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

[MrMeeb]

I could possibly make a video using these parts. I found them earlier this week and I'm in love with the concept and how well it is excecuted. I'm -very- new to the kerbal film genre, but if you look at my signature then you'll be able to see what I've made so far. If you're interested let me know :)

Also, while I'm here...

1) I can't seem to get the docking ports to dock to each other
2) Pls pls pls RealPlume support :3

I know I should go throigh GitHub but efficiency

[JoseEduardo]

I think there is a stock SSTU RealPlume laying around... as for RO, Stratochief will look into that soon

[blowfish]

[quote name='MrMeeb']2) Pls pls pls RealPlume support :3 [/QUOTE]

RealPlume support isn't really maintained by individual mods. The configs are in the RealPlume-StockConfigs repository.

[davidy12]

Yeah, it's maintained by DerpyFirework, so yeah, talk to him.

[Autochton]

[quote name='Shadowmage']LoL...

Have settled on MUS for the Upper stages acronym. Technically it stands for 'Modular Upper Stage' to reflect how they are built by the plugin and configured for use. I'm sure its probably a bad-word somewhere... but ohwell, its an acronym for an upper stage here :)[/QUOTE]

Means 'mouse' in Danish, Norwegian and Swedish. :P

[RedParadize]

I think your mod will be a great hit once released. I would not be supprise to see other modder using your plugin or adding textures and models to it.

[quote name='Autochton']Means 'mouse' in Danish, Norwegian and Swedish. :P[/QUOTE]

Thats not bad for a upper stage.

[MrMeeb]

[quote name='JoseEduardo']I think there is a stock SSTU RealPlume laying around... as for RO, Stratochief will look into that soon[/QUOTE]

[quote name='blowfish']RealPlume support isn't really maintained by individual mods. The configs are in the RealPlume-StockConfigs repository.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='davidy12']Yeah, it's maintained by DerpyFirework, so yeah, talk to him.[/QUOTE]

Okay. Sorry guys! :blush:

[Jimbodiah]

This mod is freaking awesome and getting better every day. This should be standard parts in Kerbal, building rockets is a joy with these parts and it actually looks like a rockets and not a soap-box / toilet roll model kit like with the stock parts.

Also looking forward to the capsule, I am in love with the FASA apollo one; it's one of the few parts I kept from the FASA mod after I started using SSTU. It's so shiny :)


My only wishes :)
- Monoprop fuel selection in the orange modular tanks (not just the small 50.0 mp tanks, but dedicated ones). As the main tanks have an MP selection I think it's only an added fuel switch option. I've modded my files for it, but perhaps it could be standard in a future release.
- Slanted nose cone on liquid fuel tanks like those on the SRB that point towards the central main tank. /| |\
- Option on tank sections (or the decoupler itself) to have seperatron integrated like on the raidal decouplers but to push the tank away from the section above it when seperating.


Keep up the good work, love your stuff.

[JoseEduardo]

[quote name='RedParadize']I think your mod will be a great hit once released. I would not be supprise to see other modder using your plugin or adding textures and models to it.



Thats not bad for a upper stage.[/QUOTE]

agree, on both points

and mouse is far better than * :P

[Shadowmage]

[quote name='JoseEduardo']I could help with the .craft files, for both, RO and stock, but about videos, I don't have a graphic appealing computer to start with :P

btw, got one idea for the future, but should be relativelly simple, a resizeable Instrument Unit, of course, you have the payload for control capabilities, but the IU could provide more controls for the rocket (SAS level) and reaction wheels aswell (could also include RCS, just an idea): [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V_Instrument_Unit[/URL][/QUOTE]

Sweet, will get together with you in the coming days/weeks to work on some pics and craft for the public release promotional material. Loved the pics you posted the other day of your RO creations; something similar (or even those), showcasing some of the capabilities of the mod would be great. Would like to include a few historical replicas, and a few craft/pics of some more 'Kerbal' styled vessels.

IMU - hmm... perhaps. Would need to find a -very- good reason for it, as an extra part just for a probe core (which stock already kind of covers) doesn't really fit with my style. If you would like to flesh out the concept a bit more (what use(s) would it have, what vessels would it be useful for, etc), could go a long ways towards helping me decided whether to do it or not.


