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

[Jimbodiah]

USI Tools now has a nice 2.5m skycrane module.

[tater]

4 hours ago, davidy12 said:

@Shadowmage: First off really excited for the Shuttle release.

Second, how exactly are we going to make rovers in SSTU without KIS/KAS?

You can always stick a KIS container on the side.

 

[sp1989]

Hello again. So I have been playing around trying to figure out why I am the only one having a problem getting sstu to play well with my setup even though I really dont have that many mods well I don't know why but I removed tweak scale and for some reason the game runs wonderfully now. I don't know why maybe it was having a conflict with the plugin to adjust the size of sstu tanks? IDK But after a week of figuring it out finally I have gotten it to work. Once again bravo with SSTU!

Edited March 5, 2016 by sp1989

[Jimbodiah]

I always have Tweakscale running, never any issues. SSTU parts do not scale up with tweakscale. Are you using the latest version of tweakscale?

[sp1989]

5 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

I always have Tweakscale running, never any issues. SSTU parts do not scale up with tweakscale. Are you using the latest version of tweakscale?

Im pretty sure I was. I don't know why it worked I am just happy that getting rid of it worked. Maybe I had an out of date version I will pop in the most recent one if I don't have it already but as of now my game runs very will with SSTU installed without tweak scale. 

[tater]

The LC2/3 actually makes a decent rover. The only trouble is radial attachments are kind of wonky on it. (yeah, I added extra solar panels and a battery)

I deployed by raising the gear on one side, and wiggling it off (doesn't slide well) with the help of RCS (hence my use of stock gear). I used KIS saddlebags instead of ascent propellant.

(you can see how the KER module shows the curved collider... Looked like a face

Edited March 6, 2016 by tater

[Shadowmage]

Updated testing release is available:

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/releases/tag/0.3.29-pre9

Tons of config updates and a few bugfixes, clean up landing-gear module functionality, and lots more texturing work on Series-E parts.  Also adds some length-variants for MFT-D (R-7 boosters), and a WIP single-part station service module (Progress-analogue, using SC-C models).  See the link for full change-log and downloads. 

Note there is also an updated texture-set distribution available; will be updating the front-page shortly.

Edit: Added link

Edited March 6, 2016 by Shadowmage

[Jimbodiah]

Station part??? whaaaaaa. Downloading now...

... downloaded....

aaawwwh... It's just a complete Soyuz. Is it just a place holder for something?

PS: Docking antenna and solar panel GUI buttons both toggle the solar panels

Edited March 6, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Theysen]

Awesome update, the shuttle is just so nicely done!

 

I have two things to ask / report: When you engage the crew lights on the SC-E there's some z-fighting at the rear windows. 

Thins inside the cargo bay blow up during reentry, fuselage as such is fine.

Will you make the geometries inside the bay attachable, e.g. at the airlock tubes etc? Right now stuff will float around it circular positions. (Excuse me if this all has already been mentioned, I didn't have the time to catch up reading. If so, just ignore this!)

[blowfish]

More thrust on the Soyuz engines?  Longer booster tanks?  Well, I guess upper stages are overrated anyway.

Spoiler

@Jimbodiah Did we ever figure out what was different between your setup and mine?

[Jimbodiah]

ROFL 

But seriously, I send a lot of stuff up with just the main core and two boosters.

Nah, haven't really played until tonight.

[davidy12]

@Shadowmage: Why must Dynamic texture loader do this? Can't you do something about it?

Edited March 6, 2016 by davidy12

[Jimbodiah]

Because it messes up all the textures. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Both the texture maimers free up a little bit of memory at the expense of a game that looks like it was thrown away in the 1980s.

[Theysen]

13 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

Because it messes up all the textures. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Both the texture maimers free up a little bit of memory at the expense of a game that looks like it was thrown away in the 1980s.

Only upon switching them via the GUIs. If you load it from the catalog it's fine.

[ComatoseJedi]

Loving the shuttle.. probably even more than I should. 

[Shadowmage]

20 hours ago, Jimbodiah said:

Station part??? whaaaaaa. Downloading now...

... downloaded....

aaawwwh... It's just a complete Soyuz. Is it just a place holder for something?

PS: Docking antenna and solar panel GUI buttons both toggle the solar panels

It is a Progress analogue; so yes, pretty much a single-part Soyuz setup, minus the crew capacity.  It will eventually have resource-switching to enable it to function as a small resupply vessel or station booster (not that those are really needed...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_%28spacecraft%29

Noted on the docking ant., will get that fixed for the next release.

 

18 hours ago, Theysen said:

Awesome update, the shuttle is just so nicely done!

 

I have two things to ask / report: When you engage the crew lights on the SC-E there's some z-fighting at the rear windows. 

Thins inside the cargo bay blow up during reentry, fuselage as such is fine.

Will you make the geometries inside the bay attachable, e.g. at the airlock tubes etc? Right now stuff will float around it circular positions. (Excuse me if this all has already been mentioned, I didn't have the time to catch up reading. If so, just ignore this!)

Z-fighting -- noted, apparently I left some duplicate window meshes in place; will have them cleaned up for the next release.

Cargo bay -- are they attached to something, or just loose?  If loose, I would expect them to blow up (shielding only accounts for things that are attached).  If they were attached to something and still blowing up, then that would be a bug that needs to be reported on github (https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues)

Attach nodes -- there is already an attach node at the rear of the cargo bay, and that is likely how it will stay.  I may add a dedicated docking port model (and functionality) to the rear, but there likely won't be a front node at all.  I -might- add one to the bottom in the center, but the main payload attachment point is always going to be the rear of the cargo bay.  Also, note, you can hold alt- while placing a part to force it to snap to nodes instead of surface attaching (that is how you use the node in the rear of the bay).

 

18 hours ago, blowfish said:

More thrust on the Soyuz engines?  Longer booster tanks?  Well, I guess upper stages are overrated anyway.

  Reveal hidden contents

@Jimbodiah Did we ever figure out what was different between your setup and mine?

Pretty much   Not sure how I had the wrong thrust on those engines to begin with, but after I redid the math, I realized they were a bit off (~1020 * 0.64 * 0.64 = ~417).  Longer tanks -- yah, I had intended to include some alternate lengths from the start, but did not have time to work on them earlier.  For reference, the original MFT-D-3 is the 'standard' length for the Soyuz boosters (this is the length it starts at in the VAB).

Which brings to me -- I've realized over the past few weeks that most of my engines/pods/etc are extremely....unbalanced?  for the stock system, at least as far as any kind of 'scale-like' craft are concerned.  If you create a scaled craft, it generally has scale-like performance (even with the terrible engine TWRs), resulting in ~2.5x the dV needed to get to orbit (~9kms / 3.6kms = 2.5...).  More on this below/later today...

 

17 hours ago, davidy12 said:

 

@Shadowmage: Why must Dynamic texture loader do this? Can't you do something about it?

No; but feel free to do some investigation and submit a PR for a fix if you find one.  I don't use whatever mod that is, so I'm not going to spend my time fixing your problems with it (and the problems are going to be on their end anyhow; them messing up -my- textures sure sounds like their problem to me...).

 

14 hours ago, ComatoseJedi said:

Loving the shuttle.. probably even more than I should. 

Thanks, though it is still only about 1/2 to 2/3 done.  Still working on the overall balance of the craft (aero, thermal, game), and still quite a bit of detailing to do in the texture.  It is looking quite usable though

 

 

All of this brings me to the discussion point for the day/week -- balance.  The pre-release balancing and cleanup has started, and will continue until after 1.1 is released.  This means that generally the mod should be getting even more usable and stable with every release, and there might well be a quite stable and recommendable 1.05 release before 1.1 is in pre-release testing.  If so... bonus

There will likely not be too many new parts in the next few weeks; but you will likely see quite a few updates with fixes, rebalances, and general improvements and enhancements.

If ever I told you to 'please bring that back up during the balancing pass' -- now is the time to bring it up

 

Now, on to the balancing discussion.  As stated, I have realized that the lifter parts and / or command-modules/space are a bit... overpowered for the stock Kerbin/Kerbol system.  For scale-sized craft, about 2 1/2x as powerful as they need to be.  Which sounds like it is good for a 3.2x rescale setup.

I would like these craft and parts to be usable in the stock system, in a stock-career game, without them seeming overpowered, or underpowered / no fun.  So, I will likely be maintaining two sets of stats for most parts.  The current LH2 patch stats will, for the most part, be moved over to be the 'default' stats for the engine.  This will be the starting point of the balance for these parts.  I will also be keeping a copy of the patch around for reference, possibly just renaming it and setting it up for a rescaled system patch.  So, in short.. the stats you see now will likely be the 'rescaled system' stats (with perhaps some modifications... reducing engine dry mass...), and the stock system will use an all-new balance setup.

