Singularity Research Initiative - dev thread

[cziken20]

It is just... amazing. I wish i knew how to do those things with models in Unity, and had your modelling skills. This looks awesome!

[Itsdavyjones]

*Thump* *shuffling around to find jaw* Please stop making me lose my jaw every time, its getting hard to eat these days.

[Captain Sierra]

Never seen a total conversion mod for KSP or a mod that looks this f***king good, and now I get both of them . . . .

*reattaches jaw* The only thing I notice is that engine looks like it has a small fuel tank adapter assembly on top of it. I'm not a big fan of a canned spacecraft (which is why I think it's cool you split up the pod, but I was expecting the upper part to be the capsule, whereas you went Soyuz style; not complaining though), but this looks too awesome for me to really criticize.

[Taki117]

again with the Jaw! I think you could easily split the engine piece into two separate parts (Or even three) and have the top 3rd be a small fuel tank, the middle third be an adapter (This way you could make different types of engines with that style. Like maybe a single nozzle, or dual nozzle, with the Vernier engine option. I could even see you doing something interesting with the Vernier engines and the Firespitter plugin so that they flare out (Kinda like inverted B9 airbrakes) Also, Don't forget the Solar Panels!

[Captain_Party]

This. This is the new B9 Aerospace. I can feel it.

[mrrpamplemousse]

Oh man, this is on my watch list...

but that art man, that art!

[Daze]

My gawd, it look like a futuristic Soyuz, it's beautiful!

[sojourner]

It's beautiful art, but... It's too monolithic. The beauty of the stock ksp parts is that they can be assembled in so many different combinations. The parts should be more individual. Separate those 6 engines in that block into separate parts instead of one big engine block. Make the cowl covering them a separate part. This looks like it will only go together one way. I want to be able to recombine and use the parts in different ways and still have it look right.

[ddavis425]

That's a very interesting art style, I like it

[AveXx]

i WANT THIS SO BAD ! =D This looks so awesome

[Captain Sierra]

It's beautiful art, but... It's too monolithic. The beauty of the stock ksp parts is that they can be assembled in so many different combinations. The parts should be more individual. Separate those 6 engines in that block into separate parts instead of one big engine block. Make the cowl covering them a separate part. This looks like it will only go together one way. I want to be able to recombine and use the parts in different ways and still have it look right.

Thiis is sort of what I was talking about when I mentioned the canned rocket concept in my earlier post.

Canned rocket: A self contained single-part craft which performs all the functions normally requiring many parts. CBBP's dragon capsule is a perfect example of this.

Some of the engines for Lack's SXT Saturn V replica have fuel tank adapters on them, making them a canned rocket to an extent. Splitting the capsule up like he did was really cool as now we can reconfigure it and other stuff (ideas instantly start flowing).

What I would think should be done is that it should be split at the slope. The main body should be an adapter part with three nodes inside for the mains and 3 radial nodes outside for the node-attachable radial pods (radial attach nodes will REALLY screw over FAR and can cause some complications within the game but it's cool when they work right; I can always volunteer my time to help write the configs for that part of it). By forcing 3x symmetry, you can get a really easy-to-build engine cluster that looks creaking awesome.

While I enjoy multi-nozzle engines being single parts, I do also like seeing the option to mix, match, and otherwise customize our clusters with different power radials and mains to change the performance to what each individual lifter demands.

Clustered engines FTW.

[Daemoria]

It's beautiful art, but... It's too monolithic. The beauty of the stock ksp parts is that they can be assembled in so many different combinations. The parts should be more individual. *snip*

This makes the second time you've posted in my thread and made me heavily rethink my workflow. I had originally slated for the SRBs to be modular with swappable engines, but I see how people would want the main stage rockets motors to be adaptable as well.

In terms of mechanics, I guess the engine housing adapter would fit into the utility tab in the VAB, and the various types of engine nozzles would go into propulsion. I'll have to make some concept mockups to see how well it would work out. I don't want to have so many minute parts that people lose track of parts, such as when you have 2 or 3 huge part packs (i've not even scanned any of my Aeronautics or Structural piece design sheets yet...), so there is that balancing act as well.

Captain Sierra: I'm going to add some more distinctive detailing on the engine block so that the top third doesn't look so much like a fuel tank, with some structural elements or something. You are right, because as it is right now, the top bit is too similar to the fuel tank, and that's rubbish..

--

I'm still working on these, and until they are flying around in Kerbol Space, there is still a possibility for large revisions/changes. The process has a lot of back and forth between Photoshop and Cinema4d, so what you see in not necessarily what you get.

