Sigma52 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 is it ok to post edited cfg files on here? spent about 15minutes editing cfg files for FUSTEK and Tri Hexagonal structures to make them pop up on the tech tree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaDealer Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 is it ok to post edited cfg files on here? spent about 15minutes editing cfg files for FUSTEK and Tri Hexagonal structures to make them pop up on the tech treeOnly with the explicit approval of the person they belong to and on the mod-relevant thread (this one or the Tri-Hex one, don't make a new thread) and even then it's iffy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumghai Posted October 29, 2013 Author Share Posted October 29, 2013 is it ok to post edited cfg files on here? spent about 15minutes editing cfg files for FUSTEK and Tri Hexagonal structures to make them pop up on the tech treeI would prefer that you refrain from doing so.I'm not trying to be mean, but I have specific ideas in mind for which TechNode(s) the FusTek parts will go into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madnessinmysoul Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 A simple request. Would you be able to make a part with side-facing 2.5m attachment nodes? Also, is there a possibility of fuel tanks in an upcoming release? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasmic Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 A simple request. Would you be able to make a part with side-facing 2.5m attachment nodes? Also, is there a possibility of fuel tanks in an upcoming release?I think Sumghai denied adding fuel tanks some time ago. Though it would be quite cool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaDealer Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 A simple request. Would you be able to make a part with side-facing 2.5m attachment nodes? Also, is there a possibility of fuel tanks in an upcoming release?You can just re-scale the stock six-way adapter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharpspoonful Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 A simple request. Would you be able to make a part with side-facing 2.5m attachment nodes? Also, is there a possibility of fuel tanks in an upcoming release? Probably not, and as it's already been said by wasmic, he said he wasn't doing fuel tanks. If you want rad looking fuel tanks: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/24849-WIP-THSS-Tri-Hexagonal-Structural-Strut?highlight=Semni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumghai Posted October 30, 2013 Author Share Posted October 30, 2013 A simple request. Would you be able to make a part with side-facing 2.5m attachment nodes?Probably not. Also, is there a possibility of fuel tanks in an upcoming release?I think Sumghai denied adding fuel tanks some time ago. Though it would be quite cool Probably not, and as it's already been said by wasmic, he said he wasn't doing fuel tanks. See the FAQ in the first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madnessinmysoul Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Have done that, but I just love the aesthetics of this part pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madnessinmysoul Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 My apologies, I must have missed that in the faq. Any clues on further developments you are considering? Maybe more small parts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharpspoonful Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 It is spelled out in the FAQ. He's not making any promises for much. Just let everything develop, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumghai Posted November 4, 2013 Author Share Posted November 4, 2013 X0.04-1 DEV BUILD released - refer to the blog post for download linkWarning: This is a craft and save-breaking update. Please refer to the appropriate migration procedures in the blog post.X0.04-1 DEV BUILD 4 November 2013---------------------------Changes - Compatibility Patch for KSP 0.22+ - All parts assigned to the Composites node in the R&D Tech Tree - Overhauled and optimized all parts to take advantage of MODEL{} node calls as well as common texture atlases - All crewed compartments also now temporarily use stock SQUAD internals - Proper FusTek internals will be implemented in X0.04-2 DEV BUILD - Renamed Karmony Parts Warehouse Modules to Karmony Warehouse Modules, and revised model - Warehouses now come with animated bay doors, toggleable both when directly controlling the vessel and when on EVA - These are just placeholders; rotating KASPAR rack functionality will come in future updates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Netris Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 Nice to see you kept all the great work when I didn't play KSP. I can't wait when you'll add solar panels, etc (I've just read the FAQ, I know it won't probably be in a near future though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semperfikurt Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 That's the K1 Truss section from Fusty's original Fustek station parts pack.I loaded the expansion pack but there is no K 1 truss. Is it only in the old version? Where can I find this part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Netris Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 That's the K1 Truss section from Fusty's original Fustek station parts pack.Can't be clearer than that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasmic Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 I loaded the expansion pack but there is no K 1 truss. Is it only in the old version? Where can I find this part?Right here. This pack is an expansion, not a continuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g0tchas Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 I must be doing something wrong because the IACBM's don't connect. They won't dock to each other like docking ports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasmic Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 I must be doing something wrong because the IACBM's don't connect. They won't dock to each other like docking ports.Can you post a screenshot? Several things can have gone wrong.1) Did you place them facing each other?2) Is one active and another passive? (I don't know if this has nay effect)3) Are they in allow-EVA mode? I don't think they can dock in that mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g0tchas Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Can you post a screenshot? Several things can have gone wrong.Both are the 1.25m 1) Did you place them facing each other?Yes, I have.2) Is one active and another passive? (I don't know if this has nay effect) I had it set to hatch mode, as in docking hatch. I didn't try it with Active.3) Are they in allow-EVA mode? I don't think they can dock in that mode.See above.Also, in the pic on the left, that's my "Ops Module" with the Kupola Observation Module. Whenever I tried using the "in-built MecJeb" on the Karmony Node Mk III, (even though I have the docking port set to "target", the Karmony module kept on trying to dock with the top of the Observation module. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g0tchas Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Urg. Never mind. I'm a complete idiot. Just realised my problem. I had the IACBM attached to a standard Clamp-O-Tron docking port. No wonder they couldn't dock. (Facepalm!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDBenson Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I thought that as soon as I looked at it I had it set to hatch mode, as in docking hatch. I didn't try it with Active. I *think* hatch mode is for EVA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g0tchas Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 (edited) Another thing I've found with the IACBM's: they are extremely unstable. If I use them, my rocket parts wobble out of control, yet when I use the stock Clamp-o-trons, I don't have that issue. Edited November 27, 2013 by g0tchas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SebFierce Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Another thing I've found with the IACBM's: they are extemely unstable. If I use them, my rocket parts wobble out of control, yet when I use the stock Clamp-o-trons, I don't have that issue.Did you make sure one port is active and the other passive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Another thing I've found with the IACBM's: they are extremely unstable. If I use them, my rocket parts wobble out of control, yet when I use the stock Clamp-o-trons, I don't have that issue.It's a known issue. Something changed in 0.22 that affects the joints. Not even KJR stabilizes themIf you switch hatch mode it gets a little better. Do it on both ports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neutrinovore Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Or use Quantum Struts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts