[Min KSP: 1.12.2] Deep Space Exploration Vessels - Build NASA Inspired Ships In KSP

[Angelo Kerman]

For the Discovery II, always saw the cupola as the command module, while the hitchhicker served as the hab modules and stock structural tubes comprised the arms. For the Copernicus, I will use the Homestead from Pathfinder and give it an IVA. Nautilus will have custom hex hab and command modules as well.

At some point I want to make an animated centrifuge, but my immediate plans in the new year are to overhaul the trusses to help with part count. I think the radiators might be contributing to the performance hits, but they are based upon the stock radiator modules. I had some stock radiators on my test base and they slowed framerate to a crawl. I might have to create some advanced radiators so that you need fewer of them, and hopefully cut down the number of parts and part modules needed.

The 1.875m tanks will be going away as separate parts but they'll be integrated into tank trusses and likely stretched to fit their entire length. No more toggling the end styles. I might separate out the 3.75/2.5 toggleable tanks as well, but keep the option to switch between stock orange and gold.

And once I get the overhaul done, I can finally work on the Copernicus.

All this happens with deprecated parts so your ships won't go boom...

[Technologicat]

On 3.12.2015 klo, lynwoodm said:

See what I mean: Just what Kerbin needs, another Duna Interplanetary Craft:

Cool!

Also funny how similar problems inspire similar solutions. (That, and maybe The Martian. But a design along these general lines simply makes a lot of sense.) Built this back in November:

(This one uses DSEV, NF, MRS, KPBS, SCANsat, Asteroid Day. There's also an ALCOR-based lander docked at the aft, but technically speaking it's not part of the interplanetary craft.)

 

On 13.12.2015 klo, Angel-125 said:

Yeah, not sure what's causing this. One thing I know can slow frame rates is shiny textures. I checked, the hex trusses don't have shiny textures on them. The other thing that might be causing it are the multiple mesh options similar to B9. There's a lot of mesh to render in the frame and "chicken wire" mounting racks.

One thing to check is try crating your 200-part craft without the hex trusses, or without the fuel tanks. That might tell you what type of part is causing the issues.

Good idea, I'll try that.

The pic above shows the craft in question. Most of the fuel tanks come from NF, but there are some FLM-1800 inside the trusses.

I realize it could be also one of the other mods causing the performance drop, but based on other craft with NF, MRS, SCANsat or Asteroid Day parts, this seems unlikely. KPBS is somewhat of a question mark, as I haven't yet built any large bases that would stress the part count, but here it's just three habitats and three greenhouses (for show; no life-support mods installed yet), and at least toggling the transparent pod option has no effect on the performance. Then I remembered your post mentioning a performance issue in DSEV, and seeing this is so far my only large craft that has DSEV parts...

I'll test when I have the time and report back what I find.

 

On 13.12.2015 klo, Angel-125 said:

As an alternative, those FLM-450, 900, and 1800 tanks fit nicely inside the trusses, as does the compact ISRU and WB-2 fusion reactor.

This wasn't addressed to me, but... the compact ISRU and the reactor fit there, too?!

Need to try this in a future design. Thanks for the tip!

 

On 13.12.2015 klo, Angel-125 said:

I'm thinking that if the hex trusses are causing issues, I will redesign them, deprecating the old parts. I'd start by replacing the "chicken wire" equipment rack meshes with transparent textures to cut down on rendering (assuming that helps), do away with the tripple-length truss, and resize them to be slightly larger than the FLM-450, 900, and 1800 tanks. That way, no vestibule would be needed. Then I might make variants with the fuel tanks inside, and ditch the 1.875m tanks (they'd make a return with MOLE most likely). So you'd have quarter, half, full, and double trusses that are hollow, and quarter, half, and full trusses that are closed but have integrated fuel tanks. You'd have six sides to attach things to with the fuel tank trusses and a variable number of sides to attach stuff to with the hollow trusses.

Also, the FLM-450, 900, and 1800 tanks have style options for 1.25m and 0.625m. Does anybody use those sizes? I might do away with them as style options but put them into an optional fuel tank addon pack as separate parts.

Sounds sensible.

Why remove the triple-length? I think there may be a slight issue with the positioning of the nodes, if one wishes to space things equally in it (if no one else has reported this, I can test again and check it's not a PEBKAC issue), but it's useful for saving on part count.

 

[ComatoseJedi]

3 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

For the Discovery II, always saw the cupola as the command module, while the hitchhicker served as the hab modules and stock structural tubes comprised the arms. For the Copernicus, I will use the Homestead from Pathfinder and give it an IVA. Nautilus will have custom hex hab and command modules as well.

At some point I want to make an animated centrifuge, but my immediate plans in the new year are to overhaul the trusses to help with part count. I think the radiators might be contributing to the performance hits, but they are based upon the stock radiator modules. I had some stock radiators on my test base and they slowed framerate to a crawl. I might have to create some advanced radiators so that you need fewer of them, and hopefully cut down the number of parts and part modules needed.

