Samo Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 A few things:1) Can\'t get the LEM to assemble correctly (decoupler won\'t attach, assent motor won\'t attach in the correct spot)2) Can\'t remove the LEM main body once placed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kickasskyle Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 The ascent engine attaches off the ascent module.The only fiddley bit is attaching the first decoupler to the command module since the nodes are close together. It takes abit of getting used to.As for the LEM body, I just noticed that too, I think it\'s due to the collision models, you can actually grab it by one of the 4 legs though.I\'ll look into getting that changed to the main body.Thanks, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 The LEM body grabbing problem is something I noticed and tried to fix, unsuccessfully. I\'ll have another look into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flixxbeatz Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Does the 2m and 3m tanks\' 'leaning on one side' and CS-1 mkII SRB\'s 'overshot attachment points' bug fixed already at the latest version?Thanks, and looking forward to future versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Posted November 12, 2011 Author Share Posted November 12, 2011 Does the 2m and 3m tanks\' 'leaning on one side' and CS-1 mkII SRB\'s 'overshot attachment points' bug fixed already at the latest version?Thanks, and looking forward to future versions. That SRB is one I made for myself and included in the pack accidentally, but I guess I might as well fix the nodes and put it in the next version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiyel Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Request: Can we get a CLEM balanced to Silisko Edition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venku122 Posted November 20, 2011 Share Posted November 20, 2011 I heard that the wobble between the engines and the soyez tanks is caused by by bad collision meshes. Are you planning on improving them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 can you not use such absurdly large gimbal values for your engines? It\'s not really a complaint but the ASAS modules always moves them between their max and minimum gimbal values and I\'ve had craft shake themselves apart because of it.edit: its mainly on the smaller engines, like the 2m and below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NonWonderDog Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 can you not use such absurdly large gimbal values for your engines? It\'s not really a complaint but the ASAS modules always moves them between their max and minimum gimbal values and I\'ve had craft shake themselves apart because of it.edit: its mainly on the smaller engines, like the 2m and below.That\'s really just a problem with ASAS. For reference, the space shuttle main engines have a gimbal range of +/- 8.5 to 10.5 degrees. The five F-1 engines at the first stage of the Saturn V moved +/- 6 degrees. Even the space shuttle solid rocket boosters can move +/- 5 degrees. Obviously you\'d hope never to have to use that much gimbal range on any of them, but it\'s there (and the SSMEs kind of looked like they were on the stops during both roll maneuvers, even though the SRBs did most of the work on the first one).Even though its all you usually need, I\'d really rather the gimbal ranges weren\'t set to 2 degrees. The emergency steering range is good to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 true I suppose. I guess it\'s more that the ASAS just overcompensates so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flixxbeatz Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 can you not use such absurdly large gimbal values for your engines? It\'s not really a complaint but the ASAS modules always moves them between their max and minimum gimbal values and I\'ve had craft shake themselves apart because of it.edit: its mainly on the smaller engines, like the 2m and below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 Next version won\'t be long and we\'ll be removing gimballing from some of the engines and reducing the angles on the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mincespy Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 This mod... Is amazing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiyel Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Could you maybe release a version of the lander that has a lower delta-v? I love your lander, but compared with Silisko Edition parts (about the only way I play the game anymore) it\'s absolutley insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kickasskyle Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 The New Version is out.PLFs too.Russian doll ships available for purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feanor Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 The New Version is out.PLFs too.Nice!Perhaps it\'s a good idea to update the image previews on the first post edit:139 mb + 62.5 mbwoah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kickasskyle Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 It\'s 'on the list'.Yep, the problem is you can\'t reference a universal bank of textures for a group of parts, so they stack up.Thats why we did the low res version though. which is 40~ for the main pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aevionknight Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 In the low-res pack, all of the tall fairing walls seem to be 3m in diameter, despite being named 1.75, 2, and 3.Downloading high-res to cross-check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aevionknight Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Looks like the high-res pack is OK. These fairings are really good-looking!A couple things:1. Looks like there\'s no 1m-1m shroud, that would be useful for small rockets.2. The adaptor shrouds could use an attachment node at the rim, wide payloads currently clip through the throat (e.g. landers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flixxbeatz Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 there\'s a 1m fairing? sounds interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killerhurtz Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Correction: you CAN make a general bank of textures I\'m pretty sure of it (especially easy with GME)In theory, by putting the 'shared textures' in a 'textures' folder IN THE MAIN KSP FOLDER, you should be able to make ALL mods access them, much like all mods can access the sounds in the sounds folder of KSP. Will quick-test it, and return with results.Nevermind, tried it, it failed.Also, I love you for these PLFs. They look epic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Posted November 26, 2011 Author Share Posted November 26, 2011 2. The adaptor shrouds could use an attachment node at the rim, wide payloads currently clip through the throat (e.g. landers).I\'ll add this now, I actually meant to do that but I guess I forgot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kickasskyle Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 In the low-res pack, all of the tall fairing walls seem to be 3m in diameter, despite being named 1.75, 2, and 3.Downloading high-res to cross-check.I just loaded up all the low res plfs in my KSP and I can\'t seem to duplicate this, mind throwing me a couple of pictures while I mess around some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abxl Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Is there a way to rotate fairings in the design screen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flixxbeatz Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 cool... the PLF Set was just... damn. .And yea. Looks like it regained its quality once again (no more leaning, thrust vectoring now does help, and many more stuff). Thanks guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts