
	thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
    engineID = SRB1755seg
	runningEffectName = running_closed
	throttleLocked = True
	exhaustDamage = True
	ignitionThreshold = 0.1
	minThrust = 0
	maxThrust = 1210
	heatProduction = 400
	useEngineResponseTime = True
	engineAccelerationSpeed = 8.0
	allowShutdown = False
	fxOffset = 0, 0, -10.25
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = SolidFuel
        	ratio = 1.0
		DrawGauge = True
	}
	atmosphereCurve
 	{
   	 key = 0 240
  	 key = 1 290
 	}

}

MODULE
{
	name = ModuleGimbal
	gimbalTransformName = thrustTransform
	gimbalRange = 1
}


MODULE
{
      name = ModuleAnimateHeat
      ThermalAnim = emissiveAnim
}


RESOURCE
{
 name = SolidFuel
 amount = 3500
 maxAmount = 3500
}

}


Thank you for the compliments. Most of my recent 3D projects were aimed at high-detail and realism, so I was worried that (especially as far as textures go) I might over simplify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
Posted
Here's the config for the SRBs. I just modified the config file from Frizzank's 5 segment Titan SRB, which may be the heart of my problem if its config related.

PART
{

// --- general parameters ---
name = A5SRB
module = Part
author = TheShadow1138

// --- asset parameters ---
MODEL
{
  model = Ariane5/Parts/A5SRB
}
rescaleFactor = 0.615

// --- node definitions ---
//node_stack_top = 0.0, 5.58, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
//node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -23.012, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1


 // --- FX definitions ---

//fx_exhaustFlame_yellow = 0.0, -1.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.25, running
//fx_exhaustLight_yellow = 0.0, -1.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, running
//fx_smokeTrail_medium = 0.0, 0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.25, running
//fx_exhaustSparks_yellow = 0.0, 0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.866, 0.5, running
//fx_exhaustSparks_yellow = 0.0, 0.7, 0.0, 0.0, 0.866, -0.5, running

// --- Sound FX definition ---

//sound_vent_medium = engage
//sound_rocket_spurts = running
//sound_Titan_srb = running
//sound_vent_soft = disengage
//sound_explosion_low = flameout

// --- editor parameters ---
TechRequired = veryHeavyRocketry
cost = 5000
category = Propulsion
subcategory = 0
title = Ariane 5 SRB
manufacturer = ShadowWorks
description = The Solid Rocket Booster for the Ariane 5 launcher.

// attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
attachRules = 0,1,0,1,0

// --- standard part parameters ---
mass = 5.75
dragModelType = default
maximum_drag = 0.4
minimum_drag = 0.2
angularDrag = 2
crashTolerance = 45
maxTemp = 6200

breakingForce = 150
breakingTorque = 150

stagingIcon = SOLID_BOOSTER

// --- solid booster parameters ---

EFFECTS
{
  running_closed
  {
    AUDIO
    {
      channel = Ship
      clip = sound_rocket_hard
      volume = 0.0 0.0
      volume = 1.0 1.0
      pitch = 0.0 0.2
      pitch = 1.0 1.0
      loop = true
    }
    PREFAB_PARTICLE
    {
      prefabName = fx_smokeTrail_veryLarge
      transformName = thrustTransform
      emission = 0.0 0.0
      emission = 0.05 0.0
      emission = 0.075 0.25
      emission = 1.0 1.25
      speed = 0.0 0.25
      speed = 1.0 1.0
      localOffset = 0, 0, 1
    }
    MODEL_MULTI_PARTICLE
    {
      modelName = Squad/FX/ks25_Exhaust
      transformName = thrustTransform
      emission = 0.0 0.0
      emission = 0.05 0.0
      emission = 0.075 0.25
      emission = 1.0 1.25
      speed = 0.0 0.5
      speed = 1.0 1.2
	  localOffset = 0, 0, 20
    }

  }
  engage
  {
    AUDIO
    {
      channel = Ship
      clip = sound_vent_medium
      volume = 1.0
      pitch = 2.0
      loop = false
    }
  }
  flameout
  {
    PREFAB_PARTICLE
    {
      prefabName = fx_exhaustSparks_flameout_2
      transformName = thrustTransform
      oneShot = true
    }
    AUDIO
    {
      channel = Ship
      clip = sound_explosion_low
      volume = 1.0
      pitch = 2.0
      loop = false
    }
  }
}

MODULE
{
	name = ModuleEnginesFX
	thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
    engineID = SRB1755seg
	runningEffectName = running_closed
	throttleLocked = True
	exhaustDamage = True
	ignitionThreshold = 0.1
	minThrust = 0
	maxThrust = 1210
	heatProduction = 400
	useEngineResponseTime = True
	engineAccelerationSpeed = 8.0
	allowShutdown = False
	fxOffset = 0, 0, -10.25
	PROPELLANT
	{
		name = SolidFuel
        	ratio = 1.0
		DrawGauge = True
	}
	atmosphereCurve
 	{
   	 key = 0 240
  	 key = 1 290
 	}

}

MODULE
{
	name = ModuleGimbal
	gimbalTransformName = thrustTransform
	gimbalRange = 1
}


MODULE
{
      name = ModuleAnimateHeat
      ThermalAnim = emissiveAnim
}


RESOURCE
{
 name = SolidFuel
 amount = 3500
 maxAmount = 3500
}

}


Thank you for the compliments. Most of my recent 3D projects were aimed at high-detail and realism, so I was worried that (especially as far as textures go) I might over simplify.

