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

[blowfish]

Looks a bit fuzzy, but my best guess is something like this:

• Retro rocket package is fired to deorbit, then jettisoned (this is the cylindrical part)
• The orientation package (upper conical part) stays attached through re-entry, then is jettisoned to reveal the parachutes and landing rockets underneath
• Diagram seems to show it without the parachutes and landing rockets after landing?  Not sure why this would be though.

[Shadowmage]

24 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Looks a bit fuzzy, but my best guess is something like this:

• Retro rocket package is fired to deorbit, then jettisoned (this is the cylindrical part)
• The orientation package (upper conical part) stays attached through re-entry, then is jettisoned to reveal the parachutes and landing rockets underneath
• Diagram seems to show it without the parachutes and landing rockets after landing?  Not sure why this would be though.

Yeah, that is about how I was interpreting it as well. 

Seems a bit over-complicated for what it actually needs to do in KSP, and adds unnecessary part-count (by splitting the SM up into multiple parts...).  So I'll probably keep it about how I have it in the current iteration:

SM houses retro rockets, RCS, drogue chutes? (+ battery, fuel, reaction wheel)
CM houses main parachutes, and if/when I get to developing them, the soft-landing rockets (+battery, weak reaction wheel)

So the landing sequence would go:

• SM fires retros to de-orbit.
• Keep SM attached through most of the descent -- it provides attitude control (capsule itself has no RCS)
• Deploy drogues on the SM, slow to <100m/s
• SM is then jettisoned (with jettison motor and/or secondary parachute)
• Main chutes deploy from capsule, slow to ?~20m/s (or 5m/s until soft-landing rocket stuff is worked out) (we'll just pretend they were housed under the SM)
• (if/when implemented) At ~<2m, soft-landing rockets fire.  These would be located on the parachute guide-lines.

 

Nearly have the textures finished up, should likely be doing the 'final' model exports tonight and do a bit of work on the configs.

[blowfish]

1 minute ago, Shadowmage said:

Yeah, that is about how I was interpreting it as well. 

Seems a bit over-complicated for what it actually needs to do in KSP, and adds unnecessary part-count (by splitting the SM up into multiple parts...).  So I'll probably keep it about how I have it in the current iteration:

SM houses retro rockets, RCS, drogue chutes? (+ battery, fuel, reaction wheel)
CM houses main parachutes, and if/when I get to developing them, the soft-landing rockets (+battery, weak reaction wheel)

Makes sense for KSP.  Would it be possible to have the retro package as a separate model though?  I imagine that RO will probably want to keep the original sequence.

[Shadowmage]

11 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Makes sense for KSP.  Would it be possible to have the retro package as a separate model though?  I imagine that RO will probably want to keep the original sequence.

Not without making additional geometry, and doing a bunch more work for unwrap, bake, etc.  Currently there is no separation between the retro and parachute section.  Will give it some thought before it is too late though (might be able to squish the geometry in there somewhere, and use multiple MODEL nodes to mate it all together in the part config.... not really the way I want to do things though, so no promises).

[Shadowmage]

A bit of testing on the SC-V parts....

Wannabe-Proton, using H-1 (x6-first stage), Merlin-1D (x4-2nd, x1-3rd), RD-0110 (4th) (makes it into orbit halfway through s3... so overkill....)

Yes, the updated parts support the recoloring system by default.  Have even tried to include some of the 'as-flown' patterns/markings, though possibly not entirely authentic (also not entirely finished).

 

I did split the SM up into two models (but still a single part in the default configuration that ships with SSTU).  For RO use, the models can be split up into separate parts, a 2nd part config created, various decouplers/etc added, and modules re-arranged to split them into distinct parts (retro module and parachute module).  RCS thrusters are located in the lower portion of the SM -- the part that stays attached during re-entry, as these are the spacecraft's only means of attitude control (RCS ports can be seen in the image above).

[Pappystein]

13 hours ago, blowfish said:

Diagram seems to show it without the parachutes and landing rockets after landing?  Not sure why this would be though.

So I don't have hard data on this but about 2 or 3 years ago I read that the orientation package was jettisoned with parachute deployment.

Here is the issue with that statement.  Where are the landing rockets?   I checked every photo of the VA I could find and never found rocket orifices or places that could be covers for said orifices....   This leads me to believe that the VA DID keep the Orientation package.     This made me think of an old proposed "suicide burn" option proposed in the early days of US space flight for a recoverable satellite part (Likely a Photint pod.)   A rocket mounted above the pod fires just above local ground level and slows the pod down to ~0.1g negative acceleration (IE it is falling approximately 0.981 m/ss.)    The final altitude was to be something like 0.5m AGL.   The pod would release and the Rocket would then fly unguided up and at an angle away or the Rocket would auto separate upon landing.... there were many proposals for stuff like this before the world had the computing power to actually calculate when to do all these steps..   Final impact would be below 3m/s most landers seem to be comfortable landing.

Could this be what VA does I wonder.

 

As it applies to VA this means...

Orientation module (via pilot or autonomous via something like Mechjeb,) seeks correct heading for retro-burn.

Retro rocket fires and after burning out detaches (... or see 1 below)

Orientation pod keeps HS pointed at Periapsis through combination of drag/RCS modules.   Aerodynamically for a conical VA Pod the Orientation module is like a big tail fin....

large Drogue Parachute is ejected and slows the VA pod down to something like 15-30m/s   Again no hard data.

At point just before impact Retro-rocket fires releasing the VA pod automatically at ~ 2-4m AGL   After the retro-rocket separates the VA "crash" lands at 1G of acceleration and approximately 3-5m/s

The Orientation Module has now rocketed back up to altitude (tens of meters... no more) and the drogue chutes now have enough surface area to act as a regular chute...  The VA Orientation Module is fully recoverable. (See 2 below)

 

1)  Separation is likely but not certain.   All of my statements are based on the theory that the OM separates just before landing.

2) Separating the OM is likely a crew safety feature... After all fuels would be UDMH/NTO.   To replicate this in game would require a plugin or a group of plugins for optimal performance (very few people have a reaction time fast enough to do all these steps... esp given the delays introduced in KSP itself in the manual staging process.  

 

 

[Shadowmage]

3 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Here is the issue with that statement.  Where are the landing rockets?

The landing rockets are located on the main parachute guide/tension lines.  So, when the chutes are stowed.. the rockets are all folded up inside the chute ball.  I've seen a couple sources that state as much.  ( http://www.astronautix.com/t/tksva.html --  The capsule made a soft landing using a retrorocket in the parachute lines.  This was triggered by the Probki radioactive sensor system within the Kaktus gamma ray altimeter, which set off the DU braking unit for a soft landing of the capsule. )

The retro-rocket (cylinder portion) section of the SM would have been jettisoned directly after the retro/de-orbit burn was completed.  The conical portion of the SM houses only the RCS and a giant wad of parachute.  Once low enough in the atmosphere the SM 'shell' is jettisoned, revealing the main parachute ball that rests on top of the capsule.

Upper portion of the conical SM houses the RCS (jettisoned with the rest of the SM to reveal main parachutes):

Lower portion of the conical SM is little more than a shell that covers up the parachute and retro-rockets:

 

 

 

[Motokid600]

I dont know if I did something wrong or something has changed. Im missing some fuel tanks and I cannot change the diameter on the modular type. I only see that and the cryogenic upper stage types. Where these consolidated maybe? In the sense that the tank im looking for just needs to toggled?

[Shadowmage]

1 minute ago, Motokid600 said:

I dont know if I did something wrong or something has changed. Im missing some fuel tanks and I cannot change the diameter on the modular type. I only see that and the cryogenic upper stage types. Where these consolidated maybe? In the sense that the tank im looking for just needs to toggled?

Which fuel tanks are missing?  (stock, SSTU, specific part names?)

Career/science or sandbox mode?

[Motokid600]

Sorry, checking again with a fresh install. I cant tell which ones are missing on account I cant recall their designations, But I can tell you the ones i have. Actually... I can fire up an older RSS/RO install to see the tanks im looking for. Ill report back

Edit: Cant delete posts, huh?

Edited September 14, 2017 by Motokid600

[Motokid600]

Okay. Here we are.  In the newest SSTU version I have. 

SC-Tank-MFT-A-Standard Tank ( No option to change diameter )
SC-Tank-MFT-L-Lander Tank (Also cannot edit diameter )
MFT-R-Radial Tank
MFT-S Sphereical Tank
SC Tank - MUS - Modular Upper Stage

And thats it. Thats all the dedicated fuel tanks I have. Now some of those are newer so they wont show in older versions, but I have here in my RSS/RO install the tanks im specially looking for and they are the

MUS-CB - Upper Stage
MUS-ST - Upper Stage

The Exploration and Cryogeniuc upperstages are missing as well ( possibly replaced with newer parts? )

The main issue is not being able to change diameters on ANY tank. I can in the old one. Missing tanks or not...   

Mod List

Output_log

KSP.log

Oh and this is a career game. All tech is unlocked. And I just saw this " FAR - Unsupported. "   I do have FAR. Could that be causing the diameter options to not show up?

Edited September 14, 2017 by Motokid600

[Shadowmage]

Many of the MFT tanks were merged into single parts:

MFT-B (hydrolox), MFT-C (cryo), MFT-CF (cryo-framed) were all merged in with the MFT-A.  Use the 'body variant' button/slider in the part-right click menu to get the other body styles.

The upper-stage parts were combined into a single part (MUS-CB and MUS-ST were combined into a single MUS part).  There is a button in the parts right-click menu to toggle between the two styles.  The stand-alone ICPS and HUS parts were removed (or should have been), as they were taking up space in the download (same parts could be made with the MUS).

 

17 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

And I just saw this " FAR - Unsupported. "   I do have FAR. Could that be causing the diameter options to not show up?

From the look of the logs, yep, that is likely your problem (though that specific exception is on an engine cluster, not a fuel tank).

[EXC 13:40:28.098] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.RebuildAllMeshData ()
	FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.GeometryPartModuleRebuildMeshData ()
	UnityEngine.Component:SendMessage(String)
	SSTUTools.SSTUModInterop:onPartGeometryUpdate(Part, Boolean)
	SSTUTools.SSTUModularEngineCluster:initialize()
	SSTUTools.SSTUModularEngineCluster:OnLoad(ConfigNode)
	PartModule:Load(ConfigNode)
	Part:LoadModule(ConfigNode, Int32&)
	ShipConstruct:LoadShip(ConfigNode)
	ShipConstruction:LoadShip(String)
	EditorLogic:StartEditor(Boolean)
	EditorLogic:ShipToLoadSelected(String, LoadType)
	KSP.UI.Screens.CraftBrowserDialog:onPipelineFinished(ConfigNode, CraftEntry, LoadType)
	KSP.UI.Screens.<pipeSelectedItem>c__AnonStorey1B9:<>m__89C(ConfigNode)
	KSPUpgradePipeline:Process(ConfigNode, String, LoadContext, Callback`1, Callback`2)
	KSP.UI.Screens.CraftBrowserDialog:pipeSelectedItem(CraftEntry, LoadType)
	KSP.UI.Screens.CraftBrowserDialog:onButtonLoad()
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()

But your install of FAR is having lots of problems (these are from procedural parts):

[EXC 13:40:28.474] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
	FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.RebuildAllMeshData ()
	FerramAerospaceResearch.FARPartGeometry.GeometryPartModule.GeometryPartModuleRebuildMeshData ()
	UnityEngine.Component:SendMessage(String)
	ProceduralParts.ProceduralAbstractShape:UpdateInterops()
	ProceduralParts.ProceduralShapeBezierCone:UpdateShape(Boolean)
	ProceduralParts.ProceduralAbstractShape:OnUpdateEditor()
	ProceduralParts.ProceduralPart:InitializeNodes()
	ProceduralParts.ProceduralPart:DoInitialize()
	ProceduralParts.ProceduralPart:OnInitialize()
	Part:InitializeModules()
	ShipConstruct:LoadShip(ConfigNode)
	ShipConstruction:LoadShip(String)
	EditorLogic:StartEditor(Boolean)
	EditorLogic:ShipToLoadSelected(String, LoadType)
	KSP.UI.Screens.CraftBrowserDialog:onPipelineFinished(ConfigNode, CraftEntry, LoadType)
	KSP.UI.Screens.<pipeSelectedItem>c__AnonStorey1B9:<>m__89C(ConfigNode)
	KSPUpgradePipeline:Process(ConfigNode, String, LoadContext, Callback`1, Callback`2)
	KSP.UI.Screens.CraftBrowserDialog:pipeSelectedItem(CraftEntry, LoadType)
	KSP.UI.Screens.CraftBrowserDialog:onButtonLoad()
	UnityEngine.EventSystems.EventSystem:Update()

 

Can you give it a try without FAR installed and see if the missing diameter-adjust options show back up?  I'm not seeing any other exceptions in the log that would indicate problems with the MFT tanks specifically (did you try using them in that log file posted?), but with KSP -any- exception is likely to cause seemingly unrelated problems.

31 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

All tech is unlocked.

Did you purchase the diameter-upgrade-unlock parts?  Even on 'free-unlocks' you still have to manually pay to purchase the unlocks.

[Theysen]

@Motokid600 Respecting the wish of Shadowmage to not discuss RO in here as he clearly states he does not support it - you can't compare the latest SSTU version which is made for 1.3 with the last working version for 1.2.2 which is this one - for the reasons @Shadowmage mentioned above: many things got rearranged and updated: 

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/releases/tag/0.5.34.134

 

Not surely following the reasoning behind why you mention RSS/RO in combination with this but RO changes quite a few things via the configs and absolutely need the version mentioned above. 

** I am just dropping this here quickly to make sure other users get this correct, too. ** 

 

For all other things you reported, FAR works with SSTU flawlessly in the newest 1.3 installment on my end (fresh install, no other stuff installed) and the diameter changeable. 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2017 by Theysen

[Motokid600]

No, sorry I was just using RO as a reference to see what tanks I was missing. It was using an older version of SSTU. Its irrelevant to the issue.

29 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

From the look of the logs, yep, that is likely your problem (though that specific exception is on an engine cluster, not a fuel tank).

But your install of FAR is having lots of problems (these are from procedural parts):

 

Can you give it a try without FAR installed and see if the missing diameter-adjust options show back up?  I'm not seeing any other exceptions in the log that would indicate problems with the MFT tanks specifically (did you try using them in that log file posted?), but with KSP -any- exception is likely to cause seemingly unrelated problems.

Did you purchase the diameter-upgrade-unlock parts?  Even on 'free-unlocks' you still have to manually pay to purchase the unlocks.

Okay as far as the missing parts that solves that. That Ive already posted on the procedural parts thread about that other issue. Removing FAR did not help. I still lack a diameter option without FAR. This is all I get.  As for the upgrade-unlock parts the entire tree is unlocked. I just went through it all. Going to try without Procedural Parts now and post fresh logs.

Edited September 14, 2017 by Motokid600

[Motokid600]

Okay. No FAR. No procedural parts... still no diameter options   Output_log   KSP.log

[Shadowmage]

13 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

No, sorry I was just using RO as a reference to see what tanks I was missing. It was using an older version of SSTU. Its irrelevant to the issue.

Okay as far as the missing parts that solves that. That Ive already posted on the procedural parts thread about that other issue. Removing FAR did not help. I still lack a diameter option without FAR. This is all I get.  As for the upgrade-unlock parts the entire tree is unlocked. I just went through it all. Going to try without Procedural Parts now and post fresh logs.

Thanks for taking the time to check out the FAR bit.  There was a good chance that it was causing the problems, but apparently not in this case.

From the image you linked -- everything else on the part seems to be working, except the diameter adjustment.  This would point to the diameter unlock upgrades not being purchased in your career.  Could you upload your save file (persistent.sfs)?  (this should tell me if the upgrades/unlocks have been purchased or not).

Taking a look at the updated logs now, and will edit/update if I notice anything else in them.

[Motokid600]

Ill do that next. Going to see what it says in sandbox mode.

Its there in sandbox. I have the diameter option. Here is the save file for the career game for what it counts.

Its strange. Everything is "owned" across the board in the tech tree. However what I originally did was use the cheat "Maximum technology" to unlock everything. Could that be responsible? As opposed to manually going in and purchasing each node? Thats never been an issue in the past, but... tis the present, lol. Ill try a new career save and manually unlock each node.

Edited September 14, 2017 by Motokid600

[Shadowmage]

12 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

Ill do that next. Going to see what it says in sandbox mode.

Its there in sandbox. I have the diameter option. Here is the save file for the career game for what it counts.

Its strange. Everything is "owned" across the board in the tech tree. However what I originally did was use the cheat "Maximum technology" to unlock everything. Could that be responsible? As opposed to manually going in and purchasing each node? Thats never been an issue in the past, but... tis the present, lol.

Even when you use the 'max tech' you still need to manually go into each node and purchase the 'part upgrades'.  As they are not a technology node, they don't get automatically unlocked.

Looking at the persistence file now, but I have strong suspicions that those part upgrades were not purchased / are not unlocked.

[Motokid600]

Im looking high and low. I noticed this while looking in the UpgradeParts-MFT.cfg.   These upgrades are not showing up in the tech tree. For instance

name = SSTU-MFT-D1
	partIcon = SSTU-SC-TANK-MFT-A
	techRequired = advRocketry
	entryCost = 5000
	title = Modular Tank Max Diameter Increase (1.875m)
	description = Increases the maximum diameter available for modular fuel tanks (SSTU-SC-TANK-XXX).  This upgrade allows up to 1.875m diameter tanks to be created.

Does not show up in Advanced Rocketry.

[Shadowmage]

@Motokid600

After looking through the persistence file, I can verify that the lack of diameter adjustment is being caused by the unlocks not having been purchased.

If they were purchased, this node would not be empty:

	SCENARIO
	{
		name = PartUpgradeManager
		scene = 6, 5, 7
		UPGRADES
		{
			Unlocks
			{
			}
			Enableds
			{
			}
		}
	}

This line in your advanced game settings causes me to think that they might not even be available in your career game?  (PartUpgradesInCareer = False)

		AdvancedParams
		{
			EnableKerbalExperience = False
			ImmediateLevelUp = False
			AllowNegativeCurrency = False
			PressurePartLimits = True
			GPartLimits = True
			GKerbalLimits = True
			KerbalGToleranceMult = 1
			ResourceTransferObeyCrossfeed = False
			ActionGroupsAlways = True
			BuildingImpactDamageMult = 0.03
			PartUpgradesInSandbox = True
			PartUpgradesInCareer = False
		}

 

So the first place would be to open up your career game, go into the difficulty menu, advanced settings, and make sure that 'part upgrades' are available in career mode.

Next, go into the R&D center, and find the tech-tree nodes that the fuel-tank upgrades are located under.  Click on the node, and where it shows you what parts will be unlocked you should notice a few selections with purchase costs.  Click on these, and click the 'purchase' button that appears below it.

If you are still running into problems with this later this evening when I'm home from work, I'll see if I can put up some screenshots / tutorials, and/or dig into it a bit further.

8 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

Im looking high and low. I noticed this while looking in the UpgradeParts-MFT.cfg.   These upgrades are not showing up in the tech tree. For instance

name = SSTU-MFT-D1
	partIcon = SSTU-SC-TANK-MFT-A
	techRequired = advRocketry
	entryCost = 5000
	title = Modular Tank Max Diameter Increase (1.875m)
	description = Increases the maximum diameter available for modular fuel tanks (SSTU-SC-TANK-XXX).  This upgrade allows up to 1.875m diameter tanks to be created.

Does not show up in Advanced Rocketry.

Just quoting/tagging you to make sure you see my post above....

[Motokid600]

30 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

@Motokid600

go into the difficulty menu, advanced settings, and make sure that 'part upgrades' are available in career mode.

Ow... my pride. *sigh* that did it. Thank you Shadowmage.

Edited September 14, 2017 by Motokid600

[T-10a]

This is likely going to be a pain to program, but is there plans for procedural conical tanks in SSTU? I'd love to build an N1 style rocket with SSTU, but the current options for conical tanks involve making the nose section as large as possible, and scale up the tank diameter in the hope that the nose matches up with the upper stage's diameter.

Edited September 17, 2017 by T-10a

[CatastrophicFailure]

OK, dumb queston here that's probably been answered before: Does SSTU support SmokeScreen? I've got it installed along with RealPlume, I get the pretty flame effects, but no smoke trails in atmo. Is there a config somewhere I missed?

[Mike`]

1 hour ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

OK, dumb queston here that's probably been answered before: Does SSTU support SmokeScreen? I've got it installed along with RealPlume, I get the pretty flame effects, but no smoke trails in atmo. Is there a config somewhere I missed?

I installed realplume aswell, and at least the SSTU-SRBs leave smoketrails in the atmo for me. Can you test these? If it doesn't work, something else is probably wrong. Do trails work on stock engines for you?

Edited September 17, 2017 by Mike`

[Shadowmage]

10 hours ago, T-10a said:

This is likely going to be a pain to program, but is there plans for procedural conical tanks in SSTU? I'd love to build an N1 style rocket with SSTU, but the current options for conical tanks involve making the nose section as large as possible, and scale up the tank diameter in the hope that the nose matches up with the upper stage's diameter.

Yes and no.  It has been on the long-term plans for awhile, but I've been unable to find a... reasonable... setup to make it functional (mostly related to texturing; I hate procedural tanks texture layout, but that is about the only way to do UVs for procedural tanks).

 

5 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

OK, dumb queston here that's probably been answered before: Does SSTU support SmokeScreen? I've got it installed along with RealPlume, I get the pretty flame effects, but no smoke trails in atmo. Is there a config somewhere I missed?

Yes, it does (should...).  Smokescreen is required for RealPlume, and most, if not all, SSTU engines should support RealPlume.

However with one of their recent updates, I believe they did remove smoke from quite a few of the rocket plume setups.