The 1.875m tanks will be going away as separate parts but they'll be integrated into tank trusses and likely stretched to fit their entire length. No more toggling the end styles. I might separate out the 3.75/2.5 toggleable tanks as well, but keep the option to switch between stock orange and gold.

And once I get the overhaul done, I can finally work on the Copernicus.

All this happens with deprecated parts so your ships won't go boom...

As of now, I've tried Porkjet's inflatable habs as the cm. It's the same idea as the original conception art entails. Inflatable and all that, just not to thrilled about how it looks. I guess I'm a gold foil fan to the bone. If you slap gold foil on it, it's officially ready for space. 

 

[123nick]

hey, ever thought of using the stock heat system instead of custom radiator modules+heat system for your parts?

[Angelo Kerman]

51 minutes ago, 123nick said:

hey, ever thought of using the stock heat system instead of custom radiator modules+heat system for your parts?

Actually, I do. DSEV's radiator plugin code is built on top of the stock radiator modules. It simply adds the option for active cooling.

[123nick]

35 minutes ago, Angel-125 said:

Actually, I do. DSEV's radiator plugin code is built on top of the stock radiator modules. It simply adds the option for active cooling.

oh, ok. neat. anyways, i think ive been having troubles with your pathfinder addon, i think i made a post on that topic so u can just reply to me there, i guess.

 

[JoseEduardo]

How's Copernicus progressing?

[Angelo Kerman]

It's on hold. I won't be doing anything with it for until the overhaul is done next year. Currently I'm taking a break from Pathfinder to do some stuff for my much neglected MOLE. Once I am done overhauling the trusses and tanks and hopefully improve performance then I can do more with the Copernicus.

[DBowman]

In case it's interesting for anyone I just came across NASA Discovery II proposal paper

[Jimbodiah]

Angel, I launched a huge station and now a heavy engine section. One had a DR-375 docking port, and the other a HexPort docking system (yeah, my bad). I sent up an adapter iwht one of each port that would go between the two ship sections, but none of these ships want to dock (DR375 to DR375, or hexport to hexport). Both ends have power/Ec and I tried rotating every 60° as maybe that was an issue. Any idea what I am doing wrong?

 

Hmmm... tried with a test ship, and when I bump into the hexport, it starts to bounce up and down like it's repelling and them attracting (at around a 0.5Hz rate). Something is up with the ports. The same test with two clampotron Sr. behaves normally.

edit: CLampotron Sr to hexport seems to work fine.

 

Grrr... Problem solved.... I embedded a probe core through the port on both the adapter I sent up and one of the craft... these ports do not seem to like that. Going to suicide burn and watch it explode before building a new ship 

Edited December 30, 2015 by Jimbodiah

[Jimbodiah]

Angel, would it be possible to add a heat element to your reactors? They are kind of OP right now

[Angelo Kerman]

4 hours ago, Jimbodiah said:

Angel, would it be possible to add a heat element to your reactors? They are kind of OP right now

They should already be generating heat, here's the config for the large fusion reactor:

MODULE
{
    name = ModuleFusionReactor
    ConverterName = Fusion Reactor
    StartActionName = Start Reactor
    StopActionName = Stop Reactor
    FillAmount = 1.0
    ecNeededToStart = 2000
        
    AutoShutdown = true
    GeneratesHeat = true
    TemperatureModifier = 60
    UseSpecializationBonus = true
    SpecialistHeatFactor = 0.2
    SpecialistEfficiencyFactor = 0.1
    SpecialistShutoffTemp = 0.5
    DefaultShutoffTemp = 0.3
    Specialty = Engineer
    EfficiencyBonus = 1.0
        
    INPUT_RESOURCE
    {
        ResourceName = FusionPellets
        Ratio = 0.001
        FlowMode = ALL_VESSEL
    }

    OUTPUT_RESOURCE
    {
        ResourceName = ElectricCharge
        Ratio = 3000
        DumpExcess = false
    }
}

I might need to tweak things with the new heat system in place but the reactors are indeed generating heat.

Edited January 2, 2016 by Angel-125

[Denko666]

Hey Angel,

I got a little issue with the DR-375 Dock-o-tron, they seem to be missing the decouple/undock action in the rightClick menu when in flight. Craft was assembled with 2 dock-o-trons facing each other in the VAB.

Is this behaviour as intended or could this be a bug? 

 

[Angelo Kerman]

1 hour ago, Denko666 said:

Hey Angel,

I got a little issue with the DR-375 Dock-o-tron, they seem to be missing the decouple/undock action in the rightClick menu when in flight. Craft was assembled with 2 dock-o-trons facing each other in the VAB.

Is this behaviour as intended or could this be a bug? 

 

Thanks for letting me know. I should have some updates after I finish up Pathfinder's release. DSEV is due for an overhaul..

[Denko666]

Screenshot: https://flic.kr/p/CDgpCn

KSP.log output during: nothing :/

 

[Denko666]

is 'WBModuleDockingNode' something thats inside a DLL? Or should it also be a .cfg file? If its a file, i can't find it in the DSEV directories or the WBtools tree

My apologies if i keep returning to it, but i'm stuck if these things can't decouple. So i thought i'd give it a try to troubleshoot it myself.

[Angelo Kerman]

I double-checked, the large docking ring should have this:

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleDockingNode
        referenceAttachNode = top
        nodeType = size3
        minDistanceToReEngage = 1f
        acquireRange = 0.5
        acquireForce = 3.0
        captureRange = 0.06
    }

    MODULE
    {
        name = WBIDockingNodeHelper
    }

Edited January 3, 2016 by Angel-125

[Denko666]

darnit, thats what it has so that cant be it

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

I double-checked, the large docking ring should have this:

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleDockingNode
        referenceAttachNode = top
        nodeType = size3
        minDistanceToReEngage = 1f
        acquireRange = 0.5
        acquireForce = 3.0
        captureRange = 0.06
    }

    MODULE
    {
        name = WBIDockingNodeHelper
    }

 

[Angelo Kerman]

Ok, only thing I can think of is to remove WBIDockingNodeHelper.

[123nick]

On 12/16/2015 at 4:43 PM, Angel-125 said:

For the Discovery II, always saw the cupola as the command module, while the hitchhicker served as the hab modules and stock structural tubes comprised the arms. For the Copernicus, I will use the Homestead from Pathfinder and give it an IVA. Nautilus will have custom hex hab and command modules as well.

At some point I want to make an animated centrifuge, but my immediate plans in the new year are to overhaul the trusses to help with part count. I think the radiators might be contributing to the performance hits, but they are based upon the stock radiator modules. I had some stock radiators on my test base and they slowed framerate to a crawl. I might have to create some advanced radiators so that you need fewer of them, and hopefully cut down the number of parts and part modules needed.

The 1.875m tanks will be going away as separate parts but they'll be integrated into tank trusses and likely stretched to fit their entire length. No more toggling the end styles. I might separate out the 3.75/2.5 toggleable tanks as well, but keep the option to switch between stock orange and gold.

And once I get the overhaul done, I can finally work on the Copernicus.

All this happens with deprecated parts so your ships won't go boom...

so no more 1.875 meter option on the tanks with adjustable diameters?  

[Denko666]

https://flic.kr/p/CH8pei

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

Ok, only thing I can think of is to remove WBIDockingNodeHelper.

YAY!

[Angelo Kerman]

59 minutes ago, 123nick said:

so no more 1.875 meter option on the tanks with adjustable diameters?  

Adjutable tank diameters are causing trouble when people have parts attached to them. I'm also concerned about performance issues. It could be that all the didden meshes are slowing down rendering times, which results in reduced framerates. Even though the mesh is invisible, I suspect the the game still has to check to see if it should render it. It is a guess, however. I need some data from people who use, say, just the tanks and not the fusion engine and radiator panels. Do you see a drop in framerates as well? I have recently learned how to turn off par modules so they don't receive notifications from the game, and that also may help. That would mean the mesh switch code could do its thing and then turn off, leaving the part in the desired configuration.

For the 1.875m tanks, the new Titan line in MOLE has them along with the 2.5m Titan II, so having them in DSEV would be redundant. I don't see many people using the 1.25m and 0.625m versions of the tanks so if anything they will be available separately. Plus, my texturing skills have improved and the existing non-orange tanks are kinda fugly...

[Dix2lespace]

hi! It don't works for me. The start loading stop at "module manager loading" with  KSP 1.05 + deep exploration vessels mod only . Only this mod bug. I haven't any bugs with a couple of other mods. Thanks for helps 

[Angelo Kerman]

On 1/4/2016 at 3:40 PM, Dix2lespace said:

hi! It don't works for me. The start loading stop at "module manager loading" with  KSP 1.05 + deep exploration vessels mod only . Only this mod bug. I haven't any bugs with a couple of other mods. Thanks for helps 

Make sure to install everything from the DSEV mod. Don't leave anything out; you need Community Resource Pack, the ModuleManager dll, DSEV, 000WildBlueTools, and the like.

[Jimbodiah]

Angel, I am getting a lot of these errors:

[Warning]: File 'C:\Games\Steam\steamapps\common\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\WildBlueIndustries\DSEV\Plugins/PluginData/DSEVUtils/Settings.cfg' does not exist

note the / and \ are mixed in that link.

also tons of these: [ERR 21:38:57.653] Input is null. See the attached logs.

Spoiler

http://kerbal.nl/dsev_null.rar