[1.2.2] Stock Part Revamp, Update 1.9.6. Released Source Files!

[blowfish]

I'd like some way to do that better, though not just by making a load of parts for it. Maybe something based off procedural fairings, but more controllable.

Firespitter's FSMeshSwitch module would allow covers to be added to each engine and toggleable. They can even be placed in a separate .mu file and activated with MM so that you only get the affect if you already have firespitter installed (thus not making it a hard dependency).

[Gribbleshnibit8]

I believe I saw it on a SpaceY tank, but when I placed a smaller node part on top of a 5m tank a cover appeared on the tank that covered up the insides and made it a nice flat space on top. Perhaps see how that's done and duplicate that method.

[Akira_R]

As far as adding "tankbutts" which in real life are merely aero fairings to cover the engine plumbing to reduce turbulence and drag for stages that burn in atmosphere, an easy way to get this visual look is to just put one of the structural adapters on the bottom of the tank and then just clip the engine up into it so that just the nozzle is showing.

[Captain Planet]

As far as adding "tankbutts" which in real life are merely aero fairings to cover the engine plumbing to reduce turbulence and drag for stages that burn in atmosphere, an easy way to get this visual look is to just put one of the structural adapters on the bottom of the tank and then just clip the engine up into it so that just the nozzle is showing.

I think this is the best solution. There are already a number of ways to create "tankbutts" (procedural fairings, clipping into an adapter, procedural parts) that don't involve adding a bunch of work for Ven.

[NathanKell]

I hate to be a pedant (who am I kidding, I love to be a pedant) but what you're talking about is a boattail. While in KSPland we don't make distinction between boattails and actual-butts-of-tanks when talking about Tankbutt-itis, it's worth noting the difference.

GregroxMun showed pics of actual tank butts, and bs1110101 showed boattailed enignes. However in KSP we often get a weird combination that is shaped like a tank butt + nozzle, with no room for the plumbing at all...

[Bakase]

Okay, I've been having more problems, which are probably because I've done something stupid, or they're really common issues, but I can't figure them out. With the latest texture replacer, Ven's solar panels are no longer shiny and the lights aren't pretty anymore.

In an unrelated (probably) issue, engine fairings are permanently on when I've got the stock revamp installed, and lights seem to be always switched on. Uninstalling stock revamp fixes this, reinstalling it breaks it again. Here's a screenshot of my mods folder:

[Akira_R]

The issue with the panels and lights is most likely due to the new TR update, it looks like it changes how reflections and such are handled, I know that SPR comes with a cfg for the TRReflections module that was introduced I believe in the 2.0 update. Try removing that cfg, although the problem is probably that that cfg no longer works with the new reflections stuff so now you are seeing how it normally looks lol.

As far as the issue with engine fairings and such i have no idea, anything in the debug log? If you launch and stage like normal does the shroud fall away like normal? What about toggling the lights in the flight scene?

[Bakase]

Toggling the lights in flight seems to add more of a glow over the top. If I stage the engines with decouplers and whatever, I just get a shroud attached to the decoupler and a second, intangible shroud attached to the engine. Doesn't seem to be anything meaningful in the debug log... I've also noticed that solar panels no longer seem to expand correctly (the original panel remains in place).

[Akira_R]

Interesting, did you update anything aside from TR, or install anything new?

[Bakase]

I can't remember the exact chronology, but I'm fairly sure it's likely to be a conflict with a mod (I either installed some new ones after Ven's, or installed them alongside Ven's)... I just can't think what. I've tried deleting what I thought were the likely suspects to no avail...

[Akira_R]

No doubt it is a conflict, you can try the old binary search thing, remove half the mods and see if it happens, half it again and again until you have it narrowed down. Or just look at the mods that try and do something to the stock parts.

[justinpatrick1011]

Should you make a low texture pack?? It really lags on Space Station One because of this..

[SessoSaidSo]

Okay sorry if this is dumb...But what is the reason why this mod changes the aerodynamic qualities of aircraft. I mean flying the stock craft and swapping between this mod and stock is almost like night and day.

[RainDreamer]

There shouldn't be any aerodynamic change. This mod doesn't touch any aerodynamic parameters of any part.

