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

[ComatoseJedi]

While I do launch a space shuttle from time to time, I feel that it's a total waste of time to do so when a payload rocket can do the same thing and do it without all the headache and a lot cheaper. If you really want to have something that people can use, why not develop a devoted space tug to move things around in orbit. Especially if you are going to make space station components later on. You can launch the tug into space with the payload and keep it there. When you're done, you dock it up with the station, blow it up, or put it on one of the ships you plan to dock with the station to take it with you on your interplanetary journey. Eventually, this will evolve into the "series c revamped" parts when you develop a skycrane and craft to use for cargo drops onto planets/moons.

While we are talking about the future of your mod @Shadowmage You are going to do a series of interplanetary parts, correct? I'd really like to see the inflatable modules like seen in most of the concept ships that are floating around. They don't have to be "inflatable", but that shape (like Porkjet's hab modules) fits in with something you can actually base your mod off of. You can change those into any number of uses (storage, science, habitat, command). Just my two cents on everything. 

[cy-one]

I just downloaded this... are there already parts to attach into the cutouts for the LC1-3 parts?

 

Edit, I was stupid.

Edited January 12, 2016 by cy-one

[ComatoseJedi]

On 1/10/2016 at 8:50 PM, lynwoodm said:

I did. I even installed it and tried it out to see what would it do. It works, but it gives a very large amount of fuel for this mod's fuel tanks and I do mean large. What it doesn't do is switch over to other types of fuel tanks that MFT is supposed to support according to the config files that are supported with this mod, like service module and the rest. With SSTU's patch, it uses MFT for Real Fuels tank switching and configuration and limited fuel tank switching between LOX and Mono and Xenon without real fuels. Take out MFT and the tanks use using Mage's patch to give tanks the stand alone MFT function for LH2 it needs for the size tank you create, though it's not named cryogenic, but the tanks are there to support the engines for LH2/Ox. 

Like I said, a choice will have to happen on what features you'd want. The only thing I could suggest is a fuel switch on the engines that use LH2 to switch back to LOX for an MFT mod install. And I feel that Mage *might* not do that, because it's more work on parts he has already worked on, especially this week. He put a lot of work into what he done and I'm not complaining one bit about it. Even if I have to drop a mod in order to use this mod in the way it's he wants it run, I'll do just that and figure out the rest. 

In any case, thank you for your reply, Blowfish. 

I have been further investigating this and realized that MFT does in fact have a utilization slider. This slider gives you whatever amount of fuel you need at a percentage rate. So, in essence, you could use Nertea's Cryogenic engine mod and use the cryogenics to set up LH2 for this mod's LH2 engines. Scale down the ridiculous amount of LH2/Ox you'll need and voila, you have a viable cryogenic engine stage, that in fact uses a boiloff due to cryogenic engines mod. I will be further experimenting with this and the SSTU parts and will give my findings soon.  

[Jimbodiah]

gheghe, I also just downloaded the new X2 version from Nertea    He is using a 15:1 ratio now though, so if you're using SSTU tanks, remove some Oxidizer to crank up your dV again due to the extra weight of the spare oxidizer now (around 25%).

Edited January 12, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Shadowmage]

28 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

@RedParadize Both patches were posted here and on Github.

@Shadowmage 
LS: The mass is quite low and is different between the two mods. Will it have that much impact? I've not noticed anything during docking to be honest.

Boil-off: Ask Nertea, he said people could use his plugin, so don't let that be a factor. Also KSPI has their own version of boil-off, also Ec based cooling. Would have been cool to make it part of CommResources so that LH2 is treated equally no matter which mod/tanks are used. But I guess it all boils down to the same thing (pun intended).

Shuttle:  I installed Energia+Buran, and I got it to fly in one go (and land it safely, so if I can do that first try, they thought it through). They put the CoM at an angle I think so that you can actually fly the thing as intended instead of kamikazying into the nearest building. Check it out to see how they did it. Personally I do not see any use for a shuttle and after a few ooh-aahs I uninstalled the mod. Super booster though, with slanted nose cones etc 

Pull Requests: LOL. Hey, if I can figure it out...

btw: would the new CM/SM be ready for a sneak-peek?

LS-Supplies Mass -- The problem is I'm not sure how much 'quite low' is.  If it is more than 0.1 tons, I would want to offset the mass of the base parts;  if it is less than that, can probably let is slide.  The mass/balance that I use for stock includes some mass margin for imaginary 'supplies'; so at the point where the supplies are no longer imaginary, the pods no longer need that extra mass.