[quote name='MrMeeb']I could possibly make a video using these parts. I found them earlier this week and I'm in love with the concept and how well it is excecuted. I'm -very- new to the kerbal film genre, but if you look at my signature then you'll be able to see what I've made so far. If you're interested let me know :)

Also, while I'm here...

1) I can't seem to get the docking ports to dock to each other
2) Pls pls pls RealPlume support :3

I know I should go throigh GitHub but efficiency[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the offer. Took a look at your video, and it looks great; very cinematic, with a pretty good selection for soundtrack/backing music. If you would like to help with some videos, it would be greatly appreciated. Wouldn't need anything nearly so long or orchestrated; I was thinking some short clips (10-30s each) of various craft/setups/events (launches, separations, nozzle-extensions, docking) (probably all rolled into the same video to keep things simple). Of course, if you are doing the video, most of that would be up to you :) Feel free to send me a friends request on Steam (if you have it) (info in my signature), and we can discuss further details (as I've mostly been using Steam as my IM client :)).



[quote name='blowfish']RealPlume support isn't really maintained by individual mods. The configs are in the RealPlume-StockConfigs repository.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='davidy12']Yeah, it's maintained by DerpyFirework, so yeah, talk to him.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the info guys, have added a quick blurb to the OP stating as much. I didn't see any SSTU-Stock-RealPlume configs in the repository -yet-, but that doesn't mean they won't get added in the future -- I'm sure if somebody were to make up a set and submit them, they would most likely be included much faster. (This is one of those places where a 64-bit client would have interesting side effects; as I would likely have the spare ram to use RealPlume myself, and at that point would make up the configs myself; sadly, no 64-bit client = no ram for RealPlume = I don't use it = I won't make configs for stuff I don't use).



[quote name='RedParadize']I think your mod will be a great hit once released. I would not be supprise to see other modder using your plugin or adding textures and models to it.[/QUOTE]

I've tried to make many of the plugins/modules adaptable for others to use. The custom-fuel tanks, for example, could easily be re-used by others. Heck, you could make a custom-fuel tank part to merely combine the stock fuel-tank models into a single editor-part-per-size. Similar interesting functionalities and opportunities exist with many of the other modules.


[quote name='Jimbodiah']This mod is freaking awesome and getting better every day. This should be standard parts in Kerbal, building rockets is a joy with these parts and it actually looks like a rockets and not a soap-box / toilet roll model kit like with the stock parts.

Also looking forward to the capsule, I am in love with the FASA apollo one; it's one of the few parts I kept from the FASA mod after I started using SSTU. It's so shiny :)


My only wishes :)
- Monoprop fuel selection in the orange modular tanks (not just the small 50.0 mp tanks, but dedicated ones). As the main tanks have an MP selection I think it's only an added fuel switch option. I've modded my files for it, but perhaps it could be standard in a future release.
- Slanted nose cone on liquid fuel tanks like those on the SRB that point towards the central main tank. /| |\
- Option on tank sections (or the decoupler itself) to have seperatron integrated like on the raidal decouplers but to push the tank away from the section above it when seperating.


Keep up the good work, love your stuff.[/QUOTE]

Monoprop fuel selection -- Not sure what tanks you are referring to (all the custom tanks already include MP as a fuel type)? The Lander-Core tanks? (the only ones I can think of that are orange/lacking fuel switching). If yes, I will look into adding fuel-switching as an option; no guarantees though, as those parts have a -very- special setup due to the included module-switching (that handles the legs/solar panels/etc). If I remember right, they are limited to a single fuel-selection due to already using the fuel-switching capability to represent the different sized tanks. Given the current plugin limitations on those parts, this would require duplicating every mesh-switch-setup for every additional fuel type (not only tons of work, but less-than-optimal implementation wise as well; and might not even work given how the module-switching stuff is implemented). Been awhile since I've looked at their configs/plugin code though, so it might be simpler than I'm remembering... still no guarantees though.

