Buffalo 2 Modular Space Exploration Vehicle

[Angelo Kerman]

Due to a LOT of work at my professional job, this took a lot longer than I'd hoped. But, finally I'm making progress again:

I finally have the front window section modeled and unwrapped! Off to the side is a guide for adding the side doors.

[Angelo Kerman]

Last bit for the night. Definitely WIP:

[TheSaint]

6 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Due to a LOT of work at my professional job, this took a lot longer than I'd hoped.

Day job always comes first. It all looks great.

[soyuz 33]

10 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Last bit for the night. Definitely WIP:

Looking great as Useal

[chaos113]

could you make a switcher on the docking module for a 1.25m attachment node 

[Angelo Kerman]

1 hour ago, chaos113 said:

could you make a switcher on the docking module for a 1.25m attachment node 

In what way?

[Angelo Kerman]

No modding updates today, but I did finally figure out how to turn XML documentation in Visual Studio into md documents for GitHub wiki pages. Here's a sample from an upcoming plugin that Buffalo 2 will use:

https://github.com/Angel-125/WildBlueCore/wiki

[soyuz 33]

15 minutes ago, Angel-125 said:

No modding updates today, but I did finally figure out how to turn XML documentation in Visual Studio into md documents for GitHub wiki pages. Here's a sample from an upcoming plugin that Buffalo 2 will use:

https://github.com/Angel-125/WildBlueCore/wiki

Oh that Suit Switcher Model is Something Iv been looking for a while now so i can do Launch/Land With a ACES And Do a EVA With a EMU Thank you!

[chaos113]

4 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

In what way?

the side conectors, it would be convenient to have them in 1.25m rather than the 1m 

[Angelo Kerman]

On 7/6/2022 at 11:39 PM, chaos113 said:

the side conectors, it would be convenient to have them in 1.25m rather than the 1m 

That might be tough to do. The connectors are sized for the body; any bigger and they'll stick out like sore thumbs.

Meanwhile...

The part and plugin are in WildBlueCore, which powers the part modules used by Buffalo, so anybody can use ModuleFuelPump. There's even a Wiki Page for it.

Check out the WildBlueCore pre-release if you're interested.

[chaos113]

4 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

That might be tough to do. The connectors are sized for the body; any bigger and they'll stick out like sore thumbs.

its only .25m of difference and the only thing using 1m size is your parts, it makes it more difficult to use it with other mods

[SkyFall2489]

11 hours ago, chaos113 said:

its only .25m of difference and the only thing using 1m size is your parts, it makes it more difficult to use it with other mods

Pathfinder has an adapter, if I remember correctly. Or was that the original buffalo?

[chaos113]

3 hours ago, SkyFall2489 said:

Pathfinder has an adapter, if I remember correctly. Or was that the original buffalo?

it does have an adapter but it looks awkward  with it flaring out 

[SkyFall2489]

What if you were to clip a mk1 structural fuselage into the part? It should be exactly as tall as the Buffalo 2 frame is wide, and you can place it horizontally so that it sticks out just where the buffalo 2 airlock module is. Then, slap some docking ports on it.

[Angelo Kerman]

Made more progress today, I learned about modifying vertex normals. This looks much better than before:

[Angelo Kerman]

More progress today:

I cleaned up the sharp sides on several parts, and cut the side doors into the command pod:

I'm looking at adding different variants for the front windows including MSEV (shown above), Cupola, Puddle Jumper, and Retro (a nod to the original Buffalo).

I also looked into a Size 1 variant of the docking tube:

Such a variant is possible but it will cut into existing windows and doors. I was able to use a structural tube, which might be the way to go if people really want larger ports.

I also double-checked to make sure that the existing ports will fit the standard Clamp-O-Tron:

[Angelo Kerman]

Today I started working on the final bit of modeling for the baseline command pod. In a nod to the original Buffalo, the new one will have fold-out stairs. To do that, I created the cutout and alcove for them:

This was tricky because I had to make a cutout that matched the textured door, but as you can see it worked. When the door is closed (it's off to the left at the moment) you'll barely notice the difference between the textured door and the 3D meshed door. At any rate, the fold-out stairs will be one of the variants for the command pod, so you can not use them if desired.