Sorry, no pictures in this post, I just woke up, and I've yet to find a way to make (good) models in my sleep.

Thanks for all the comments.

--

TL;dr I will go back and up the modularity of the entire rocket motor setup, once i figure out a way to make it look not rubbish. Also, 'canned' rockets are bad for KSP, i agree.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Daemoria

[Captain Sierra]

WARNING: Large, modular post incoming

This makes the second time you've posted in my thread and made me heavily rethink my workflow. I had originally slated for the SRBs to be modular with swappable engines, but I see how people would want the main stage rockets motors to be adaptable as well.

I don't think modular SRBs are going to be possible without a plugin. I personally think that what you are trying to do won't require one (this is total conversion, so most of what you need is already available config-wise) but that might and I think it would be much more complicated for less reward than modular clusters.

In terms of mechanics, I guess the engine housing adapter would fit into the utility tab in the VAB, and the various types of engine nozzles would go into propulsion. I'll have to make some concept mockups to see how well it would work out. I don't want to have so many minute parts that people lose track of parts, such as when you have 2 or 3 huge part packs (i've not even scanned any of my Aeronautics or Structural piece design sheets yet...), so there is that balancing act as well.

I think the engine housing would be more of a structural item. Currently, we have I think 280 stock parts. Now, if you go with modular clusterable engines, then there will be some part inflation. Then again, if you achieve your goal of total conversion, this will likely be B9 size BUT will make people be able to completely delete their stock parts. I know I would.

Captain Sierra: I'm going to add some more distinctive detailing on the engine block so that the top third doesn't look so much like a fuel tank, with some structural elements or something. You are right, because as it is right now, the top bit is too similar to the fuel tank, and that's rubbish..

Cannot wait to see what you come up with.

I'm still working on these, and until they are flying around in Kerbol Space, there is still a possibility for large revisions/changes. The process has a lot of back and forth between Photoshop and Cinema4d, so what you see in not necessarily what you get.

Sorry, no pictures in this post, I just woke up, and I've yet to find a way to make (good) models in my sleep.

Thanks for all the comments.

yo're welcome. I look forward to seeing them flying in kerbolar space. And I'm sure you'll figure out the trick to sleep-modelling soon enough. When you do, be sure to share.

TL;dr I will go back and up the modularity of the entire rocket motor setup, once i figure out a way to make it look not rubbish. Also, 'canned' rockets are bad for KSP, i agree.

I basically just rattled off a good idea on how in my earlier post, but I reread it and it basically overcomplicated things with my wording, so, PICTURE TIME!

Behold, my crappy MSPaint skillz.

So, let's explain this. Everything circled in red can go away, unless we want to artificially inflate the height of rockets.

The green would be the main engines and look to be 0.625m (0.5 size). These can come in multiple types from orbital CSM type engines to highly efficient aerospikes to raw power lifting engines.

The yellow is a bit more complicated. These are radial pod vernier engines. These can be powerful, or not. There could be types that are strong lifters, wide control range (5+ degrees), orbital CSM efficient engines, etc.

Both of these would still be node mounted and locked in 3x symmetry, with the radials having some options. First, you can either mount them as true node radials, which a) has issues with symmetry sometimes but there is a workaround, requires complex trig maths or TONS of trial and error to place correctly, and c) limits the podded engines as radial (with and without node) only.

The other option for the radials is a standard stack node. This makes them able to also be used as stack engines (at least theoretically). This is simpler to do (one less variable to add in the .cfg) and is easier to get the symmetry force to work on.

Another idea which goes with this is 6 radial nodes and 3x forced symmetry, allowing for two different types of radial engines to be placed.

The last thing is below the main engine nozzles, the adapter should have a bottom node. This is where the autoshrouding would be and it would cover the whole adapter and any radials attached (can be achieved purely with good shroud shape).

Now, have I sufficiently explained things or am I only confusing people?

[Nazari1382]

I'm a fan of mod parts having many uses and being flexible with other parts, but not for these. Splitting this part up would take away everything that makes it look good. Plus, he could just make a small oms-style engine mount with a similar look to the part in yellow. You could make it open to other engine nozzles, but why? Are these nozzles (the ones on the outside) even scaled to other nozzles that would actually be needed for some reason? It'd be easier for a user to just edit the cfg if they want different stats on the thing. edit: You may want to make the central engines another part (or mode) unless you want to treat the entire setup as one engine.