Slanted nosecone - Won't say yes, but can't say no either. Maybe in the future if I have the time (time is really what keeps me from implementing most things). Already thinking of reworking the SRBs a bit, so perhaps will add this in as I am working on them. Thought they already had a slanted nosecone style though? (Honestly, I have not been able to use them in my career game yet, as it's SSTU version is like 3-months old and does not include any of that stuff..)

Retro/Jettison motors - I likely won't be integrating them into fuel tanks. However, I have done a small bit of concept work on an 'advanced decoupler' that would include some of this functionality -- retro-rockets on the decouple stage, as well as ullage engines attached to the 'live stage', with a third set of retro-rockets for decoupling the decoupler. Confused yet? So was I when I first saw the concept... but it is how it really worked for the Saturn-V parts (as far as I know). Will know more on these when I start working on them.

[JoseEduardo]

well, they could be added as a top endcap for tanks with some RCS, probe control and reaction wheels strong enough to help maneuvering the rocket, like KW had the radial reaction wheels for the tanks, which were far more powerful than stock ones (well, they had to move a 5m tank around where the biggest ingame are the 3.75m ones that doesn't even have a reaction wheel :P ), of course, in order for the RCS to have any practical meaning the reaction wheels couldn't be so strong, the RCS units could run in LFO from the tanks and give even more power to move the rocket around :)

although that would have a weight gain of course, so having a IU for each tank could be a bit counterproductive :P

EDIT: about the rockets... hm.... I think I can come up with a rocket in RO based on real stuff that should be kerbal enough... (Saturn MLV and Nova says hi :P) Edited November 24, 2015 by JoseEduardo

[blowfish]

[quote name='JoseEduardo']well, they could be added as a top endcap for tanks with some RCS, probe control and reaction wheels strong enough to help maneuvering the rocket, like KW had the radial reaction wheels for the tanks, which were far more powerful than stock ones (well, they had to move a 5m tank around where the biggest ingame are the 3.75m ones that doesn't even have a reaction wheel :P ), of course, in order for the RCS to have any practical meaning the reaction wheels couldn't be so strong, the RCS units could run in LFO from the tanks and give even more power to move the rocket around :)

although that would have a weight gain of course, so having a IU for each tank could be a bit counterproductive :P[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure I see the use case for this ... on a lower stage, it probably has gimbaling and you're going to get rid of it as soon as it's spent. On an upper stage, Shadowmage is planning specific parts with control, RCS, and possibly power generation.

[MrMeeb]

Awesome :) I can't seem to see you signature...what's your username?

[Shadowmage]

[quote name='MrMeeb']Awesome :) I can't seem to see you signature...what's your username?[/QUOTE]

*Gasp* you are right... looks like my sig is gone (probably part of the forum updates...).

shadowmage45 is my Steam username (iirc... could be capital S - Shadowmage45).

Will be off-work/available for chat likely here in a few hours.

[MrMeeb]

[quote name='Shadowmage']*Gasp* you are right... looks like my sig is gone (probably part of the forum updates...).

shadowmage45 is my Steam username (iirc... could be capital S - Shadowmage45).

Will be off-work/available for chat likely here in a few hours.[/QUOTE]

Okay, I'll add you. Hmmm, timezones might make that a problem :huh: it's 20:55 here

[Shadowmage]

[quote name='MrMeeb']Okay, I'll add you. Hmmm, timezones might make that a problem :huh: it's 20:55 here[/QUOTE]

Aye, might not get in touch today, but for the next few days I'll be off work for Thanksgiving holiday; so I should be more available during the mornings as well. Will try to remember to sign into Steam in the mornings :)

[MrMeeb]

[quote name='Shadowmage']Aye, might not get in touch today, but for the next few days I'll be off work for Thanksgiving holiday; so I should be more available during the mornings as well. Will try to remember to sign into Steam in the mornings :)[/QUOTE]

Okay :)

[JoseEduardo]

