[WIP] CxAerospace: Stations Parts Pack v1.0 - Head Over to Add-On Release

[RaendyLeBeau]

On 3.12.2015 06:22:17, cxg2827 said:

Getting pretty far along with the Airlock IVA. Still more details and then some props 

 

absolutely great awesome IVA details

[cxg2827]

2 hours ago, RaendyLeBeau said:

absolutely great awesome IVA details

Thank you

 

@VenomousRequiem, here is an album showing off the 1/2 resolution. About a 14 MB savings in memory

 

Also while I have them all shown together, do people like having the gym, sleeping modules, and node 1 be more white like they are now so it fits with Stock and Near Future, or would people prefer for me to have them more gray/metallic looking like the kibo and airlock?

 

[SpacedInvader]

4 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

The thought behind the crew capacities with these parts is that the sleep modules arent used for hot-bunking, so every personnel on the vessel has their own personal bunk and storage lockers. It kind of forces the effect of crew rotations by making it appear that the empty bunks are kerbals on duty or just off-duty and putzing around.

If you do plan on increasing the capacity, without me adding new transforms in the Unity project file, the extra crew wouldn't show in the IVAs or have portraits. If you type out the MM config, I'll make the changes, and include the hot-bunking config as a separate download link in the first post (and listing you as the author).  

 

The science module is only 50% longer than the Mobile processing lab, so I scaled the crew capacity to match (3 crew vs 2).

 

TAC-LS was next on my list to create MM configs, but if you want to share your files, I'd be more than happy to look at them and make some tweaks based on my thoughts on capacities for each module.

 

I added the ModuleScienceContainer and the ModuleScienceLab to both of the labs when released. Are they not functioning?

 

Go for it.

I'm going to have an ECLSS modeled in the Kibo lab IVA, and then later when I make the MPLM that will have KIS inventory.

I understand what you're saying about hot-bunking, but for me at least, the current config gives that impression because you can't actually fill all of the bed space in a module. As best as I can tell, ISS crew don't sleep in shifts and only sleep in different parts of the station because that's where the sleeping berths could be fit in. Also, the original plan was to have all of the crew sleep sleep in one module, but the end result was instead split sleeping areas. All of this is why I think the sleep habs should have a crew cap equal to their number of beds... This would allow everyone to have their personal space when not "on duty" rather than being forced to float around in the gym or science lab.

On a side note, I was thinking about keeping the life support rates for the modules at around 2 Kerbals per module and maybe even none in the nodes to encourage variety in station design.

For the science labs, the 2M is definitely ~3x the size of the Mini:

Spoiler

That said, for some reason I didn't see the 3 Kerbal capacity, and I was only going to make it a 4 Kerbal capacity anyway to represent the extra science racks that would be added in there for its size. The addition of the station science research module is not because the current science modules aren't working, but rather to increase functionality and reduce necessary parts for anyone who is using the station science mod (like me ).

 

EDIT: On a further side note, I'm also thinking about adding OKS functionality into these modules as well, though those will end up being much more complicated and I've got no idea what would make a suitable aeroponics / agricultural module. I should also point out that the configs I'm planning for the extra mods will be contingent upon those mods being installed, so they won't add a bunch of useless modules to the configs for people who don't have the mods.

Edited December 6, 2015 by SpacedInvader

[VenomousRequiem]

@cxg2827 looks good to me, yo. 1/2 resolution would save people a lot of memory, and like I said, I like having this mod.

[MrMeeb]

1 hour ago, cxg2827 said:

Also while I have them all shown together, do people like having the gym, sleeping modules, and node 1 be more white like they are now so it fits with Stock and Near Future, or would people prefer for me to have them more gray/metallic looking like the kibo and airlock?

 

I think they should all be the same colour if I'm honest, otherwise it messes with the continuity for me, like they've been made by different authors or something

[SpacedInvader]

Just now, MrMeeb said:

I think they should all be the same colour if I'm honest, otherwise it messes with the continuity for me, like they've been made by different authors or something

He's asking which color people like best. Personally, I like the darker grey as it looks a little more realisitc. That said, I don't necessarily think that all of the modules of a space station should be the same color as it tends to make it feel like a single part rather than a collection of modules.

