[1.12.5] Cormorant Aeronology - Mk3 Space Shuttle

[macc92]

3 hours ago, Pak said:

Let me do a quick functions check with you here to make sure we're on the same page.

1. Bay doors closed. Solar panels cannot deploy while stowed

2. Open bay and deploy panels

3. Close bay. Solar panels should now read 0.0 sun exposure, blocked by mk3cargobay

that is the result I get when I use the Mk.3 piece at the rear, not with the CA parts

with CA parts, the panels deploy with the bay closed no problem, and exhibit the 'exposed' behaviour

 

2 minutes ago, ZobrAA said:

Can you tell where and what need to be size 3 for a quick hand made fix?

I would also like to know 

and thank you for every ounce of effort put into this mod @Pak

[Pak]

Changing Node Stack Top to 3 will do it

Should look like this

node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.0, -0.515, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3

[Pak]

This makes me happy.

 

I've had this idea so I had to see if it would work. I've been trying to figure out a way to do a large satellite launcher like the IUS for a while.

Just like the beast it's named after, the idea struck suddenly while I was doing something completely different. Kraken-Tech! If you're unfamiliar with the concept you should check out EJ_SA on twitch, but in short it's a way of making moving pieces in stock using docking ports and part collision to hold separate craft together and form a working hinge.

Still in the idea stage but after lots of messing around it's pretty reliable so far.

Check it out!

[ZobrAA]

1 hour ago, Pak said:

've had this idea so I had to see if it would work. I've been trying to figure out a way to do a large satellite launcher like the IUS for a while.

Just like the beast it's named after, the idea struck suddenly while I was doing something completely different. Kraken-Tech! If you're unfamiliar with the concept you should check out EJ_SA on twitch, but in short it's a way of making moving pieces in stock using docking ports and part collision to hold separate craft together and form a working hinge.

Still in the idea stage but after lots of messing around it's pretty reliable so far.

Check it out!

Cool! I'm thinking a lot about similar support equipment these days. And now this perfectness! But... this is only for 1.25m part interface. Maybe you can add something more independent of bottop piece size of satellite? Like maybe solid backplate on hinge, that cal hold much wider payload, like my LittlePony?

 

[Pak]

 

Update 1.1.3 posted on Spacedock

• New Part - External Tank Decoupler added. - Texture is mostly a placeholder until I know what else is sharing a map with it.
• SAS added to MMU
• Shuttle body node changed to hopefully resolve some issues.
• A bunch of small edits/tweaks that I don't really remember!

 

 

On 7/13/2016 at 4:08 AM, ZobrAA said:

Maybe you can add something more independent of bottom piece size of satellite?

Yeah I'm looking at other mounting options

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

I was waiting for this! It's very nice. I do wish I didn't have to put struts everywhere, though. A couple things I noticed:

The decoupler is not working as a fuel line for me. It doesn't seem to have anything about it in the config either.

Additionally, the shuttle lifting body has a node on it that I assumed would be for the decoupler, but isn't.

Also, instead of having two versions of the lifting body for the different flags you made, you could just have a flag module on it that lets the user set their own.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Z3R0_0NL1N3

[TimothyC]

6 hours ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Also, instead of having two versions of the lifting body for the different flags you made, you could just have a flag module on it that lets the user set their own.

One of the lifting bodies has a flat back end for Buran style lifters, while the other has an angled back for Shuttle Style lifters.

[Pak]

Yeah the fuel crossfeed wasn't working with the stock modules for whatever reason so I took it out for now. Forgot to remove the description bit.

 

The little bottom node is for using the separate lifting body panels instead of the normal length. The decoupler doesn't really need a node of its own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Draconomial]

Release thread when?

[Cuky]

@Pak Is there some mistake with where attachment node is on the airlock? When I choose extended version it extends into the cockpit instead of cargo bay

[FlyMeToTheMinmus]

@Cuky That's for if you want to use the offset tool to move the airlock further down the cargo bay, similar to how the airlock was placed during the mir docking missions:

You can see the docking adapter on the shuttle is a lot further from the cockpit than usual.

Edit: Sorry, I may have misread your question, if you already knew the above, you can just use the offset tool to move the airlock down the cargo bay after choosing the extension. Helps you customise exactly how far it extends too.

