[1.3.1] Prakasa Aeroworks

[akron]

Nice IVAs. I really like the ion engines and effects. You last images look very Star Trek

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 4/15/2016 at 9:43 AM, theonegalen said:

Have you considered using the ASET Props and Avionics packs for IVA props? It might make the interiors even more beautiful.

Yeah, mostly haven't jumped on it because of how time consuming IVA prop arrangement is. I may yet do that overhaul though. Presently I'm fixing some things with the pod in the post above (the lighting is rather strange and doesn't reflect well) and working on a config for an inline RTG. Heating behavior appears to have changed slightly in 1.1, which solved one problem with it and created a new one. Fuel tanks and a battery bank will also be coming next time around.

 

Meanwhile, current adventures in modeling:

Someone told me my 2.5m ion looked like the bow of Mass Effect's Normandy, so I just had to develop a pod or two from the skeleton

Spoiler

(1.25m and 2.5m respectively? Could do whatever.)

 

Fuel tanks, battery, RTG/Radiator combo..., Wings?

Spoiler

 

Failed attempt at a railcar-like observation dome turns into an inline 2.5m bridge, is complimented by a b-29ish bow (which might see a 1.25m version).

Spoiler

Day 25: The submarines have accepted me as one of their own.

 

[SpaceMouse]

Wow, amazing work.  was going to try my hand at command pods but between this and Mk2 expansion....

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

2 hours ago, SpaceMouse said:

Wow, amazing work.  was going to try my hand at command pods but between this and Mk2 expansion....

Do it anyway. There's something downright cathartic about it. I'm probably not ideal to direct you since I do all my modelling with splines, which no one else seems to, but I'll answer questions on the particulars

[SpaceMouse]

26 minutes ago, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

Do it anyway. There's something downright cathartic about it. I'm probably not ideal to direct you since I do all my modelling with splines, which no one else seems to, but I'll answer questions on the particulars

There's at least a few i can think of that there aren't a huge number of. Next thing i need to do is IVA's, and figure out these annoyingly awesome part transparency features.

I enjoy modeling. Not much for textures though.

Edited April 21, 2016 by SpaceMouse

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

6 hours ago, SpaceMouse said:

There's at least a few i can think of that there aren't a huge number of. Next thing i need to do is IVA's, and figure out these annoyingly awesome part transparency features.

I enjoy modeling. Not much for textures though.

I do my modelling in sketchup where this particular tactic is uniquely approachable, but you may be able to replicate it elsewhere: I just model the entire thing together, inside and out, as one "realistic" model, then cut the inner skin from the outer skin along the seams created by the windows. The result is a perfectly matching IVA and EVA version. Since the windows don't have a thickness, I align based on the inner bezel of the window matching the outer bezel on the exterior. This has to be done manually (in theory you could do it with snaps in 3ds, but I usually just do it in unity) but is easy to varify by inspecting the window frames for proper alignment and checking the glass for proper thin-ness. If the windows perfectly coincide, then they should appear in unity like one way class with no visible gap between them. Perfect alignment with a properly sized IVA.

 

Basically its all done as one whole and split into the iva and external. I'll post pictures to clarify what I mean in a bit once I hop on my actual computer

 

 

Edit: 

Forgive the glorious Microsoft Paint. I promise I don't do textures this way, although it might be fun to try.

 

Starting from a blank like this, modeled however I modeled it. provides actual shape of the pod

<Modelling happens>

Foreground: "Whole" model of interior and exterior together. The fuselage (inside and outside) is one object. Furniture is divided into several objects  by region. Unnecessary, but convenient. I usually have a "decor" group, a "furnishing" group, a "panel" group, and a "detail" group, with decor being objects like the telescopes etc, furnishing being furniture, panel being the actual panel geometries, and detail being things like emissive lights etc. 

