[WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: such nuke, wow

[Nertea]

Cool, cool. I didn't realize he was contracted past 0.25, but it'd be a damned shame if they dropped him after this first pass of SP+ inclusion. Wasn't he working on a bunch of new parts for SP+ 1.4 when the news came? Be crummy if those never saw the light of day.

I do hope that these will show up, particularly the heavy landing gear he mentioned. If they don't, I'll have to make my own!

Also, a bit of feedback on the Mk4, if I may. I experienced some trouble with balancing my Mk4 spaceplane. The main trouble was the CoM being too far to the rear. Way I built it was Cockpit, 3x payload segment, LFO segment, tail segment. I think I'll agree with the need for the cockpit to be heavier as a ballast thing if nothing else. Also connected to this: maybe consider adding a modest fuel capacity to all segments? B9 does this in a very snazzy way, allowing you to select whether you want a structural fuselage, LFO, LF, or monoprop.

I increased the mass of the cockpit to 5.5t, not including the mass of the monoprop. All segments do have fuel capacity, except for the cargo bays. However I'll not do the fuel switcher, that would involve more plugin bundling. You'll have to be content with an LF and LFO fuselage (and a small monoprop slice eventually).

One thing that I'm digging about this fuselage system is the flat keel (is that the right term for the underside?), allowing me to very comfortably add landing gear. Adding rear landing gear's a bit of a problem with B9's 3.75m spaceplane fuselage, for example. A problem with the flat keel, however, could be clearance issues with the payload. I noticed that payloads which comfortably fit inside the bay doors on the top have a tendency of clipping through the fuselage on the bottom.

There's some instances where this is true, but I don't think they're any worse than for the Mk2 bits.

Hey Nertea,

Love all your work around here, Near Future definitely is a must have for my game.

I was wondering if you ever plan to add this solar panel from way back in this thread?

http://nertea.the3rdage.net/ksp/panel_circular02.png

I have three more solar panels that I'd like to make before I consider NFSolar feature complete. That's one of them, so it'll happen eventually!

[Guest]

Are Almaz panels among them? I sent you a pic some time ago, they're my favorite solar panels.

[Nertea]

New MkIV test release.

I added a Mk4 -> 2.5m adapter, a docking nosecone and an aerodynamic nosecone. Colliders and models for all parts got tweaks and improvements, some balance tweaks were also implemented. I started unwrapping some of the parts, so the fuselage and the cockpit have colours.

edit- Sorry Dragon, not on the list at the moment.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Speaking of solar panels and near future aerodynamics, would the latter perchance include one or two variants of a solar wing? It's pretty easy to cover a regular wing in static panels for use in atmosphere, but it sort of drives the part count up and doesn't look that good. Two sizes of rectangular wing segment with integrated solar panels would do quite well for any electric atmospheric engines you might add later, not to mention any non-reactor spaceplanes.

[Bomoo]

I added a Mk4 -> 2.5m adapter, a docking nosecone and an aerodynamic nosecone. Colliders and models for all parts got tweaks and improvements, some balance tweaks were also implemented. I started unwrapping some of the parts, so the fuselage and the cockpit have colours.

Mm mmm. Super excellent.

One thing my OCD sense tingled at is the nosecones being slightly offset on the vertical axis - they sit a tiny bit too high.

Edited October 18, 2014 by Bomoo

[Nertea]

Speaking of solar panels and near future aerodynamics, would the latter perchance include one or two variants of a solar wing? It's pretty easy to cover a regular wing in static panels for use in atmosphere, but it sort of drives the part count up and doesn't look that good. Two sizes of rectangular wing segment with integrated solar panels would do quite well for any electric atmospheric engines you might add later, not to mention any non-reactor spaceplanes.

Maayyyybe, that pack is still very much in the planning stage.

Mm mmm. Super excellent.

One thing my OCD sense tingled at is the nosecones being slightly offset on the vertical axis - they sit a tiny bit too high.

As I go through and unwrap the pieces, they get model tweaks and such to fit in. When I get to the nosecones, they will indeed be made to sit flush

[bromanche]

Would something like this be within the scope of this project? I imagine a tail ramp like this would make the MKIV system a mainstay in my KSP.

Also I would just like to express how much I am looking forward to seeing this project complete.

[Bomoo]

As I go through and unwrap the pieces, they get model tweaks and such to fit in. When I get to the nosecones, they will indeed be made to sit flush

Hurray!

Bit of feedback: I'm noticing instantly that CoM/CoL balancing is a bit easier now, and I expect it to get easier still when you introduce the monoprop slice. Fit that sucker right behind the cockpit. Tried taking off with a full load of fuel + dummy payload and dude actually gets airborne. Hallelujah!

[Nertea]

Yes that's planned, though I don't know about the aft node. I had intended it to open upwards too to increase clearance and to allow it to be attached at the front of the aircraft, though I haven't modeled it yet, so it's possible that there would be enough without it. Of course, two separate parts would be possible (now I'm just getting greedy haha).

Edited October 18, 2014 by Nertea

[bromanche]

Have you thought about what the ramp would be like (if you plan one)? Although it's not really necessary given you could just lower the rear gear, it would be something I would make great use of.

[Nertea]

No I haven't. Aside from the fact that it will not be perfect (how to determine clearance? Ideally it would be adaptive, but that's probably not possible without making it a landing leg with suspension. Would that work, actually? )

This too forever, but I present Imitation Pork.

Porkjet's style is damn slow to match over such a large area, but I feel it works ok (even without a specular map on my part). There are still additional details to add, small doors, widgets, etc, but at least I've established that I can do it.

Edited October 19, 2014 by Nertea

[Neutrinovore]

Whoa, okay, I was interested before, but seeing that latest pic makes me WANT this mod now!! Especially if I can get a rear loading ramp as proposed by Bromanche.

[CaptainKipard]

Nicely done. Finally some stock-alike I can get behind.

Not sure about that window though. Have you checked what the visibility is like?

[BudgetHedgehog]

That is one amazing cockpit..

[4nxs]

Wow, that is looking good Nertea! I knew these parts were going to be awesome.

[Alewx]

No I haven't. Aside from the fact that it will not be perfect (how to determine clearance? Ideally it would be adaptive, but that's probably not possible without making it a landing leg with suspension. Would that work, actually? )

This too forever, but I present Imitation Pork.

http://nertea.the3rdage.net/ksp/mk4tex01.jpg

Porkjet's style is damn slow to match over such a large area, but I feel it works ok (even without a specular map on my part). There are still additional details to add, small doors, widgets, etc, but at least I've established that I can do it.

That is a damn nice match of the texture style.

[Bomoo]

I think you nailed the structural panels, but the windows look a bit off to me. Like they're too big, you know? Maybe going for windows of a similar size to the pork cockpit would look more fitting. If you look at it from a practical standpoint, the kerbal pilots aren't going to need bigger viewing ports just because the cockpit is bigger. The flight deck would, realistically, be about the same size.

And more angular curvature, maybe, if that makes sense. The smooth curve of the windows looks a bit out of place there, I feel like.

And for no particular reason:

Edited October 19, 2014 by Bomoo

[Ikaneko]

Mash up of mods there Bomoo!

I really want to be able to launch meaningful chunks of station and/or interplanetary modular craft!!!!

Once again spotted a niche I barely realised was there but now can't wait for its release, Nertea!!

[ZodiusInfuser]

http://nertea.the3rdage.net/ksp/mk4tex01.jpg

This is what we need from the MK3 update!! Great work as always Nertea!

[Nertea]

Nicely done. Finally some stock-alike I can get behind.

Not sure about that window though. Have you checked what the visibility is like?

Thanks. It's pretty good, I haven't decided whether to go with one pilot in the middle (180 degree visibility) or two side by side (~100 degree visibility)

I think you nailed the structural panels, but the windows look a bit off to me. Like they're too big, you know? Maybe going for windows of a similar size to the pork cockpit would look more fitting. If you look at it from a practical standpoint, the kerbal pilots aren't going to need bigger viewing ports just because the cockpit is bigger. The flight deck would, realistically, be about the same size.

And more angular curvature, maybe, if that makes sense. The smooth curve of the windows looks a bit out of place there, I feel like.

And for no particular reason:

http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/49863355712430565/DF004737F790906D0C990BC9BF5FE38900B3FC69/

's a little too late for geometry changes... the window probably look off because they really need a normal and specular map to match Porkjet's.

Nice plan though. Yesterday I made a plane that launches a small plane. Wot wot.

[Bomoo]

's a little too late for geometry changes... the window probably look off because they really need a normal and specular map to match Porkjet's.

Nice plan though. Yesterday I made a plane that launches a small plane. Wot wot.

Ah well. And thanks! Can't really get it anywhere near space, though, due to a tendency to flip over at higher altitudes. Probably need to go back and revise the design from the beginning. Damn those tricky spaceplanes.

[Exothermos]

Thanks for making the parts! As a spaceplane specialist here is my feedback.

Things I like:

The general shape of the structural parts

the tail adapters

the huge bay

The animations on bay doors and nose cones

The fit of most parts

Things I don't like

I'm just not sold on the cockpit section, specifically

-The abrupt step on the lower section. It seems that that should blend seamlessly.

-The side pod section interface. Again, too abrupt for me. Maybe leave off that part entirely so that we can add intakes there or place the special blending part a la the b9 fuselage section.

-The size and shape of the windows. With them so big, it doesn't give one a sense of how big these parts really are.

-The Stubbyness of the part in general. It would be more graceful looking in my eyes if it were longer.

The nose cone sections needs some re-sizing / fitting work.

There is a very minor annoyance with fitting wings to the side pods. The center of Mass is above the widest section of the parts meaning that the side pod curve bulges out underneath the wing when it is attached via snap mode. Very Minor, but aesthetically annoying.

So that's my input, take it for what you will. Either way, I will definitely be downloading the final product!

Test plane:

link if anyone is interested:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8swm30urjr7ewej/Test.craft?dl=0

Edited October 20, 2014 by Exothermos

[Nertea]

Thanks for the detailed feedback! I'll address some of them below.

Things I like:

The general shape of the structural parts

the tail adapters

the huge bay

The animations on bay doors and nose cones

The fit of most parts

Ok, good

Things I don't like

I'm just not sold on the cockpit section, specifically

-The abrupt step on the lower section. It seems that that should blend seamlessly.

-The Stubbyness of the part in general. It would be more graceful looking in my eyes if it were longer.

These two are staying. They are key elements of the design reference, and I like it I'm not sure I want it to look graceful.

-The side pod section interface. Again, too abrupt for me. Maybe leave off that part entirely so that we can add intakes there or place the special blending part a la the b9 fuselage section.

This is a difficult one. I would not be a fan of removing them and replacing them with specific shoulders, because then I need to make a single-use part to go there. I really don't like single-use parts, and that area is about 25% too small for a standard 1.25m node. The options are keeping it as-is, modifying it to accept 0.625m nodes (holes I guess), or integrating something different into the structure there. The design reference has air intakes at that location - adding integrated intakes to that area is not completely out of the question, but I'm not sure... not yet, for sure, I need to step back from the part for a while before I come back to it.

-The size and shape of the windows. With them so big, it doesn't give one a sense of how big these parts really are.

I guess everyone seems pretty convinced of this. I made them smaller, but kept the whole area dark grey/black (though I may add some detail to it). It was the easiest solution in terms of limiting reworking of the UVs.

The nose cone sections needs some re-sizing / fitting work.

Yeah, they are not very done. There will probably be a third one too.

There is a very minor annoyance with fitting wings to the side pods. The center of Mass is above the widest section of the parts meaning that the side pod curve bulges out underneath the wing when it is attached via snap mode. Very Minor, but aesthetically annoying.

It annoys me too. I could move the CofM down, but that will run into problems with engine alignment. The adapters would no longer give you engines centered on the CofM (and it would be impossible to rework them completely, the 1.25m ones maybe, but the 2.5m node just can't move down far enough).

Anyways, thanks for your comments, even if I can't implement them, they are appreciated. Essentially I'm totally open to changing a part until I unwrap it, then I get really reluctant (even more so if it's textured). I textured the small LF fuselage today, later in the week I'll have time to texture the LFO version and the cargo bay (which is getting a number of model tweaks).

I also made a start on the other two adapters that I plan - a Mk4 -> 2x2.5m and a Mk4 -> 4x1.25m one. Besides a possible cargo bay/tail adapter, I don't expect to do anymore. They are sloooow to unwrap.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Nertea

[CaptainKipard]

What's the visibility like now. Wouldn't it make sense to angle the windows a bit more, like every other plane in existence ever?

[Nertea]

It's fine.