Kerbal Electric animated Turbofan engines - New : Low bypass KT-8D jet engine !

[Rushligh]

This is glorious. i need it. I NEED IT.
I can't tell if I'm being silly and blind of if the download link for the parts isn't there...
if at all possible i"d love to have those parts. for... science. yes, science >_>

[MrXels]

Can't download, links are broken.

[sgt_flyer]

@Rushligh

@MrXels

 

the files were hosted on mediafire. links to mediafire have been disabled by squad since january on the whole forum. besides, those were built before we got the jet engine revamp in 1.05 - so what you see in the images would be broken in 1.05. - i need to set up an account at a new host and completely rebuild them.

 

Edited February 25, 2016 by sgt_flyer

[Rushligh]

aww, thats too bad. well, i appreciate your effort to make great things anyway :3

[RandomAppleGaming]

I know how to fix the links, the thing is, you have to do this everytime

Because of the no longer allowed  ITAR REDACTED  links, simply type in  ITAR REDACTED  after the www.

This will get you to the site

Close off the ads and you can download it

 

Am i violating rules doing this?

 

EDIT:

Itar redacted.... google time

You know what to type if u been on it b4

Edited July 6, 2016 by RandomAppleGaming
Redacted

[Val]

1 hour ago, RandomAppleGaming said:

Am i violating rules doing this?

No. You're free to download from that site. Links are only disallowed because the site shows inappropriately rated ads.

[vsully]

Cool!

[Majorjim!]

If these still work I wonder if they could be made larger and to create thrust. That would be epic. @sgt_flyer What say you?

[RandomAppleGaming]

52 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

If these still work I wonder if they could be made larger and to create thrust. That would be epic. @sgt_flyer What say you?

maybe if you used little wings for the blades, maybe.

On 2/25/2016 at 3:40 PM, MrXels said:

Can't download, links are broken.

what squad has done is that they have removed med fire links from pages (Or just removed media fire .com)

To fix, just put the links there in the box, and put the part that has been removed back in manually, its fairly easy

@sgt_flyer What i found was that the engines dont work because of 2 things:

1. the outer shell (or fairing) keeps blocking it, making it break apart

2. the actual blade thing isn't being prevented from coming out of its housing, meaning you have to find a new way to do that. (ill upload a video of this when i do)

[RandomAppleGaming]

15 hours ago, Val said:

No. You're free to download from that site. Links are only disallowed because the site shows inappropriately rated ads.

I meant actually posting a fix for said banned disallowed sites

 

[sgt_flyer]

On 07/07/2016 at 0:48 AM, RandomAppleGaming said:

maybe if you used little wings for the blades, maybe.

what squad has done is that they have removed med fire links from pages (Or just removed media fire .com)

To fix, just put the links there in the box, and put the part that has been removed back in manually, its fairly easy

@sgt_flyer What i found was that the engines dont work because of 2 things:

1. the outer shell (or fairing) keeps blocking it, making it break apart

2. the actual blade thing isn't being prevented from coming out of its housing, meaning you have to find a new way to do that. (ill upload a video of this when i do)

i never tested them in 1.1  the extensive rework of how fairings physical collision layers that came from the switch to unity 5 pretty much killed the original versions .

for example : a 2 sided 1,25m fairing will have only 4 physical collision boxes per side ! an octogon is not really a great way to make wheels roll  (using x6 sided 1,25m fairing will  end up with 2 collision box per side, so you get a 12 sided polygon for the inside.

now multiply those 12 polygons by the number of placed points of the fairings (can be 6 to 10 segments depending on the diameter) and you end up with up to 120 physical polys per engine hull - not counting the mechanism itself. unity 5 physical geometry can quickly become a resource hog  (as it's convexes only) 

additionnaly, 1.1 landing gears are not really meant for that  a well made dry bearing might be much more reliable  

the new 3d models for the jet engines didn't help either  

besides, we now have the goliath for a large animated turbofan

i'll try to upload an alternate version this week end based around the structural fuselage and retractable ladders for a 1,25m

@Majorjim

you should ask more in Azimech's thread about this kind of things  

 

Edited July 7, 2016 by sgt_flyer

[Majorjim!]

Just now, sgt_flyer said:

@Majorjim

you should ask more in Azimech's thread about this kind of things  

Nah, I'm asking you good sir.

 The new fairing geometry is a pain indeed..

[RandomAppleGaming]

I managed to get much bigger (Like, huge) and more kerbal-y-er engine to work, then screwed it up trying to downscale it

and its that basic "Make a box, put a bearing in it, done" shape, so nothing special yet

[sgt_flyer]

beware, 1.1+ Open ended / interstage fairings use a lot of resources, and are slightly less round than pre 1.1 ones (especially less round if you use 2 sided 1.25m fairing, as it's an octogon shape inside) 

A 6 sided 1.25m open ended fairing would be more rounded, with a 12 sided polygon as a roll cage - but for ingame calculation, the fairing would count as 12 individual physical parts - per vertical slice ! So if you clicked 5 times when making the fairing, that's like having 60 individual parts for the physical calculations ! 

 

[Majorjim!]

6 hours ago, sgt_flyer said:

that's like having 60 individual parts for the physical calculations ! 