I'm not sure that I'm going to be able to solve the 'overpowered scale-designed craft' problem... but I'll give it a bit of a go.  Part of why I won't be able to solve it is merely the stock setup -- try building a scaled-down Saturn-V using stock parts (S-I = 3.75m), and it will -still- be extremely overpowered for the stock system for any reasonable CSM mass.

Honestly, I'm a bit lost as to where to even begin on balancing things for the stock system... so if you have any bright ideas, I'm listening   

Should I aim for a consistent payload-fraction for rockets, keeping consistent with stock setups, while ignoring 'scale craft' designs?  This would generally see ISPs reduced all around, command-pod/service module masses increased, and a general 'lead-cladding' added to most parts to increase their dry-mass to stock like levels.  I'm not really sure of any other way to do it, as that -is- stock balancing... (even though I disagree with it).  This would also likely see some engine thrusts -increased- to be usable with increased mass of payloads, and others increased to just be -usable- in the stock system (cannot do orbital injection @ 0.2TWR in the stock system; the orbit just isn't long enough/shallow enough).

Anyhow, feel free to chime in if you have some ideas / input / etc -- going to be at this for a couple weeks it sounds like, so should be a good amount of time to get most things sorted out.

Ohh, and anyone have any good schematics / diagrams of the RD-0110?  (or even good high-res images from various viewpoints?)  The usual Google-images search (https://www.google.com/search?q=rd-0110+rocket+engine+images&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwio4t6n_67LAhXptoMKHbQED0YQ_AUIBygB&biw=1920&bih=912) is turning up the usual (lack of) information for Russian stuff, giving me only a few decent high-res images, and zero schematic or diagram like images.

Specifically, I need a diagram of the bell layout / curves / dimensions, fuel-flow diagram, and at least enough high-res imagery to tell what is going on with the plumbing and mounting braces.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Shadowmage

[Theysen]

13 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Z-fighting -- noted, apparently I left some duplicate window meshes in place; will have them cleaned up for the next release.

Cargo bay -- are they attached to something, or just loose?  If loose, I would expect them to blow up (shielding only accounts for things that are attached).  If they were attached to something and still blowing up, then that would be a bug that needs to be reported on github (https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues)

Attach nodes -- there is already an attach node at the rear of the cargo bay, and that is likely how it will stay.  I may add a dedicated docking port model (and functionality) to the rear, but there likely won't be a front node at all.  I -might- add one to the bottom in the center, but the main payload attachment point is always going to be the rear of the cargo bay.  Also, note, you can hold alt- while placing a part to force it to snap to nodes instead of surface attaching (that is how you use the node in the rear of the bay).

 

So no, apparently it behaves like this, i had the batteries blowing up yesterday as I had them attached to the front under the beams. It seems like this area is excluded from the being shielded area (i can report on GitHub later!)

My second question was in connection to those beams and geometry: Is it possible to make those tubes and beams surface-attachable for e.g. batteries, science etc? 

 

[Shadowmage]

23 minutes ago, Theysen said:

So no, apparently it behaves like this, i had the batteries blowing up yesterday as I had them attached to the front under the beams. It seems like this area is excluded from the being shielded area (i can report on GitHub later!)

My second question was in connection to those beams and geometry: Is it possible to make those tubes and beams surface-attachable for e.g. batteries, science etc? 

 

Was it still blowing up the batteries even when it said 'Shielded parts: 2' ?

Otherwise, yes, I can/will add some colliders for the beams and docking adapter.  Will also investigate if I need to adjust the position and/or size of the shielding bounds to encompass the entire cargo bay (has only a rough/guessed at setup currently).

[Theysen]

18 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Was it still blowing up the batteries even when it said 'Shielded parts: 2' ?

Otherwise, yes, I can/will add some colliders for the beams and docking adapter.  Will also investigate if I need to adjust the position and/or size of the shielding bounds to encompass the entire cargo bay (has only a rough/guessed at setup currently).

No, once shielded everything was fine during reentry.

