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

[Shadowmage]

Chances are that I'll start working on the actual geometry for those parts over this weekend... what I have now is just a basic shell, intended to be only good enough for initial concept validation; making sure the stuff will work at all before I spend too much time on it.  Thanfully, it looks like it will work out, if not well, then at least decently.

Lots of work to do on it yet... nearly all of the geometry needs cleaned up, quite a bit needs more detail added (windows, hatches, hinges, cargo-bay interior and docking stuff).  Need to make and integrate the landing gear (one in the fuselage/nose, one in each wing), RCS (and the goemetry for the RCS on the OMS pods), and finalize all of the thrust transforms.  Still debating on if I should add additional in-flight gimbal/trim adjustment through another plugin... it is flyable without, but it could be helpful.  Also thinking on solutions to allow for an off-axis control transform... so you can have a 'control from here' that points in the direction of thrust rather than just the nose (will make MJ ascent a bit easier).  And of course I still need to handle all of the thermal stuff.

I would love a way to add the split-rudder air-brakes, as well as allowing for the rear body flap as an air-brake.  Sadly, stock doesn't really support such complex setups (and I'm not sure if they would even work in FAR); which is why the wings, tail, and elevons are already separate parts.

Hopefully by this time next-week that series of parts will be in a much more presentable state

 

 

[RedParadize]

Hello again

I am sure you are awaire of this, but the SRB don't cost 0 regardless of their size. In fact, a emptyed SRB have a negative cost. Its weird that even costPerDryTon in fuel type don't seem to change this.

thanks!

[ComatoseJedi]

@Shadowmage You gave any thought on the the texture of the shuttle? Are you going to make it to where you can change the name of it on the wing? Like Atlantis, Enterprise? It would be cool if there was a way to put the name of the ship you made for it on it. While, perhaps just a flag toggle will do nicely as well. Just shooting out some of my thoughts. If you want me to shut up about it, it'll cost ya a quarter. LoL. 

[RedParadize]

Would be quite simple to add a flags for each of the shuttle and then chose it using the mission flag.

[Shadowmage]

On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Delta_8930 said:

Do you have plans to make the ESA ATV and the Ariane 5?

Maybe, and not particularly.  ATV might come as part of the Service-Module series.  Ariane -- what is missing?  Looks to be just a rocket+srbs to me... so you're going to have to be more specific.

 

2 hours ago, RedParadize said:

Hello again

I am sure you are awaire of this, but the SRB don't cost 0 regardless of their size. In fact, a emptyed SRB have a negative cost. Its weird that even costPerDryTon in fuel type don't seem to change this.

thanks!

Aye, cost (and mass) adjustments are still on the todo list for that module next time I have time to do coding work.

 

49 minutes ago, ComatoseJedi said:

@Shadowmage You gave any thought on the the texture of the shuttle? Are you going to make it to where you can change the name of it on the wing? Like Atlantis, Enterprise? It would be cool if there was a way to put the name of the ship you made for it on it. While, perhaps just a flag toggle will do nicely as well. Just shooting out some of my thoughts. If you want me to shut up about it, it'll cost ya a quarter. LoL. 

A bit early to even think about it yet; I'm still trying to figure out the geometry and function of it all

[blowfish]

Would it be possible for you to say exactly which RL-10 variants you based the stats on? It seems like there are a lot.

[Shadowmage]

53 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Would it be possible for you to say exactly which RL-10 variants you based the stats on? It seems like there are a lot.

If I remember correctly, the A-3-3, A-4-2N, and B-2-1?

Yes, there have been quite a few variants over the years apparently.

[blowfish]

2 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

If I remember correctly, the A-3-3, A-4-2N, and B-2-1?

Yes, there have been quite a few variants over the years apparently.

Thanks.

So I got bored tonight and butchered a couple of your engine mounts:

Spoiler

(RS-25 chosen because it doesn't have any turbopump exhaust sticking out)

Any interest in actually using them?  They don't actually require any texture modifications.

And yeah, I know there's a generic shroud already, but it just bothers me to have an engine without any turbopump exhaust in a hole that wide.  I guess an alternative would be a version of the generic shroud with a smaller opening (just move the verts inward :P)

Speaking of the generic shroud, I found an oddity with its geometry: it seems that each arg segment is actually two coplanar segments.  Based on the UVs I think they could be merged without harming anything.

Edited February 19, 2016 by blowfish

[RedParadize]

I would take that!

[Shadowmage]

Got the RD-107 texture(s) nearly finished last night.  Needs perhaps one more pass over for cleanup and maybe a bit more detailing.  This should be available with tomorrows release.  Will not have an emissive texture/glow initially, though I intend to do a pass over those to fill in for the missing ones in the next couple of weeks (RS-68, J-2X, RD-107).

 

 

6 hours ago, blowfish said:

Thanks.

So I got bored tonight and butchered a couple of your engine mounts:

  Reveal hidden contents

(RS-25 chosen because it doesn't have any turbopump exhaust sticking out)

Any interest in actually using them?  They don't actually require any texture modifications.

And yeah, I know there's a generic shroud already, but it just bothers me to have an engine without any turbopump exhaust in a hole that wide.  I guess an alternative would be a version of the generic shroud with a smaller opening (just move the verts inward :P)

Speaking of the generic shroud, I found an oddity with its geometry: it seems that each arg segment is actually two coplanar segments.  Based on the UVs I think they could be merged without harming anything.

Nice

I could at least take a look at them; I have no reason not to include them aside from memory use (which I'm going to stop worrying about soon).  Geometry looks clean enough, though I'm curious how you handled the arm extrusion stuff on the D-IV mount (did you just clone the non-extruded side and rotate, or leave the extrusion in place?).  Up to you if you wanted to submit a PR, or just send them through dropbox link/etc.  I should likely have time to look over them tonight/tomorrow morning, and could possibly include them in tomorrows release if everything works out.

Generic mount -- not quite sure what you are referring to, but I'll take a look at the geometry.  Sometimes I put extra edge-loops in just to fix shading artifacts, so that might be what you are seeing... but there could also be some legitimate errors in the mesh (this stuff gets mangled so terribly during construction, splitting for AOs, duplicating non-unique faces, rejoining for export... I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few parts with duplicate geometry in places).

13 hours ago, ComatoseJedi said:

@Shadowmage You gave any thought on the the texture of the shuttle? Are you going to make it to where you can change the name of it on the wing? Like Atlantis, Enterprise? It would be cool if there was a way to put the name of the ship you made for it on it. While, perhaps just a flag toggle will do nicely as well. Just shooting out some of my thoughts. If you want me to shut up about it, it'll cost ya a quarter. LoL. 

Thinking a bit on this -- -if- I handle the setup from the start / build it into the design, there could potentially be both name decals and standard KSP flags.  Think flags on the tips of the wing, sides of the tail, and names across the wide of the wing, fuselage side, etc.

Flags would use the standard KSP flag selection mechanisms.

Decals / text could use a standard texture-swapping setup, with config-defined list of textures.  So, yes, you could potentially make and use your own decals; simply add the art asset, and patch the extra texture into the texture-switch module.

Still a bit early to worry about it too much, but don't let me forget about it when it comes time to do the cleanup/finishing/texturing of the model

[ComatoseJedi]

1 hour ago, Shadowmage said:

Still a bit early to worry about it too much, but don't let me forget about it when it comes time to do the cleanup/finishing/texturing of the model

You can have the utmost reassurance that I will remind you on matters such as this. Normally, I would charge for such a service, but for you, I'll do it for free.  

[Shadowmage]

Bit of initial geometry cleanup on SC-E parts.  Mostly wings, elevons, and rudder; adding beveling and hinge points.  Also added some beveling to the cargo-bay doors (both hinge and top sides) so that the edges don't pop out as much; still going to do some beveling on the front and rear (err..top/bottom) as well.  Also added in the rear-body flap

Still need to do windows, OMS-RCS, landing gear, and cargo bay interior (docking port, airlock/hatches, latches, handles/etc).  So.. still a lot to do, but might actually have a good portion of it done by the end of the weekend.

[Kerbal01]

In the most recent release, the game hangs when loading the SRB-A, then spawns Null Refs,the game doesn't finish loading. 

Mod list:

SSTU  0.3.29-pre 1

AIES Aerospace 1.61

Tweakscale. 

RealPlume and dependencies

KSP: 1.05 build 1024.

Logs:https://paste.ee/p/Msovu

I'll try reverting to 3.28 pre 7. 

Edited February 19, 2016 by DarthVader

[blowfish]

Just now, DarthVader said:

In the most recent release, the game hangs when loading the SRB-A, then spawns Null Refs,the game doesn't finish loading. 

Mod list:

SSTU  0.3.29-pre 1

AIES Aerospace 1.61

RealPlume and dependencies

KSP: 1.05 build 1024.

Logs:https://paste.ee/p/Msovu

Thanks for providing logs!  There is currently a bug that Shadowmage is aware of where the tank types don't load properly if CommunityResourcePack is not installed.  The workaround for now is to install CRP.  If you don't wish to use the LH2 patches with that, you can remove the LH2 patch in SSTU (though I highly recommend using LH2 - it results in much more sensible rocket designs!).

[Kerbal01]

reverted to 3.28 has the same bug, ill try installing CRP. removed AIES and tweak scale.

[blowfish]

3 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Nice

I could at least take a look at them; I have no reason not to include them aside from memory use (which I'm going to stop worrying about soon).  Geometry looks clean enough, though I'm curious how you handled the arm extrusion stuff on the D-IV mount (did you just clone the non-extruded side and rotate, or leave the extrusion in place?).  Up to you if you wanted to submit a PR, or just send them through dropbox link/etc.  I should likely have time to look over them tonight/tomorrow morning, and could possibly include them in tomorrows release if everything works out.

I can definitely submit a PR, but I probably won't have time until the weekend, and then I'm not quite sure when (cluster configs to do too).  But no rush.

On the Delta IV mount, yeah, I just mirrored the part of the geometry without the extrusion - it's currently mirrored along the 45° axes.

[Kerbal01]

It loaded, now ill try going back to 3.29 pre 1.

[Shadowmage]

36 minutes ago, blowfish said:

I can definitely submit a PR, but I probably won't have time until the weekend, and then I'm not quite sure when (cluster configs to do too).  But no rush.

On the Delta IV mount, yeah, I just mirrored the part of the geometry without the extrusion - it's currently mirrored along the 45° axes.

Whenever you have time is fine with me

You don't have to do the configs if you don't feel up to it/have time; I've done enough of them that it doesn't take me too long to get them all figured out and sized properly.  Though, if you do them, that is fine too

[JoseEduardo]

@Shadowmage for the shuttle airlock, do you plan on making one exactly like the Shuttle one, one like the shuttle but with the APAS docking port extendable like the Buran one or use the Buran airlock?

[Shadowmage]

7 hours ago, DarthVader said:

It loaded, now ill try going back to 3.29 pre 1.

Just fixed this bug in dev-code (or the patch for LH2 rather).  Fix will be available with tomorrows update.

 

6 hours ago, JoseEduardo said:

@Shadowmage for the shuttle airlock, do you plan on making one exactly like the Shuttle one, one like the shuttle but with the APAS docking port extendable like the Buran one or use the Buran airlock?

None of the above?

Fixed / non-animated (too many bugs with the stock animated docking port), but not offset as far into the body as the shuttle docking port is.  Will likely be very similar to what you see on the current prototype parts, though perhaps moved inwards a bit (as the doors are becoming thicker).  The aim is that you shouldn't need special adapters on your station in order to dock the shuttle, but we'll see how that works out.

Edit:  The docking port itself is added through a MODEL node, so it could in theory be replaced through a patch with an animated one.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Shadowmage

[RedParadize]

Was wondering, could you fix the no cost SRB on the next patch? Not asking to balance anything, just the FuelTypes costPerDryTon would do.

Only if you have the time of course.

Thanks in advance!

[Shadowmage]

2 hours ago, RedParadize said:

Was wondering, could you fix the no cost SRB on the next patch? Not asking to balance anything, just the FuelTypes costPerDryTon would do.

Only if you have the time of course.

Thanks in advance!

Fixed   (Both dry mass and cost).  It now uses the values from the SSTU fuel-type definition as it should.

 

And also fixed the scaling of the SRB effects (at least for real-plumes; stock -should- be fixed, but untested... you guys will have to let me know on the stock effects, as I'm pretty much moving over to RealPlumes as the default now... its grown on me a bit)

Currently I have it scaling only with the diameter, and it merely adjusts the fixedScale value for RealPlumes.  For stock it will scale both emission and speed float-curve values... but as stated I haven't tested it yet.  Might also add support for scaling of audio effects... let me know if you think it is needed, shouldn't be too hard to add in.

 

Has anyone tested / ran into problems with the new engine-cluster plugin (the copy of the RS-25 that does not have the x1 in the name; hit next-layout and it'll add/remove engines/change layouts)?  Want to continue testing/fixing/improving the plugin before I have to swap everything over.

[StickyScissors]

Any particular reason why docking ports are fused into the capsules instead of removable? They say they work with stock ports, but they don't look good in the process. and i prefer tantares ports anyways

[Shadowmage]

15 hours ago, StickyScissors said:

Any particular reason why docking ports are fused into the capsules instead of removable? They say they work with stock ports, but they don't look good in the process. and i prefer tantares ports anyways

1.) The entire purpose of the mod is part-count reduction.  Integrating the docking port is an easy 1 part saved.

2.) They are added through MODEL nodes, so feel free to patch them with whatever model you want.  This was intentional;  if you don't like the ports, you can write yourself a patch to fix it. (remove the model, offset the attach node downwards, and remove the docking-port module and possibly light/animation modules)

Edited February 20, 2016 by Shadowmage

[JoseEduardo]

14 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Just fixed this bug in dev-code (or the patch for LH2 rather).  Fix will be available with tomorrows update.

 

None of the above?

Fixed / non-animated (too many bugs with the stock animated docking port), but not offset as far into the body as the shuttle docking port is.  Will likely be very similar to what you see on the current prototype parts, though perhaps moved inwards a bit (as the doors are becoming thicker).  The aim is that you shouldn't need special adapters on your station in order to dock the shuttle, but we'll see how that works out.

Edit:  The docking port itself is added through a MODEL node, so it could in theory be replaced through a patch with an animated one.

Sure, no problem, once I get back to KSP I'll take a look at making a patch to use a alternate docking port  (and back to RO too )

(btw, Buran is the first that comes to my mind, I simply find it so much handier to use it's extendable airlock )