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

[RedParadize]

@Shadowmage I noticed that Shuttle realplume FX does not show after quicksave quickload. I do not understand why... 

About the legs, the one I use have colider. So it worked! I might keep them separated anyway. 5 part for a lander is kinda good anyways.

[StickyScissors]

26 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

@Shadowmage I noticed that Shuttle realplume FX does not show after quicksave quickload. I do not understand why... 

About the legs, the one I use have colider. So it worked! I might keep them separated anyway. 5 part for a lander is kinda good anyways.

I assume you are using the shuttle fuselage with the built in engines? RealPlume does not like engine FX on the root part of any craft after reload, it's not specific to this mod

[StickyScissors]

Finished the other part of my infographic for the Vishera A-series: Exploded view.

Also, i have an idea in mind to convert the second stage into a lander/ascent stage for the Mun along with my Arion crew transportation system (pictured below). Direct Ascent has never really been my cup of tea, but it's growing on me as something that won't look like poo (stock parts, euuhhgg).

 

[Pappystein]

On 9/16/2016 at 6:09 PM, StickyScissors said:

 

-

Oh yeah, and then this stuff happened

 

It looks like you have SAS on with TORQUE on.   Before docking Disable torque on all craft!

I used to have destructive Stations and Tinkertoy Ships until I either;

A) get all Gyros in a single line all on the same plane of rotation(hard to do) or

B) Disabled Torque on all parts.

The Shuttle is offset by a large mass movement arm as well as having a lot of mass itself.   It is also 90 degrees off the plane of the rest of the station with it's docked location.   All of those with the torque from the SASes will QUICKLY rip apart a station.   After all that is why all REAL space ships use RCS for positioning..  Gyroscopes are limited to keeping balance or orientation not actually for moving a ship.

[Duski]

Hey everyone.

Is it just me or is the J-2X way overpowered? I can get about 3000 m/s Delta V from a small SSTU tank. Just want everyone else's opinion.  

[tater]

The I_sp is spot on. Just use that LH2 before it boils off.

[RedParadize]

If trust isn't a issue. You can squeeze even more dV with RL10. I rarely use the J2X, its just too heavy.

 

Edit:

 

Sad face. 

I finished my lander only to realise that while everything works. The hatch won't. My kerbal can't get out. I can click on the hatch and the context menu will pop up. But If I try to get a kerbal out that way I get this error message:

Spoiler

NullReferenceException
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.Transform:INTERNAL_get_position (UnityEngine.Vector3&)
  at UnityEngine.Transform.get_position () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at FlightEVA.onGoForEVA () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at FlightEVA.spawnEVA (.ProtoCrewMember pCrew, .Part fromPart, UnityEngine.Transform fromAirlock, Boolean tryAllHatches) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at CrewHatchController.OnEVABtn (.ProtoCrewMember crew) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KSP.UI.Screens.Flight.Dialogs.CrewHatchDialog.OnBtnEVA (.ProtoCrewMember crew) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KSP.UI.Screens.Flight.Dialogs.CrewHatchDialogWidget+<Init>c__AnonStorey180.<>m__932 () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCall.Invoke (System.Object[] args) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.Events.InvokableCallList.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.Events.UnityEventBase.Invoke (System.Object[] parameters) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.Events.UnityEvent.Invoke () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.UI.Button.Press () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.UI.Button.OnPointerClick (UnityEngine.EventSystems.PointerEventData eventData) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute (IPointerClickHandler handler, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents.Execute[IPointerClickHandler] (UnityEngine.GameObject target, UnityEngine.EventSystems.BaseEventData eventData, UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventFunction`1 functor) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
UnityEngine.Debug:Internal_LogException(Exception, Object)
UnityEngine.Debug:LogException(Exception)
UnityEngine.EventSystems.ExecuteEvents:Execute(GameObject, BaseEventData, EventFunction`1)
UnityEngine.EventSystems.StandaloneInputModule:ProcessMousePress(MouseButtonEventData)
UnityEngine.EventSystems.StandaloneInputModule:ProcessMouseEvent(Int32)
UnityEngine.EventSystems.StandaloneInputModule:ProcessMouseEvent()
UnityEngine.EventSystems.StandaloneInputModule:Process()
UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()
 
(Filename:  Line: -1)

ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Argument is out of range.
Parameter name: index
  at System.Collections.Generic.List`1[ProtoCrewMember].get_Item (Int32 index) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KerbalEVA+<StartEVA>c__Iterator12.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine_Auto(IEnumerator)
UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine(IEnumerator)
KerbalEVA:OnStart(StartState)
Part:ModulesOnStart()
<Start>c__Iterator25:MoveNext()
 
(Filename:  Line: -1)

Module ModuleKISInventory threw during OnStart: System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Argument is out of range.
Parameter name: index
  at System.Collections.Generic.List`1[ProtoCrewMember].get_Item (Int32 index) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KIS.ModuleKISInventory.OnStart (StartState state) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at Part.ModulesOnStart () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 64)

[ModularFlightIntegrator] MFI Start
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 64)

[ModularFlightIntegrator] Start. VesselModule on vessel : 
  ModularFlightIntegrator
  RPMVesselComputer

 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 64)

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at Part.TransferResource (.PartResource resource, Double amount, .Part other) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KerbalEVA.UpdatePackFuel () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KerbalEVA.FixedUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename:  Line: -1)

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at Part.TransferResource (.PartResource resource, Double amount, .Part other) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KerbalEVA.UpdatePackFuel () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
  at KerbalEVA.FixedUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename:  Line: -1)

Kerbal  was marked as debris, fixed.

