Randazzo Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 Coming along nicely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemeko Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 That service engine with dual-mode is lovely !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted December 31, 2015 Author Share Posted December 31, 2015 7 minutes ago, Nemeko said: That service engine with dual-mode is lovely !!! Thanks! I thought it was so pretty I bumped it up to a 2.5m service engine. Now I just have to make another equally pretty engine to take it's place in the 1.25m slot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemeko Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 24 minutes ago, Randazzo said: Now I just have to make another equally pretty engine to take it's place in the 1.25m slot that part will be probably my standar engine for all my crafts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kokanee Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 Rad mod, big ups! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 3, 2016 Author Share Posted January 3, 2016 (edited) I'm finding myself at a loss when it comes to naming new engines, and I sure could use some help with it. I'm open to any ideas at this point. Here's a look at the upcoming stuff. 0.625 1.25 2.5 3.75 Specialty Landing Service Mid-Range Heavy Lift Edited January 13, 2016 by Randazzo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 6, 2016 Author Share Posted January 6, 2016 And the Pulsar (2.5m heavy lift) begins to take shape. Still open to name suggestions for any of these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Sierra Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 On 1/3/2016 at 1:06 AM, Randazzo said: I'm finding myself at a loss when it comes to naming new engines, and I sure could use some help with it. I'm open to any ideas at this point. Here's a look at the upcoming stuff. -snip- Are the things labeled as "Not Planned" simply things you havent come up with ideas for and aren't slating for this update or things you're blotting out of the workflow indefinitely? As for names, sometimes a good name can come from a witty description. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 5 minutes ago, Captain Sierra said: Are the things labeled as "Not Planned" simply things you havent come up with ideas for and aren't slating for this update or things you're blotting out of the workflow indefinitely? As for names, sometimes a good name can come from a witty description. The slots marked "Not Planned" are engines I don't see a need for. If there's a solid argument for any of those slots, I would consider it, but probably not in this particular update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbas_ad_astra Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Since the two lander engines look like they use common nozzles, their technical/numerical designations could be [something]-4 and [same-something]-8. For their nicknames, maybe "Pegasus" and "Sleipnir", as four- and eight-legged legendary flying horses, respectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 10 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said: Since the two lander engines look like they use common nozzles, their technical/numerical designations could be [something]-4 and [same-something]-8. For their nicknames, maybe "Pegasus" and "Sleipnir", as four- and eight-legged legendary flying horses, respectively. Mythological winged beasts. I like it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjl1966 Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Not to sound to Buzz Aldreny (who wanted to name the CSM and LM Alpha and Bravo), I would actually find it quite useful for the names to indicate size and thrust. I still have to check each one in the inventory to know how bit it is and what it does. It's a hassle. R-1.25-750, for example, would be very useful. R is for Randazzo, just to give it some zing. Or, if we use A, B, C, D for 0.625 1.25, 2.75 and 3.5: R-750A, R-1050B, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 8, 2016 Author Share Posted January 8, 2016 5 hours ago, mjl1966 said: Not to sound to Buzz Aldreny (who wanted to name the CSM and LM Alpha and Bravo), I would actually find it quite useful for the names to indicate size and thrust. I still have to check each one in the inventory to know how bit it is and what it does. It's a hassle. R-1.25-750, for example, would be very useful. R is for Randazzo, just to give it some zing. Or, if we use A, B, C, D for 0.625 1.25, 2.75 and 3.5: R-750A, R-1050B, etc. That's not a bad idea for the designations. The designations start with VX (as opposed to VC for my other engine mod, for my own sanity in case of a necessary MM patch), a letter for the model line, and some sequential numbering that had just been random. For example the Pegasus and Sleipnir engines (thanks @Kerbas_ad_astra!) designations are VX-L40 and VX-L80 respectively. I could change that to reflect their thrust instead. Not sure about the diameter indicator. VX-LA40, VX-LB80... VX-CB9. Probably better to just stick that in the title line in the config. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 2 hours ago, Randazzo said: That's not a bad idea for the designations. The designations start with VX (as opposed to VC for my other engine mod, for my own sanity in case of a necessary MM patch), a letter for the model line, and some sequential numbering that had just been random. For example the Pegasus and Sleipnir engines (thanks @Kerbas_ad_astra!) designations are VX-L40 and VX-L80 respectively. I could change that to reflect their thrust instead. Not sure about the diameter indicator. VX-LA40, VX-LB80... VX-CB9. Probably better to just stick that in the title line in the config. My engine names usually follow the format of "[series]-[subseries]-[thrust] "[casual name]" Liquid Engine". Makes it easy to just plug the name in when I'm making them. But I tend to make parts in bulk haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 10, 2016 Author Share Posted January 10, 2016 Plans have changed! After messing a bit with the 2.5 heavy lift, I decided I liked it better with larger engine bells and bumped it up to 3.75 using the Constellation nozzles instead of the Hornet nozzles. I think I'm going to carry this over to the new new 2.5m heavy lift and make it a twin nozzle design instead of a 5-6 nozzle design. Something like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 Pre-release is available on Github if anyone cares to try and break their game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StahnAileron Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 If you have a "Pulsar" engine, does this mean you'll also have "Magnetar" and "Quasar" engines as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proteus Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 do these engines work with tweak scale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akron Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 Very nice designs. They go very well with stock parts and stockalike packs. I think your road map is right on target. Those engines sizes your are not planning are covered by stock, other mods, or simply better use of combined parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 6 hours ago, StahnAileron said: If you have a "Pulsar" engine, does this mean you'll also have "Magnetar" and "Quasar" engines as well? That actually was going to be the theme for the H-line, but I decided not to change the hornet and went with Nova for the biggun. 5 hours ago, Proteus said: do these engines work with tweak scale? The pre-release won't, but I could add a patch for that. 30 minutes ago, akron said: Very nice designs. They go very well with stock parts and stockalike packs. I think your road map is right on target. Those engines sizes your are not planning are covered by stock, other mods, or simply better use of combined parts. Thanks! The urge to make too much stuff is powerful, but I think this is a nice spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbuckminsterfullerton Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Randazzo said: Thanks! The urge to make too much stuff is powerful, but I think this is a nice spread. I just stopped by to say your roadmap spreadsheet is a chart after my own heart, and suggest reconsidering the plan not to build a size 3 landing engine. The larger the stack the more inadequate the landing gear become, and the more needed a low profile motor becomes. That said, I for one cannot control the urge to make too much stuff, and have thus ended up with sixteen RCS blocks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Randazzo said: Thanks! The urge to make too much stuff is powerful, but I think this is a nice spread. You are a stronger man than I... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 13, 2016 Author Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, Starbuckminsterfullerton said: I just stopped by to say your roadmap spreadsheet is a chart after my own heart, and suggest reconsidering the plan not to build a size 3 landing engine. The larger the stack the more inadequate the landing gear become, and the more needed a low profile motor becomes. That said, I for one cannot control the urge to make too much stuff, and have thus ended up with sixteen RCS blocks... 4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: You are a stronger man than I... Well, it's actually a bit of a fib. At this point I'm so utterly sick of drawing textures that I'm quite glad to be finished. Modeling is all fun and games, adding bits and bobs and whirlygigs... and then the realization of "Oh, I have to paint this now" sets in. I did the majority of this work by hand as opposed to my usual straight lines and Gaussian blur, I think it's way more "stockalike" this way. As for a size 3 landing engine... maybe. Sometime in the future. Edited January 13, 2016 by Randazzo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randazzo Posted January 14, 2016 Author Share Posted January 14, 2016 Pre-release version 1.3.1 is up with added TweakScale support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 3 hours ago, Randazzo said: Well, it's actually a bit of a fib. At this point I'm so utterly sick of drawing textures that I'm quite glad to be finished. Modeling is all fun and games, adding bits and bobs and whirlygigs... and then the realization of "Oh, I have to paint this now" sets in. I did the majority of this work by hand as opposed to my usual straight lines and Gaussian blur, I think it's way more "stockalike" this way. I don't mind texturing. It may be my favorite part, actually. I find it relaxing. But that may be because it's what comes after UV mapping, so there's this huge sense of relief, as if you've crossed over a big hump... I started out very slow texturing. It's definitely something that gets faster with practice, as well as learning to make use of layer styles to automate certain effects like panel edge wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts