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

[Jimbodiah]

Base sizes may be off, I only did a rough copy of the J2 into a J2X, will spend more time on it tomorrow together with the Merlin clusters.

[davidy12]

 

3 hours ago, Jimbodiah said:

Base sizes may be off, I only did a rough copy of the J2 into a J2X, will spend more time on it tomorrow together with the Merlin clusters.

Yeah it is a bit small.

[Jimbodiah]

Download it again, I changed the sizes and added the SLS and Direct mounts to some models. I've also done a PR on Github for Mage to implement it.

I'm working on a cluster for the Merlins right now and might make one for the H1, but seeing as those are only place holders, I will only offer a download link (no PR).

Link to J2X, H1 and Merlin clusters: download

Edited February 7, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[BolleT]

how is it going with the soyuz?

[ComatoseJedi]

I've seen most of the concepts and actual designs for American rocket technology, but when it comes to the Soyuz, what's used to get that into space? I've looked for launch vehicles, but nothing that's considered "stock SSTU". 

 

What would be the equivalent to these launch vehicles or concepts for a Soyuz capsule launch? 

[Shadowmage]

57 minutes ago, ComatoseJedi said:

I've seen most of the concepts and actual designs for American rocket technology, but when it comes to the Soyuz, what's used to get that into space? I've looked for launch vehicles, but nothing that's considered "stock SSTU". 

 

What would be the equivalent to these launch vehicles or concepts for a Soyuz capsule launch? 

Currently?  Stuff from other mods.

Nothing says you have to use an R-7-like rocket to get it into space; and indeed such designs are severe overkill for the stock Kerbin system.

However, if you look at this issue ticket: https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues/202

You'll see that they are a planned item in the near future (2-3 weeks out).

And will look something like:

(which has >4k dV on its booster+core stages, doesn't even need upper stages to get the capsule into orbit)

However I do not have any engines similar to those used by the R-7's, nor are they planned anytime soon (lack of schematics/detailed diagrams).

[Shadowmage]

Updated testing release is available:

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/releases/tag/0.3.28-pre2

Fixes up a couple issues with the MSRBs/plugin/code and incorporates some PRs from Jimbodiah to add J-2X engine clusters and life-support updates.

[ComatoseJedi]

38 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Currently?  Stuff from other mods.

Nothing says you have to use an R-7-like rocket to get it into space; and indeed such designs are severe overkill for the stock Kerbin system.

However, if you look at this issue ticket: https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues/202

You'll see that they are a planned item in the near future (2-3 weeks out).

And will look something like:

(which has >4k dV on its booster+core stages, doesn't even need upper stages to get the capsule into orbit)

However I do not have any engines similar to those used by the R-7's, nor are they planned anytime soon (lack of schematics/detailed diagrams).

You'll just have to excuse me being an unimaginative stiff, sometimes. I've been concentrating on interstellar travel far more than SOI travel. Let's face it, I love going to Duna. 

[Jimbodiah]

LOL. Any real-scale looking build tends to be enough to send the payload to Duna, instead of just LKO 

I'm updating my NASA Rockets topic with the new builds. These rockets look better every time I build them! LINK

Edited February 8, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[Shadowmage]

15 hours ago, Jimbodiah said:

LOL. Any real-scale looking build tends to be enough to send the payload to Duna, instead of just LKO 

I'm updating my NASA Rockets topic with the new builds. These rockets look better every time I build them! LINK

Indeed; Duna and back with half of my designs.  The stock Kerbal system really just does not lend itself to using scaled rockets very well; they certainly work, but mostly are all severe overkill.

Your rocket designs are looking very nice, glad you are finding use out of some of the more esoteric features I have added in; at least someone is getting good use out of them

 

16 hours ago, ComatoseJedi said:

You'll just have to excuse me being an unimaginative stiff, sometimes. I've been concentrating on interstellar travel far more than SOI travel. Let's face it, I love going to Duna. 

LoL, you are excused

There's nothing wrong with wanting scale-like rocket designs; they just aren't the main focus of this mod (you are mostly getting them as a side effect of my terrible modeling skills).

 

[Shadowmage]

How do you guys feel about the SRB nozzle and nosecone geometry?  Do they need more detail / geometry added, or mostly just texturing?

 

I'm leaning towards perhaps doing some slight revisions to a couple of them, but overall I think they are sufficient for their intended purpose -- IMO adding more geometry won't make them any 'better';  but I'm open to opinions on the matter.

FYI -- Jettison motor locations can/will be added to the textures as part of the normal and diffuse textures rather than as part of the geometry.  Even if I don't include the jettison functionality I'll likely still have the ports on the part textures.

Anyhow, most of the rest of this week will be spent finishing up those models, and doing texturing.  And finishing up texturing for the other WIP stuff (J-2X).

[Jimbodiah]

51 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Your rocket designs are looking very nice, glad you are finding use out of some of the more esoteric features I have added in; at least someone is getting good use out of them

Mwuhahahaha   Thanks!  It's just fun to launch rockets when you can make clean separations with the new decoupler and match different stages with the fairings. Really love building rockets that resemble the real thing, or at least look like something that would have been built in the real world. I'm a big scifi fan so I love my Near Future ships as well, but combining real-world and sci-fi is why I still enjoy playing this game. I could not imagine building stuff like I do without your mod. I think Squad could take an example from you and implement some modular tanks in 1.1, I have no clue why this was not included to begin with. Next to tweakscale and SSTU, there are no mods that I can think of that have sizeable tanks (maybe Proc Parts).

Re the SRBs:  The nose cones look fine to me, they tend to be just plain white in the real world, so not much to work with. As for the nozzles it's hard to say, the plain nozzle from the Delta and Atlas are not detailed IRL, so I think not much can be done there, and when the textures are added to the Shuttle/Ariane nozzles, I think they will be quite detailed already.

[Shadowmage]

Re: Nosecones -- I agree, they generally tend to be very plain affairs.

However, I've noticed that due to texture-space/texture-use I need to make a couple more, at least one, in order to fill out the texture sheet for them.  So... any ideas? 

(I need either 2 more to fit on a 2048x1024 texture, or I can remove 2 in order to fit onto a 1024x1024 texture).

Edit:  Alternatively, I could do each nosecone on its own 512x512 texture; but that is alot of files to manage and swap between while I'm texturing. 
Having the entire group on a single texture is easier for texturing and config stuff, but it is a bit more painful for unwrapping.  Pros and cons either way.... hmmm....

 

Nozzles -- yah, after taking a second look at the Delta SRBs, I can see that their nozzle setup is about as simple as geometry can get; cylinder tank-but with a nozzle sticking out of it.  No greeble, beveling, or really any detail.  LoL, at least that one is easy to make

The rest are probably acceptable geometry wise, though I might revise the jettison hardware on the Shuttle-SRB nozzle to make it a bit more realistic / usable if I implement the auto-jettison stuff.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Shadowmage

[blowfish]

My (admittedly limited) understanding is that fewer, larger textures are better, even if there's a bit of wasted texture space.  If you're looking for additional ones then maybe rounded ones like in this screenshot (I know that was just a test).

Though in truth, if you're going with plain white for the nosecones, then it's possible that many of them could share texture space, and that might allow you to bump it down to 1024² 

Edited February 8, 2016 by blowfish

[Jimbodiah]

Euhm, are you asking us for more modelling work?    The only nose cones I can think of are the stumpier Titan III booster and the long pointed slanted Proton tips (although they are not separate boosters, you could build a replica that way if you just don't add the decouplers. But that is all just nitpicking at this stage; maybe someone else has a nicer suggestion.

Here is a poster with a LOT of rockets... LINK

btw: is the black vertical strip down the side of the booster supposed to go on the outside, or is this the mount that is supposed to attach to the main core?

[Shadowmage]

54 minutes ago, blowfish said:

My (admittedly limited) understanding is that fewer, larger textures are better, even if there's a bit of wasted texture space.  If you're looking for additional ones then maybe rounded ones like in this screenshot (I know that was just a test).

Though in truth, if you're going with plain white for the nosecones, then it's possible that many of them could share texture space, and that might allow you to bump it down to 1024² 

Texture atlasing = always a good thing; I have never found an instance where it is less efficient than individual textures; as long as the gfx card can load larger the texture into memory, it will generally result in fewer texture bind calls and fewer draw calls.  Wasted texture-space is mostly a RAM and VRAM concern, though hopefully both of those concerns will be minimized with 1.1 (VRAM only if they implemented dynamic asset loading, RAM still dependant on system configuration).

Sadly I cannot think of a way to share texture space with these models as they will all have the jettison motor stuff done as part of the texture/normal map, and will mostly need unique positioning of those details on a per-model basis.  Will do some experiments though, it might be possible to fudge them a bit to make it work.  If ever it were going to, these would be the models to try it on, as they do not have any AO bake to speak of.  If that works out, these could potentially all be mapped onto a single 512x, which would be great from a memory-use perspective.

Hmm... you know... I might be able to clean this up a bit to use a single 512x if I... cheat... a bit regarding the thrust transform locations;  I could easily add a 0.25m or so straight section to the bottom of each nosecone where the thrust transforms are located; this geometry could be consistent across all of the nosecones.  This could also simplify the plugin-side of things if I know I have a consistent thrust transform setup/location for the nosecones.  Hmm... will give this a bit of thought and testing as it seems like it might be the best all-around compromise for texture-space/density/memory use.

Re: existing nosecones -- the SRBs will have access to all of the MFT nosecones (and vice-versa), although the existing nosecones will not have the nosecone jettison motor port textures unless I rework them a bit.  So...perhaps they won't be available on the SRBs initially....

51 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said:

Euhm, are you asking us for more modelling work?    The only nose cones I can think of are the stumpier Titan III booster and the long pointed slanted Proton tips (although they are not separate boosters, you could build a replica that way if you just don't add the decouplers. But that is all just nitpicking at this stage; maybe someone else has a nicer suggestion.

Here is a poster with a LOT of rockets... LINK

btw: is the black vertical strip down the side of the booster supposed to go on the outside, or is this the mount that is supposed to attach to the main core?

Not -really- looking for more modeling work, merely looking to fill in /fix some inefficient texture-space use; though it amounts to the same thing in the end.

If I end up doing more nosecones to fill out the texture I will certainly look into doing an extra-point and an extra-blunt design; would round out the selection nicely I think.

Black stripe -- not sure what you are referring to?  If you are talking about the geometry that runs down the side of the SRBs -- that is the avionics/electronics/cabling tunnel -- it generally is positioned on the outside of the stack.  You can see it on the left-side of this image (painted white)

 

Nice find on that poster / image -- that is a ton of rockets !!

 

Edit:  Thinking a bit more on things I might be able to include the jettison motor detail bits on the texture for the SRB segments themselves;  They all have consistent top and bottom skirt pieces, and this would also give a consistent location to all of the thrust transforms.  Would enable easy texture-sharing for the nosecones, enable easy use of the existing MFT nosecones, and allow for consistency on the location and orientation of the thrust transforms/texture details for both the nosecones and nozzles.  Could potentially even add a bit of geometry for them to the skirts if deemed necessary; I have a bit of wiggle room on that texture still.

This wouldn't be 100% technically accurate as far as positioning and function goes, but seems like a good compromise for most of the gameplay and efficiency concerns -- they would be functional, aesthetically consistent, and quite appropriate for a 'generic' implementation.

Hmm.. and more hmm...

Anyone have any strong arguments or feelings -against- moving forwards with this method (jettison transforms/details as part of the top/bottom skirt segments on the SRB's themselves?) 
So far it is seeming like it will solve... many... implementation problems and go a long way towards letting me do the auto-jettison end of things in the future.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Shadowmage

[ComatoseJedi]

@Shadowmage In my honest opinion, an srb is an srb. They only last long enough to get you off the ground and fall aimlessly back to the ground when they are spent and that's about as far as I think of them. What you are doing with them is outstanding work (btw, your modelling skills are 1000x better than mine any day). So with that being said, to add more is totally up to you. If there is a niche that needs to be filled, I am sure we have more knowledgable folks here who love how srbs look and operate to perform on a real world basis and have varied input on these things. I on the other hand only use them if I need them. Whether they look like they are based off something is totally happenstance when I apply them to a rocket design. I'm not too hard to please, just keep up with the awesome work. 

I know you were looking for constructive criticism, but I have none to offer you since you pretty much replaced several part mods for me. But, you can guarantee that if I do see something, you will be the first to know. 

[blowfish]

So the sequence would be nosecone -> top skirt -> some number of segments -> bottom skirt -> nozzle?  That makes sense to me.  I think modularity is more important than real-world accuracy - as long as the end result looks good and makes sense

[Shadowmage]

9 minutes ago, blowfish said:

So the sequence would be nosecone -> top skirt -> some number of segments -> bottom skirt -> nozzle?  That makes sense to me.  I think modularity is more important than real-world accuracy - as long as the end result looks good and makes sense

Yes, exactly.

The skirts are already part of the prototype/test parts from the latest release;  the lower skirt is technically counted as part of the lowest segment, and the top skirt is the top-most segment that they all currently share.

Upper-skirt is also where the parachutes will be located if/when I add recovery hardware support to the MSRB's (already mostly planned, though needs stage-recovery support before I will be implementing it).

The only difference is that I would be adding in some additional detail to the texture and/or geometry for reference of where the thrust transforms/motor ports would be located.

 

[Shadowmage]

With basic (white) texture.  May or may not keep the black stripe at the bottom, mostly was using it to test for consistency and proper alignment of the bottom portion of the UV's. 

These are all unwrapped onto a single shared 512x texture.  This will allow them to match the texture density of the existing tanks and nosecones;  this will mostly be important if I include orange-foam type textures for them, where it will allow the foam grain to be of approximately the same size.  Could also add new nosecones using this texture / set of textures in the future with minimal impact to existing parts, and even minimal time spent on modeling/unwrapping (...if all parts were this easy to do, I wouldn't mind modeling nearly as much).

Will also be doing a simple flat black / dark gray texture for them (and the bodies, and nozzles...).  Will look into doing other colors/textures as things progress.

Note however, that due to them sharing textures and being unwrapped organically (curved/mirrored, rather than seamed and aligned), there is no way to add any form of actual detail;  these nose-cones will -not- have any kind of stripe or checker pattern to them, and will be limited to flat-color textures only (aside from the lower lip on them, which is unwrapped in an aligned/squared manner).

Will be working on exporting these through Unity and getting them in-game tonight with their textures, and adding texture-set-swapping support to the MSRB module.  I guess either bodies or nozzles will be the focus for tomorrow (or even later tonight depending on how smooth things go).

[Jimbodiah]

I wouldn't even mind the jettison nozzles not being visible in the textures. Details are nice, but it has to be practical from your side as well, and a lot of effort for two black dots seems "hmmm".

[davidy12]

 

On February 7, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Shadowmage said:

Updated testing release is available:

https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/releases/tag/0.3.28-pre2

Fixes up a couple issues with the MSRBs/plugin/code and incorporates some PRs from Jimbodiah to add J-2X engine clusters and life-support updates.

Well S**T. Apparently, the J-2X BROKE ALL MY ROCKETS and my Duna Hab. 

Going to be a long night REBUILDING ALL MY ROCKETS AND MY HAB!!! 

 

(note: not angry just trying to point out an issue. WHY DID IT BREAK ALL MY FILES?)

[Jimbodiah]

The double mount version had a copy/paste error in the last release, my bad. All others should work normally.

 

BTW: Did you come up with this mission, or are they randomly generated?

Edited February 9, 2016 by Jimbodiah

[davidy12]

@Shadowmage: 2x J-2X doesn't work!!!

[StickyScissors]

22 minutes ago, davidy12 said:

@Shadowmage: 2x J-2X doesn't work!!!

You're using a very WIP mod and you didn't expect things to break or not work?