Boiloff -- Its not that I can't bundle it from a licensing perspective; its that I'm not going to use external dependencies where I would be forced to wait for them to update / be beholden to their updates breaking my parts / be at the mercy of them changing mechanics or balance.  If it were part of CRP, I would use it as-is (as CRP is required for the LH2 anyhow) and just go with whatever balance they put in; but I'm not going to have a external dependency on a third-party mod for such a critical/integral function.  Its just too much headache from both an end-user and maintenance perspective.

Shuttle -  Mostly its a 'just for kicks' thing.  It could be quite useful from a utility perspective, but as others have pointed out a regular rocket + orbital tug is generally more efficient.  The one unique capability it has is to bring things back down from orbit... which is not as useful in KSP gameplay as it is in real life (aside from a few contracts, it has no use; you never need to return science stuff to the surface as you can just transfer the experiments to a return pod).  I'm pretty sure that these parts will go nowhere though -- as far as I'm aware KSP is incapable of handling a single-part shuttle setup, and I'm unwilling to break it into multiple parts; but I have to have at least a prototype to do testing on... so that is what I have created.

PRs - Yah, they're not overly difficult (after the initial setup)... just nothing I've had to do yet

SC-C Pod - not even close; still doing geometry and rough modeling on it.  I'm 99% certain that these parts will work fine in-game, so there is no pressing need to do prototypes.  The first time you'll see them in-game will likely be after the texturing/etc is all done.

34 minutes ago, lynwoodm said:

While we are talking about the future of your mod @Shadowmage You are going to do a series of interplanetary parts, correct? I'd really like to see the inflatable modules like seen in most of the concept ships that are floating around. They don't have to be "inflatable", but that shape (like Porkjet's hab modules) fits in with something you can actually base your mod off of. You can change those into any number of uses (storage, science, habitat, command). Just my two cents on everything. 

Yes, at some point.  No clue what they will be modeled after though; at least a few months out from even starting on the concept development for those parts.

[Jimbodiah]

TAC supplies is 0.004t total for the A-CM and 0.008t total for the B-CM, 3x that for their respective SM (A 0.012t and B 0.024t).

So 4kg for 3 dudes for 3 days, that's a can of coke per day each, man those TAC guys are stingy!

Edited January 12, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Jimbodiah]

Re the radial booster decouplers... would it be possible to direct the retro-rockets only outwards (or change the angle enough to do mostly outward) instead of forwards+out? Pretty much everything jumps forward (even SSTU boosters) and stays too close or has a tendency to come back towards the main tank. I've tried playing with force/fuel, but if I reduce force they don't throw the boosters away far enough, ditto with fuel amount, so thrust seems good.

[Shadowmage]

8 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

Re the radial booster decouplers... would it be possible to direct the retro-rockets only outwards (or change the angle enough to do mostly outward) instead of forwards+out? Pretty much everything jumps forward (even SSTU boosters) and stays too close or has a tendency to come back towards the main tank. I've tried playing with force/fuel, but if I reduce force they don't throw the boosters away far enough, ditto with fuel amount, so thrust seems good.

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues/146

already done

[Jimbodiah]

Ah, is that what that was... ok!!!

[Jimbodiah]

Testing LH/Ox vs LF/Ox today with Nert's new setup. It's lighter for the same dV, but twice as long   The only benefit is that the LH/Ox version has a better TWR and will have some spare dV left (+280dV) on a 150x150 orbit vs the LOx which takes too long to get velocity up (-220dV), so around 500dV in favor of the LH/Ox as a LKO lifter.

[Jimbodiah]

Oh wow, look what I found today. Hidden away in the Community ISS mod.  Noice!!!

A one piece HTV (ex docking port) and a nice ATV where I put on Chaka's ATV panels and a docking port from some obscure mod

7

Edited January 12, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[RedParadize]

Hello, Quick bug report, if thats one. massPerBaseCubicMeter massPerPanelArea don't seem to affect the mass off SC-GEN-IPA at all. Or maybe I am missing something.

[ComatoseJedi]

Here's something to throw around the room. 

I could go on and on, but you get the idea. 

[trooperMNG]

16 hours ago, Jimbodiah said:

Oh wow, look what I found today. Hidden away in the Community ISS mod.  Noice!!!