@cxg2827have you thought about maybe including fstexture switch to make the textures changeable in the VAB? It would take some extra memory, but the whole module can be written out in favor of one color or the other using an MM config for those who would rather save memory. Just a thought.

[curtquarquesso]

2 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

Thank you

@VenomousRequiem, here is an album showing off the 1/2 resolution. About a 14 MB savings in memory

Also while I have them all shown together, do people like having the gym, sleeping modules, and node 1 be more white like they are now so it fits with Stock and Near Future, or would people prefer for me to have them more gray/metallic looking like the kibo and airlock?

– imgur album snip –

Honestly, don't worry about the textures at the moment. Focus on parts, and modeling. When 1.1 comes out, there's going to be huge changes with regards to textures. Add-on authors will actually be able to use textures that look metallic and reflective. Replicating the US segment, and the Apollo spacecraft has always been really difficult because of the lack of shader and texture support. I wouldn't spend a ton of time on it. I'm not sure if you can do any of that work in advance, but for now, just focus on modeling. 

[MrMeeb]

58 minutes ago, SpacedInvader said:

He's asking which color people like best. 

Okay, sorry. I prefer the grey one  

Edited December 6, 2015 by MrMeeb
I can't make up my mind

[cxg2827]

8 hours ago, SpacedInvader said:

All of this is why I think the sleep habs should have a crew cap equal to their number of beds... This would allow everyone to have their personal space when not "on duty" rather than being forced to float around in the gym or science lab.

Gotcha. I might change them then. In the later future i might even create some kind of general recreation module as a space lounge.

 

8 hours ago, SpacedInvader said:

On a side note, I was thinking about keeping the life support rates for the modules at around 2 Kerbals per module and maybe even none in the nodes to encourage variety in station design.

life support rates? I thought TAC had fixed quantities and no converter. Or are you talking about a different LS mod?

 

8 hours ago, SpacedInvader said:

For the science labs, the 2M is definitely ~3x the size of the Mini:

  Reveal hidden contents

That said, for some reason I didn't see the 3 Kerbal capacity, and I was only going to make it a 4 Kerbal capacity anyway to represent the extra science racks that would be added in there for its size. The addition of the station science research module is not because the current science modules aren't working, but rather to increase functionality and reduce necessary parts for anyone who is using the station science mod (like me ).

Aaaah, I thought you were referring to the stock one, not my mini one.

I'll see how the IVA for the science module pans out, and if it makes sense I'll add a 4th seat.

 

8 hours ago, SpacedInvader said:

He's asking which color people like best. Personally, I like the darker grey as it looks a little more realisitc. That said, I don't necessarily think that all of the modules of a space station should be the same color as it tends to make it feel like a single part rather than a collection of modules.

JAXA modules will remain as is, the others I'll have them match the same darker gray of the Quest airlock, but probably wouldn't touch them until 1.1 for the new features as curtquarquesso mentioned.

[SpacedInvader]

3 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

Life support rates? I thought TAC had fixed quantities and no converter. Or are you talking about a different LS mod?

Aaaah, I thought you were referring to the stock one, not my mini one.

I'll see how the IVA for the science module pans out, and if it makes sense I'll add a 4th seat

TACLS has various converters designed to emulate real life ECLSS  processes like the Elektron or CO2 scrubbers. TaranisElsu put a ton of work into trying to balance them based on real human needs, but you can use his template to scale the reaction appropriately. I was thinking about giving each functional module (Hab, Lab, Gym) converters to support 2 Kerbals, emulating the ISS style of distributed life support systems, and also promoting variety by needing more than a single sleep hab to support its full compliment of Kerbals.

As for the science lab, I think 3 would probably be just fine as it fits with the size difference between it and the mini. For some reason I thought both the mini and the 2M had capacities of 2 Kerbals, which is why I was going to make the 2M 4.