[Ven]

Okay sorry if this is dumb...But what is the reason why this mod changes the aerodynamic qualities of aircraft. I mean flying the stock craft and swapping between this mod and stock is almost like night and day.

There shouldn't be any aerodynamic change. This mod doesn't touch any aerodynamic parameters of any part.

The Mk1 cockpit has an air intake currently (which is going to be removed), which causes excess drag at the front of the craft. this extra frontal drag causes smaller airplanes to be slightly unstable.

Other than that there's no changes to the wings or the flaps.

Should you make a low texture pack?? It really lags on Space Station One because of this..

Unfortunatly, reducing the texture sizes won't help your framerate. The low framerate is probably due to the physics and/or another mod.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Ven

[Akira_R]

The lag could also be because of NRE spam, have you checked your debug log while the station is focused? I know that currently there is a problem with the inline docking port not having a proper transform or something for the docking node, this can result in a lot of NRE spam when it is included in a vessel that has other docking ports.

[theonegalen]

Aw, I liked the intakes on the Mk1.

[BudgetHedgehog]

Aw, I liked the intakes on the Mk1.

Same Can I ask why they're getting removed?

[Akira_R]

Same Can I ask why they're getting removed?

My guess would be the excess drag that they cause

[Robotengineer]

Are you Project V Ven?

[Phoenix84]

I just heard about this mod (from a Project V reference), and man is it beautiful.

My ONLY complaint is some of the spacing is off on a few of the parts.

Here's an example:

Take a FL-T400 tank, and stack a FL-T100 below it. Notice there's a small gap between them.

I also noticed a gap with both the above tanks and KW Vesta VR-1, but I don't expect you to do anything about other mods.

Otherwise it's great. It really keeps the stock feel, while looking not only more realistic, but better. It really makes other mods, like KW, not feel so out of place.

As for the Mk1 cockpit, I hope you include a new one that keeps the intake (or maybe an intake nosecone).

Edited January 23, 2015 by Phoenix84

[mjones1052]

I just heard about this mod (from a Project V reference), and man is it beautiful.

My ONLY complaint is some of the spacing is off on a few of the parts.

Here's an example:

Take a FL-T400 tank, and stack a FL-T100 below it. Notice there's a small gap between them.

I also noticed a gap with the FL-T100 and KW Vesta VR-1, but I don't expect you to do anything about other mods.

Otherwise it's great. It really keeps the stock feel, while looking not only more realistic, but better. It really makes other mods, like KW, not feel so out of place.

As for the Mk1 cockpit, I hope you include a new one that keeps the intake (or maybe an intake nosecone).

I had this problem too. If you're having the same issues I was. If you load something like the stock super heavy lander ship is the FLT400 on that ship and the one from the parts list the same size? I noticed what was happening for me was that if they were already on a saved ship it would be the correct size. However, if I tried to place one it would be a tiny bit smaller. This is what caused the gap for me and it happened with a bunch of parts. I noticed uninstalling tweakscale or this mod fixed it. What I finally did was a reinstall of KSP and all my mods and it was magically fixed. I never really figured out what caused it to happen in the first place though. But I would check to see if you're having the same issue.

[RainDreamer]

Tweakscale sometimes cause problems with part size in flight.

[Phoenix84]

Tweakscale sometimes cause problems with part size in flight.

This was in the VAB, and I don't use Tweakscale. It was too unstable (wasn't just in-flight sizes that were wrong) and I dumped it before 0.90. I only had it installed for IR anyway.

I had this problem too. If you're having the same issues I was. If you load something like the stock super heavy lander ship is the FLT400 on that ship and the one from the parts list the same size? I noticed what was happening for me was that if they were already on a saved ship it would be the correct size. However, if I tried to place one it would be a tiny bit smaller. This is what caused the gap for me and it happened with a bunch of parts. I noticed uninstalling tweakscale or this mod fixed it. What I finally did was a reinstall of KSP and all my mods and it was magically fixed. I never really figured out what caused it to happen in the first place though. But I would check to see if you're having the same issue.

I haven't tried a stock craft (playing hard mode), but I'll try it out tomorrow. I did however, design my ship with the old parts, then reload the game and my craft in the VAB with the new parts and saw it. I did try replacing the part, in case it was because of it already being placed, but it didn't help.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Phoenix84

[Sage]

It's probably just an attach node misplaced