Thanks, I think:

node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

Is too big?

It needs to be half the diameter of the boosters, which aren't 3.76m, unless I'm getting the scale wrong from the pictures.

So for example, a 1.25m diameter booster would have:

node_attach = 0.625, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

What is the diameter of the boosters in the 3D modelling program? That rescaleFactor is quite strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Thanks, I think:

node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

Is too big?

It needs to be half the diameter of the boosters, which aren't 3.76m, unless I'm getting the scale wrong from the pictures.

So for example, a 1.25m diameter booster would have:

node_attach = 0.625, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

What is the diameter of the boosters in the 3D modelling program? That rescaleFactor is quite strange.

They're 2.5m in-game. I've fixed the configs for myself.

Also, I've released an alpha.

Edited by _Augustus_
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShadow1138

TheShadow1138

Posted
Posted
Thanks, I think:

I worded that thank you wrong, making it sound like I was lowering myself somehow, which is not what I meant at all. I certainly meant no offense, if any was taken. Most of the 3D work I've done has not been showcased to the public, so what I was really hoping was that it would be well received regardless of how much detail I modeled (my "high-detailed" models aren't near as good as some of the work I've seen on these forums). I really am truly grateful for the compliments.

node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

Is too big?

It needs to be half the diameter of the boosters, which aren't 3.76m, unless I'm getting the scale wrong from the pictures.

So for example, a 1.25m diameter booster would have:

node_attach = 0.625, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

What is the diameter of the boosters in the 3D modelling program? That rescaleFactor is quite strange.

The boosters are scaled to a 3.75cm diameter in Maya. I know that I should be working in meters, but for some reason when I do set Maya to use meters instead of centimeters and then set up the FBX DAE export for meters, a part with a 1m diameter is larger than the 1.25m parts once I put it in the game, so I'd have to scale it down to fit, by about 61.5%. Perhaps oddly if I model in centimeters and export in centimeters, once I get it in the game it behaves as though it were in meters the whole time. So either way I end up needing an odd rescaleFactor to get them to standard sizes. I'm using Maya 2008 so I don't know if its an issue with the export plug-in, Maya itself, or what is causing this apparent strangeness.

So that

node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

is correct, well its actually 0.01 units greater than the edge of the model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
Posted
I worded that thank you wrong, making it sound like I was lowering myself somehow, which is not what I meant at all. I certainly meant no offense, if any was taken. Most of the 3D work I've done has not been showcased to the public, so what I was really hoping was that it would be well received regardless of how much detail I modeled (my "high-detailed" models aren't near as good as some of the work I've seen on these forums). I really am truly grateful for the compliments.

The boosters are scaled to a 3.75cm diameter in Maya. I know that I should be working in meters, but for some reason when I do set Maya to use meters instead of centimeters and then set up the FBX DAE export for meters, a part with a 1m diameter is larger than the 1.25m parts once I put it in the game, so I'd have to scale it down to fit, by about 61.5%. Perhaps oddly if I model in centimeters and export in centimeters, once I get it in the game it behaves as though it were in meters the whole time. So either way I end up needing an odd rescaleFactor to get them to standard sizes. I'm using Maya 2008 so I don't know if its an issue with the export plug-in, Maya itself, or what is causing this apparent strangeness.

So that

node_attach = 1.88, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1

is correct, well its actually 0.01 units greater than the edge of the model.

Misunderstanding!

I should have wrote:

"Thanks!

I think:" (I think as in talking about the solution to radial problem).

Etc... (Non-native speaker :P)

Anyway, I understand better now how you're doing it.

I'd recommend modelling to real units but, eh, whatever is your own preference that's fine.

The problem I think is that Unity defaults to importing .FBX files at a smaller scale (0.1 I think, but I don't have the exact numbers).

If there are no animations tied to the models, you could try export as a .OBJ file instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShadow1138

TheShadow1138

Posted
Posted

I'm not sure what's going on with the shading. The original diffuse textures that I made my screenshots with apparently didn't have the alpha channel for the specular, and once I fixed the alpha channel on the diffuse texture this strangeness started. I'll have to play with that some more and see if I can figure out what's going on with the shading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Have you started on the Morpheus yet? That would be a pretty interesting part to play with. :)
I have to start after break, unfortunately. Tomorrow is my last day before I go to Texas, I leave at 6 am.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VenomousRequiem

VenomousRequiem

Posted
Posted

I don't know if this has already been addressed, but it looks like the exhaust from the engines starts a little too high so it clips through the engine or whatever. That doesn't really matter but it kinda bothers me a tad. Is there any way you could fix that? (Sorry I'm strange)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I don't know if this has already been addressed, but it looks like the exhaust from the engines starts a little too high so it clips through the engine or whatever. That doesn't really matter but it kinda bothers me a tad. Is there any way you could fix that? (Sorry I'm strange)
It doesn't clip for me. Have you gotten the new version? Shadow fixed some attachment and texture problems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...