[WIP][1.8.x] SSTULabs - Low Part Count Solutions (Orbiters, Landers, Lifters) - Dev Thread [11-18-18]

[Blind_Side]

Another forum Newb, but longtime player and user of this mod.  Have an issue I cant find help with, I'm missing my LV-N after Updating to SSTU-0.4.31.119.

 

I stupidly started a career thinking I was updating SSTU properly from Curse.  But I kept getting SSTU-0.3.30-pre-6, and using that.

 

I then had to 'clean' up my ships to accomodate (ie. missing or incorrectly loading parts) the update but LV-N no longer exists.  I removed all my mods to ascertain the culprit, but it is SSTU. I'm trying to figure out if it has anything to do with different tech tree, or something in communityresourcepack.  Any help would be appreciated, tell me where to get logs and I will.

 

Cheers

 

[Sudragon]

4 hours ago, rasta013 said:

They have been removed in the 1.1.x versions because landing gear and wheels are so borked right now.  They were there before though - you didn't imagine it.  

Although, with a bit of Move tool adjustment, stock landing gear fits in the cutouts reasonably well.

 

[RedParadize]

@Shadowmage Another "quick" question: Is it possible to have a base mass on top of tankageMass? For cockpit spaceplate part etc...

 

Edit: I imagine I could do a workaround, something like adding a container that can only be a heavy structural setup. BTW, I droped the idea of mass MM editing to convert to SSTU fuel tanks. 

Edited July 12, 2016 by RedParadize

[Nightside]

Welcome to the forums @Blind_Side

 

1 hour ago, Blind_Side said:

Another forum Newb, but longtime player and user of this mod.  Have an issue I cant find help with, I'm missing my LV-N after Updating to SSTU-0.4.31.119.

 

I stupidly started a career thinking I was updating SSTU properly from Curse.  But I kept getting SSTU-0.3.30-pre-6, and using that.

 

I then had to 'clean' up my ships to accomodate (ie. missing or incorrectly loading parts) the update but LV-N no longer exists.  I removed all my mods to ascertain the culprit, but it is SSTU. I'm trying to figure out if it has anything to do with different tech tree, or something in communityresourcepack.  Any help would be appreciated, tell me where to get logs and I will.

 

Cheers

 

Double check you are on the latest version.

From the last change log:

CHANGE - NRV patch to only disable stock NRV rather than delete it. This should leave the part active, but hidden in both research and editor screens.

 

Try downloading from Github, it is easier to tell what version you are getting.

Hope that helps.

[ctbram]

This looks like a very promising mod.  Unfortunately the 1.0.5 pre-made ships do not work with the latest version.  Many of the part and assembly names have been changed.  Without examples to work from I cannot get anything assembled!  I spent well over and hour trying to build something around the SC-S-SMX core and could not find a tank that fit.  Between these parts and the stock parts trying to figure out how things need to be assembled is nearly impossible.  So I had to just give up as I want to get stuff into space and not spend frustrating hours of time randomly trying to figure out what parts are intended to connect to what.

Please make ship configs, or a document, or a video that explains what parts are designed to connect to each other.  Otherwise all the work on this is just wasted as people are going to get frustrated just like me and uninstall it.

Edited July 12, 2016 by ctbram

[JoseEduardo]

SC-S-SMX is a new part to me, never heard of it before

these parts are meant to be used like stock parts, it isn't like replica mods that need to go a certain way to work, you can put a Soyuz in orbit with a stubby rocket that looks like a bullet or something, or make a SLS-analogue and launch a Apollo on top of it... it's really up to you and there's no mystery in it... if you can build a stock rocket you can build a rocket with SSTU parts... the only part that is a bit confusing at first is figuring out how to customize the tanks with mounts, nosecones, adapters, size etc... which is solved with a bit of right-clicking and exploration

plus, as @Shadowmage has said in many occasions, the mod isn't in a stable state yet for craft files

[Blind_Side]

That does help Nightside.  Thanks, and thanks for the welcome. I somehow missed that, possibly because I was looking for LV-N rather than NRV.  

[StickyScissors]

1 hour ago, ctbram said:

This looks like a very promising mod.  Unfortunately the 1.0.5 pre-made ships do not work with the latest version.  Many of the part and assembly names have been changed.  Without examples to work from I cannot get anything assembled!  I spent well over and hour trying to build something around the SC-S-SMX core and could not find a tank that fit.  Between these parts and the stock parts trying to figure out how things need to be assembled is nearly impossible.  So I had to just give up as I want to get stuff into space and not spend frustrating hours of time randomly trying to figure out what parts are intended to connect to what.

Please make ship configs, or a document, or a video that explains what parts are designed to connect to each other.  Otherwise all the work on this is just wasted as people are going to get frustrated just like me and uninstall it.

Not to be rude or anything but...snapping parts together as is done with stock parts and learning how to use stuff (tankage adjustments, mounts, nosecones, etc.) by just screwing around in the right-click menu should not be all too challenging.

[Shadowmage]

14 hours ago, RedParadize said:

@Shadowmage Another "quick" question: Is it possible to have a base mass on top of tankageMass? For cockpit spaceplate part etc...

 

Edit: I imagine I could do a workaround, something like adding a container that can only be a heavy structural setup. BTW, I droped the idea of mass MM editing to convert to SSTU fuel tanks. 

in the SSTUVolumeContainer, add:

subtractMass = false

This value defaults to 'true' and when true, will 'zero out' the part mass from the config leaving only the mass from the tankage/resources.  This is what you are currently seeing.
When set to 'false' the config mass will be untouched and all tankage mass will be -added-to- the part config specified mass.


Combined with the 'tankageMass' field (which determines what percent of resources mass to use for tank dry mass), you can easily add VolumeContainer based handling to (nearly?) any part, and can be compatible with a wide range of external modules.

15 hours ago, Blind_Side said:

Another forum Newb, but longtime player and user of this mod.  Have an issue I cant find help with, I'm missing my LV-N after Updating to SSTU-0.4.31.119.

 

I stupidly started a career thinking I was updating SSTU properly from Curse.  But I kept getting SSTU-0.3.30-pre-6, and using that.

 

I then had to 'clean' up my ships to accomodate (ie. missing or incorrectly loading parts) the update but LV-N no longer exists.  I removed all my mods to ascertain the culprit, but it is SSTU. I'm trying to figure out if it has anything to do with different tech tree, or something in communityresourcepack.  Any help would be appreciated, tell me where to get logs and I will.

 

Cheers

 

Looks like others had already pointed you in the right direction; and sorry for the confusion.

A heads up though that JoseEduardo has pointed out/pioneered/reminded me of the best way to do engine patches... which is to patch the existing engine in-place.  So.. the SSTU-NRV may be retired in the near future to be replaced with a properly patched stock LV-N setup; I may need to add some improved 'defaults' handling though so that it would not try and add mounts to already in-flight craft that were using the stock engine (will need a code-side change).

[RedParadize]

@Shadowmage Thats brilliant thanks. I am currently converting OPT spaceplane part as a testbed for further implementation. I think that If I divide base mass per something like 2 and then do what you said, I could come up with a semi-balanced formula generic enough to convert alots of parts.

Edited July 12, 2016 by RedParadize

[Shadowmage]

Working through laying out the plans for the upcoming station parts, deciding what parts need to be made, and in what fashion they should be made/what type of setup they should use.

One... problem... I'm running into, is in regards to allowing resizing of crewed parts.  I simply don't think it is reasonable, or prudent, to allow such manipulation of the parts.  First the parts would end up with hatches/windows/internal areas that are either too large, or too small, for kerbals to use efficiently (or even fit inside of).  Second.. the ever-present problem of crew capacity and IVA layouts;  the stock system only supports a single IVA and a specific crew capacity for a specific part.

This means that most crewed station parts will be non-modular in nature, at least the crewed/IVA'd portion of it (though could include adapters and optional resource-containing bits/models).  It also means that most crewed parts will only come in a single size/diameter and will not support scaling.

Also as far as station parts go I intend on relying heavily on the Near-Future construction trusses for most of the 'structural' bits.

 

A few questions whos answers will help me lay out/plan the rest of the station parts; please keep in mind this is all for -orbital- stations, ground-based bases may have a bit more variety in their parts/sizes.
1.)  What diameter should the crewed parts come in?  I'm leaning towards a 2.5m diam for most of them, as this enables them to be launched from stock-sized rockets and/or in shuttle cargo bays.  It also lines up with most other mods' station parts.  It is also the stock size of the NF-Octo trusses and maintains compatibility with those without any need for enabling resizing on them (which I may or may not do... still thinking things over).
2.)  What specific parts would you all like to see made?  Please see the initial concept list below to see if your desired part is already on it, otherwise please post a reply with the info regarding your part.
3.)  Modularity / configurability of station parts.  How complex should some of the parts be made, what options should they have, and why?  Please keep in mind that MODULES cannot be swapped (yet), so there cannot be any functional difference between the parts, only models/geometry/textures/resources.  For example, a part with a docking port must -always- have a docking port.  A part with an antenna must -always- have an antenna.  The specific models used and their positioning may be altered a bit, but the functionality must remain unchanged.  Yes I know this greatly reduces the actual use of 'modularity' as far as station parts are concerned, but this is a limitation of the base KSP code and not anything that I can solve or work around easily or cleanly.

 

(below is taken directly from the wiki: https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/wiki/Parts-‐-StationCore )

Parts Concepts

• Welding docking Port - when two welding docking ports are 'docked' together and the 'weld' button is pressed, they will remove themselves from the vessel. These are intended to cut-down on the number of docking ports needed just to build any multi-part station, to reduce wobbles from excess docking port joints, and cut down on the part-count of a finished station (you just won't be able to undock/decouple modules from the finished article).
• Multi-axis Solar Panel Truss Segment - large truss with 2 or 4 solar panels, whole truss rotates for second axis of sun-tracking, e.g. the ISS solar panel trusses. May have deployable radiators on the non-solar-panel equipped sides? Will likely only be available in a single size (2.5m), and will be based on the NF-OctoTruss form factor for compatibility.
• Inflatable Hab - See Bigelow Aerospace / Boeing inflatable modules. Possibly 2-3 different lengths with varying crew capacity and/or integrated labs or storage.
• Inflatable Torus - Basic habitation ring, or storage?, e.g. UKS Hab Ring. Is this even needed given the UKS one exists?
• Multi-docking-port-truss segment - pre-built truss segment(s) equipped with multiple docking ports. Basically a docking 'hub' that can be added to existing stations. May have some modularity to it for swapping the length of the truss arm it is attached to.
• Rigid Torus - Storage part. Intended to be constructed in-orbit through EPL as it will be non-deployable and far too large to launch on a standard rocket. Modular in so much that you can resize and select various model part diameters.
• Orbital Shipyard - Deployable EPL shipyard part. 2.5m stowed form-factor, expands to 5m+ 'construction' area. Will likely be very similar to the UKS shipyard part... but easier to launch due to smaller diameter. Mass will likely be very similar; the thing should be heavy... but nobody needs 3.75m payloads. Ideally would be able to have a 'small', 'medium', and 'large' shipyard part with each having a maximum size (mass) of craft it can construct.
• Station Command - Stylized command part that includes small crew capacity (1-2), unmanned control, RCS, and reaction wheels.

 

I tend to think that between UKS and Near-Future that most of the resource-processing, life-support, and reactor type parts are already available in sufficient variety.  Really have no desire to replace their functionality, and would rather work towards better integration with those mods to use their models and features as much as possible.  Mostly what seems to be missing for stations are construction aids and a few part-count reduction type parts (solar truss, multi-docking port part, welding docking port).

Any other types of parts that are severely lacking in availability, or any other part-reduction type parts that could be made?  Pictures/examples for any suggestions would be extremely helpful.  In the end the goal is to enable nice and coherent looking fully functional stations, with a lower part count (and CPU overhead) than could be accomplished with stock or other mods' parts alone.
 