A one piece HTV (ex docking port) and a nice ATV where I put on Chaka's ATV panels and a docking port from some obscure mod

7

that was a very nice mod. Low on parts, great in fun. Except for the ISS solar panels, making a lot of lag and spamming null everywhere

[Jimbodiah]

Yeah, I noticed that. I once had a version where the panels would rotate around the axis of the ship to track the sun, but the current one does not do that. Also all the rockets included with that pack are broken. I would have loved to had that Ariane/Sputnik system up an running. Hopefully Kartoffel will get his rockets back online soon so we have those back. Also the ISS is not practical for a game perspective as all the pieces are just for tshow, they don't really have any function. Right now I am digging through Chaka's mod to make a decent looking ISS that also serves the purpose (store resources, kerbals and have a science lab for career).

edit: Chaka's solar panels rotate this way as well, so axially and radially, so cool! And they are properly big as well.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Shadowmage]

12 hours ago, RedParadize said:

Hello, Quick bug report, if thats one. massPerBaseCubicMeter massPerPanelArea don't seem to affect the mass off SC-GEN-IPA at all. Or maybe I am missing something.

            float baseCost = costPerBaseVolume * baseVolume;
            float panelCost = costPerPanelArea * panelArea;
            float baseMass = massPerBaseCubicMeter * baseVolume;
            float panelMass = massPerPanelArea * panelArea;

            fairingCost = panelCost + baseCost;
            fairingMass = panelMass + baseMass;

            part.mass = fairingMass;

Pretty sure it is working -- if the fairing has anything but zero mass, it means that the code is running.

Don't trust the stock editor-info thing -- its wrong, and doesn't update properly/use the right numbers for its values (it uses prefab part values).  Try checking mechjeb/KER/etc, or checking the mass once the vessel is launched.  If you can confirm that there is definitely no change with the in-flight vessel (or KER/MJ even in the editor)  when you change those values, please let me know (preferably through a bug report/issue ticket), and I will investigate it for the next batch of bugfixes.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Shadowmage

[RedParadize]

27 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Pretty sure it is working -- if the fairing has anything but zero mass, it means that the code is running.

Don't trust the stock editor-info thing -- its wrong, and doesn't update properly/use the right numbers for its values (it uses prefab part values).  Try checking mechjeb/KER/etc, or checking the mass once the vessel is launched.  If you can confirm that there is definitely no change with the in-flight vessel (or KER/MJ even in the editor)  when you change those values, please let me know (preferably through a bug report/issue ticket), and I will investigate it for the next batch of bugfixes.

I can confirm that mass don't update on save/load in vessel editor, at least not according to Mechjeb. But I will test tonight if it update on lunchpad, That would be suprising, and quite annoying.

[Jimbodiah]

Same thing happens when you change fuel-layout on tanks (not st SSTU), the KSP edit will show the old weight. You need to detach and reattach it in order for the new weight to be calculated. Seriously PITA for making rockets when dV is off by 30% sometimes.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jimbodiah
spelink

[Jimbodiah]

23 hours ago, lynwoodm said:

If you really want to have something that people can use, why not develop a devoted space tug to move things around in orbit.

I actually find myself looking for something realistic looking along those lines, with low part-count. Also a small orbital inserter like used on Ariane and other smaller payload, but with battery/panels/rcs (smaller, more dedicated version to the modular upper stage). Maybe Mage's modular SM might be something along those lines?

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Jimbodiah]

Re the .craft files... Would you like me to make and maintain a few ships? I can keep them up to date with each release and send a PR if a new version is required.

Maybe José can maintain his Saturn V? I always have a Delta IV Heavy, Ares I, Ares V (when RS68 clusters become available, can use RS25 in the meantime) and a small ATV launcher in my saves. I tend to use Precedural Fairings, but I can see if I can use your fairings to keep the parts all within SSTU.

[Shadowmage]

General development update:

Interstage decoupler part is in-game and working (at least on a prototype basis).  Model for the ullage-engine is... WIP/lacking texturing/etc, and likely not the final model either.  Anyhow, if I have time I aim to release an updated testing release tonight so that this prototype part can be given a bit of a workover and test run before I move on to finishing the model/etc.  Balance on the initial part config will be... mostly guessed at.  Still have a tiny bit of plugin work to do regarding updating the part mass dependent upon the current size/configuration of it, but that is some fairly easy math to add in.  Trying to determine if I want to adjust the engine modules thrust and/or resource quantities based on scale (and if I do, will likely apply similar stuff to the RBDC as well, so it is not as OP for light parts).  Some of this will likely need testing to determine how best to move forward.

In setup it is very similar to the IPA -- has a procedural fairing that can select top and bottom radius, and the height of the taper point.  It automatically rescales the engine models dependent upon the current diameter/scale, and the engine models are positioned at the bottom of the fairing.  The taper-point starts at the top of the engine models (engine models are always mounted straight).  Engine models can be inverted though, for use as retro-rockets.



Work on the Series-C parts continues (which is actually for the -next- update, 0.3.27, a couple of weeks out). 

Orbital module is modeled, unwrapped, and AO baked.  Needs to have its unity-oriented stuff added (colliders for hatch/ladder), and determine if it needs any additional detail stuff added.  Also a bit undecided if I want to 'grow' the model a bit to simulate the cloth covering on the real-life articles -- as the cloth covering obscures some of the other geometry details of the OM.  Will probably do a test-texture on the current geometry and go from there.