I know the parts are rigid bodies but are you sure fairings are not one part until separation?

[sgt_flyer]

6 hours ago, Majorjim said:

I know the parts are rigid bodies but are you sure fairings are not one part until separation?

for physics calculations it is. it's one of the things squad had to deal with when they switched to unity 5 - Unity 5 can only handle convex shapes for the collisions, concave shapes are not supported. creating a filled cylinder (fuel tank) is an easy convex shape - creating a tube or a half-fairing require to build the physical collision model out of several convex parts, which are then grouped together to create one entity - but when doing physics calculations, it has roughly the same impact than if you built a tube out of wing parts. it's why when the 1.1 beta test was released, that complex / huge fairings created long freezes on scene loading. 

the fix squad did for this was to make 'closed' nose fairings out of simple primitives (half cylinders , cones - per vertical segment) - so you have much less 'physical' parts. (try decoupling something inside a closed fairing ^^) those switch to their full multi-convexes physical shapes only when you stage the fairings.

open ended fairings / interstage fairings however are hollow - thus made of a variable amount of convexes. (multiplied by the number of vertical segments).

it is still possible to adversely affect the game performance if you create a complex interstage / open ended fairing

current 'open ended' fairing / or ejected fairing halves physical 'mesh' generation is roughly this (from infos gathered from @Claw and the patchnotes during the beta test of 1.1) : each 'size' of fairing baseplate has a 'minimal' amount of internal 'sides' hardcoded. (something like 8 for the 1,25m fairing, 9 for the 2.5 and 12 for the 3,75m one) when you modify the number of panels (fairing to split in 2,3,4 or 6 sections) the game recalculates the amount of 'convex' needed per section (distributed evenly), to always be equal or above the minimal. so if a 1,25m fairing is set to split into 2, you can have 4 convexes per section (2x4, = 8 convexes ). when switching to a 3-way split, you get 3 convexes per section (total 9 convexs) - 4-way split, you get 2 convex per section (8 convexes total) and in 6-way split, again 2convex per section (so 12 convexes - because if it only had 1 convex per section, 6 convex would be below the hardcoded limit) 

all that multiplied by the number of vertical slices ! 

even something like my custom 1,8m space shuttle SRBs were resource hogs when built solely out of open ended / interstage fairings, so i rebuilt them to have one huge closed fairing on top of a interstage fairing made only out of 3 vertical slices in 2-way split, to have a minimal performance impact.

Edited July 22, 2016 by sgt_flyer

[Majorjim!]

I get all that man, I've seen that information many times and I understand the lag caused by the fairing but even unreleased it still counts as a load of ridged bodies? 

 They are not interacting with each other though right? Please no numbers this time man, simplify the answer please. :-)

Edited July 22, 2016 by Majorjim

[sgt_flyer]

7 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

I get all that man, I've seen that information many times and I understand the lag caused by the fairing but even unreleased it still counts as a load of ridged bodies? 

 They are not interacting with each other though right? Please no numbers this time man, simplify the answer please. :-)

they are not interacting with each other - they are effectively grouped as a rigid body - but the physics engine still has to process them on scene loading - simply to at least get the parameters (size, position, and at what it is attached) of each convex into memory (they are procedural afterwards, difficult to process in advance) - and it seems it has to retest them at each staging event to check if nothing changed / they didn't collide with anything. (which is why we were sometimes getting very long freezes at scene loading, and then at various staging events) 

[Majorjim!]

1 hour ago, sgt_flyer said:

they are not interacting with each other - they are effectively grouped as a rigid body - but the physics engine still has to process them on scene loading - simply to at least get the parameters (size, position, and at what it is attached) of each convex into memory (they are procedural afterwards, difficult to process in advance) - and it seems it has to retest them at each staging event to check if nothing changed / they didn't collide with anything. (which is why we were sometimes getting very long freezes at scene loading, and then at various staging events) 

Got ya, cheers for the exploration. 

[Claw]

On 7/22/2016 at 9:17 AM, sgt_flyer said:

they are not interacting with each other - they are effectively grouped as a rigid body - but the physics engine still has to process them on scene loading

Yeah, that's pretty much it. It takes a bit for the fairings to build up, but they are a collider set within a part. So they act together just like another model that had multiple colliders.

The issue previously was that, with the change to U5, the old way of generating the colliders and setting them up in physics caused a huge amount of processing time as it went through all the colliders during scene load. There was something that changed with Unity 5 that used to work speedily in Unity 4, but for some reason was incredibly slow in U5. I suspect there was some optimization on their end that was incompatible with the way KSP was doing it. So the system had to change, and now they generate colliders.

[Claw]

And I just read all this again. @sgt_flyer does a pretty good job detailing it all out, and I noticed I might not have actually answered (or added to) the question. The fairing acts as a single rigid body, though it still has to process collisions on those colliders when it's interacting with a separate vessel. So yeah, there is a performance penalty just like any complex shape, but not really from from the rigidbody standpoint. And they aren't constantly testing for interactions/collisions between themselves. (Actually, making sure they aren't tested against each other was part of what caused the loading slowdown.)

[sgt_flyer]

@Claw

thanks for the additional explanations