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

[RedParadize]

1 hour ago, JoseEduardo said:

um.... I forgot to ask this earlier....

we'll be able to add new endcaps later on from other mods meshes, right?

EDIT: btw, looking at KOSMOS now... I think I could make some patches having SSTU and KOSMOS as dependencies, and making them all low-part-count SSTU counterparts.... possibly a new SSTU add-on thread

Are you talking about URM here? these thing were quite nice, but buggy. If URM was transfered in SSTU it would be quite intresting. Beware that URM had allot of small high definition model for every tanks. The tank cylinder was cut into section and tilled with a rotation offset if I recall correctly.

Edited August 26, 2016 by RedParadize

[JoseEduardo]

29 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

Are you talking about URM here? these thing were quite nice, but buggy. If URM was transfered in SSTU it would be quite intresting. Beware that URM had allot of small high definition model for every tanks. The tank cylinder was cut into section and tilled with a rotation offset if I recall correctly.

nope, SSPP

I already got Bobcat's Soviet Engines working with the SSTU cluster, and there's nothing that the URM tanks can do that the SSTU tanks can't surpass it by a mile, so from the URM there's nothing there that isn't SSTU-fied AFAIK, as for the SSPP, sure, Mage is going to make parts based around the TKS/DOS architecture, but I think that the two could perfectly be used along....

I know for a fact that I'll be using KOSMOS TKS panel on Mage's TKS (I really like the TKS panels, and since these can be swapped I don't see why I shouldn't try that, even if that's just on my end ), so I might aswell make some stuff for KOSMOS SSPP

[Pappystein]

On 8/23/2016 at 3:07 PM, Domfluff said:

There wouldn't need to be an animation for the actual wheel, since the whole station would be turning.

Now... I think I'd much rather have a single inflatable than a single solid torus part, but if there was a solid torus space station that existed, then something like the above would make more sense to me than having to create the whole thing all at once.

I would love to see this kind of Torus construction in space.   I don't think it would be TOO complicated either.   The biggest issue is that you can only use X size Torrus for Y Part... unless you make less than a perfect wheel.  

Each piece could have either a 3 way Docking node (one inside the torus, one on each end of the Torus piece.  Or a Torus piece with a one time 180 degree rotation and two docking ports.   The Rocket would need an angled docking port as well to interface with the part and keep the COM in line with the base Rocket.  

 

Alternatively.  The Part could launch as a "Scrunched" cylinder and then when activated expand/inflate to a curved structure.   Just like a Zeppelin of the 1910s, the structure would be both inflated and rigid allowing it to withstand rotational and gravitational forces..   One side of the "Scrunched" and "Activated" Torus part would need to be painted a different color to make it easy to dock with the correct orientation...  But think about all the Helical stations that could be made with such a part and some 6 way Junctions with docking ports....  

 

[RedParadize]

The idea is to have less part. Also, centrifuge with multiple parts create torque, freeze on warp etc..

[falken]

Well Shadowmage, I've returned to KSP after what seems to be an eternity and you have made me a very, very happy man.
 

For the longest time, I was using an old plugin called "engine thrust control" which allowed you to make SRB profiles in a .cfg file, and it worked really well too! Unfortunately, it was a) very hard to fine tune and test as you had to keep relaunching the game, and b) It affected all solid rocket firing motors. This included launch escape towers and separation motors. 

Imagine my surprise when I see that your SRBs not only look better than anything I've seen before, but have thrust profiling! I could kiss you, I really could.

I think I'm going to spend the first couple hours of my day off deleting a bunch of Squad parts that were clogging up my inventory. Your fantastic mod is just covering most of my bases, and from what I'm seeing in early iterations of... all of them, seeing as you are working on station parts too.

[Shadowmage]

Will not be an updated release today;  have not made any real progress on the parts this week aside from geometry changes on the DOS modules.

Today I will be playing around with the 'kit-out' plugin / mechanics for the HAB parts, and if I can get it sorted out I'll have an updated release tomorrow with those mechanics included.

However I do have this nice SS to share; just a random rocket, but shows off the specular mask/highlights on the textures quite well:

[CobaltWolf]

9 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

However I do have this nice SS to share; just a random rocket, but shows off the specular mask/highlights on the textures quite well:

What size + what configuration of engines for the stages?

[Shadowmage]

3 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

What size + what configuration of engines for the stages?

