[WIP][1.8.x] SSTULabs - Low Part Count Solutions (Orbiters, Landers, Lifters) - Dev Thread [11-18-18]

[blowfish]

If the ICPS and HUS engines were also capable of retracting, this would be hands down perfect.

Nitpick: The HUS/EUS is slated to use RL10C engines, which to my knowledge have fixed nozzles - according to Wikipedia, the nozzle diameter is less than most of the RL10A variants.

I haven't been following this thread for very long, but I don't recall seeing any RO configs posted in the time that I've been here.

[VenomousRequiem]

Oh, god, yes, please model more engines for more lifters!

http://andegraf.com/rockets

This website has a lot of reference for models.

[Shadowmage]

Hmm...

Feels like there is something big missing from this picture:

Oh, right! SSTU doesn't have any shuttle parts! (and I removed the stock ones from my dev setup to speed up the load times)

- - - Updated - - -

[snip]

as for the upper stage mount, I suggested that more like a customizable thing for each mission, like, one mission you want to use 6x RL-10-B2 and in the next one you may need only 4 or 5, or might need 7, or maybe swap them for J-2X or RS-25, allowing for a custom design

EDIT: now that i'm looking closer to the "white" Soyuz rocket, i'm starting to think that that might be ice...

Awesome, thanks for the references. Will see what I can do about adding in a few more decorative paint-schemes based on a few of those (after I get the parts finished/working!).

And yes, I believe the white on the Soyuz is ice/frost on the tanks (you can see the fogginess of it in higher-quality versions of that photo...probably even that one if you zoom in).

Regarding upper stages/engine configs... have a few ideas in the works that I need to investigate a bit more, but chances are that I will be writing a custom plugin to handle the upper stages; so you -can- swap in different engine variants/etc, or swap tank configs, based upon your specific needs for the mission. They will likely -not- be 'one size fits all' deals like the current ICPS/HUS, but more of a modular/configurable part(s). It may well be that I end up creating some strange engine-config-swapping plugin to handle the differences in engine specs.... we'll see. Still a ways out on those, so its good to post up your ideas / feedback / suggestions. Even if I don't use them exactly, they will likely influence the final design / part setups.

What I've seen so far of this is truely amazing! There are even some super cool and useful functions that I haven't seen in other parts, such as being able to dynamically change between visual and functional models in the VAB.

I want to ask if anybody has worked on configs for some of the parts for RO / RealFuels? I still need to read through all 30 pages of comments, so I may end up answering my own question.

Some of the parts have obvious and direct analogs in reality, so I may either be able to directly copy some of the RO configs I had developed for some of the Chaka Monkey exploration pack. In particular, I worked on the Ares and SLS upper and lower stage parts. If the ICPS and HUS engines were also capable of retracting, this would be hands down perfect.

Thanks Be sure to check back in a few weeks to see the upcoming developments (going to be interesting!), lots more fun stuff to come.

There are currently no RO/RSS configs, and it would still be a -bit- early to start working on them anyhow, as so much of the mod is still in flux. However I'm pretty sure they -will- be developed in time, even if not directly by me. You are more than welcome to help contribute when the time comes (... could start on them now, but might have to rebalance / update stuff as the mod progresses).

Edit -- Two more quick questions before I dive back into dev stuff:

Thoughts on the upper/lower stringers on the orange tank texture? I'm a bit torn... they break up the monotony of such a large texture, but they also seem a bit out of place for the orange tanks.

Any desire for a Delta-IV specific orange texture, with the white inter-tank (as opposed to the yellow/orange on the Shuttle ET)? Would mean more textures / larger download / bigger memory footprint (not as relevant with 64-bit, but VRAM is still limited). Perhaps I should offer most of the variants in a separate texture pack(s)?

Edited October 10, 2015 by Shadowmage

[JoseEduardo]

meh, slap a few RS-25 under that tank, and change the nose cone for a extension and a fairing, and voila, you have what's been missing

EDIT: btw, have you noticed that the game still considers all tanks to be at max height? if you open the info tab in the lower corner and get a 5m tank, even if you're using a 5m tank it will say you have a 40m long one

might give some people a headache in career mode before unlocking all VAB and pad upgrades

Edited October 10, 2015 by JoseEduardo

[Shadowmage]

meh, slap a few RS-25 under that tank, and change the nose cone for a extension and a fairing, and voila, you have what's been missing

EDIT: btw, have you noticed that the game still considers all tanks to be at max height? if you open the info tab in the lower corner and get a 5m tank, even if you're using a 5m tank it will say you have a 40m long one

might give some people a headache in career mode before unlocking all VAB and pad upgrades

I actually -just- noticed and fixed that bug while I was working through the editor-icon size stuff (which should also be fixed here shortly). Thanks for the report though, let me notice if you run into anything else odd.

