Jump to content

Nertea

KSP Team
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,792

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Nertea

    Does anyone have experience with why Physics.RayCast sometimes passes through parts?

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted · Edited by Nertea

    So here's some things to try:

    1. Is the behaviour the same with Physics.Raycast() as well as Physics.RaycastAll()? In the past I've had issues with RaycastAll() in my own Unity projects.
    2. Try using Physics.Spherecast() with an appropriate radius, which does what you'd expect it to (raycast with a sphere instead of a point). It's more expensive, but it should get you an idea of what's going on. If you're thinking that there is positional jitter that is causing your error, using a Spherecast will help determine that - if it is hitting but the raycast isn't, there's a small jitter involved. If it's still not hitting
    3. I don't know exactly how the methods you're using to get your laser aim start point and direction are working exactly, but it seems like a far easier way would be to place a transform in your model file (placed and oriented as your laser origin), get it via a standard method, and just use that transform's position and forward parameters to aim the beam. I'm not sure why you're doing otherwise, but as you're raycasting within KSP's physics bubble against things inside the physics bubble, you shouldn't need to do much else. If all else fails, you should try this.
    4. Related to point 3, how are you drawing your LineRenderer (I don't see it in your code)?

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted

    Ohh!! Pretties! Are those Textures already in the download? or do we have to wait for a bit?

    Waiting is required.

    Judging from the screenshots I'm not sure you understand what I'm getting at. I'm curious about the visibility from inside the cockpit. It looks like most of the visibility will be up, instead of forward.

    Like I said earlier... better visibility than the Mk2 cockpit in terms of both side facing and foward view. Due to how large the part is, it may be hard to see, but the vertical extent of the window is about the same as an entire oversized kerbal head.

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted · Edited by 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 :P 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.

    smallerwindows.png

    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.

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted

    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.

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted · Edited by 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? :P)

    This too forever, but I present Imitation Pork.

    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.

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted · Edited by 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).

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted

    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 :)

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted

    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!

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

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted

    These look fantastic Ven!

    Some comments on the last album:

    • The 909 is my favorite ;)
    • I like how you unified the look of the docking port with the one on the inline ones (handle basically)
    • You did a clever job of keeping the overall feel of the tanks. I also liked the dark stripes on the T800, but hey, you can do what you like. Looking forward to your take on the 2.5m ones ;)
    • The jet engines are gorgeous!

    [WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

    in KSP1 Mod Development

    Posted

    Well, you can all have a test of the MkIV parts if you like. I appreciate general input, but mainly I'm looking for feedback on the general shape, concept and (vaguely) balance. Parts are textureless and in some cases don't look that great, so be warned.

    I'm also testing out GitHub as a more comprehensive workflow with this, so get the test from my GitHub release page

    God damn, that spaceplane fuselage system. I'm not trying to butter you up or anything, but incredible work. Not sure if I've popped in to say so before!

    I'm curious about how you're planning to do docking adapters, however. If you ask me, the most convenient way (speaking for myself as a builder) would be to do it like the space shuttle - a docking module, potentially with a telescoping 1.25m tube and docking port, that fits inside the cargo bay (the original small KSO shuttle did it this way, for example). This is opposed to the SP+/stock way of doing it, where the docking adapter is a self-contained fuselage segment. That way if you're running a mission that doesn't require docking, you just pull that sucker out of the cargo bay for some extra space - no need to drastically rearrange the craft.

    There are a few ideas I am thinking of:

    • Openable nosecone with extending docking port
    • Integrating docking port into crew cabin
    • Specific "slice" with port like SP+

    Your idea seems interesting, but for some reason I don't really like it :P. I think if I did it, I would put it in SSPX and make it a 1.25 or 2.5m airlock+extending port part.

×
×
  • Create New...