[quote name='blowfish']I'm not sure I see the use case for this ... on a lower stage, it probably has gimbaling and you're going to get rid of it as soon as it's spent. On an upper stage, Shadowmage is planning specific parts with control, RCS, and possibly power generation.[/QUOTE]

fair enough, I was thinking more of the S-IV, S-IVB, S-II (when it's the last stage, like INT-20 or 21, don't recall which one right now), DIRECT (same as S-II, without upper stage it would be on the core), but now that you've mentioned the upper stages that should do the trick

[Shadowmage]

Upper Stages -- Will include at least RCS, some small battery capacity, and a fuel-cell based EC generator (consuming LF+O). Might also be including unmanned-probe-core capability, and am contemplating including a variable-torque SAS module (torque would vary with size of the tank). I'm personally not too fond of the KSP 'magic-torque' system... but it is the stock system...

Well, some of that is still in-flux. Have not decided if I will be including some Monoprop in the base tanks for the RCS, or if they will be verniers consuming LF+O. Might just use Monoprop for both the RCS and fuel-cell, to make sure they are still operable when alternate fuels are selected for the upper-stage.

Will be working on the rest of the upper-stage plugin tonight, and should know much more by tomorrow.

[blowfish]

[quote name='Shadowmage']Might also be including unmanned-probe-core capability, and am contemplating including a variable-torque SAS module (torque would vary with size of the tank). I'm personally not too fond of the KSP 'magic-torque' system... but it is the stock system...[/QUOTE]

+1 for the probe core capability, particularly since it's just a few lines in the cfg. I also am less a fan of reaction wheels, particularly for expendable stages ... you'd be surprised how far a little RCS fuel will go when you don't blatantly waste it.

[quote name='Shadowmage']Well, some of that is still in-flux. Have not decided if I will be including some Monoprop in the base tanks for the RCS, or if they will be verniers consuming LF+O. Might just use Monoprop for both the RCS and fuel-cell, to make sure they are still operable when alternate fuels are selected for the upper-stage.[/QUOTE]

Interesting question ... as far as real life goes, I think that expandable stages have traditionally used a dedicated monopropellant (hydrazine/nitrogen/whatever) reserve, but newer designs have begun to take advantage of boiloff from the tanks for both RCS and power generation - the goal being enabling longer, more flexible missions and reduced mass (monoprop tanks and batteries). So setting the RCS and fuel cell to both use LFO might be reasonable.

[Whirligig Girl]

This will very rapidly become my favorite stockalike-realism compromise for RSS. :D

[JoseEduardo]

[quote name='GregroxMun']This will very rapidly become my favorite stockalike-realism compromise for RSS. :D[/QUOTE]

can we expect SSTU Hype Train? :P

[Jimbodiah]

[quote][COLOR=#333333]Monoprop fuel selection -- Not sure what tanks you are referring to (all the custom tanks already include MP as a fuel type)? The Lander-Core tanks? (the only ones I can think of that are orange/lacking fuel switching)[/COLOR][/quote]

[COLOR=#333333]Yep, those are the ones.

I build setups like the Apollo CSM/Lander rigs and have a couple of modules from the lander range to get solar panels + LF + Ox + MP. Basically a unit like the SC-B-SM but with LF/Ox and a bit bigger. Hence the request for an MP tank version or the existing ones, or maybe a fuel switch on the SC-C-SM and no engine ;) Ooooohh, the possibilities.

[/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][quote]Slanted nosecone - Won't say yes, but can't say no either. Maybe in the future if I have the time (time is really what keeps me from implementing most things). Already thinking of reworking the SRBs a bit, so perhaps will add this in as I am working on them. Thought they already had a slanted nosecone style though?[/quote]

The SRBs do indeed already have that option. It's just a cosmetic thing, but makes LF boosters look way cooler.
[/COLOR]
[quote][COLOR=#333333]Retro/Jettison motors - I likely won't be integrating them into fuel tanks. However, I have done a small bit of concept work on an 'advanced decoupler' that would include some of this functionality -- retro-rockets on the decouple stage, as well as ullage engines attached to the 'live stage', with a third set of retro-rockets for decoupling the decoupler.[/COLOR][/quote]

[COLOR=#333333]Cool!!! You're one step further to what I had in mind. 2.21 here we come [/COLOR]:cool:[COLOR=#333333]


[quote]Confused yet?[/quote]

Nope, sick minds think alike [/COLOR]:P[COLOR=#333333]

[/COLOR]

[Shadowmage]

[quote name='Jimbodiah'][COLOR=#333333]Yep, those are the ones.

