[Min KSP: 1.12.2] Deep Space Exploration Vessels - Build NASA Inspired Ships In KSP

[Neutrinovore]

Looks cool! I can sort of make that if I create an inflating centrifuge. It would not use IR.

Looks great! Thanks for sharing the album.

One thing I'm looking into-and am not sure how to resolve yet- is the performance lagging with some of the parts. I think the trusses might be slowing things down, but I'm not sure. I've learned a lot about Unity since making those trusses, things like mesh colliders take a higher performance hit than box colliders. It may take some redesigning to fix. That leads me to my question: For the trusses, how many people use more than two sides to attach stuff?

Regarding the inflating centrifuge rings, I suspect you'll be able to do that with no problems. The reason I know this is that BobCat has had an inflating AND rotating habitat in his MPSS Nautilus pack for years, and I still use them all the time. The only thing I don't care for about them is that their cosmetic appearance is a bit dated, that's all. Well, that and it's only available in 1.25 meter size, although I did clone the part into a 2.5 meter version for myself, with double the crew capacity. Anyway, I'd love to see a new version of such a part!

Now, with the trusses, absolutely YES, I definitely use more than just 2 sides, that's what I like about the Hex trusses specifically, they allow TRI-lateral symmetry if I so desire! Everything else currently available (or, at least, USEABLE) in the game is either just cylinders or squares or other boring shapes like that. There was THSS a while ago, and there have been a few attempts to redo that system recently, but with limited success and support. One thing I think might be causing the lag is the mesh switching feature, but I'm just spitballing about that. Is it really necessary to have that feature on the trusses? I mean, I know why you're doing it, so that one can attach to the surface of the truss if desired, or one can get the collider 'out of the way' so as to attach something to a tank or piece of equipment that's been placed inside the truss. Here's an alternate idea: Could you maybe create a narrow strip of collider down the middle of each face on which to attach something, and also of course on the corners where the metal structure would be, but leave areas to either side through which we could thread something into the middle? Again, just an idea, don't know how practical or even doable such a thing would be.

Anyhow, keep up the great work on everything, and as always I look forward to whatever future developments are coming from DSEV.

Later!

[Angelo Kerman]

Get the latest here.

Bug Fixes

- The Supernova now recognizes that off means off.

Other

- Updated to KSP 1.0.5

[wreckreation]

Are the DR-375 Dock-O-Trons intended for permanent docking? I've got two ships docked with DR-375's, and there's no "undock" or "decouple" option in the dock-o-tron's (right-mouse_button) context menu. No way to undock these ships. Is this the intended behavior, or a bug?

Thanks!

[Angelo Kerman]

Are the DR-375 Dock-O-Trons intended for permanent docking? I've got two ships docked with DR-375's, and there's no "undock" or "decouple" option in the dock-o-tron's (right-mouse_button) context menu. No way to undock these ships. Is this the intended behavior, or a bug?

Thanks!

That sounds like a bug, actually, thanks for pointing it out.

[wreckreation]

[quote name='Angel-125']That sounds like a bug, actually, thanks for pointing it out. :)[/QUOTE]

Cool. Glad to help. Love the parts, btw.

[Technologicat]

[quote name='Angel-125']That leads me to my question: For the trusses, how many people use more than two sides to attach stuff?[/QUOTE]
I do, too!

(Been playing KSP for 200+ hours, but only bothered registering on the forums just now.)

The hexagonal truss system is ideal for craft with three- or sixfold symmetry, offering a unique cross-section profile and thus expanding options for craft design. Both the stock modular girders and the octagonal trusses from Near Future Construction are geared for two- or fourfold symmetry. I think each of the three truss systems has its niche.

Love the centrifuge parts, too. An artificial gravity system feels very appropriate for any interplanetary cruiser, given the typical flight times.

Which brings me to one question: how is torque determined in KSP?

What I'm trying to do is to determine the optimal rotation speed for the counter-torque ring for a given configuration. If there is to be no net rotation, the total angular momentum must cancel out: L = sum I[SUB]j[/SUB] omega[SUB]j[/SUB] = 0, where I is the moment of inertia, omega is the speed of rotation, and j indexes the parts of the craft. (All parts that are not rotating in the centrifuge can be ignored.) The moment of inertia I is the integral of r[SUP]2[/SUP] dm, but how is the mass distributed in the rings? The radii for the two ring types are the same. Can the mass distributions be considered to have identical shapes, which would make the moment of inertia simply linearly proportional to the total mass of each ring?