 

<We cut the interior from the exterior by way of the window seams>

Interior IVA model: The interior skin with the unnecessary external faces deleted manually. This is what will fit inside our actual exterior model, meeting it where the windows are. Note they extend out from the IVA and in from the exterior. This is the thickness of the blank from before, and it provides some actual apparent structure and prevents you from accidentally cheating with an interior as big or bigger than the exterior.

 

 

The leftover exterior  V V V

Note that the windows here are inset. The windows on the interior and exterior will occupy the same space later, this is how we know we did it right. Since non-facing normals aren't rendered in KSP, this doesn't cause flashing problems.

The remaining, non-facing "interior" of the exterior , offering some insight into how we did the actual cut: V V V

 

<We put the interior and exterior models back together along the seams we cut them on. Windows now coincide.>

Everything inside the window is now one model, while everything outside is now another. This is our IVA and our exterior respectively. Note that they fit together at the window seam. I usually do this part in unity and eyeball it, as if you watch along the window rims while you're doing this you can bring it down to a lot of points of precision. For this alignment to remain true when exporting, the origin of the IVA and exterior must coincide as unity defines them, though their angles must be different because reasons. This is easy enough to do: Do the alignment as they are, then create a new GameObject and place it at the same coords as the exterior origin and change its angle as necessary. Simply re-parent the interior parts to this new aligned origin, and you should be set as alignment goes. In theory you could also align the parts with snap and move their origins together in 3ds, then export them together. This is arguably more precise, but I prefer not to as it makes it a little harder to keep track of what belongs to what.  If you have several windows at several different angles, its easy to tell when things are aligned just by looking at the seams and comparing them. If everything seems to meet regardless of angle and parallax, your'e good.

 

Nested IVA in Exterior from behind (rear panel removed for visibility):

 

Nested IVA in external, oblique X-ray edition

That's how I position my IVAs exactly against the exteriors. They're simply one model made into and interior and exterior shell then aligned back into the form they belong in. I came up with that technique on the fly simply because it was the easiest way to deal with KSP's system in sketchup; I've not actually seen anyone else do it and I've no idea if anyone else does. It definitely makes scaling and shape easy, and I'd recommend it if it can be made practical in whatever program you're using. I've never actually tried modelling an IVA wholly separate from the exterior, but it seems to me that it would be a miserable experience of constant trial and error.

 

Edited April 22, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[Gatrnerd]

On 4/21/2016 at 5:45 PM, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

I do my modelling in sketchup where this particular tactic is uniquely approachable, but you may be able to replicate it elsewhere: I just model the entire thing together, inside and out, as one "realistic" model, then cut the inner skin from the outer skin along the seams created by the windows. The result is a perfectly matching IVA and EVA version. Since the windows don't have a thickness, I align based on the inner bezel of the window matching the outer bezel on the exterior. This has to be done manually (in theory you could do it with snaps in 3ds, but I usually just do it in unity) but is easy to varify by inspecting the window frames for proper alignment and checking the glass for proper thin-ness. If the windows perfectly coincide, then they should appear in unity like one way class with no visible gap between them. Perfect alignment with a properly sized IVA.

 

Basically its all done as one whole and split into the iva and external. I'll post pictures to clarify what I mean in a bit once I hop on my actual computer

 

 

Edit: 

Forgive the glorious Microsoft Paint. I promise I don't do textures this way, although it might be fun to try.

 

Starting from a blank like this, modeled however I modeled it. provides actual shape of the pod

<Modelling happens>

Foreground: "Whole" model of interior and exterior together. The fuselage (inside and outside) is one object. Furniture is divided into several objects  by region. Unnecessary, but convenient. I usually have a "decor" group, a "furnishing" group, a "panel" group, and a "detail" group, with decor being objects like the telescopes etc, furnishing being furniture, panel being the actual panel geometries, and detail being things like emissive lights etc. 

 

<We cut the interior from the exterior by way of the window seams>

Interior IVA model: The interior skin with the unnecessary external faces deleted manually. This is what will fit inside our actual exterior model, meeting it where the windows are. Note they extend out from the IVA and in from the exterior. This is the thickness of the blank from before, and it provides some actual apparent structure and prevents you from accidentally cheating with an interior as big or bigger than the exterior.

