Orionkermin

[1.0.2]Corvus -Size 1, two Kerbal command pod(Version 1.1.1)

Recommended Posts

I tried making the foil on the OAS shiny but I don't think it turned out that well (see gif)... I think that the reflections work best on flat looking textures.

Again, to best implement it the foil would need its own mesh. Plus, It would probably need a less crinkly texture.

Also, Yup! I am using Ven's stock revamp in my earlier post.

oh yes it doesn't look so well but the rest of the OAS look nice it shine like the Apollo CSM:P

EDIT: Nice "Kagena" CERVERUS

Edited by CosmoBro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CERVERUS. Wow nice agena! That looks pretty fun! Might have to make one myself!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi and welcome to the forums. :)

My plan for the nose is to make it so the entire top is removed when the chute deploys; see the actual Gemini. That will get rid of the ugly clipping we have right now. The stats definitely need tweaking, I agree with you there.

I want to make separate docking and non docking versons of the chute, so that you aren't getting docking technology earlier in the tree than you are meant to. I can add an extra .cfg to make a copy of the Non docking version be probe controlled, but it will get added to the extras DL. I want to make sure to keep the main mod fairly small, this helps avoids part bloat and still gives everyone what they want. For example, while it's a cool idea, how often will people use this pod without crew? Even in a campaign that is RP focused it won't be too many flights. So that's just one of the things I have to weigh in when I decide what goes into the primary DL.

I hear you on keeping the parts low, etc. And thanks for all you are working with here, this is my go-to pod for most manned flights right now. I'll find some creative ways to hide an SAS controller in there for the unmanned tests.

-W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Corvus extras fuel tank has this bug:

http://i.imgur.com/TRvMuAu.jpg

When you try to place it on the side of a tank or decoupler, it will sometimes bug out and appear to successfully place quite a distance away. As pictured, there are no issues with the stock fuel tanks.

EDIT: I also noticed when it does attach where it should, it introduces some fuel line bugs. No issues with stock fuel tanks.

Edited by MarcAlain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who install the KIS 1.1.5 And have problem when load the game with the "Corvus_Exterior" try delete this to .cfg file of the "Corvus_Exterior" .cfg archive!

http://prntscr.com/7bwaqr

Oops! I forgot that was there. I'll delete it ASAP. Thank you.

The Corvus extras fuel tank has this bug:

http://i.imgur.com/TRvMuAu.jpg

When you try to place it on the side of a tank or decoupler, it will sometimes bug out and appear to successfully place quite a distance away. As pictured, there are no issues with the stock fuel tanks.

EDIT: I also noticed when it does attach where it should, it introduces some fuel line bugs. No issues with stock fuel tanks.

I'm 99% sure that I forgot to set up the attach_node correctly... I'll take a look when I get home today. If you want to try and fix it yourself, it should be something like 0.625 in the z axis. Sorry for the bug! ><

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh it's not a huge issue, just thought I'd let you know! Turns out the fuel issue I was having is due to a bug with how I had the liquid booster attached to the main rocket body. Aerodynamic parts directly attached to a rocket ( like the nosecones) can cause asparagus staging bugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Orionkermin -

The DRE config needs to be updated to this:


@PART[Corvus_Heatshield]:FOR[DeadlyReentry]
{
!MODULE[ModuleAblator]{}
!RESOURCE[Ablator]{}

@thermalMassModifier = 1
@maxTemp = 1800

MODULE
{
name = ModuleHeatShield
ablativeResource = AblativeShielding
lossExp = -6000
lossConst = 20
pyrolysisLossFactor = 10000
reentryConductivity = 0.025
ablationTempThresh = 500
skinHeatConductivity = 0.25
}
RESOURCE
{
name = AblativeShielding
amount = 100
maxAmount = 100
}
}

The current CFG prevents the heatshield from ablating properly :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This mod made me like Gemini.

But I'm too impatient to limit my throttle on putting it in orbit, so 1.25-1.875 adapter says goodbye during ascent, he-he.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh it's not a huge issue, just thought I'd let you know! Turns out the fuel issue I was having is due to a bug with how I had the liquid booster attached to the main rocket body. Aerodynamic parts directly attached to a rocket ( like the nosecones) can cause asparagus staging bugs.