If so, then in the case of no payload, the rotation speed that exactly cancels the torque should be omega[SUB]2[/SUB] = -(m[SUB]1[/SUB]/m[SUB]2[/SUB])*omega[SUB]1[/SUB], where m is mass, omega is rotation speed, subscript 1 refers to the spin hub and 2 to the counter-torque ring, and the minus sign indicates the opposite direction of rotation. Then, if there is payload attached to the spin hub, we assume that each attached part is a point mass located at its center. The distances from the axis of rotation should be rather easy to approximate visually. This would give a ballpark estimate for the needed rotation speed for the counter-torque ring, which can then be fine-tuned once the craft is in orbit (without causing the craft to spin wildly when the centrifuge is first activated). This also allows skimping out on ballast unless the estimated speed is ridiculously high, saving payload mass.

What really won me over to installing DSEV - aside from the stockalike look - is its modular nature. As a craft builder, I prefer flexibility over replication of minute details of actual real (or concept) spacecraft. Right now I'm building a ship for a manned (kerbaled?) trip to Duna, for which the DSEV parts (along with Near Future and MRS) come in very handy.

Thanks for the great mod!

[Angelo Kerman]

Glad you like the mod. :) I strive to make my artwork look stock, and aim for quality similar work by PorkJet or Neartea- I admire their art. My aim for DSEV, MOLE, and Buffalo is to provide parts that give a similar look and feel to NASA's exploration craft but adopt the kerbal look and approach, so parts are asmodular as I can make them. DSEV is due for an overhaul to improve performance but will need to wait until I can get Pathfinder stabilized. Still having issues with bases exploding upon loading and such..

as for the centrifugal force, I would assume that KSP is using real-world physics but I don't honestly know. I tend to put Masscon parts on the counterspin ring that match the mass on the hub, then spin it in the opposite direction and let the Spindle's torque module deal with the rest. That mostly works. I do have plans for an animated centrifuge similar to the Discovery II and one designed for the Nautilis, but I have to finish some other parts first. Sadly I can't create mods for a living so it will take some time to finish the parts..

[Technologicat]

[quote name='Angel-125']Glad you like the mod. :) I strive to make my artwork look stock, and aim for quality similar work by PorkJet or Neartea- I admire their art. My aim for DSEV, MOLE, and Buffalo is to provide parts that give a similar look and feel to NASA's exploration craft but adopt the kerbal look and approach, so parts are asmodular as I can make them.[/QUOTE]

Buffalo is also very nice. Allows building space trucks for refueling :)

The cockpit with the ASET props is excellent.


[quote name='Angel-125'] DSEV is due for an overhaul to improve performance but will need to wait until I can get Pathfinder stabilized. Still having issues with bases exploding upon loading and such..[/QUOTE]

There have been performance issues?

Rapid unplanned disassembly tends to be a problem with bases for some reason. [URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/127413-WIP-1-0-5-Kerbal-Planetary-Base-Systems-v0-2-10-Update-17-11-2015"]Kerbal Planetary Base Systems[/URL] was struggling with that earlier, too.

(By the way, DSEV and KPBS combine nicely to make a rotating habitat for a cruiser.)


[quote name='Angel-125'] as for the centrifugal force, I would assume that KSP is using real-world physics but I don't honestly know. I tend to put Masscon parts on the counterspin ring that match the mass on the hub, then spin it in the opposite direction and let the Spindle's torque module deal with the rest. That mostly works.[/QUOTE]

Ok. I'm trying to minimize ballast and preconfigure the rotation rate before launch, that's why I was wondering :)


[quote name='Angel-125']I do have plans for an animated centrifuge similar to the Discovery II and one designed for the Nautilis, but I have to finish some other parts first. Sadly I can't create mods for a living so it will take some time to finish the parts..[/QUOTE]

Mm, hobbies tend to be like that. :)

[MaverickSawyer]

Huh. Is the little fusion reactor supposed to have a max FusionPellet capacity of 10, but start with 50? Or is that a typo?

[Angelo Kerman]

[quote name='MaverickSawyer']Huh. Is the little fusion reactor supposed to have a max FusionPellet capacity of 10, but start with 50? Or is that a typo?[/QUOTE]
Oh that's definitely a typo. It should start with 50 and has a max of 50. Thanks for pointing that out. :)

[MaverickSawyer]

[quote name='Angel-125']Oh that's definitely a typo. It should start with 50 and has a max of 50. Thanks for pointing that out. :)[/QUOTE]

Another oddity... the Hotplate radiators now rotate to be face-on to the sun, not edge on.