[chaos113]

may

On 7/12/2022 at 7:12 PM, Angel-125 said:

I also looked into a Size 1 variant of the docking tube:

Such a variant is possible but it will cut into existing windows and doors. I was able to use a structural tube, which might be the way to go if people really want larger ports.

perhaps it should be longer on the size 1 version as to not cut into other parts

[SkyFall2489]

15 hours ago, chaos113 said:

may

perhaps it should be longer on the size 1 version as to not cut into other parts

or just put some short part in between? Buffalo 1 had some pretty short parts that could be used as spacers.

[Angelo Kerman]

I've got a bunch of work at work to do today, but I still managed to create a design that I like for the fold-out ladders:

It's inspired by the Kelus Mobility Enhancer, but redone for the Buffalo.

I also did some number crunching for potential parts that fit into that alcove space. In a nutshell, each storage unit would be small, just 110 liters- a little over half the amount of the stock Mk1 capsule. A battery pack could store about 600 EC, based on the stock Z-400 Rechargeable Battery, a resource tank would store 20 units of Liquid Fuel, Oxidizer, or Ore, and a fuel cell would generate 10 Electric Charge. IMO, that's not enough to warrant creating parts that fit into the alcove, so for now I'm tabling that idea.

Another idea I had today was to create a short hollowed-out part that has the side door and ladder set. The body components don't have doors on the sides like the OG Buffalo did, so if users want a side door, they'd add the hollow part with the doors and ladders.

[Angelo Kerman]

@adsii1970et. al: A little help if you have time?

I've got the fold-out ladders modeled and am rigging them into the game, and I'm trying to gauge user preferences. I have a couple of options. Option 1: have the kerbals grab the ladder and climb as one normally does. Like so:

Option 1 is on the left-side of the rover.

Option 2 is on the right-side of the rover. With Option 2, there is no ladder-trigger that the kerbal grabs onto. Instead, the kerbal just climbs. Like so:

What I need to know is which method is preferred, and it'll take play testing in various environments like Minmus, Kerbin, Duna, Eve, etc.

You can try out the pre-release here. NOTE: The pre-release is using the original Buffalo rover's IVA for the time being. You'll need Buffalo installed for this testing. Please take a look and report back your preferences. Thanks for your help!

[SkyFall2489]

3 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

@adsii1970et. al: A little help if you have time?

I've got the fold-out ladders modeled and am rigging them into the game, and I'm trying to gauge user preferences. I have a couple of options. Option 1: have the kerbals grab the ladder and climb as one normally does. Like so:

Option 1 is on the left-side of the rover.

Option 2 is on the right-side of the rover. With Option 2, there is no ladder-trigger that the kerbal grabs onto. Instead, the kerbal just climbs. Like so:

What I need to know is which method is preferred, and it'll take play testing in various environments like Minmus, Kerbin, Duna, Eve, etc.

You can try out the pre-release here. NOTE: The pre-release is using the original Buffalo rover's IVA for the time being. You'll need Buffalo installed for this testing. Please take a look and report back your preferences. Thanks for your help!

Personally, I feel like Option 2 may be better. Option 1 was used in older WBI mods, and I found it annoying that when you climbed the ladder, sometimes there was no option to climb out onto the platform or board the vessel. I feel like option 2 would avoid this, as long as the kerbals can still get up onto the platform. 

However, I propose option 3: ramp or stairs.

Say, why don't you set up a poll?

[Angelo Kerman]

Not actually sure how to set up a poll. I'll look into it. Meanwhile, I finished modeling the ladder and have some basic texturing:

[chaos113]

will buffalo 2 have a version of the atv seat

[TheSaint]

Personally, I like Option 1 better. It feels more like the Kerbal is actually climbing a ladder. But if Option 2 makes your life easier, by all means go with that. It's not that important.