Edited July 21, 2016 by FlyMeToTheMinmus

[MrMeeb]

For the more observant shuttle pilots, I present you a little thing I've been working on for the past couple of days: a more accurate version of the shuttle cargo bay. It brings with it a couple of improvements, including radiators and a new animation, in which the doors open one at a time:

However, the main reason I decided to make it will be explained in the picture:

As you can see, the stock Mk3 part is too short! 

Currently busy installing Unity, so I can drag it into the game, kicking and screaming. Once I've done that, I'll make an extended version of the heatshielding (or make my own mini piece...not sure) and release it!  

Edited July 21, 2016 by MrMeeb

[Pak]

@MrMeeb Looks great, man.

It would probably be easiest to just scale the smallest extension bit in the cfg to fit. Otherwise you could send the model over and I can make an extension to fit and send it back.

Either way I'd be happy to post a link to your thread/spacedock on the front page once you're done.

 

@Cuky FlymetotheMinmus got ya already, but yes that's right. As far as I know you can't adjust nodes with mesh switching like that so it's purely a visual thing to cover the gap if you want to pull the airlock further out.

[Cuky]

@Pak & @FlyMeToTheMinmus Thanks for your answers. I didn't know that airlock was placed further back for Mir missions.

[MrMeeb]

19 hours ago, Pak said:

@MrMeeb Looks great, man.

It would probably be easiest to just scale the smallest extension bit in the cfg to fit. Otherwise you could send the model over and I can make an extension to fit and send it back.

Either way I'd be happy to post a link to your thread/spacedock on the front page once you're done.

Thanks! Interestingly, the KSP bay is also a lot deeper than the original one (in terms of cargo capacity), which would explain why that pallet I showed a while back would touch the bottom of the actual shuttle, but not the KSP one. I guess it must be a lot more wiring and structural reinforcement.

Edit: Trying it sure does look a bit odd (possibly a tad over-dramatic, but you get the idea)

I'll probably send it over to you. Cfg editing would stretch textures, I think. Thanks for the offer!

Edit 2: It's in the game! Scale is still slightly off, colours, are slightly too dark, and nodes need to be done, but yeah. Also, due to the added length, the stock wings-size wings aren't an option. Here, they are tweakscaled, and it mostly works. Probably will have quite a large impact on the amount of lift this thing has. I feel bad for posting my progress in this thread, but you are the people who would be bothered by this, and I don't think it's right to start a thread for one part:

Might try normal and specular mapping the radiators, then I wanna make the shuttle's Ku-Band and the SpaceHab + Lab. Probably make a thread at that point

Edited July 22, 2016 by MrMeeb

[trooperMNG]

6 hours ago, MrMeeb said:

Thanks! Interestingly, the KSP bay is also a lot deeper than the original one (in terms of cargo capacity), which would explain why that pallet I showed a while back would touch the bottom of the actual shuttle, but not the KSP one. I guess it must be a lot more wiring and structural reinforcement.

Edit: Trying it sure does look a bit odd (possibly a tad over-dramatic, but you get the idea)

I'll probably send it over to you. Cfg editing would stretch textures, I think. Thanks for the offer!

Edit 2: It's in the game! Scale is still slightly off, colours, are slightly too dark, and nodes need to be done, but yeah. Also, due to the added length, the stock wings-size wings aren't an option. Here, they are tweakscaled, and it mostly works. Probably will have quite a large impact on the amount of lift this thing has. I feel bad for posting my progress in this thread, but you are the people who would be bothered by this, and I don't think it's right to start a thread for one part:

Might try normal and specular mapping the radiators, then I wanna make the shuttle's Ku-Band and the SpaceHab + Lab. Probably make a thread at that point

woooo that cargo bay is sexy as hell. Now that you make me notice the difference in cargo bay lenght, I can only see my shuttles as too short. It's a once-seen-can't-unseen kinda thing. Like the mouth/mustache on Kim Possible

[Pak]

@MrMeeb No worries. More shuttle stuff is good in my book.

How long is the extended bit? Would it still look good to just match the size of the CRG-100 plus a CRG 25, or would that be too big?

 

Also. does anyone have a request for what I should look at finishing next? Here's a review of my old plans with updates

Cargo Bay texture switches (including the back of the cockpit to match)

ET Decoupler

ELC pallet

A hybrid of the Spacelab style pallet and meshswitchable ICC-VLD pallet to create a modular way to partition the cargo bay. 