[Angelo Kerman]

It's a hotplate. It's supposed to keep warm. ;) Sounds like another bug, don't know why it points in the wrong direction

[Deadpan110]

Heya, I have just added DSEV to my Career and because I have yet to unlock a lot of tech in my RnD, I decided to have a sneak preview in Sandbox mode.

Previous posts mention that there was a bug where you could only upgrade the Supernova while on EVA but I have tried upgrading in Sandbox both internally and while on EVA.
Both cases 10000 rocket parts are consumed and I get a screen message 'Insufficient resources to upgrade the engine'.

I can only assume that its waiting for 600 science points which are not available in Sandbox mode?

Is there a way for me to temporarily disable this requirement so I don't ruin my career experience when I switch back?

[Angelo Kerman]

On 11/26/2015, 10:07:07, Deadpan110 said:

Heya, I have just added DSEV to my Career and because I have yet to unlock a lot of tech in my RnD, I decided to have a sneak preview in Sandbox mode.

Previous posts mention that there was a bug where you could only upgrade the Supernova while on EVA but I have tried upgrading in Sandbox both internally and while on EVA.
Both cases 10000 rocket parts are consumed and I get a screen message 'Insufficient resources to upgrade the engine'.

I can only assume that its waiting for 600 science points which are not available in Sandbox mode?

Is there a way for me to temporarily disable this requirement so I don't ruin my career experience when I switch back?

Currently the only way to disable the feature is to  go to the Supernova config file and change the requirements there.  Also it sounds like there's still a bug preventing the upgrade. I'll take a look, thanks for the feedback.

[ComatoseJedi]

Great mod, but I am experiencing some issues. On the graphene radiator panels, there is no option to open them, did I miss a step somewhere? Nor do the reactors or the engine turn on(doesn't even give an option to do enable them, just the lights for the reactor and toggling between modes for the engines. If it does require fuel, it doesn't specify what fuel it uses or the heat tolerance). Is there a mod this is not compatible with? I have ksp-e, I wonder if that's got anything to do with it?

 

[Angelo Kerman]

35 minutes ago, lynwoodm said:

Great mod, but I am experiencing some issues. On the graphene radiator panels, there is no option to open them, did I miss a step somewhere? Nor do the reactors or the engine turn on(doesn't even give an option to do enable them, just the lights for the reactor and toggling between modes for the engines. If it does require fuel, it doesn't specify what fuel it uses or the heat tolerance). Is there a mod this is not compatible with? I have ksp-e, I wonder if that's got anything to do with it?

 

Be sure to install everything included with GitHub or KerbalStuff release. Don't rely upon CKAN to install the mod.

[ComatoseJedi]

2 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Be sure to install everything included with GitHub or KerbalStuff release. Don't rely upon CKAN to install the mod.

Found the problem. After sifting through my mod folders, I found another copy of this mod in another folder and the game counted it as ANOTHER mod. And, I don't use CKAN on Linux. It's more trouble than it's worth to even use it. I always install from GitHub or KS for your mods and manually install them. But, at the same time, you hover over another folder for a nano second while dragging a file into where they're supposed to go, it will go into that folder quicker than anything. But, thanks for the quick reply. Everything works as it should and better than expected. 

 

See what I mean: Just what Kerbin needs, another Duna Interplanetary Craft: 

Edited December 3, 2015 by lynwoodm
added pictures

[Angelo Kerman]

Looks great! Glad you got it working.

[Technologicat]

On 19.11.2015 klo, Angel-125 said:

DSEV is due for an overhaul to improve performance but will need to wait until I can get Pathfinder stabilized

I think I've now seen the performance issue... I've built a couple of 200-part craft, and the others work fine, but the one that includes DSEV parts is getting something like 3-4 fps in orbit. (This is with physics time delta at 0.04.)

Is it known which of the parts cause the largest performance hit? I think there was something earlier in the thread about the girders having overly detailed collision meshes?

 

Also, I've noticed that the hexagonal girders are not recognized by Filter Extensions as girders, although NF's octo-girders are. Should this be reported here or in the Filter Extensions thread?

(Looking at the FilterExtensions configs, if I'm interpreting it correctly, SubCategories_Structural.cfg matches anything with "Girder" in the title, but "Truss" is not included in the list.)

[Jimbodiah]

I just found out hex trusses can be configured to hold stuff inside... color me stoopid. Now it's awesome to build stations with

I'm using Procedural parts to make tanks inside the trusses, then add racks to them for surface attaching stuff. It was right under my nose all along

Edited December 16, 2015 by Jimbodiah

[Angelo Kerman]

On 12/11/2015, 6:09:45, Technologicat said:

I think I've now seen the performance issue... I've built a couple of 200-part craft, and the others work fine, but the one that includes DSEV parts is getting something like 3-4 fps in orbit. (This is with physics time delta at 0.04.)