No worries, I just hate when I let little bugs like this through. :D

Orionkermin -

The DRE config needs to be updated to this:

~Awesome Scripting~

The current CFG prevents the heatshield from ablating properly :)

Thanks Mr. Peabody!

But seriously, thanks for the help. I'll get it fixed for the next update.

This mod made me like Gemini.

But I'm too impatient to limit my throttle on putting it in orbit, so 1.25-1.875 adapter says goodbye during ascent, he-he.

It burns up, how does the chute survive? I've been using KER since 1.0 came out so my TWR has been kept down on most launches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't deorbited my Geminiesque mission yet and was too lazy to not just revert during failed launch, sorry. I'll report on chute survivability tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, tested chutes.

They burn at ~30 kilometers altitude from 100 km orbit with putting like 3/4 of Corvus monoprop for decelerating into descent.

Without jettisonong service module (for weight and some sheilfing) I was able to land it opening chutes at ~5 km. Engine blowed up, everything else was nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be alone in this but while I love the Corvus, I think it's a bit too light. At 1.1 tons dry and .55t per kerbal, it's the lightest pod to bring a couple kerbals into orbit. Lighter than even the lander cans which have lower impact tolerance and temperature resistance due to being made of "very light materials" 0.6 and 1.25t/k for the mk1 and 2 lander cans. Mk1 pod is 0.8t, Mk1-2 is 1.333~t/k, the Corvus is even better than the Hitchhiker which has 0.625t/k and that's made out of aluminum and gold foil. It's only beat by the Mk3 passenger module at 0.406k/t

In short, would it be possible to put the Corvus somewhere between the Mk1 and Mk1-2's mass? Like 1.6 tons dry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to be missing the service module. Currently using the stock service bay as a replacement. How do unlock this in the community tech tree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I might be alone in this but while I love the Corvus, I think it's a bit too light. At 1.1 tons dry and .55t per kerbal, it's the lightest pod to bring a couple kerbals into orbit. Lighter than even the lander cans which have lower impact tolerance and temperature resistance due to being made of "very light materials" 0.6 and 1.25t/k for the mk1 and 2 lander cans. Mk1 pod is 0.8t, Mk1-2 is 1.333~t/k, the Corvus is even better than the Hitchhiker which has 0.625t/k and that's made out of aluminum and gold foil. It's only beat by the Mk3 passenger module at 0.406k/t

In short, would it be possible to put the Corvus somewhere between the Mk1 and Mk1-2's mass? Like 1.6 tons dry?

The balance of stock crewed parts is totally bogus there is no consistency whatsoever between the stats of any two pods so it would be wrong to try to impose stocks chaos on a mod part.

Here are two better approaches

A. Quick and dirty you determine the mass based on the average density of real world spacecraft or other vehicles made out of similar materials and the volume of the pods conical shape

B. I worked out a formula in the tantares thread but I'm on a phone so digging it up and pasting here isn't easy but the gist of it is. First you determine the mass for batteries reaction wheels and mono prop tanks based on the mass ratios of their dedicated part equivalents. Second add 0.1 mass if a part is commandable at all and an additional 0.1 for each level of sas the part provides. Third add 0.25 per seat (unless you can give me a better reason they should weigh more other than "but-but... Stock..."). And finally take this total and multiply it by 1.5 if this part is intended to survive reentry. Tada you have an op mod part but don't feel bad it's squads fault for not overhauling the balance of crew parts like they should have for 1.0 and at least this part was made folowing a set of rules instead of randomly picking numbers like how some squad pods feel. which means if you apply these same rules to other pods you can bring peace and balance and consistency to the universe. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Third add 0.25 per seat (unless you can give me a better reason they should weigh more other than "but-but... Stock...").

"but-but..." Dank memes. Very dank.

Anyways, pressurized, fully enclosed, the ones that aren't lander cans have impact tolerances of in the hundreds of kph, the ability to store "hundreds of pounds of moon rocks" in soil samples that a simple chair with a joystick can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I seem to be missing the service module. Currently using the stock service bay as a replacement. How do unlock this in the community tech tree?
Found it :blush:. I have way too many parts and a complicated tech tree. At last the the power generator.
Third add 0.25 per seat (unless you can give me a better reason they should weigh more other than "but-but... Stock...").
That number is good. In my game the pods low weight is offset by using TAC life support. A crew of two will only have supplies for about 1.5 days. The small life support canister is required. It is also classed as cramped living conditions using Keepfit. It also has no linked access space thanks to CLS. So although I love the Covus. My Kerbals won't tolerate it for long term missions. They need the more comfortable and heavy pods. The 0.25 per seat is good rule of thumb for a basic flight controls but in my game more weight is the price for long term habitation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Found it :blush:. I have way too many parts and a complicated tech tree. At last the the power generator.

