Kerbal Space Program Kanuary Edition: von Braun ain't got nothing on this v2!
1,694 replies, posted
Is anyone else getting problems downloading the updated version? Mine still stops halfway and decompressing it doesn't work.
[QUOTE=The-Spy;34182696]Is anyone else getting problems downloading the updated version? Mine still stops halfway and decompressing it doesn't work.[/QUOTE]
sometimes I get corrupted files but never had them not download.
Make the cockpit a bit larger compared to the SSTO craft, along with giving it the windows from the second one you just posted.
I suppose it's hard trying to put windows on what was supposed to be a windowless craft.
[QUOTE=-Xemit-;34183060]The new one looks like that big Antonov and the old one looks like its face is too short. I think it's just a matter of personal opinions. I know! Make two different cockpit models available, so it's just a matter of attaching the one you like the most to the fuselage, plus there's some customization available for the player that way.[/QUOTE]
Excellent idea!
And I looked up Antonov:
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PaGZkPHTWLE/TnL2Q-9DslI/AAAAAAAACog/Mu8cjTon1A8/s1600/antonov225faci1.jpg[/img]
[sp]Sure it's fake, but c'mom[/sp]
Edit:
I love this guy Kurt who's doing a KSP let's play. "Okay... there's a separation thing... there's a separation thing... annnnnd there's a separation thing."
still cant download 13.1 :c
6 for second window so that si what i will go with. plus I resolved the problem i had with them being there :D
[editline]12th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Gubru;34183751]I suppose it's hard trying to put windows on what was supposed to be a windowless craft.[/QUOTE]
indeed. ESp. for something that is so blunt and not really sloped :D
as for An-225 windows. they would look awesome but then it would not look very x-33. so. i will keep them for later.
I am tempted to call it the B-3F (Big Fat Flying Fuck)
Anyway modelling the inner tanks in a way that shows their design makes the whole thing come to realixation that it is just a big fat flying fuck of a fuel tank that can fly. If i just made it a smooth wall that attached to other walls i feel this fact of flying fuck tank would not be conveyed.
PS. these where fun to model. Got to learn a few more modelling techniques.
[IMG]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1417259/vroomvroomIamaflyingGastank.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~portwin/Images/x33technology.gif[/IMG]
make it the B-3F!
I agree with that name. Then for the even bigger version(you will make an even larger version, right) call it the XLB-3F(eXtra-Large Big Fat Flying Fuck)
Can someone do the Heart of Gold?
I want this for reasons.
[QUOTE=Saza;34186795]Can someone do the Heart of Gold?
I want this for reasons.[/QUOTE]
Trying to kidnap the intergalactic president are we?
[QUOTE=CardBoardBox;34185347]I am tempted to call it the B-3F (Big Fat Flying Fuck) [/QUOTE]
Just a heads up, to us military plane enthusiasts (me), the B in the name implies it's a bomber. Which I guess is pretty accurate for what it'll probably be doing.
[QUOTE=Pilotguy97;34186945]Trying to kidnap the intergalactic president are we?
Just a heads up, to us military plane enthusiasts (me), the B in the name implies it's a bomber. Which I guess is pretty accurate for what it'll probably be doing.[/QUOTE]
what do you suggest? XL-3F
Extra Large Flying Fuck? :P
[QUOTE=Pilotguy97;34186945]Trying to kidnap the intergalactic president are we?[/QUOTE]
Zaphod's just this guy, you know?
[QUOTE=CardBoardBox;34187237]what do you suggest? XL-3F
Extra Large Flying Fuck? :P[/QUOTE]
Oh no, I never said it was bad, I was just pointing out the irony.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/D1MYs.png[/img]
First decent orbit.
I almost landed from it after an epic burning 6km above the ocean.
Hit a fucking cliff about a meter away. Fuck.
Wait, 13.1 increases fps by a lot?
Intense happiness
Yes 13.1 added hyper-threading, so the CPU can calculate the terrain even faster.
[QUOTE=MC3craze;34191522]Yes 13.1 added hyper-threading, so the CPU can calculate the terrain even faster.[/QUOTE]
So I WAS right and that Nova Silisko shithead was wrong. Unity DOES support multiple threads.
[QUOTE=Chubbs;34193322]So I WAS right and that Nova Silisko shithead was wrong. Unity DOES support multiple threads.[/QUOTE]
Yeah well that's kinda the whole point of the 13.1 update.
[QUOTE=Chubbs;34193322]So I WAS right and that Nova Silisko shithead was wrong. Unity DOES support multiple threads.[/QUOTE]
Well, the new version does, depending of course on when you had this argument, you may have been wrong.
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668640/datcircular.jpg[/img]
Dat circular orbit.
[QUOTE=LarparNar;34193768][imghttp://dl.dropbox.com/u/2668640/datcircular.jpg[/img]
Dat circular orbit.[/QUOTE]
How did you do yours? I used the super weak RCS for mine.
[editline]13th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;34193709]Well, the new version does, depending of course on when you had this argument, you may have been wrong.[/QUOTE]
The mod deleted the posts.
[QUOTE=MC3craze;34193797]How did you do yours? I used the super weak RCS for mine.[/QUOTE]
I used a pretty powerful rocket engine to get it sort-of circular, but I used a joystick with throttle on it, so it was pretty easy to just thrust a little.
When approaching the apoapsis I burned a little upwards and forwards at the same time, which meant the apoapsis stayed in front of me, then I just adjusted that to get everything right by the time the periapsis caught up.
Then I sent the rocket engine flying and fine tuned a little bit with RCS.
Yeah once you learn how it works it's much easier.
I should start using RCS for orbiting, but it just feels like a waste of space and bad use of weight.
Is it possible to fly to the mun and back with only RCS?
[QUOTE=Ignhelper;34194499]Is it possible to fly to the mun and back with only RCS?[/QUOTE]
Yes. I did it before with Nova's.
From an existing orbit or just from on the ground?
[QUOTE=RayvenQ;34194595]From an existing orbit or just from on the ground?[/QUOTE]
From the ground, I tried it after someone else did it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