I should have known. If @Shadowmage didn't put hatch on adapter there for a reason... 

Edit 2:
Lol.  I added a hatch in the middle of the core part and the hatch on the adapter now work! 

Edited September 20, 2016 by RedParadize

[Shadowmage]

Work is continuing on the 1.2 updating.  Most parts have been moved over to use the new 'Model Selection GUI' for selecting nose caps and mounts.

MFT-A tank now has four variants:  Klox, Hlox, Cryo, Cryo-Framed (see below).  Cryo and Cryo-Framed both made possible by the custom shader with swappable AO maps.

Will be continuing work on the updating this week for 1.2.  Most of the fuel-tank reworking goals have been completed, and most everything works that has been tested in 1.2.  A few new bugs to track down, and a few new features to clean up (PartUpgrades).  Investigating one more fuel-tank type (MFT-F, freight container) but unsure that I'll be able to get it setup right now; it may still have to wait a while.  Ideally it will be re-using the other MFT textures, but perhaps have its own custom normal/spec/ao maps.

Should likely be back onto station-parts a bit later this week... next parts to be worked on and finished will likely be the solar-truss and blanket style solar panels (Hint:  Its not going to have much truss to it anymore....); should be transitioning to those later this week/weekend. 

Re:  PartUpgrades -- right now I'm only using them for diameter on things.  For fuel tanks I could lock the different 'tank modifiers'/'tank types' behind upgrades (as well as add a few more?) -- so Zero-Boiloff tanks might be a late-career thing, as would be some of the lightweight tank types (and a new line of 'composite' tank types).  Had contemplated having specific resources be locked behind upgrades as well... but I'm not very fond of the idea (either from the implementation or balance end of things).

Was thinking of having the MSRB's gimbal be locked behind a PartUpgrade, and potentially its thrust-curve setup as well.

Engine Clusters -- obviously they are all candidates for various engine stat upgrades (which -should- be working/compatible...).  Not sure how far I want to go with them though; perhaps one or two upgrades per engine / line of engines.  These will take a bit of time to get setup and balanced.

 

Edit:

The custom shader / splitting off the AO map allows me to do some neat stuff that I couldn't previously pull off in regards to texture sharing/re-use:

MFT-S line of tanks (prototype shown, still much WIP).  Will only require a single additional texture to be created; the AO map (possibly a second AO map for the trusses).  Yes it will have both framed and unframed variants.

Also working on the MFT-F line of containers which will re-use the existing MFT textures; they should only require a new AO and NRM map.  Still working out the specifics of how they will be setup, but they'll share a form-factor with the Near-Future trusses and USI Kontainer parts (semi-octagonal).

 

Many new parts, only a couple new textures.

Edited September 20, 2016 by Shadowmage

[RedParadize]

@Shadowmage I imagine it will be possible to have these structure empty as well? I would like to keep my nuclear engine as far as possible from my kerbal. I would not want @Nertea to kill them with his new radiation mod.

[tater]

4 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

The custom shader / splitting off the AO map allows me to do some neat stuff that I couldn't previously pull off in regards to texture sharing/re-use:

 

Excellent! We're almost at a dream retrofuture:

[RedParadize]

That thing have legs????

[Matuchkin]

On 28/07/2015 at 2:13 PM, Shadowmage said:

1.2 Notes:

What the hell, 1.2 is out? Did I live under a rock?

[Shadowmage]

1 hour ago, RedParadize said:

@Shadowmage I imagine it will be possible to have these structure empty as well? I would like to keep my nuclear engine as far as possible from my kerbal. I would not want @Nertea to kill them with his new radiation mod.

I'm not quite sure what you are asking?  Just some trusses with no tanks in them?

 

17 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

What the hell, 1.2 is out? Did I live under a rock?

 

As a public pre-release (for testing), yes:

 

[RedParadize]

7 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

I'm not quite sure what you are asking?  Just some trusses with no tanks in them?

Yeah, these one are closed and much longer that the open one you already made. I think it would be nice to have them as a stand alone or mesh switch, is it possible to have this without causing too much trouble for you?

[blowfish]

1 hour ago, RedParadize said:

@Shadowmage I imagine it will be possible to have these structure empty as well? I would like to keep my nuclear engine as far as possible from my kerbal. I would not want @Nertea to kill them with his new radiation mod.

Empty space doesn't do a lot to block radiation.  Intensity does fall off with r² though I guess, so being farther might help a bit.  Still though, my understanding is that any crewed vessels with nuclear engines in real life were planned to have heavy radiation shielding between the engine and the crew.