 

 

The leftover exterior  V V V

Note that the windows here are inset. The windows on the interior and exterior will occupy the same space later, this is how we know we did it right. Since non-facing normals aren't rendered in KSP, this doesn't cause flashing problems.

The remaining, non-facing "interior" of the exterior , offering some insight into how we did the actual cut: V V V

 

<We put the interior and exterior models back together along the seams we cut them on. Windows now coincide.>

Everything inside the window is now one model, while everything outside is now another. This is our IVA and our exterior respectively. Note that they fit together at the window seam. I usually do this part in unity and eyeball it, as if you watch along the window rims while you're doing this you can bring it down to a lot of points of precision. For this alignment to remain true when exporting, the origin of the IVA and exterior must coincide as unity defines them, though their angles must be different because reasons. This is easy enough to do: Do the alignment as they are, then create a new GameObject and place it at the same coords as the exterior origin and change its angle as necessary. Simply re-parent the interior parts to this new aligned origin, and you should be set as alignment goes. In theory you could also align the parts with snap and move their origins together in 3ds, then export them together. This is arguably more precise, but I prefer not to as it makes it a little harder to keep track of what belongs to what.  If you have several windows at several different angles, its easy to tell when things are aligned just by looking at the seams and comparing them. If everything seems to meet regardless of angle and parallax, your'e good.

 

Nested IVA in Exterior from behind (rear panel removed for visibility):

 

Nested IVA in external, oblique X-ray edition

That's how I position my IVAs exactly against the exteriors. They're simply one model made into and interior and exterior shell then aligned back into the form they belong in. I came up with that technique on the fly simply because it was the easiest way to deal with KSP's system in sketchup; I've not actually seen anyone else do it and I've no idea if anyone else does. It definitely makes scaling and shape easy, and I'd recommend it if it can be made practical in whatever program you're using. I've never actually tried modelling an IVA wholly separate from the exterior, but it seems to me that it would be a miserable experience of constant trial and error.

 

I'm guessing you're using Google Sketchup there.

Still, nice to see more 2.5m aircraft/spaceplane parts since I'm annoyed there's nothing to fill that niche in the stock game.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

12 hours ago, Shinji-The-Kerbonaut said:

I'm guessing you're using Google Sketchup there.

Still, nice to see more 2.5m aircraft/spaceplane parts since I'm annoyed there's nothing to fill that niche in the stock game.

Figure if its good enough for Bac9 then its good enough for me. For whatever reason it's a lot more natural to me to model that way, and the merging mechanics make IVA cutting/combining much easier to do than it would be otherwise.

 

Edit: Fuel tanks

There's one for Xenon, Liquid fuel, and LFO, each with a different color stripe. Unfortunately they all have the same color at the moment because I didn't get to cheat the way I expected to be able to, and its Spring in Alaska, so the sun is almost totally up and I either go to bed now or not at all tonight.

Edited April 23, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[SpaceMouse]

Interesting method for doing windows! I haven't done any windows yet but i used a boolean in blender to cut out space in my conforming tank for 1.25 engine mounts. Looks like your essentially doing the same thing. My original understanding was sketchup was very limited in nature but it appears that statement may be out of date. I had to remake most of the mesh in the area anyway after boolianing (is that a word?) since blender didn't do a particularly efficient job of matching up poly's and verticies.

Edited April 23, 2016 by SpaceMouse

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 4/23/2016 at 6:31 AM, SpaceMouse said:

Interesting method for doing windows! I haven't done any windows yet but i used a boolean in blender to cut out space in my conforming tank for 1.25 engine mounts. Looks like your essentially doing the same thing. My original understanding was sketchup was very limited in nature but it appears that statement may be out of date. I had to remake most of the mesh in the area anyway after boolianing (is that a word?) since blender didn't do a particularly efficient job of matching up poly's and verticies.