[JoseEduardo]

Shadowmage, have you seen this PDF? http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/defense-space/space/sls/docs/sls_mission_booklet_jan_2014.pdf

some nice payloads there, and they could give you inspiration for your future station/base parts

[riocrokite]

Shadowmage, one thing that came to my mind:

Will your mesh switch plugin account for texture switching as well? For example you have several versions of tanks that use orange texture. Later on you want to add a black texture version that could be switched in editor. So apart from switching meshes you could also switch texture that they use.

[Shadowmage]

Shadowmage, have you seen this PDF? http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/defense-space/space/sls/docs/sls_mission_booklet_jan_2014.pdf

some nice payloads there, and they could give you inspiration for your future station/base parts

Aye, got that one saved into my resources folder. Had actually used some images from that for the diagrams when I made the HUS Is certainly one of the more informative and detailed bits of information out there.

One thing that I do want to make is a set of payload adapters / fairings (at least for 5m). Still a bit undecided as to how I want to do it (stock fairing w/ custom texture + geometry, custom fairings... ??)

Shadowmage, one thing that came to my mind:

Will your mesh switch plugin account for texture switching as well? For example you have several versions of tanks that use orange texture. Later on you want to add a black texture version that could be switched in editor. So apart from switching meshes you could also switch texture that they use.

So far the texture-switch module is separate from the mesh switch/custom fuel tank modules, and they can work completely independently (and is the only way they work currently). However I do have the texture switch setup in such a way that it will accept input from external modules, so in the future I could specify a per-fuel(resource)-texture; similar to MKS/Kontainers texture switching. Or really, you could trigger the switch off whatever; it just accepts a single input parameter -- the String name of the texture set to enable.

Texture sets are defined outside of the part.cfg, in separate files (GameData/SSTU/Data/TextureSet-XXX), and can be added/removed fairly freely (and have parts added to/removed from them). If a texture set is not available that is specified in the part, nothing bad happens (you get to click the button an extra time to skip past it).

So yes, you can certainly add in more texture variants... now... later... both... whichever. Should have no effect on stability / existing save games.

Things are looking good so far on the release. Had a last minute scaling issue that I had to clean up, but it looks like all the fuel-tank stuff is in and working, at least well enough for its initial setup (a few adapters are not included where they could be). Going through and doing a bit of internal testing on all that stuff, and then I have a couple other small issues to tackle (SC-B-SM lower fairing clipping with solar panels), but I can't forsee any problems with those. So.. hopefully here in a few hours I'll have the updated release ready.

Advanced Warning -- This update is going to break any craft (saved or in-flight) using the previous versions of the configurable fuel-tanks.

I'll post more warnings with the release post, and on the download page. I would apologize for breaking things... but such is the nature of development and progress (and why these are test releases, in the test/dev thread, with a big disclaimer at the top stating things will often break between releases). But I will thank you all for helping to test things and provide feedback, and generally guide the evolution of the mod.

Edited October 10, 2015 by Shadowmage

[Shadowmage]

Hit a last minute issue with the editor-part-size detection stuff. Thought I had it cleaned up last night, but apparently I didn't test it well enough.

Implementing a new solution that actually solves many other problems as well -- model load-on-demand. Going to take likely another few hours to get it all sorted and working.

The good news is that it cleans up the last of the known issues and improves performance by not having all of the meshes/colliders constantly attached to the part.

[VenomousRequiem]

There should totally be a 5 metre fairing included! Maybe one that starts at 5m and the fairing itself is 5m but it tapers down to 3.75/2.5/1.25 as it goes up!

And if you're serious about making the Atlas/Delta, you should include fairings that start at their diameter and taper down as they go up as well.

As for scaling:

The Delta IV should be 3.75, the Delta III should be 1.25 at it's base, and on the cryogenic upper stage it should be 1.875, and the Atlas(Presumably Atlas V?) should start at 2.5 at it's base, and Centaur should be 1.875.

Just my two cents on the scale of the rockets, as these scales would be super useful. It would be Delta III as light, Atlas V as medium-light, Delta IV as medium-heavy, SLS as heavy. It would be perfect! You could do pretty much any mission with this pack alone!

And I'm too lazy to sift through too many posts, but are you planning on making a Proton and Soyuz(Molniya/Vostok/Voskhod/Soyuz-U/Soyuz-FG/ what ever you want to model the performance after... R-7) rockets too? That would be absolutely fantastic! Those are by far my favorite rockets to use in any situation! I'm a big fan of Russian rockets.

[Shadowmage]

Sorry for the delay. Just as I was wrapping up testing and getting ready to package things up, I had to help a friend out whose motorcycle had died on him. To make a long story short... now I've got a motorcycle stored in my garage for a bit.