I build setups like the Apollo CSM/Lander rigs and have a couple of modules from the lander range to get solar panels + LF + Ox + MP. Basically a unit like the SC-B-SM but with LF/Ox and a bit bigger. Hence the request for an MP tank version or the existing ones, or maybe a fuel switch on the SC-C-SM and no engine ;) Ooooohh, the possibilities.
[/COLOR][COLOR=#333333]
The SRBs do indeed already have that option. It's just a cosmetic thing, but makes LF boosters look way cooler.
[/COLOR]
[/QUOTE]

I'll open a long-term goal regarding upgrading the lander-core parts with better fuel switching capability. I need to revisit the system they are using anyhow, as I've learned a bit since I designed it, and could probably make it a bit easier to work with / setup. No guarantees though as to when.

Nosecones -- Ahh, that makes sense :) Will add that to the list of nosecones/mounts/adapters that I will be making. Who knows, might even see it with the next release. In the short term it should be possible to re-use the existing SRB-slanted nosecone on the fuel tanks; all their model stuff is config based, and it would just require adding an additional 'cap' entry with the proper scaling/offsets setup. Let me know if you try it out and how it goes; if it doesn't work I can probably either help you fix your config, or fix the plugin (as it should work).

Decoupler stuff would be a ways off -- haven't even put it into the schedule anywhere yet as I'm still working through the concepts (and need to investigate the code-side 1.05 changes to decouplers and such), but it is seeming like a needed part-reduction-type part even for heavier stock setups. I know my 100t+ discarded stages don't go very far from the standard decoupling force, and it only gets worse with bigger craft.



[quote name='blowfish']+1 for the probe core capability, particularly since it's just a few lines in the cfg. I also am less a fan of reaction wheels, particularly for expendable stages ... you'd be surprised how far a little RCS fuel will go when you don't blatantly waste it.

Interesting question ... as far as real life goes, I think that expandable stages have traditionally used a dedicated monopropellant (hydrazine/nitrogen/whatever) reserve, but newer designs have begun to take advantage of boiloff from the tanks for both RCS and power generation - the goal being enabling longer, more flexible missions and reduced mass (monoprop tanks and batteries). So setting the RCS and fuel cell to both use LFO might be reasonable.[/QUOTE]

Yea, the new common-power-system using boiloff seems the way to go (for real life purposes). I mean.. the waste-gases are already sitting there ready to be burned (or, even just spin a turbine from the pressure/outgassing? idk). Fewer propellants to worry about, better use of existing tankage, and probably a very easy adaptation for the existing designs. o2/h2 fuel cells/power generation are fairly well tested and refined at this point, and wouldn't even be consuming any 'usable' propellant. Its like generating energy for throwing out the garbage :)


For KSP purposes though, I'm -mostly- settled on having a dedicated monopropellant reserve for both their RCS and fuel-cell use. Mostly I need to know what propellant to put into the configs for the RCS + fuel cell modules; whatever propellant I put in there will need to have a dedicated reserve. And keeping it as monopropellant is still not too-far-off of the norm/real way of doing things (although, I'm unsure about a monopropellant fuel cell... but we'll pretend that its a dedicated gaseous o2/h2 reserve). Sadly, this removes the ability for using main-tank fuel for the fuel-cell (unless the main tank is set to monopropellant)... but these things really aren't intended for super-long-duration-use anyhow (and if they are, solar or nuclear are probably both better options for power gen, and monopropellant would be the more realistic choice for fuel in that case anyhow).

In short -- Upper stages will have fuel switching capability + dedicated monopropellant reserve based on their current size/setup.

[Jimbodiah]

Minor bug on engine group fairing (I think). On the SC-ENG-J-2x4 group the fairing does not go all the way down.

[IMG]http://dasher.nl/kerbal/sstu_01.jpg[/IMG]