 

[123nick]

cant you just have no IVA for the crewed parts? and with scaling them, scales the crew limit, too? if its possible?

[blowfish]

Hmm ... how would the welding ports "removing" themselves work?  If you don't move the attached parts, you're left with a gap.  If you do try to move them, you will likely encounter issues with KJR.

[123nick]

2 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Hmm ... how would the welding ports "removing" themselves work?  If you don't move the attached parts, you're left with a gap.  If you do try to move them, you will likely encounter issues with KJR.

id assume the other 2 parts would be like, moved together, so they connect where the docking ports once were.

[Shadowmage]

4 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Hmm ... how would the welding ports "removing" themselves work?  If you don't move the attached parts, you're left with a gap.  If you do try to move them, you will likely encounter issues with KJR.

Their attach nodes sit flush with the attach nodes of the parts they are attached to when in the 'retracted/active' state; they present an external 'ring' around the top of the parent part so that the user can interact with them when they are docked and retracted.  They will be resizable to be compatible with various diameter parts.  They have a 'docking animation' that pulls them from an extended state into the retracted and flush state.  When extended the magnetics are active (but not yet docked) so that the player can rotate them precisely.  Once the 'retract' button is pressed the animation begins retracting the extension bits, and the parent parts for each docking port end up sitting flush against eachother.  When the 'weld' button is pressed the two welding docking ports do the stock part.decouple() actions for themselves and part.couple() action for the parent parts.

Basically I cheat and eliminate the gap by using docking ports that have no depth when they are 'retracted' (armed/docked), and thus there is no gap after they are welded and removed from the vessel.  The docking port magnetics close the gap as the animation is played.

The code for them is already written, prototyped, and tested to work (even with KJR as far as I know).  I just haven't had time or motivation/will to sit down and finish up proper models (damn wheels...taking all my time, and slowly eroding my motivation).  ( https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/blob/master/Source/WIPModule/SSTUWeldingDockingPort.cs )

Is it the best method for it?  Perhaps not.. but I couldn't figure out any better way to make it work without leaving extra parts in place.  I'm open to ideas/suggestions though if anyone can think of a better method or how to improve this one.

[RedParadize]

What about a rigid deployable centrifuge that are not a torus? There is several exemple on Atomic rocket webside.

[Shadowmage]

55 minutes ago, 123nick said:

cant you just have no IVA for the crewed parts? and with scaling them, scales the crew limit, too? if its possible?

Not really, no.  The hatches, ladders, and windows really only work/look proper at a single scale.  And while the parts won't have IVA's initially, I would at least like the -possibility- to have them in the future.  Scaling of crew-sizes seems to be just asking for trouble;  what happens with a part with 4 active kerbals in it that initializes to zero crew capacity (before the plugin code runs and sets the capacity properly for the current models/part setup)?  Probably very bad things involving crashing or dead/missing kerbals...

[123nick]

Just now, Shadowmage said:

Not really, no.  The hatches, ladders, and windows really only work/look proper at a single scale.  And while the parts won't have IVA's initially, I would at least like the -possibility- to have them in the future.  Scaling of crew-sizes seems to be just asking for trouble;  what happens with a part with 4 active kerbals in it that initializes to zero crew capacity (before the plugin code runs and sets the capacity properly for the current models/part setup)?  Probably very bad things involving crashing or dead/missing kerbals...

oh yeah, i guess you have a point with the initializing. but the hatch could be a seperate part that is placed onto the crew container, maybe? like how lack luster labs has a crew hatch that can be attatched too a crew part.

[Shadowmage]

Just now, 123nick said:

oh yeah, i guess you have a point with the initializing. but the hatch could be a seperate part that is placed onto the crew container, maybe? like how lack luster labs has a crew hatch that can be attatched too a crew part.

Separate hatch parts actively work against the theme of the mod... which is part-count reduction, and still don't solve any of the IVA or crew-capacity problems.

