Jump to content

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

cxg2827

By cxg2827
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I think that the PMA and the APAS should be separate anyway; because of the offset docking port, various mods including Docking Port Alignment Indicator, Hullcam VDS (When I added a camera using modulemanager it was in the base's centre instead of the port's centre) and MechJeb's autopilot don't work properly and can't account for the offset

Do others have the same feeling about the PMA tunnel having the docking port not integral to it?

Also, another progress shot. Went a bit all out with the hatch.

Texturing is basically complete and now its just setting up the .cfg and colliders.

EzFGTK0.png?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G'th

G'th

Posted
Posted

^ I think it would be wise to separate the two, if only to mesh well with how KSP would treat such a device. The docking port would be its own thing and the rest of the device would be a structural part.

And that airlock is looking awesome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hieywiey

hieywiey

Posted
Posted

Well CSS (I still call it that even though it's not technically called that anymore but whatever) has a nice APAS that can dock with your PMA without modification, as it is treated by the game as the same size docking port as the standard 1.25m Clamp-o-tron (which is also what the game treats your PMA as). I will say that that APAS port is not a standard size (it's like 0.986m or something uneven), so Procedural Parts is required to make things look pretty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted

New update is out on Kerbal Stuff.

Changes:


v0.10
-Updated GymHab texture to show hatch on both ends to match IVA
-Fixed minor texture issue for Node1
-Fixed External Ladders for SleepHab V4-1 
-Removed all "Airlock" colliders from crewed modules. Only the Airlock has this now.

-Added Part:
    -2M Airlock: Crew capacity 1, no IVA yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ciaran

Ciaran

Posted
Posted (edited)

KSP has just updated, But that won't stop me from modding it to hell again.. Going to be downloading this again to check out the airlock and make some stations. EDIT: Oh and one last thing, Thanks for atleast replying to my comment, It makes me happy when a developer or mod maker takes somekind of feedback at all.

Edited by Ciaran
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Oh and one last thing, Thanks for atleast replying to my comment, It makes me happy when a developer or mod maker takes somekind of feedback at all.

Of course :)

With some texturing techniques Ive picked up the past few weeks, I decided it was a good time to revisit the CBMs and give them another pass. I managed to get both of them on the same texture file without having to increase the size, so that will help reduce the pack size a small amount.

I am also making the ACBM look more like an ACBM.

EFo8XxK.png?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tristonwilson12

Tristonwilson12

Posted
Posted
Of course :)

With some texturing techniques Ive picked up the past few weeks, I decided it was a good time to revisit the CBMs and give them another pass. I managed to get both of them on the same texture file without having to increase the size, so that will help reduce the pack size a small amount.

I am also making the ACBM look more like an ACBM.

http://i.imgur.com/EFo8XxK.png?1

ooooo looking good!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
Neither. So excited :D

*Shamelessly promotes my own work*

Seriously, I love your mod so much

[video=youtube;hy48tTI6MQc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy48tTI6MQc[/video]

More information: [URL="http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/139812-Cooperation-The-Beauty-of-Teamwork?p=2300637#post2300637"]http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/139812-Cooperation-The-Beauty-of-Teamwork?p=2300637#post2300637[/URL]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Very cool! I'm glad you like the parts :)

I cant tell, but it seems you are using PCBMs on both ends to dock in the video. With my next update, the gendering will mess with your station a bit, so you might need to delete (2) lines from the CFGs on the CBMs.


Regarding the PMA and your last post about the targeting offset:
With the re-texturing I'm splitting the port off from the PMA tunnel section and going to make the APAS a separate part. Though I will still include an additional CFG to have a PMA with the integral docking port so existing crafts dont get broken.

I havent tested it yet, but I wonder if I can use the CoG offset in the CFG to fix the targeting issue of the PMA w/ integral APAS, or if it will still point to the CoM even though the models origin is @ the docking ports center.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
[quote name='cxg2827']Very cool! I'm glad you like the parts :)

I cant tell, but it seems you are using PCBMs on both ends to dock in the video. With my next update, the gendering will mess with your station a bit, so you might need to delete (2) lines from the CFGs on the CBMs.


Regarding the PMA and your last post about the targeting offset:
With the re-texturing I'm splitting the port off from the PMA tunnel section and going to make the APAS a separate part. Though I will still include an additional CFG to have a PMA with the integral docking port so existing crafts dont get broken. [/QUOTE]

Thanks! :) Oops, I think you're right :blush: ...good spot though
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Still working on the texturing, but did some quick testing with the updated PMA.

Looks like a few Tantares Docking ports fit nicely. Cant say the same with the stock docking ports. The shielded docking port doesnt look too bad, but the problem is the extra segment modeled behind the attachment node, so it clips into the PMA tunnel a bit.



 

Edited by cxg2827
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted
New update is out on Kerbal Stuff.

A thank you to NathanKell for adding a bunch of new features for docking ports, and Tristonwilson12 for assisting with some testing.


[B]Changes:[/B]
[code]
v0.11
-CBMs merged into a single folder named "CBMs". Delete CxAerospace folder prior to dropping in this version (or just remove the ACBM and PCBM folders from "parts").
-Updated CBM textures and modifed UVs so they both fit on the same texture.
-Added Genders to CBMs. Docking using CBMs now required to use opposite genders.
-Added acquireMinRollDot, captureMinRollDot, snapRotation and SnapOffset to CBMs. Docking will now require to line up the CBM guide fins, any only allows docking at 90 degree increments.
[/code]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
[quote name='cxg2827']Still working on the texturing, but did some quick testing with the updated PMA.

Looks like a few Tantares Docking ports fit nicely. Cant say the same with the stock docking ports. The shielded docking port doesnt look too bad, but the problem is the extra segment modeled behind the attachment node, so it clips into the PMA tunnel a bit.




[url]http://imgur.com/a/iWKNa[/url][/QUOTE]

Great! I used the Tantares APAS clipped into the PMA if you looked closely, so I'm glad it looks as good as it does here!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted
[quote name='trooperMNG']How's truss progress going? Adding them will surely make your pack complete.[/QUOTE]

It's been held up on progressing with the trusses since I've been updated the CBMs and PMA.

And now that I've split the PMA as just the tunnel, I still need to make the individual APAS parts. Unless if people dont care much for them (which would make the original PMA w/ integral port obsolete)? If I made the APAS, it would be a bit of an awkward part that doesnt really work with any other parts in the pack except for the PMA. The other possible option is if I made a docking port that resembles the stock one, and just modify the attaching base so it looks good on the PMA. [U]So suggestions and opinions are welcome for what I should do for this.[/U]


I still want to finish the 3 missing IVAs before i move on to the trusses too.

[quote name='MrMeeb']Great! I used the Tantares APAS clipped into the PMA if you looked closely, so I'm glad it looks as good as it does here![/QUOTE]

Yea I'm glad the dimensions work out, I modeled the PMA very closely off the proportion of a 3-view drawing I found. The APAS tunnel end has an outer diameter of 0.96m, and I think the Tantares ports have an OD of 0.9375m.

[COLOR="silver"][SIZE=1]- - - Updated - - -[/SIZE][/COLOR]

on the topic of the airlock, does anyone know what this hatch in the back was for? from all the photos I've seen, the Equipment lock portion had the CBM hatches on both ends, though several pictures looking into the crew lock section show this hatch at the back

[B]Looking into the crew lock:[/B]
[IMG]http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/A61011.jpg[/IMG]


[B]Equipment lock view:[/B]
[IMG]http://tntoday.utk.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Willmore.jpg[/IMG]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
[quote name='cxg2827']It's been held up on progressing with the trusses since I've been updated the CBMs and PMA.

And now that I've split the PMA as just the tunnel, I still need to make the individual APAS parts. Unless if people dont care much for them (which would make the original PMA w/ integral port obsolete)? If I made the APAS, it would be a bit of an awkward part that doesnt really work with any other parts in the pack except for the PMA. The other possible option is if I made a docking port that resembles the stock one, and just modify the attaching base so it looks good on the PMA. [U]So suggestions and opinions are welcome for what I should do for this.[/U]
[/QUOTE]

Tbh I preferred your model of the APAS (don't tell Beale :3), it just didn't work for me in other ways that I previously described. I'd like to see a separate part, but what do you mean by it not working with any other part in the pack except the PMA? As in aesthetically or that it physically won't be able to dock (which makes sense)?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cxg2827

cxg2827

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

[quote name='MrMeeb']I'd like to see a separate part, but what do you mean by it not working with any other part in the pack except the PMA? As in aesthetically or that it physically won't be able to dock (which makes sense)?

I was thinking aesthetically. The passive port would only look ok at the end of the PMA, and not on any of the other modules attachment points (see album using Beale's port as a comparison).

Though looking at the Mk1-2 pod, if i also made the Active APAS unit, i can either have it fit inside the black lip, or do something similar as the stock docking port and be a smooth transition when mounted to the nose.





[quote name='Tristonwilson12']https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-dc243a6ece3a94470419808d835b8671?convert_to_webp=true

Yea, so that first picture i posted. from front to back:
UAI, Astronaut, popping through the EV hatch, then its that round hatch door, which if you look at the diagram you posted leads to nowhere?

Edited by cxg2827
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...