Sketchup isn't so much technically limited as it is tool-lacking. Aside from a few really neat ones like follow me, stock sketchup is bare bones. It's a shame because, true to the name, the line-based modeling is in and of itself very free and intuitive. Plugins make up for this, however, and sketchup makes acquiring and installing them downright painless. Personally, I use BZ toolbar (an absolute must), curviloft, round corner, and joint push/pull. (Along with a lot of manual line dragging). My actual workflow looks something like this:

That's the skeleton of what became Bhatak Naga by way of a series of lofts. Basically it's just splines stretched around a tree of various lines and circles. Most everything I've made has been designed and skinned this way, with the exception of some of the simpler stuff. I usually just doodle until I fall in love with a certain profile, then set to lofting.

A simpler example of Ankhen, the WIP pod you've seen a few times in above posts:

 

To be clear this isn't exactly a golden method. It tends to result in more polygons than are really necessary. I simply don't care that much; I'm not really building any of this to run fast on low end computers. On a more annoying note though, it tends to create bad normals and inconsistent geometry, which usually has to be fixed manually, line by line. It so happens that creatively I seem to operate this way when it comes to spacial reasoning, so for me I stick to it because its how I do my best work. It also facilitates sleek, organic shapes that can be very difficult to attain otherwise.

 

Here's some more eye candy from .5:

 

.5 itself might be a bit though. I've been hearing requests for intakes (which I've yet to start), and I'm planning on including a few more pods because I'm addicted to pods. The trouble is they're labor intensive. I'll probably skip the inline bridge for this update and just add the b-29 ish one, but even then I'm probably adding two sizes of it, so that one alone will be some doing. Alternatively I could push .5 within the next couple of days with the fuel tanks, 1.25m ion, 2.5m ion, and Ankhen, advantage being that I'm home from college for the next few months, and moving out complications aside, I'll probably be throwing a bit less at this than I usually do as I'll be having far more of a life. I'd estimate no less than a 50% drop in productivity, though, if that. Turns out I really like doing this stuff. If I did that I could have .5 out as soon as I clean up a few config files and save the rest for later. As usual, open to any preferences.

[Kerenatus]

OMG, look at those cockpits and engines! Keep up the good work

[SpaceMouse]

I wanted to learn something i could expand into a full render/movie and/ or do bigger projects. Except for some of the more annoying details,  KSP mods are relatively simple to model. (At least what I've done thus far.) I've heard before sketchup tends to create extra polys, I wasn't even aware it could do UV mapping. Clearly I'm out of the loop.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SpaceMouse

[SpaceMouse]

With all the giant windows and telescopes this mod is just begging for a observatory/science lab.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SpaceMouse

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

5 hours ago, SpaceMouse said:

With all the giant windows and telescopes this mod is just begging for a observatory/science lab.

Bingo. I have one planned but have yet to come up with geometry I like. Current idea is straight up tube but with a constellation of hexagonal windows with small bezels. 

 

5 hours ago, SpaceMouse said:

I wanted to learn something i could expand into a full render/movie and/ or do bigger projects. Except for some of the more annoying details,  KSP mods are relatively simple to model. (At least what I've done thus far. )I've heard before sketchup tends to create extra polys, i want even aware it could do UV mapping. Clearly I'm out of the loop.

It doesn't UV natively, although there is a plugin for it. Personally I export to 3ds and UV there. I don't really care for 3ds for modelling, but I understand and like its UV interface

[SpaceMouse]

9 minutes ago, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

It doesn't UV natively, although there is a plugin for it. Personally I export to 3ds and UV there. I don't really care for 3ds for modelling, but I understand and like its UV interface

I did a few short movies in 3DS Max a loooooong time ago. I don't even remember how UV mapping works.

I'd definitely like that inline cockpit. My spaceplane skills are.... lacking.

Also, like the Cessna in your profile. I come here from X-Plane.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SpaceMouse

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

Just now, SpaceMouse said:

I did a few short movies in 3DS Max a loooooong time ago. I don't even remember how UV mapping works.