 

I see if I stumble across balancing issues the next missions I fly in stock with the parts!  Right now, I'd support your approach of increasing thrust on upper stages and SMs, as for your point stated above about orbit insertion and people playing stock not wanting to sit through 7 minutes TLI burns, e.g. This could be a turn down for new mod users who are not into realistic TWR's and burn times etc and want to do the "fun parts" quicker. 

Oh and one thing what could be changed is the Torque power on the reaction wheels in the CMs, right now they flip rather brutal. I will keep making notes about things I come across and share them, if no one minds

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Shadowmage said:

Ohh, and anyone have any good schematics / diagrams of the RD-0110?  (or even good high-res images from various viewpoints?)  The usual Google-images search (https://www.google.com/search?q=rd-0110+rocket+engine+images&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwio4t6n_67LAhXptoMKHbQED0YQ_AUIBygB&biw=1920&bih=912) is turning up the usual (lack of) information for Russian stuff, giving me only a few decent high-res images, and zero schematic or diagram like images.

Specifically, I need a diagram of the bell layout / curves / dimensions, fuel-flow diagram, and at least enough high-res imagery to tell what is going on with the plumbing and mounting braces.

I'll see what I can dig up in a few hours.  No promises, though.

Thanks again for all the hard work!

[blowfish]

@Shadowmage I found this schematic and this fuel flow diagram.  There's a lot on the fuel flow diagram that I don't understand (especially since the text is in Russian and it's an image so I can't paste it into a translator), but basically it's a single shaft gas generator engine with the exhaust being directed to the verniers.

Re: balance - most of the stuff I've been doing has been in a 3-3.2x system which yields much more reasonable payload fractions.  I agree that stockalike balance is always going to look ridiculous as far as payload fractions go, but this is the case even with stock parts.  I like the idea of realistic I_sp values but scaled masses - stock I_sp values are already basically correct for modern hypergolics (~95% of what you get with kerolox) according to NathanKell.  Keep in mind that hydrolox will inevitably result in higher payload fractions, and there's nothing wrong with that - hydrolox stages should have other tradeoffs (more tank volume and more expensive engines).

[Shadowmage]

Thanks for the images/references -- that is more than I was able to dig up    No worries on the Russian notation / writing -- I can infer what I need from the diagram given what I know of the specific engine, rocket engines in general, and the actual diagram   (only so many ways that the fuel flow can be setup, only one of those will be 'right', and can usually tell which based on the the flow of the fuel, as LOX and fuel are generally routed quite differently, with LOX often going straight into the CC after pumping).

Likely the only new parts that I'll be creating in the next few weeks will be some engines to help fill in some of the gaps in the engine lineup; and these will be mostly smaller sized lifter and KLOX engines (have lots of larger stuff already).  H-1, Merlins, RD-0110 -- stuff to fill in the lower spots on the tech tree, and offer decent alternatives to the early stock engines (LVT-30/45, skipper).

Aye, going to take a bit to figure out the balance of things.  I'll have to do some testing to see what they payload fraction of current SSTU rockets is with the current balance;  if it is in-line with stock stuff then there might not be much to change.

[bypedro]

2 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Ohh, and anyone have any good schematics / diagrams of the RD-0110?  (or even good high-res images from various viewpoints?)  The usual Google-images search (https://www.google.com/search?q=rd-0110+rocket+engine+images&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwio4t6n_67LAhXptoMKHbQED0YQ_AUIBygB&biw=1920&bih=912) is turning up the usual (lack of) information for Russian stuff, giving me only a few decent high-res images, and zero schematic or diagram like images.

I found some images and diagram: ZIP.

I hope this helps to make this mod more amazing.

 

[Shadowmage]

2 hours ago, bypedro said:

I found some images and diagram: ZIP.

I hope this helps to make this mod more amazing.

 

Thanks, hopefully they will

[blowfish]

3 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Thanks for the images/references -- that is more than I was able to dig up    No worries on the Russian notation / writing -- I can infer what I need from the diagram given what I know of the specific engine, rocket engines in general, and the actual diagram   (only so many ways that the fuel flow can be setup, only one of those will be 'right', and can usually tell which based on the the flow of the fuel, as LOX and fuel are generally routed quite differently, with LOX often going straight into the CC after pumping).

The basic cycle makes sense, but there are a few components I can't identify - any idea what 1, 8, and 15 are?