Is it known which of the parts cause the largest performance hit? I think there was something earlier in the thread about the girders having overly detailed collision meshes?

 

Also, I've noticed that the hexagonal girders are not recognized by Filter Extensions as girders, although NF's octo-girders are. Should this be reported here or in the Filter Extensions thread?

(Looking at the FilterExtensions configs, if I'm interpreting it correctly, SubCategories_Structural.cfg matches anything with "Girder" in the title, but "Truss" is not included in the list.)

Yeah, not sure what's causing this. One thing I know can slow frame rates is shiny textures. I checked, the hex trusses don't have shiny textures on them. The other thing that might be causing it are the multiple mesh options similar to B9. There's a lot of mesh to render in the frame and "chicken wire" mounting racks.

One thing to check is try crating your 200-part craft without the hex trusses, or without the fuel tanks. That might tell you what type of part is causing the issues.

@Jimbodiah: Looks pretty cool! Glad you figured out that the hex trusses are hallow. Nice idea with the procedural tanks. As an alternative, those FLM-450, 900, and 1800 tanks fit nicely inside the trusses, as does the compact ISRU and WB-2 fusion reactor.

I'm thinking that if the hex trusses are causing issues, I will redesign them, deprecating the old parts. I'd start by replacing the "chicken wire" equipment rack meshes with transparent textures to cut down on rendering (assuming that helps), do away with the tripple-length truss, and resize them to be slightly larger than the FLM-450, 900, and 1800 tanks. That way, no vestibule would be needed. Then I might make variants with the fuel tanks inside, and ditch the 1.875m tanks (they'd make a return with MOLE most likely). So you'd have quarter, half, full, and double trusses that are hollow, and quarter, half, and full trusses that are closed but have integrated fuel tanks. You'd have six sides to attach things to with the fuel tank trusses and a variable number of sides to attach stuff to with the hollow trusses.

Also, the FLM-450, 900, and 1800 tanks have style options for 1.25m and 0.625m. Does anybody use those sizes? I might do away with them as style options but put them into an optional fuel tank addon pack as separate parts.

[Jimbodiah]

I'll try those out. That was too obvious for me as well :))) haha...

Could you add the gold/brown textures to the smaller tanks? I've modified the cfg to hold other resources as well, basically I use them for all my tanks as I can switch them in-game to another resource, which can be useful for a lot of things.

Near Future Construction had the option to add tanks to the frames as well, I used to use in 1.0.4 but they were never updated to 1.0.5. Now I know the hex-trusses have the same options, I am using those. The triple-fex strut is amazing to keep part-count as low as possible.

As to the small size, I don't really use anything under 1.25m ever.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Jimbodiah

[ComatoseJedi]

On 12/13/2015, 12:46:30, Jimbodiah said:

I'll try those out. That was too obvious for me as well :))) haha...

Could you add the gold/brown textures to the smaller tanks? I've modified the cfg to hold other resources as well, basically I use them for all my tanks as I can switch them in-game to another resource, which can be useful for a lot of things.

Near Future Construction had the option to add tanks to the frames as well, I used to use in 1.0.4 but they were never updated to 1.0.5. Now I know the hex-trusses have the same options, I am using those. The triple-fex strut is amazing to keep part-count as low as possible.

As to the small size, I don't really use anything under 1.25m ever.

the hex trusses in NFC still work as they've had in 1.0.4. I haven't seen any issue with them and I use them regularly. A quick question Angel: You planning on a custom cockpit for this series? I've been mulling over countless NASA developments for ideas on how to implement a "close to design" interplanetary ship while incorporating your parts. Seems that all you need are hab modules and a command deck (maybe some arms to stick to the spindle). I know these would be hard to implement, but it's just a thought on what you plan on doing to expand on this.

[Jimbodiah]

Check out CX Space Station Parts for hab modules, he made replicas of the ISS modules for hab and even a science lab.

[ComatoseJedi]

2 hours ago, Jimbodiah said:

Check out CX Space Station Parts for hab modules, he made replicas of the ISS modules for hab and even a science lab.

I already use CX, (The pictures I posted ^ there show I used the 2 little two man sleep hab on the centrifuge arms). I suppose this is the true nature of lego part construction. It allows you to explore your "artistic engineer" side.