Edited February 22, 2014 by Nazari1382

[Daemoria]

Nazari382: Initially these rocket motors were going to be for one use only, the primary lift stage, but because I build everything on a grid, I can easily split them up with some degree of modularity. The comments of Captain Sierra and sojourner made me realize some certain structural failures in the single piece design, namely the side vanir thrusters would not have an independent gimbal range.

Captain Sierra: This is why i joined the KSP community, so many helpful forum goers. I hear all the above comments, and here is my response.

Yes, it is just a bulky 1meter to .5meter adapter holding a couple engines. Because I want to incorporate a sense of progression into game play thru the techtree, this is probably one of the least efficient ways to get a payload into orbit, but still possible.

Later tech stages will have less internal mechanical bits, thus cutting down on the size of the adapter plate. See bellow for a 1meter/1meter radial engine mount plate.

Now it's a balance of rocket nozzle pr0n, and realism. I could sink the motor nodes into the adapter plates, so only the ends stick out, while keeping the rockets reusable for true skeletal builds (flying octagonal girders?) if people ever want to build such insanity. My personal vision for these parts and what people create with them is going to be different, but thats the beauty of a modular system.

[Nazari1382]

While it's true the side thrusters wouldn't have an independent gimbal, they wouldn't need one. You could have a gimbal be invisible and be just as functional. Something to think about: how many applications would a part like the slanted side thruster housing really have outside of this thing?

[Daemoria]

Quite a few uses actually. My modsheet i posted back on page 1 has a lot of inverted sloped surfaces. In the physical sketch i had them covered in radial thrusters, but I removed them for the sake of clarity.

I'd have to position the attach node on the vanir's sloped inner surface for it to be universal, but that's the only hiccup i can foresee currently.

[Neutrinovore]

Great. In the space of just a few posts, we've now turned one (freakin' AWESOME looking!) part into, what, eight? Thanks for the memory hit, fellas.

A few posts ago someone said that this was going to be the new B9. I agree, but that's a double-edged sword, you know. Good that it's like B9, great-looking-parts-wise, bad that it's going to be a MAJOR memory hog because it'll have so many 'must have' parts.

Oh well, I'll just have to figure out what I need to delete when this comes out.

Keep up the great work, Daemoria. REALLY looking forward to this mod, even if it does blow up my computer, lol.

[Captain Sierra]

Great. In the space of just a few posts, we've now turned one (freakin' AWESOME looking!) part into, what, eight? Thanks for the memory hit, fellas.

Seven.

A few posts ago someone said that this was going to be the new B9. I agree, but that's a double-edged sword, you know. Good that it's like B9, great-looking-parts-wise, bad that it's going to be a MAJOR memory hog because it'll have so many 'must have' parts.

That was probably me. The main difference between this and B9 is that B9 is far from total conversion, where this is specifically intended to be total conversion.

Oh well, I'll just have to figure out what I need to delete when this comes out.

Are you already running memory reducer? How many mods do you have!?

Keep up the great work, Daemoria. REALLY looking forward to this mod, even if it does blow up my computer, lol.

When this is finished, you can delete your stock parts. That'll save some RAM.

[Daemoria]

Yea I keep forgetting the completely inefficient method KSP uses for texture calls. Typically, in any other game, a complete rocket would use 2 or so fairly high resolution textures, their uv coordinates all pointing at a shared texture. But because i guess KSP loads a texture for each part, even if they all call for the same one texture, it causes your videocard to go into a corner and cry.

Neutrinovore, have no fear. I plan on supporting all ranges of computers with this, it'd be poor form not to. I'm going to be releasing a 'low-spec' pack with the 'omg-how can i hold all these engines' pack. The part count (and triangle count) should be drastically lower, and manageable on lower end desktops/laptops.

--

enough internets for me for a while now. the next time you see this 'face', it'll be attached to a Soyuz-wannabe...

[Nazari1382]

This is how I'd do them - it'd make them just as useful on the bottom of something, as they are on the side of a slope.

Also, splitting something like this up wouldn't necessarily increase use of resources.

[123nick]

this will be THE BEST MOD EVER! great parts, its like KOSMOS V2 , or novapunch V2, or K&W V2, or all of them combined!

[BLUAV8R]

This is gonna be great keep up the good work

[tygoo7]

Those parts look great! They remind me of the new HOME parts. I can't wait to see them in game!

[Helix935]

Can't wait for these parts as they will supplement for the wait for H.O.M.E. 3