Was launching some of the DOS prototype modules for docking tests, so had an ~8t payload in the fairing.

Upper stage = 2.5m x 1.25m HLOX tank; 3x RL10A-3, ~800dv with payload.

Core/first stage = 2.5m x 12.5m KLOX tank; 6x Merlin 1-C, ~2900dv

On-Launchpad = 16 parts, 82.25t, 28m x 4m x 4m

[Pappystein]

18 hours ago, RedParadize said:

The idea is to have less part. Also, centrifuge with multiple parts create torque, freeze on warp etc..

 

@RedParadizeI am assuming you were responding to my liking the tinker toy "Elbow Macaroni" Torus station...   I do not worry about spinning.   It is a Torus therefor it spins.  Does not mean the game needs to make it spin.  If stock game supported persistent rotation without a mod that becomes buggy when lots of parts are involved (as you allude to) it would be one thing.      Even if you run RO/RSS this game does not have enough Physics points to be real accurate.  It is more game than a simulation.  Mind you a Kick-butt game with lots of AWESOME modders that has soaked over 1200 hours of playtime out of me.

Besides, I am running 14 parts mods on my laptop (22 parts mods on my gaming desktop with SSTU in both.)  3 or 4 more parts is a small price for something cool and re-usable.  x64 FTW!

 

42 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Was launching some of the DOS prototype modules for docking tests, so had an ~8t payload in the fairing.

 

Hmm,  I need to play with those Merlins some more...  I keep skipping them for the Russian or Saturn derived engines.   The picture is PERFECT @Shadowmage

[Theysen]

1 hour ago, Shadowmage said:

Will not be an updated release today;  have not made any real progress on the parts this week aside from geometry changes on the DOS modules.

Today I will be playing around with the 'kit-out' plugin / mechanics for the HAB parts, and if I can get it sorted out I'll have an updated release tomorrow with those mechanics included.

However I do have this nice SS to share; just a random rocket, but shows off the specular mask/highlights on the textures quite well:

 

Is this in a stock scale? I tend to have way too much delta v if I try to build sane in stock.

[tater]

I've experimented with some insane craft in sandbox akin to those @JoseEduardo has posted (like some of the 1970s VSSTOL concepts Boeing worked on). One part I find myself using for different things is the petal fairing. I assume that it must not have a full closure option for a coding reason, right? Seems like a toggle for it to be an interstage or a full fairing would be sort of cool.

The deployed petals might have some utility as added surface area for propulsive EDL...

[StickyScissors]

@Shadowmage

Hmm, so a bug that i -thought- was related to FAR has resurfaced yet again, but there is no FAR involved this time (that bug-fixing PR you made still hasn't been merged).

Just went to separate the fairings, but instead of jettisoning the fairings only, the fairing base exploded, the fairings separated, and the 2 fairing pieces turned pink.

Output log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/91dp3a9rhk791d5/output_log.txt?dl=0

Note:

-IIRC, this has only happened when i had the fairings set to the "clam-shell" mode, not the regular "confetti" mode

-This doesn't always happen. This happens every time.

-No NRE -spam- in the Alt+F2 window when problem occurs. Most of the time there is a single NRE

-This Does not happen with the stock fairings

Ignore the GFX issues, that's just KSPRC going berserk. The launchpad explosion is also not the fairings fault

Edited August 28, 2016 by StickyScissors

[tater]

I'm unsure about the launchpad issue. I have tried a few clamshells recently, and if they so much as brush the craft that deployed them, BOOM. The fairing base also seems particularly fragile. Wonder if they are too massive?

(BTW "resizable" is typoed in the fairing part description)

Edited August 28, 2016 by tater

[thomash]

I think I found a couple of bugs since the last update.

1. In the LC2 and LC3 IVAs the seats are all backwards.  You can't see the bottom row of buttons on the RPM displays.
2. I think the lower connector node on the Orion service module has been repositioned.  I think it used to be right at the end of the engine bell but it is now a bit away causing a gap between the side panels and the next stage.

Also, it would be great to have a docking camera.

  

[StickyScissors]

37 minutes ago, thomash said:

I think I found a couple of bugs since the last update.

1. In the LC2 and LC3 IVAs the seats are all backwards.  You can't see the bottom row of buttons on the RPM displays.
2. I think the lower connector node on the Orion service module has been repositioned.  I think it used to be right at the end of the engine bell but it is now a bit away causing a gap between the side panels and the next stage.

Also, it would be great to have a docking camera.

  

Your install is borked, it's not the mod itself.

See here: http://imgur.com/a/IbnEx

2 seats are facing forward, and the are 2 in the back is facing sideways which is intended. Although, only 3 kerbals can board the capsule, Shadow might wanna check that. As for Orion, the bottom panels are definitely there, they are kinda hard to see, but they are there.

Edited August 28, 2016 by StickyScissors

[tater]

I just checked this as well, IVAs are fine for me.

[JoseEduardo]

on the topic of the station parts...

http://imgur.com/a/pMuwJ

that also leaves the possibility to have the KOSMOS VA adapter to the SSTU modules if I add this cap to them....

the only thing here is that this is mostly for testing purposes, as the KOSMOS VA is originally 2.5m (even though I rescaled on my end to 1.875m) and there's no decoupler in it, so it is stuck with the TKS body

 

[tater]

The new probe core defaults to being "debris" instead of probes.

[RedParadize]

@JoseEduardo Nice! trough I never realy liked Kosmos texture. I can't wait to have shadowmage parts textured, the funny part is that even in plain white I do like them allot!

[MacLuky]

4 hours ago, JoseEduardo said:

on the topic of the station parts...

http://imgur.com/a/pMuwJ

that also leaves the possibility to have the KOSMOS VA adapter to the SSTU modules if I add this cap to them....

the only thing here is that this is mostly for testing purposes, as the KOSMOS VA is originally 2.5m (even though I rescaled on my end to 1.875m) and there's no decoupler in it, so it is stuck with the TKS body

 

How did you texture those? Mine were still plain white?

[thomash]

10 hours ago, StickyScissors said:

Your install is borked, it's not the mod itself.

See here: http://imgur.com/a/IbnEx

2 seats are facing forward, and the are 2 in the back is facing sideways which is intended. Although, only 3 kerbals can board the capsule, Shadow might wanna check that. As for Orion, the bottom panels are definitely there, they are kinda hard to see, but they are there.

Thanks for the reply Sticky but I don't think it really addressed my problem.  I should of posted pics to begin with.  

 http://imgur.com/a/fGywU

Note in the IVA pic that while the pilots are facing forward, their seats are backwards.  Their chests are against the back of the seats and the peddles are behind them.

Scroll down to view the position of the connector to the SM engine bell.  I think that connector was originally right against the engine bell.

I have reinstalled the mod, and the bugs still exist.  

 

 

[tater]

Oh! I honestly didn't look at the seats, I just looked left and right, and could see out the windows.

[RedParadize]

Jeb say its more confortable that way.

[Shadowmage]

Update on the inflatable kit-out function:

Much easier to work in than I had thought at first, and didn't require any changes to the existing ModularStationCore code, and only minimal changes to part configs.  The new module takes the place of the animation interface module, providing its own GUI buttons with backing code to update resource capacity, crew capacity, and consume construction resources.  It uses the stock IMassModifier interface to decrease part mass while deflated, so all other settings for the part can remain unchanged.  This all means that it will be very easy to patch out this functionality if it is desired; simply replace the inflatable module with an animation module and the old/simple functionality will be restored.

One semi-major problem so far:

Crew capacity does not update in the editor.  Whatever is specified on the prefab part will be what is shown for the crew slots for the in-editor crew assignment tab.  However it is respected while in flight, and properly toggles depending upon inflation/construction state.  If crew are added in the editor while in the 'deflated' state and the craft is launched, those crew will be removed when the craft appears on the pad (in sandbox at least, they are still in the Astro-complex; might be MIA on career mode).

This presents a choice:  Do as others' have done and zero out the capacity on the prefab part (I believe PJ's habs, and RD's inflatables both do it this way).  This prevents any crew from being added in the editor, but also prevents any potential for crew being deleted when launching the craft; crew must be transferred to the part in flight, and only after it has been inflated.  The other option is to leave it as-is...which I would be fine with as long as it doesn't MIA/KIA crew in career mode; this allows it to be launched manned if it is inflated, but will merely kick the crew out if not inflated.  Will do some career testing and see how it goes.

I -might- be able to find a way to force re-building of the in-editor crew-assignment GUI, but no guarantees.

Couple other points:

I will be using RocketParts as the construction resource for a base install, switching to MaterialKits/etc if UKS is installed.