I only just figured it out 6 months ago. The sadhak pod was literally the first thing I've ever UV'd in my life. Unfortunately there wasn't really a single guide that made it make sense to me, it just clicked. TBH 90% of the difficulty is 3ds's clumsy UI and trying to figure out when you can and can't edit/click on something and why. Most of the tutorials gloss over how to use the interface because it becomes second nature, but UV tutorials are hard to follow when you can't select any polygons and have no idea why. The actual methodology is very simple. I usually just select convenient border polygons like around Windows etc and map them flat, at least when I'm skinning the window frames a different texture like Nireksha or Asima. After that, I either flat project the rest around convenient seams or I cylindrical unwrap it.

[Mekan1k]

On 4/25/2016 at 5:07 AM, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

Sketchup isn't so much technically limited as it is tool-lacking. Aside from a few really neat ones like follow me, stock sketchup is bare bones. It's a shame because, true to the name, the line-based modeling is in and of itself very free and intuitive. Plugins make up for this, however, and sketchup makes acquiring and installing them downright painless. Personally, I use BZ toolbar (an absolute must), curviloft, round corner, and joint push/pull. (Along with a lot of manual line dragging). My actual workflow looks something like this:

That's the skeleton of what became Bhatak Naga by way of a series of lofts. Basically it's just splines stretched around a tree of various lines and circles. Most everything I've made has been designed and skinned this way, with the exception of some of the simpler stuff. I usually just doodle until I fall in love with a certain profile, then set to lofting.

A simpler example of Ankhen, the WIP pod you've seen a few times in above posts:

 

To be clear this isn't exactly a golden method. It tends to result in more polygons than are really necessary. I simply don't care that much; I'm not really building any of this to run fast on low end computers. On a more annoying note though, it tends to create bad normals and inconsistent geometry, which usually has to be fixed manually, line by line. It so happens that creatively I seem to operate this way when it comes to spacial reasoning, so for me I stick to it because its how I do my best work. It also facilitates sleek, organic shapes that can be very difficult to attain otherwise.

 

Here's some more eye candy from .5:

 

.5 itself might be a bit though. I've been hearing requests for intakes (which I've yet to start), and I'm planning on including a few more pods because I'm addicted to pods. The trouble is they're labor intensive. I'll probably skip the inline bridge for this update and just add the b-29 ish one, but even then I'm probably adding two sizes of it, so that one alone will be some doing. Alternatively I could push .5 within the next couple of days with the fuel tanks, 1.25m ion, 2.5m ion, and Ankhen, advantage being that I'm home from college for the next few months, and moving out complications aside, I'll probably be throwing a bit less at this than I usually do as I'll be having far more of a life. I'd estimate no less than a 50% drop in productivity, though, if that. Turns out I really like doing this stuff. If I did that I could have .5 out as soon as I clean up a few config files and save the rest for later. As usual, open to any preferences.

These engines... I WANT THEM SO BADLY. Seriously- These are sexy ion engines.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 4/27/2016 at 9:30 PM, Mekan1k said:

These engines... I WANT THEM SO BADLY. Seriously- These are sexy ion engines.

Glad you like 'em, been falling in love with them myself as I've been testing. You can thank Cupcake Landers and his Who said Ion Engines are Boring? video (and subsequent personal frustration with clustering, as I rarely build small) for the inspiration. You can probably expect even more in the future. On that note, is there a "market" for other engine types? I'll probably throw in a 2.5m Nuke at some point, but traditional bipropellant thrusters? It doesn't seem to me there'd be much of a function gap to fill, but they could be of aesthetic use. 

 

I'm working on a science module right now, the design I settled on basically being a straight up observatory in a traditional tube fuselage with retracting window shudders (hopefully, I've never animated before). Depending on whether I can get it skinned, exported, and working in the next few days, I'll release it in .5 with the engines, Ankhen, generator, and fuel tanks. If not, I'll release .5 as is before I resettle for the Summer. There's a lot of content as it is and I've got the configs largely squared away, so there's not much reason for me to withhold what I've got until I get a few more pods/intakes done. Maybe I'll call it .4.5. The b-29-ish cockpit series will be a bit of an affair, and the inline is going to be a massive chore as I plan on giving the cylindrical part of it an interior as well. Given that, I think I'll just leave 'em out until next time around. Given their scope, .6 will likely be just them. Intakes too, probably. Intakes are fast.