Edited December 7, 2015 by SpacedInvader

[SpacedInvader]

I should have some configs to share by later tonight or tomorrow afternoon. In the meantime, @cxg2827you might want to consider changing your part naming convention somewhat. As they are now, they are named only with their actual part, but this leaves it open to name conflicts and also makes it a little harder to call them out in MM configs because you have to use the specific name for each part. What I was thinking about would be to change it to follow the convention CxAero_TYPE_MODEL_VERSION or something similar. Functionally, this would end up looking like CxAero_SleepHabV4-1 or CxAero_LabMini. First of all, this would add the CxAero_ to all of your parts so if someone created a part also named 2MMiniLab sometime down the road, there wouldn't be any conflicts, and second, it would allow you to call out all CxAero parts, or all CxAero_SleepHab parts without having to call each out individually.

Just a thought.

[cxg2827]

if you rename a part, it will break any craft it is on. So that would make all of my parts break existing crafts they are on. Though I do agree that my naming convention is a bit too generic and can cause conflicts.

 

[SpacedInvader]

16 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

if you rename a part, it will break any craft it is on. So that would make all of my parts break existing crafts they are on. Though I do agree that my naming convention is a bit too generic and can cause conflicts.

 

Maybe something to think about for the 1.1 update then as most people will probably be starting new saves and anyone attempting to convert their save would be adept at save file editing anyway.

[cxg2827]

Just now, SpacedInvader said:

Maybe something to think about for the 1.1 update then as most people will probably be starting new saves and anyone attempting to convert their save would be adept at save file editing anyway.

Yea, that would definitely be the best time to roll out the name change. I'll probably add a warning to the first post as well so people can be ready for it.

[SpacedInvader]

Question:

I'm thinking about adding additional mass to the modules to account for the life support machinery. I've only been able to find a mass for the Elektron, which is 150Kg, but thats not the process that I'm putting into to deal with O2 recycling. Instead I'm using the carbon extractor process, but I can't find a mass for something similar to it and the TACLS unit seems pretty heavy at 5 tons, even dividing that by 4 to account for the reduced size of the one I'm putting into the modules, the TACLS weights for the extractor and water purifier would come to 2 tons per module, which seems heavy to me.

So, does 2 tons sound like a good number, or should I go with something smaller than that? Or am I overthinking this?

EDIT: I did just find that the ISS ECLSS water reclamation / purification system weighs in at about 1.5 tons, but that's for the whole station and not for an individual module.

Edited December 8, 2015 by SpacedInvader

[cxg2827]

3 hours ago, SpacedInvader said:

I'm thinking about adding additional mass to the modules to account for the life support machinery. I've only been able to find a mass for the Elektron, which is 150Kg, but thats not the process that I'm putting into to deal with O2 recycling. Instead I'm using the carbon extractor process, but I can't find a mass for something similar to it and the TACLS unit seems pretty heavy at 5 tons, even dividing that by 4 to account for the reduced size of the one I'm putting into the modules, the TACLS weights for the extractor and water purifier would come to 2 tons per module, which seems heavy to me.

So, does 2 tons sound like a good number, or should I go with something smaller than that? Or am I overthinking this?

EDIT: I did just find that the ISS ECLSS water reclamation / purification system weighs in at about 1.5 tons, but that's for the whole station and not for an individual module.

I found this informative PDF:

http://wsn.spaceflight.esa.int/docs/Factsheets/30%20ECLSS%20LR.pdf

It seems that each system has been created to fit in an individual rack from some of the pictures and documents I've seen.  I wouldn't think any of the individual rack assemblies would exceed 200kg (real life, not KSP scale). Though I did set the mass of all my parts to take into consideration additional subsystems that would be typical in a module, so we can probably keep the masses the same for all parts.

For instance, the NapHab and Node1 are both about the same mass as the Mobile Processing Lab, yet they are both about 2/3rds in size.

Are you also going to add a water purifier to the GymHab, since it has a shower and lav?