Descent module is mostly modeled -- deciding if I want to put in some form of details regarding the parachute caps.  Seems likely not; as the cloth covering completely obscures the parachute caps before it is burned/melted off during re-entry.  Will likely move on to unwrapping and UV layout for this part within the next couple of days.  The

For the SM -- I'm having problems locating reliable information regarding the position and orientation of the RCS ports -- I know there are some near the top of the SM, and some on the bottom-skirt;  those near the top of the SM are simple enough to figure out, but the ones on the bottom skirt I cannot locate any information on.  Sources list them as 'forward + pitch thrusters', but don't tell me what orientation they are at (do they point outward, forward, or some angle inbetween?).  If I can get the RCS ports figured out, I could finish the model for the SM within a few hours of whenever I start working on it.  Anyone have more concrete information on them?

 

I -might- include these parts in the 0.3.26 release this weekend as prototypes / rough draft parts for initial testing and balancing/feedback.  Will all depend on if I can get the models finished or not (mostly just those RCS port positions/orientations are stopping me).  If I can't otherwise get them figured out I'll likely put them as forward-facing thrusters, as those are least-likely to mess up the RCS balancing of the rest of the craft when assembled (and would still be usable for pitch control if needed).

 

Prototype testing on the Series-E parts (shuttle) showed that, as feared, KSP is incapable of properly handling multiple aero-control surfaces on the same part (the elevon controls would actuate in opposite directions for elevator input, and not move at all for aileron input, while the tail surface responded to elevator input and ignored yaw input).  Still quite unsure how/if to proceed with this series of parts.  Minimum part-count would be 4 if it were to be created to be usable in the current iteration of KSP aero/modules (fuselage, left-wing, right-wing, tail); which is not that terrible... though I'm still unsure that I'm willing to deal with KSPs joint mechanics (e.g. flex between the wings and fuselage).  Will continue to do prototype development and testing on this as I have time.

[Jimbodiah]

Couldn't you make the body/wings one part and just add the control surfaces as seperate parts? One flap per wing, one on the stabilizer, still only 3 extra parts. The body could have the bottom tail section stabilizer integrated as on the real shuttle, but that is only one part for one function, KSP should handle that properly?

I will try to uncover some info on the soyuz rcs ports tonight unless someone else has the info.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[RedParadize]

To clarify what I did yesterday:

Created a 5m IPA, weighting about 11 tons (10x heavier that Saturn V equivalent)

Closed the game, reduced PerBaseCubicMeter and massPerPanelArea by half. Restarted the game.

Created a 5m IPA, still weighting 11 tons, I don't recall the decimal but it was exactly the same weight.

Saved the vessel, opened the vessel, same weight.

 

About the Tug thing, I support that. I spend too much time around Kerbin. That remind me a movie I worked on, Journey to space. It had allot of error that KSP player would spot instantly.

 

 

 

[Jimbodiah]

BTW, will the soyuz get re-entry braking rockets as well?

 

What I found so far on the Soyuz RCS

Quote

Reaction Control System

The reaction-control system is used for translation and attitude control.  It is composed primarily of fourteen 10-kilogram thrusters and eight 1-kilogram thrusters (Johnson 112).  In addition, there are four of each size as back-up.  All thirty engines burn the same hydrogen peroxide used to power the turbines in the main engines (Johnson 112).

 

and a picure of the rear units

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Shadowmage]

3 hours ago, RedParadize said:

To clarify what I did yesterday:

Created a 5m IPA, weighting about 11 tons (10x heavier that Saturn V equivalent)

Closed the game, reduced PerBaseCubicMeter and massPerPanelArea by half. Restarted the game.

Created a 5m IPA, still weighting 11 tons, I don't recall the decimal but it was exactly the same weight.

Saved the vessel, opened the vessel, same weight.

 

About the Tug thing, I support that. I spend too much time around Kerbin. That remind me a movie I worked on, Journey to space. It had allot of error that KSP player would spot instantly.

 

 

 

Well, I can verify that for some reason the part is not respecting the config-set values for those fields while in the editor.  The prefab part initializes fine with non-default values, but as soon as i use the part in the editor, all I get are the default plugin values rather than the config-specified ones.  Stranger yet when I have MM do a database dump, it spits out the proper config-modified values.

And...upon further investigation, it appears that I left the fields at default security level (no qualifier), so that while they -did- get loaded into the prefab part, they did not get properly copied into the cloned part in the editor (as Unity and/or KSPs field code only copies fields marked as public)

Have fixed this dev side -- will be available with tonights bugfix release (if I get around to it).