KrakenTech IUS mount

EDO supply module

Spacelab (MrMeeb might be doing this?)

something to mount small satellites onto

Assorted KIS tool boxes and other doodads

Edited July 22, 2016 by Pak

[MrMeeb]

1 hour ago, Pak said:

@MrMeeb No worries. More shuttle stuff is good in my book.

How long is the extended bit? Would it still look good to just match the size of the CRG-100 plus a CRG 25, or would that be too big?

Spacelab (MrMeeb might be doing this?)

It's about 3/4 of the size of a CRG 25 and, having tried that combo, it just looked too long, so yeah.

I'm certainly gonna try Spacelab and it's tunnel pieces, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't or something. Maybe just bump it down to the bottom of the list, and I'll put it to the top of mine, and we'll see how mine turns out?  

[Wahgineer]

In all honesty, @MrMeeb, it would probably be best to just make the cargo bay the same size as the CRG-100. It would fit in better, and wouldn't require tweakscaled wings, special heat-tile-shield pieces, etc. Just my 2¢

[MrMeeb]

5 minutes ago, awsumindyman said:

In all honesty, @MrMeeb, it would probably be best to just make the cargo bay the same size as the CRG-100. It would fit in better, and wouldn't require tweakscaled wings, special heat-tile-shield pieces, etc. Just my 2¢

The problem is that would go against the main motivation for the part. I'll probably make some scaled up wings using the cfgs and bundle them or something, so it's easier. Could make an alternate that's normal scale some time later down the road though. I just noticed my shuttles were too stubby, couldn't unsee it, and fixed it

Edited July 22, 2016 by MrMeeb

[StevieC]

I think that this discovery @MrMeeb has made may explain why @TheReadPanda had so much difficulty making a usable shuttle for his KSPTV project of building the International Space Station in KSP

[MrMeeb]

Began working on Spacelab today. I seem to have a bad habit of choosing things with either no orthographic drawings, or unusably low-res ones, so I just have to go off actual images, which there are also fairly few of. But hey, I'm trying. It's 2.5m in diameter, and the end points are 0.9375m

If anyone has any schematic-like drawings of Spacelab, please please please send them my way

Edited July 23, 2016 by MrMeeb

[Pak]

22 minutes ago, MrMeeb said:

no orthographic drawings, or unusably low-res ones, so I just have to go off actual images, which there are also fairly few of.

The life of a 3d modeler summed up right here. Looking good though

 

I'll add a front attach node to my airlock for tunnels and stuff.

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

Wow, @MrMeeb's parts look awesome! I sort of didn't mind the stubby-ness personally, it looked more kerbal; so I too would like to see a stock-sized version of the part. A couple general questions, however.

How would an un-stubby shuttle fit with the DIRECT LV tank and SRBs? Could you perhaps create a MM config that modifies that to be longer?

Additionally, about the DIRECT tank, I tried config editting that to use standard liquid fuel and oxidizer, but I have a feeling it's too heavy, or I am incompetent at shuttle design, because I've never gotten a stable shuttle that gets into orbit.

Finally, is the extended airlock supposed to just be dragged using the tool? I'd sort of want a separate node. Honestly, I think that separate parts instead of mesh switches is more stockalike overall, so, while I'm sure there's a way to edit the config to separate the parts, how would I go about doing so?

[MrMeeb]

38 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Wow, @MrMeeb's parts look awesome! I sort of didn't mind the stubby-ness personally, it looked more kerbal; so I too would like to see a stock-sized version of the part. A couple general questions, however.

How would an un-stubby shuttle fit with the DIRECT LV tank and SRBs? Could you perhaps create a MM config that modifies that to be longer?

Thanks!  

I'm not quite sure yet, so I'll definitely look into it. I've already found the the DIRECT SRBs are better scaled up by around 18% anyway, but I expect the extra length will mean it needs a bit of tweaking to look right. However, in terms of d/V, it won't have an effect - the bay is the same weight as a CRG-100.

40 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Finally, is the extended airlock supposed to just be dragged using the tool? I'd sort of want a separate node. Honestly, I think that separate parts instead of mesh switches is more stockalike overall, so, while I'm sure there's a way to edit the config to separate the parts, how would I go about doing so?

Pak said a few posts back that it requires dragging because node position can't be changed on the fly, or something. Looking at the model, the default state is the extended one, so if you want to make a seperate extended piece, duplicate the Airlock.cfg, give the part a new name, and disable/remove the FSmeshSwitch module. You'll have to reposition the node (use Node Helper to give you coordinates), but it should work fine