Anyhow... I present to you... the 'Lots of textures' update. Also nosecones. Maybe its the 'Lots of adapters' update. Its got lots of new stuff one way or the other...

WARNING - This update will break craft using existing versions of the custom fuel tanks due to a complete plugin rewrite/change. I think the new feature set is probably worth it in the end though (nosecones, fuel types, texture switching).

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/releases/tag/0.2.13-beta

Full change log is behind the link, as are the downloads.

I did notice one problem in the VAB related to using part symmetry on surface-attached custom tanks; I believe the symmetrical tanks are trying to update one another, but doing so poorly. I had noticed model duplication and texture-set inconsistencies, but only when symmetry was used with surface attached tanks. For now you can work around it by setting up a single tank fully to your preference, and -then- using symmetry to attach it. Or just setup to tanks without symmetry, whatever works.

Texture bloat in the main release will likely be dealt with soon through texture size reduction for some parts, and moving the alternate texture sets off into a separate optional download.

As usual, please let me know if you run across any problems or issues, or have suggestions regarding improvements or balance.

You can find the issue tracker at: https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues, please check it before reporting issues. If your problem is already listed, feel free to add any new / relevant information you may have.

Thanks, and enjoy

Shadowmage

[Sudragon]

Would it possible to add the liquid hydrogen/oxidizer mix that Nertea's Cryogenic rockets mod uses to the fuel choices?

[riocrokite]

this stuff is awesome \o/

Tried that delta 4 /SLS setup with biggest stock engines. I guess the tanks/engines were too close because the rocket exploded upon staging

The only thing I lack now is a 5m fairing with custom paint (or maybe I missed that?).

[blowfish]

Is it really worth having two engine modules on the service module? They seem rather redundant.

[Shadowmage]

Would it possible to add the liquid hydrogen/oxidizer mix that Nertea's Cryogenic rockets mod uses to the fuel choices?

Chances are very good (already have most of the config drafted up). However, I need to look into the legalities of distributing CRP with my mod, or otherwise redefining the resources when no other mods are present. And need to write up the actual patches to enable the choice.

this stuff is awesome \o/

Tried that delta 4 /SLS setup with biggest stock engines. I guess the tanks/engines were too close because the rocket exploded upon staging

The only thing I lack now is a 5m fairing with custom paint (or maybe I missed that?).

I actually didn't try to even launch that rocket (nor could I have, there were no decouplers on it anywhere), just wanted a recognizable pic to post up with the release Sadly, I got little/no time to test or play with things over the weekend; real-life decided to step in and keep me occupied. It does that from time to time.

5m fairings are on the 'todo' list. Likely a 5m straight, and 5m expanded (starts at 5m, tapers outwards a bit) fairing, using the stock fairing module with some custom base geometry. If you've seen the KW rocketry ones, they will likely be very similar.

Is it really worth having two engine modules on the service module? They seem rather redundant.

Nope, not at all (worth it). However, when I modeled those parts I was going for 'realism' (and had intended on originally using proper scaled values for mass/isp/etc), and as such designed the engines and RCS as they are (or close to) the real article. However, if/when I rework the model I will either be removing the secondary engines or repurposing them as high-thrust RCS ports. Currently all the 2nd engine does is mess up MechJeb when you have the engine disabled (it thinks you have higher TWR than you do, and doesn't start burns early enough).

So, yes, that is a problem that will be looked into as time permits, but it is likely months out before I start re-doing any of the older parts (probably sometime after KSP 1.1); have tons of stuff to finish and a few new concepts that I would like to develop. Redoing a few of those parts is on the extended todo list (want to rework the ICPS/HUS as well a bit)

Feeling a bit burned out at the moment, so will likely be taking things a bit slow this week. Will likely concentrate on bugfixes, balance, and a bit more texture work for this weekends update/release. I'm currently thinking through options for a customizable-engine module, and might start doing a bit of engine geometry for various engines, though none of it would likely be finished/usable for the next release (engines generally take me a bit). Will probably post up the preliminary design/draft/specs on the engine stuff later for feedback -- if I can get the initial specs figured out.

[VenomousRequiem]

If you'll be reworking textures, you should take a look at the CM/SM/BPC textures. They don't really match with the rest of the parts as they're a little bit lower quality if you ask me.

[Shadowmage]

If you'll be reworking textures, you should take a look at the CM/SM/BPC textures. They don't really match with the rest of the parts as they're a little bit lower quality if you ask me.

-Not- reworking textures. Maybe working on finishing existing WIP textures. Any texture marked as 'finished' will -not- be being touched until/if/when the part is completely redone. I hate doing textures enough as it is; there is no way I'm going to redo a finished texture just for the heck of it.

And I personally think some of those are the better looking textures. Well, the CM could perhaps use some better tiles; but there is no way to do it given texture size/resolution limitations(unless you are wanting me to do 2048x textures for -every part-; which I'm actually unwilling to do anyhow). Really, I hate texturing things. And modeling. I seem to suck at both, and they take unreasonably long amounts of time for minimal and mostly unsatisfactory results. Those are the reasons -why- I am burned out; sadly it seems to be that KSP modding is 80% texture/modeling work, and only ~20% coding work (which is the part that I actually enjoy, or at least don't despise). (Seriously, I spent -all @#%^@#$^ day- yesterday working on engine geometry / plumbing stuff. For a single engine. And got maybe like 5% of the model done.)

You are more than welcome to re-texture them yourself however. I can/will provide the original UV and AO maps if needed/wanted. But I will not be touching the textures on those parts in their current form.

[riocrokite]

-Not- reworking textures. Maybe working on finishing existing WIP textures. Any texture marked as 'finished' will -not- be being touched until/if/when the part is completely redone. I hate doing textures enough as it is; there is no way I'm going to redo a finished texture just for the heck of it.

And I personally think some of those are the better looking textures. Well, the CM could perhaps use some better tiles; but there is no way to do it given texture size/resolution limitations(unless you are wanting me to do 2048x textures for -every part-; which I'm actually unwilling to do anyhow). Really, I hate texturing things. And modeling. I seem to suck at both, and they take unreasonably long amounts of time for minimal and mostly unsatisfactory results. Those are the reasons -why- I am burned out; sadly it seems to be that KSP modding is 80% texture/modeling work, and only ~20% coding work (which is the part that I actually enjoy, or at least don't despise). (Seriously, I spent -all @#%^@#$^ day- yesterday working on engine geometry / plumbing stuff. For a single engine. And got maybe like 5% of the model done.)

You are more than welcome to re-texture them yourself however. I can/will provide the original UV and AO maps if needed/wanted. But I will not be touching the textures on those parts in their current form.

Yah I agree on all points, I can bear modelling, however texturing and especially unwrapping efficiently to reuse textures is an ugly work Compared to stock you did amazing job, look for example at biggest ksp 3.75m tank

[Shadowmage]

Yesterday and today's progress:

The F1 Engine (Saturn-V). Playing around with/learning how to do all the pumps/piping, while keeping it at reasonable poly count for the amount of detail included. Finished model should be <6k triangles (SSME that I just did is ~4.2k per engine, for reference).

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[VenomousRequiem]

Ohh, looking good, man.

[davidy12]

Now you're making a Saturn V?

[_Augustus_]

If you're making the F-1, perhaps you could make the Pyrios boosters for the SLS?

[Shadowmage]

Now you're making a Saturn V?

Nope.

Just making a bunch of various engines for an upcoming use. Chances are, as these engines will likely take me ~1 week each, that you guys won't be seeing any of these for a few months (have a bunch of engines to make, need them all done before I can work on the next bit, which needs to be done before the engines can be released).

- - - Updated - - -

If you're making the F-1, perhaps you could make the Pyrios boosters for the SLS?

Ehh? They look to me to be a fuel tank with some engines on the bottom? How/why do you need me to create them?

And either way... probably not. I have no interest in creating discrete liquid fueled boosters. A fuel tank+engine works fine.

[_Augustus_]

Nope.

Just making a bunch of various engines for an upcoming use. Chances are, as these engines will likely take me ~1 week each, that you guys won't be seeing any of these for a few months (have a bunch of engines to make, need them all done before I can work on the next bit, which needs to be done before the engines can be released).

- - - Updated - - -

Ehh? They look to me to be a fuel tank with some engines on the bottom? How/why do you need me to create them?

And either way... probably not. I have no interest in creating discrete liquid fueled boosters. A fuel tank+engine works fine.

So what are you doing with the F-1 then?

Also the Pyrios is a booster with 2 F1B engines that have nice-looking mounts.

[Shadowmage]

So what are you doing with the F-1 then?

Nothing, yet. Need to model a bunch of engines before I can do what I want with them (or... at least 2 to get the basics working). The plan so far is for a semi-procedural engine part (like the fuel tanks) that allows for easy clustering of engines and gives a choice of mounting options (really just shrouded or skeletal). Ideally I will find a way to set these up to work for both lifters and upper stages (seems doable, mostly dependent on engine choice and mount size). Still in the very early concept stages though, haven't even started on the coding yet (starting on the models this time, as I figure I wanted a bunch of engine models whether the plugin works out or not).

So what are you doing with the F-1 then?

Also the Pyrios is a booster with 2 F1B engines that have nice-looking mounts.

So... if I can pull the plugin off, you will be able to cluster the 2 F1's that you need, and already have variable sized fuel tanks (which is far more useful together than a single LFB model that would only be usable for one case/purpose).