[tater]

28 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Empty space doesn't do a lot to block radiation.  Intensity does fall off with r² though I guess, so being farther might help a bit.  Still though, my understanding is that any crewed vessels with nuclear engines in real life were planned to have heavy radiation shielding between the engine and the crew.

Generally they'd have a "shadow shield" at the bottom of the stack, just above the NTR (or other nuke). Basically a massive disk. The crew would be at a distance, but within the solid-angle that is the shadow of that shielding. 

1 hour ago, RedParadize said:

That thing have legs????

Von Braun moon lander concept.  

[RedParadize]

@blowfish Indeed, distance does not replace shadow shielding, But further away you are more space is covered by the shadow shield. I do plan on using the centrifuge on my radioactive spacecraft you see. And more impotently than r² and shadow shielding: It looks nice. Remember 2001?

[Pappystein]

7 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Work is continuing on the 1.2 updating.  Most parts have been moved over to use the new 'Model Selection GUI' for selecting nose caps and mounts.

MFT-A tank now has four variants:  Klox, Hlox, Cryo, Cryo-Framed (see below). 

<SNIP>

Re:  PartUpgrades -- right now I'm only using them for diameter on things.  For fuel tanks I could lock the different 'tank modifiers'/'tank types' behind upgrades (as well as add a few more?) -- so Zero-Boiloff tanks might be a late-career thing, as would be some of the lightweight tank types (and a new line of 'composite' tank types).  Had contemplated having specific resources be locked behind upgrades as well... but I'm not very fond of the idea (either from the implementation or balance end of things).

Was thinking of having the MSRB's gimbal be locked behind a PartUpgrade, and potentially its thrust-curve setup as well.

Engine Clusters -- obviously they are all candidates for various engine stat upgrades (which -should- be working/compatible...).  Not sure how far I want to go with them though; perhaps one or two upgrades per engine / line of engines.  These will take a bit of time to get setup and balanced.

 

RE Tank Variants,   By Variants I assume differing textures based on tank selected, we can then choose to swap out say KLox for NTO?

RE Part upgrades and SRBs:   Most SRBs of X type do not ever get upgraded.  The Exception to the rule is the Space Shuttle SRB. 

IE the UA-1205 used the same fuel and thrust curve from the 1960s right up until it's last launch in the 1990s.   The UA-1207, which uses a slightly different fuel and two addtional segments, was the same from the late 1960s right up until the early 2000s for last launch.

The next Generation USRM for the Titan however is a whole new beast and is more technology advanced than any rehash of the Shuttle SRB (it was after all designed with lessons from the Challenger explosion in mind.)

 

PART Upgrade and Engines:   I can see a great use for this so long as we are not trying to bring Different engines in that re-use the same designation (J-2X vs J-2, they are almost completely unique to each other.)  For example the J-2 via the J-2X (first use) program resulted in 9 engine variants... not all are germain to Part upgrade (J-2T Annular aerospike) and not all were actually built.  The engine that has the most upgrades is the TItan's LR-87-AJ-x for the US.  THe RD-58 also has 8 differing engines.

     *ISSUE*   There are reasons a lot of engines have Variants... Not always is it because it is better.   For example the LR-87-AJ-3 was KLOx, not NTO like all later production LR-87s.   LR-87-AJ-3s were used at the same time as the Latter LR-87-AJ-5 (NTO) engine was used.   I am personally not for using Part Upgrade unless there is a way to "Decrement" back to an older version for things other than tanks.

Lastly Engine Clusters.   Instead of making it a change in thrust.  What about if it is a change in the SIZE of the cluster (# of engines.)

 

 

 

[mechanicH]

@Shadowmage Just out of curiosity, since your pods and shuttles are embedded with mechjeb (which I Absolutely LOVE that you did that) , how is it going to function in 1.2, or will it be disabled? 

[CobaltWolf]

4 minutes ago, mechanicH said:

@Shadowmage Just out of curiosity, since your pods and shuttles are embedded with mechjeb (which I Absolutely LOVE that you did that) , how is it going to function in 1.2, or will it be disabled? 

Why would 1.2 change any of that?

[mechanicH]

Well because mechjeb does not work in 1.2 ... i have tried it a few times and its not functioning correctly. 

unless i doing something wrong putting it in the gamedata folder.

Edited September 21, 2016 by mechanicH

[blowfish]

7 minutes ago, mechanicH said:

@Shadowmage Just out of curiosity, since your pods and shuttles are embedded with mechjeb (which I Absolutely LOVE that you did that) , how is it going to function in 1.2, or will it be disabled? 

Mechjeb isn't required, the module is only added in the presence of Mechjeb.

[mechanicH]

ohh i see now, thank you for clearing that up for me. My assumption was that it was part of the SSTU module. So basically if mechjeb is not present it will not be activated by command units. 

[RedParadize]

Shadowmage does not like dependency to other mods. Soon he might even get rid of KSP dependency!

[mechanicH]

K.S.P.     Kerbal Shadowmage Program .  yup  i just did that. that is all.