Essentially those functions would need to be supported at some level in the stock code; dynamic IVA assignment, combining multiple IVAs, and full/proper support for dynamic crew-capacity.  I believe that the dynamic crew capacity partially works at the moment (so says the 1.1.?? patch notes), but I haven't yet gotten to play around with it at all to see how it works / if it will be compatible with how my modular parts work.

[tater]

A few things...

1. Porkjet has inflatable parts, and he's said that he means to bring them up to current at some point... something to consider, perhaps.

2. Size wise, you are right, 2.5m is likely the best, though I would like to see larger for planetary base use, perhaps (the Mars Direct concepts show basically 2 floor high cylinders, but they look more squat than 2.5m would be. Even if you don't do an IVA, think in terms of a rough sketch of how it might look so that they are the right size, IMO, I'd rather see them bigger than too small for their supposed job (for example if they are supposed to have an airlock, the storage for kerbal helmets alone eats up most of a 2.5m part  ). Functionally, what crew parts are actually needed? Sort of depends on the use of LS mods. A hab part would make sense (fit in some sort of beds), as would perhaps a common area (food prep/eating, etc).

3. The shape change possibilities of SSTU should be used... I agree that resizing the crew parts makes no sense as you have described the problems, but that doesn't mean they could not have elements outside the crew cylinder, right? Like "mount" and "nose"? They could also be like the fairings where there is a diameter setting on that part. So the crew part is 2.5m, and 5m longer a given part. You could set one side to slope to 1.25m, and the other side to go to a larger diameter, for example. The crew part is unchanged, only the external bits to the compartment scale.

Edited July 12, 2016 by tater

[123nick]

Just now, Shadowmage said:

Separate hatch parts actively work against the theme of the mod... which is part-count reduction, and still don't solve any of the IVA or crew-capacity problems.

Essentially those functions would need to be supported at some level in the stock code; dynamic IVA assignment, combining multiple IVAs, and full/proper support for dynamic crew-capacity.  I believe that the dynamic crew capacity partially works at the moment (so says the 1.1.?? patch notes), but I haven't yet gotten to play around with it at all to see how it works / if it will be compatible with how my modular parts work.

oh. the docking ports being welded though, they reduce partcount by like, a lot, like, more than 2 per docked module, right? so if you have too add one more part, with this mod you would still be reducing part count by 1, in a way, right?

[Shadowmage]

20 minutes ago, 123nick said:

oh. the docking ports being welded though, they reduce partcount by like, a lot, like, more than 2 per docked module, right? so if you have too add one more part, with this mod you would still be reducing part count by 1, in a way, right?

Yes, the welding ports would reduce overall part count (though I consider those to be parts that should have never been on the station anyway, so a net reduction of zero for my purposes).

The real point is that introducing a stand-alone hatch part does nothing to solve the other problems that need to be solved regarding dynamic crew-enabled parts (the dynamic IVAs and the actual dynamic crew capacity).

 

21 minutes ago, tater said:

A few things...

1. Porkjet has inflatable parts, and he's said that he means to bring them up to current at some point... something to consider, perhaps.

2. Size wise, you are right, 2.5m is likely the best, though I would like to see larger for planetary base use, perhaps (the Mars Direct concepts show basically 2 floor high cylinders, but they look more squat than 2.5m would be. Even if you don't do an IVA, think in terms of a rough sketch of how it might look so that they are the right size, IMO, I'd rather see them bigger than too small for their supposed job (for example if they are supposed to have an airlock, the storage for kerbal helmets alone eats up most of a 2.5m part  ). Functionally, what crew parts are actually needed? Sort of depends on the use of LS mods. A hab part would make sense (fit in some sort of beds), as would perhaps a common area (food prep/eating, etc).

3. The shape change possibilities of SSTU should be used... I agree that resizing the crew parts makes no sense as you have described the problems, but that doesn't mean they could not have elements outside the crew cylinder, right? Like "mount" and "nose"? They could also be like the fairings where there is a diameter setting on that part. So the crew part is 2.5m, and 5m longer a given part. You could set one side to slope to 1.25m, and the other side to go to a larger diameter, for example. The crew part is unchanged, only the external bits to the compartment scale.

