Jump to content

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


Shadowmage
 Share

Recommended Posts

Crew is irrelevant. Why needs space for 100+ kerbals?  I think the main goal for large habs is extra living and storage space for the few kerbals on long missions. USI LS needs large habs to accommodate kerbals on long trips, maybe look into the calculation for this "hab space" and tune for the LS mods. 16-20 kerbals seems like plenty for the large torus to me, leaving the other space available for LS mods or maybe the storage container module.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was thinking something in that range as I recall. Even 100 is not implausible. Depends on how comfortable it is. I'd probably err on the side of more volume per kerbal with a goal of much longer term habitation. The D could possibly be 3 levels.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Anyone have an idea on the m^3 (and mass) per crew needed for life-support equipment on the ISS (storage, recyclers, scrubbers, etc)?

The ISS has about 900 m^3 of habitable volume, for a crew of 6 (up to 9). This is an eagle view of all the life support systems.

ScGws.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, this is not meant to be a passenger liner that fits as many people in coach as they can. Most space would be allocated towards extra living space for long flights, storage space and equipment. And I don't see any point in having 100 kerbals on board either for game-play. Not sure on current versions, but older versions of KSP would come to a complete halt because of the IVA animation icons of 10+ kerbals, let alone 100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimbodiah said:

Yeah, this is not meant to be a passenger liner that fits as many people in coach as they can. Most space would be allocated towards extra living space for long flights, storage space and equipment. And I don't see any point in having 100 kerbals on board either for game-play. Not sure on current versions, but older versions of KSP would come to a complete halt because of the IVA animation icons of 10+ kerbals, let alone 100.

There is no IVA, so I don't see the total as really having any impact. USILS is sort of pegged to seats (base habitation is related to seats, anyway), so in that sense they represent room. Seats also give a sense of size, and the CFG-D is huge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going to spend a bit of time tonight working on the 'docking-port-fix' system.  Initial code is written, fairly simple after I figured out what all needed to be done; less than a few hundred lines for the entire system, and completely event driven (so should not add any appreciable performance costs).  The 'fixer' is a separate module that will be added in the flight scene to any part that contains a docking port (or multiple ports); every part in a vessel will be examined for docking ports, one 'fix' module will be added for each docking port present on the part. 

What it will do is add a 'Force Undock' button any time it detects that a docking port is 'stuck' (docking port is in docked state but 'undock' button is already deactivated); pressing the button will call a method to decouple the parts (using stock couple/decouple code).  And.. that should be it.  Nice and simple.

Going to -try- and develop it as an external mod, independent of SSTU (so, like my rescue-pod-fix).  Hopefully should be small and lightweight.  Will keep you guys posted, and put out some links if/when I get it working. 

(Although it begs the question of why the stock docking port doesn't include code to check -itself- for undocking errors; why is it disabling the undock button if it is still docked?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the plus side, I figured out how to hook directly into the ModuleDockingNode's own Update code.  Heck, with the method they have used (FSM with delegate methods and callbacks), I can completely replace, in-line, most of the docking port code without breaking existing patches/etc.  Basically the module merely calls these delegate methods for its update functionality, and the devs were kind enough to leave them public/unprotected -- so you can remove or replace any particular bit of the docking port code without having to touch the original source.  Kind of a neat way of handling things -- it has not always been that way; previously all the functionality was built directly into the FixedUpdate, was truly 'hard-coded' and unalterable.

This means that if I can figure out what the -root- of the problem is, I can merely insert code into the docking port itself that can fix the problem (haven't tried yet, but I think I can even set it up in an override-fashion, adding new code and still calling the original delgate as well).

So.... if any of you guys run into an SSTU+stock craft that has stuck docking ports, please post up the persistence file to GitHub so that I can investigate the problem a bit more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TopHeavy11 said:

How do you change diameter?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you are in sandbox mode. In that case, you need to go into Settings from the KSC view, and at the very top is "Difficulty Settings." Select that. Under "Advanced" select All Part Upgrades Applied in Sandbox.

Now the diameter is a right click in the VAB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tater said:

De nada. Now for @SQUAD to fix the absurd default in sandbox to NOT apply all upgrades.

Yeah, sadly, I saw no mention of that in the 1.2.2 patch notes =\

Is anyone aware of a bug/feedback ticket for this in the stock bug tracker?  (If not, one of us should probably open one up; flagged as feedback)


Speaking of 1.2.2 -- I have no idea if SSTU is compatible or not.  Should be fine as long as they didn't do any API changes.

I'll do a re-compile and put out an updated release this weekend.  Probably won't have too many fixes or balance changes in it, but the SC-E will be back in and mostly functional.  It flies and lands, but haven't tested re-entry recently.  I did clean up the GUI a bit though so its not quite so outrageous.  Will try and do some testing/updating to make sure it can at least re-enter in stock.


 

Edited by Shadowmage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

*snip* 

SC-E will be back in and mostly functional.  It flies and lands, but haven't tested re-entry recently.  I did clean up the GUI a bit though so its not quite so outrageous.  Will try and do some testing/updating to make sure it can at least re-enter in stock.

Downloaded the SC-E stuff today to give it some testing. It reenters and lands really well. The only problem I've come across is that every time I load or launch my shuttle, the wheels will be deployed, even if it is saved/launched with them retracted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Qwarkk said:

Downloaded the SC-E stuff today to give it some testing. It reenters and lands really well. The only problem I've come across is that every time I load or launch my shuttle, the wheels will be deployed, even if it is saved/launched with them retracted.

Thanks for the testing :)

The landing gear state not persisting is a known issue with the KSPWheels deployment/animation module.  It has already been fixed in dev code (and dev4 branch on github), and will be available with the next KSPWheels release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andromeda_ said:

Can anyone help me with the centrifuge? I see that it requires 30 tons to activate but no matter how many ships are docked it refuses to work. 

30.52 tons of Rocket Parts. Have an SSTU tank, and "Configure Containers" in the right click, and add rocket parts.

Fitting%20out.png

There is a large "fitting out" craft I made for a CFG-D. The orange tank is propellant, and everything forward is equipment to fit out (inflate) the -D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...