 

[SpacedInvader]

23 minutes ago, cxg2827 said:

I found this informative PDF:

http://wsn.spaceflight.esa.int/docs/Factsheets/30%20ECLSS%20LR.pdf

It seems that each system has been created to fit in an individual rack from some of the pictures and documents I've seen.  I wouldn't think any of the individual rack assemblies would exceed 200kg (real life, not KSP scale). Though I did set the mass of all my parts to take into consideration additional subsystems that would be typical in a module, so we can probably keep the masses the same for all parts.

For instance, the NapHab and Node1 are both about the same mass as the Mobile Processing Lab, yet they are both about 2/3rds in size.

Are you also going to add a water purifier to the GymHab, since it has a shower and lav?

 

That's a nice find! Much more detailed than the general "This is what the ISS has for ECLSS systems" I've been able to find. I especially like that systems map as I spent some time looking for equipment locations to be sure that they were actually distributed around the station and not concentrated in one or two places.

As far as the masses go, if you've already added some to account for subsystems, that works just great.

Right now, I've got a carbon extractor and a water purifier in all 5 SleepHabs, the GymHab, and both Labs. I figured the node and the airlock probably shouldn't have them as they're more secondary modules. I think I will probably leave the life support modules out of the PMM since it is really just for logistics and storage, so it should consist of a big KIS module and a similarly large service module / life support MFT tank. All of the converters are scaled to support 2 Kerbals so at a minimum, two modules will be needed to support the three crew of the NapHab and three modules will be needed to support a full 6 Kerbal crew.

[cxg2827]

I'd say only have water purifiers in the labs and gym. you can consider the sleeping modules to instead have temp/humidity controls.

[SpacedInvader]

14 minutes ago, cxg2827 said:

I'd say only have water purifiers in the labs and gym. you can consider the sleeping modules to instead have temp/humidity controls.

I think the water purifiers in the sleeping modules would represent urine reclamation while the ones in the labs and gym would be representative of greywater reclamation. On the ISS, both the service module and tranquility contain water purification systems according to that map, with tranquility being mostly for exercise / storage according to wikipedia (equivalent to the GymHab) and the service module containing 4 of the 6 sleeping berths (equivalent to the SleepHabs).

[the.fllying.ace]

I'm thinking about building a space station using this mod, I'm just worried about the name change break when 1.1 comes out... will you have a guide on how to modify the save file to where it wont break my vessel? Oh, and when will IVAs for the labs and other parts be added?

Edited December 10, 2015 by the.fllying.ace

[cxg2827]

6 hours ago, the.fllying.ace said:

will you have a guide on how to modify the save file to where it wont break my vessel?

I can make a guide for the save file change that will include a table with the old and new names. It will be a pretty easy CTRL+F and replace.

 

6 hours ago, the.fllying.ace said:

Oh, and when will IVAs for the labs and other parts be added?

Airlock just needs a tiny bit of work, and I am try to finish that up before a trip I'm taking this weekend. Science lab IVAs are next in my queue.

I'm also planning on updating the SleepHab6-2 and 4-2 to replace the 2 side hatches that don't correlate with the exterior model, but that will be later.

[the.fllying.ace]

20 minutes ago, cxg2827 said:

I can make a guide for the save file change that will include a table with the old and new names. It will be a pretty easy CTRL+F and replace.

 

Airlock just needs a tiny bit of work, and I am try to finish that up before a trip I'm taking this weekend. Science lab IVAs are next in my queue.

I'm also planning on updating the SleepHab6-2 and 4-2 to replace the 2 side hatches that don't correlate with the exterior model, but that will be later.

Ok great! Thanks for responding so quickly. It's nice to see a mod maker active on his form page 

[VenomousRequiem]

This framerate is physically hurting me...

"Loosely based" off of a real life space station.

Edited December 11, 2015 by VenomousRequiem

[cxg2827]

1 hour ago, VenomousRequiem said:

This framerate is physically hurting me...

Nice gif 

[cxg2827]

New release on Kerbal Stuff.

v0.13
-Removed acquireMinRollDot parameter. Captures easier now (just like stock).
-Added Airlock IVA.
-Added new bag props.