That number is good. In my game the pods low weight is offset by using TAC life support. A crew of two will only have supplies for about 1.5 days. The small life support canister is required. It is also classed as cramped living conditions using Keepfit. It also has no linked access space thanks to CLS. So although I love the Covus. My Kerbals won't tolerate it for long term missions. They need the more comfortable and heavy pods. The 0.25 per seat is good rule of thumb for a basic flight controls but in my game more weight is the price for long term habitation.

Tell a lie it does come with a full 3 days of life support. However, I did noticed that the radiation shielding is poor in interstellar to compensate. So guess that's where the weight saving is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Found it :blush:. I have way too many parts and a complicated tech tree. At last the the power generator.

That number is good. In my game the pods low weight is offset by using TAC life support. A crew of two will only have supplies for about 1.5 days. The small life support canister is required. It is also classed as cramped living conditions using Keepfit. It also has no linked access space thanks to CLS. So although I love the Covus. My Kerbals won't tolerate it for long term missions. They need the more comfortable and heavy pods. The 0.25 per seat is good rule of thumb for a basic flight controls but in my game more weight is the price for long term habitation.

Well then you'll be happy with the next update I think, since the fuel cell will become its own part in the same node you get the first battery. Here's some WIP shots for the new "Utilities" all are sharing the same texture sheet, so memory shouldn't go up much, but I'm separating out the parts a bit to get away from the all-in-one style of parts. So the rear RCS and fuel cell are now their own parts. I'm not too happy with the Kapton, so it could change a lot from what is shown. The trunk is modeled and on the same texture sheet as well, but I haven't started texturing it yet.

Untitled2_zpsanebgtsg.pngUntitled3_zpstecdyl1n.pngUntitled_zpslqzo6nof.png

I'm all for giving the pod a bump in weight, but lets wait a couple weeks to see what changes 1.0.3 brings before we make a final decision on how to proceed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's some WIP shots for the new "Utilities" all are sharing the same texture sheet, so memory shouldn't go up much, but I'm separating out the parts a bit to get away from the all-in-one style of parts. So the rear RCS and fuel cell are now their own parts.

Will the fuel cell will take the place of the Generator function that's currently in the Service Module? Just curious but, why bother with a fuel cell if Squad already has a stock one? What will be different?

I like the look of the new engine part! But since no stock parts have that gold mylar texture, have you thought about changing it? I myself have no ideas on what would be a better choice, and the gold looks good enough, so I'll welcome it either way. It's just not too stock-alike is all.

Edited by ev0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will the fuel cell will take the place of the Generator function that's currently in the Service Module? Just curious but, why bother with a fuel cell if Squad already has a stock one? What will be different?

I like the look of the new engine part! But since no stock parts have that gold mylar texture, have you thought about changing it? I myself have no ideas on what would be a better choice, and the gold looks good enough, so I'll welcome it either way. It's just not too stock-alike is all.

The fuel cell is one only in name. It still functions like the generator, burning monopropellant for electric charge. I guess you could head cannon it as hydrazine reacting with some kind of oxidizer that's inside the cell. Either way it's intended as an early game alternative to solar panels.

The idea is to remove it from the service module, although I am worried about people not being able to click on it and action groups are stupidly not available in the early career. (The new service module has no doors just a hollow back end) I may put it to a vote to see if I should make it a stand alone part or not. If not this asset can still be used, I'll just add it to the inside of the service module.

The foil not being stock-alike doesn't bother me too much. Mostly because it's such a common space craft element that it probably should be represented in some stock parts. It's on the engine mostly just to evoke a connection to the Gemini equipment module. Although, I'm aware that Gemini had no engine propper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

screenshot1.png

You have served me well, Corvus. Last major mission: Link-up with an ultra-light Mun lander. Mission went well (the lander, not so much, but it made it). Everyone got home safe. New mission requirements need 3 crew as we advance further afield. Such a reliable craft shall not be discarded, however, and will serve our Space Program as a crew shuttle for years to come...

Godspeed, good ship. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.