Will be adding RocketParts/etc as resources to all MFT tanks so that they may be shipped/launched to the stations.  In the future I will be making custom container-style parts for 'dry' resources, but for now the tanks should be sufficient.

Initial balance for kit-out mass will be 20%/80% for all parts.  This will be adjusted/updated on a per-part basis in the future.

 

Still have a bit of work to do on the coding end of things but will likely have a release available in a few hours/later this afternoon.

2 hours ago, thomash said:

Thanks for the reply Sticky but I don't think it really addressed my problem.  I should of posted pics to begin with.  

 http://imgur.com/a/fGywU

Note in the IVA pic that while the pilots are facing forward, their seats are backwards.  Their chests are against the back of the seats and the peddles are behind them.

Scroll down to view the position of the connector to the SM engine bell.  I think that connector was originally right against the engine bell.

I have reinstalled the mod, and the bugs still exist.  

 

 

I'm guessing this was an existing craft that you reloaded after the most recent SSTU update?  If so, there were some known issues with module-changing in that part that would result in some of the fairings not reloading properly.  Try using a -new- part from the editor parts list, and see if the problem persists.  I am otherwise unable to duplicate this problem on my end; new parts function fine (even after reloading).  (And the node has always had a gap between the bell and the bottom of the fairing)

IVA Seats -- will take a look, certainly didn't notice anything like that when I last looked at those IVAs.

 

15 hours ago, StickyScissors said:

@Shadowmage

Hmm, so a bug that i -thought- was related to FAR has resurfaced yet again, but there is no FAR involved this time (that bug-fixing PR you made still hasn't been merged).

Just went to separate the fairings, but instead of jettisoning the fairings only, the fairing base exploded, the fairings separated, and the 2 fairing pieces turned pink.

Output log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/91dp3a9rhk791d5/output_log.txt?dl=0

Note:

-IIRC, this has only happened when i had the fairings set to the "clam-shell" mode, not the regular "confetti" mode

-This doesn't always happen. This happens every time.

-No NRE -spam- in the Alt+F2 window when problem occurs. Most of the time there is a single NRE

-This Does not happen with the stock fairings

 

Ignore the GFX issues, that's just KSPRC going berserk. The launchpad explosion is also not the fairings fault

Interesting.... can't say that I've seen that before.  Will see if I can duplicate it.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Shadowmage

[Shadowmage]

2 hours ago, thomash said:

Thanks for the reply Sticky but I don't think it really addressed my problem.  I should of posted pics to begin with.  

 http://imgur.com/a/fGywU

Note in the IVA pic that while the pilots are facing forward, their seats are backwards.  Their chests are against the back of the seats and the peddles are behind them.

Scroll down to view the position of the connector to the SM engine bell.  I think that connector was originally right against the engine bell.

I have reinstalled the mod, and the bugs still exist.  

 

 

Update on the IVA seats --  They are fine in my install.  All are facing the proper direction.

Make sure that you completely delete the SSTU folder when upgrading/re-installing the mod.  A few file-names with the IVAs had changed in the last update, and these may be causing conflicts when loading up those spaces.

 

 

Edit:  Ahh... just noticed the difference.  You are using RPM, which uses a different internal space config.  Those have -not- been finished, and may not be for the foreseeable future.

 

 

15 hours ago, StickyScissors said:

@Shadowmage

Hmm, so a bug that i -thought- was related to FAR has resurfaced yet again, but there is no FAR involved this time (that bug-fixing PR you made still hasn't been merged).

Just went to separate the fairings, but instead of jettisoning the fairings only, the fairing base exploded, the fairings separated, and the 2 fairing pieces turned pink.

Output log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/91dp3a9rhk791d5/output_log.txt?dl=0

Note:

-IIRC, this has only happened when i had the fairings set to the "clam-shell" mode, not the regular "confetti" mode

-This doesn't always happen. This happens every time.

-No NRE -spam- in the Alt+F2 window when problem occurs. Most of the time there is a single NRE

-This Does not happen with the stock fairings

Ignore the GFX issues, that's just KSPRC going berserk. The launchpad explosion is also not the fairings fault

Fairing textures:  Cannot duplicate it on this end.  They stay properly textured for me:

Are there any additional steps needed to duplicate this issue?  It was not present regardless of if clamshell was enabled, nor did it appear to matter what texture I used (all seemed to work fine).