1.)  Indeed, PJ does have a nice selection of inflatable parts, and well done models/textures at that.  However, from looking at them, they seem to be 1.25m for some reason (or at least have 1.25m connection points)?  There are whispers about him re-doing/modernizing the pack/models, but I have not found any previews or information on it.  That leaves me still needing some 2.5m inflatables.

2.) Base parts will be coming (much) later.  Some of the parts may be compatible for either purpose, but mostly the base parts will have a different layout and feel to them (different aesthetics).  Yes, they will come in a much wider range of sizes.

3.)  Modularity - yep.  Nothing would prevent the crewed parts from sharing the same nose/mount system that the tanks do (top and bottom adapters).  So you could certainly add a 'life support' segment onto your crewed part, or various shaped/sized/modeled adapter segments.  However they will be limited to altering resources only;  there is no possibility to add a docking port, science lab, antenna, or any other functionality that relies on PartModules (MODULE's in the part.cfg files).  Although I am/will be investigating dynamic module swapping, I still don't think it will work out and so am intentionally planning the parts around not having it.  If I do happen to get it working.. well.. that can open up all sorts of new module combinations, and would be easy enough to add onto the existing planned parts.  One thing that I might be able to get working would be optional external lights on some of the parts, but it would be a bit hacky unless I can get the dynamic module swapping figured out.

 

1 hour ago, RedParadize said:

What about a rigid deployable centrifuge that are not a torus? There is several exemple on Atomic rocket webside.

Thanks for the link; I'll take a look at what is there and see if anything pops out at me.

[RedParadize]

About IVA limitation, A work around could be to have the IVA as a completely separated part:

1- A single Pressured hull part : A basic frame that have nodes on its side to attach IVA, one or more depending on its size. Size, and some external option and feature can be changed, like what you have with SSTU tanks, plus some extra option that work the same way than mount, like external experiment, storage etc.

2- multiple IVA parts: Attachable only to node. In VAB its a simple hatch or window, with a red or green cylinder that represent the volume of the interior once attached to Pressured hull. Its red if it clip, its green if it doesn't. Whats good about this is that it would allow in orbit modification using KAS.

Its more part, but its customizable, and its not limited to Station It also works for interstellar spaceship and possibly for deployable part and spaceplane. What do you think?

Edited July 12, 2016 by RedParadize

[tater]

I'm pretty sure the large pork jet inflatable (Bigelow looking thing) is actually 2.5m.

2.5m tank left, 3.25m right.

Edited July 12, 2016 by tater

[RedParadize]

Thinking a bit on the Idea of separated IVA, There is some mechanics that would garantee IVA fit in a given presured hull without being too complicated (to play with at least!). 

Say Hulls length can be adjusted by section of 2m. Player chose to have a 8m long hull with two attachment node on its side. One at 3 meters from the top, one at 1m of the bottom. The one at 3m from the top would allow "deployment" of IVA that are shorter than 6m, could still be 2m or 4m. The one meter from the bottom would only allow 2m. Again, IVA could be storage as well, and they would use the same mechamics as a regular tank, when switching to transparent, you would see the 6m IVA plus a 2m tank.

Now say you can have multiple diameter hull. Say 1.25 and 2.5m for a start. In VAB, Player decide to have a hull 8m long hull, a section that accept a single full size 2.5x4m IVA and another that accept four small 1.25x4m IVA. Player can chose to decide to have a lab plus 4 experiment, storage etc... Or say a hab with a comune room and 4 individual bed.

A bit like Universal Storage, but with a potentialy larger scope. Again, these are simple suggestion. I have the tendancy to trow them at every modder around. Sorry about that...

About atomic rocket website, I feel realy sorry for you if you never visited it. Realy, its cover everything related to space and Si-Fy in the best retro format possible.

Edited July 12, 2016 by RedParadize