 

Edit 4/28:

It works!

Shutters open and close properly! The IVA will take a bit, but I'll see if I can knock it out before I drop .4.5 or whatever I call it.

Edit:

(I've got a thread up in modelling and texturing about finding a way to animate the telescope to face the targeted object)

 

Side note: That demonstrator craft can make a munar transfer in two passes. Two passes seems to be pretty standard for large/midsized craft fielding these engines. Having a xenon tank that big is incredible though; I used maybe a 20th of my fuel, even with my ion engines being directly scaled up in performance from their smaller cousins and as such drawing the same fuel per kn.

Edited April 29, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

0.4.5 Up on spacedock. See release thread. Sorry guys, no science module just yet; its IVA is proving time consuming and the object-following telescope is probably going to take me doing a little plugin work.

 

Edit: Progress on Science lab, presently sans animated telescope.

Shutters open:

Shutters closed:

Complete with a sodium lamp for your sanitary spectroscopy convenience! Sadly the shutters (which are part of the exterior model) don't actually block exterior light. I might try a few things to see if I can get them to.

Edited May 8, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[Titan 3000]

Really great mod here. just a small request, can you make a Connected Living Space config for your next release? I use it and your mod and it would really streamline it with my game play. I made a huge SSTO with your parts and KSP Interstellar extended and i would really like to be able to move them between the living space parts.

Just a suggestion for integration with other mods.

[Stone Blue]

On 4/27/2016 at 7:35 AM, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

On that note, is there a "market" for other engine types? I'll probably throw in a 2.5m Nuke at some point, but traditional bipropellant thrusters? It doesn't seem to me there'd be much of a function gap to fill, but they could be of aesthetic use.

Hmmm... @Balto-the-Wolf-Dog Have you seen Eskandare's Thermonuclear Turbines ? Seems these might fit well with Prakasa... AND you shouldnt have to do much work... Just make sure they fit your parts, and/or maybe make custom .cfgs if needed?... Then maybe add them as a Recommended Mod... ???

Edited May 12, 2016 by Stone Blue

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

4 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

Hmmm... @Balto-the-Wolf-Dog Have you seen Eskandare's Thermonuclear Turbines ? Seems these might fit well with Prakasa... AND you shouldnt have to do much work... Just make sure they fit your parts, and/or maybe make custom .cfgs if needed?... Then maybe add them as a Recommended Mod... ???

I had my eye on them, or the concept more accurately. I considered making the larger SCRAM a Nuclear air augmented rocket/turbojet, and I may still put together a variant. I love modelling, so effort in that regard hasn't really kept me from doing it; I just didn't want to encroach overly on other's territory. Not really looking to compete or replace. That said, if that sentiment isn't really present then I will anyway.

Personally I've been developing this in the direction of replacing most other mods I run for my own purposes, seeing as one doesn't need as much when one can make it exactly one's own needs and tastes, so that'd hardly be out of pattern.

Edited May 12, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[andreasblom]

Very good looking

[SpaceMouse]

Oooooooooooooo.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

Still alive! Sorry for my relative inactivity, but I suddenly have considerably more life.

 

Edit:

So nice to do a small, simple interior after Ankhen and Bhatak Naga. A few props are upside down, but that's a relatively easy fix.

 

 

Edit: Finish one and on to the next. Starting to get back into my production groove.

That light 1.25m pod replacement someone asked for.

Hybrid Nuclear Engines

 

Edit 6/14: More eye candy. I may end up doing another release ahead of the science module since I still have literally no idea what I'm doing in that regard. Possibly after I finish the above engines.

 

Edited June 16, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog