General procedural parts for tanks/structure/volume

[brygun]

Presenting a slightly different view to get a point across.

Devs do a lot of work to make parts look nice as one of structure, fuel tank of type A and currently none just add in habited volume.

I think we could use the same graphics and instead making it a selection that a part is:

= a fuel tank (standard)

= what that fuel is (modifies fuel quanity as well, small modification of tank weight, may have losses over time, may have power needs to stop losses over time)

= a crew volume (which is an empty fuel tank holding in the pressure of 1 atmosphere, no crew)

= a shell structure only (lighter as it doesnt need the internal tanks, has uses mounting batteries or other internals, also useful for mounting other structure)

If you also allow us to change the length of the part we get a lot more options with only a little coding. For instance in the medium sized parts you have coded several tanks. Those  could have been one procedural tank.  We can keep the exisiting ones as already coded just that they match certain settings of length and fuel type. 

This method is also more open to modders. If a modder adds a fuel type he can add a line to the procedural tank including a weight of tank adjustment, perhaps a power requirement. 

 

 

Also cargo bays should be procedural in their length.

Currently I either get a very thin or a very long bay cylinder. Rather than code a medium can you just make the length procedural and I can set what is right for the particular craft.

 

[brygun]

Additional thought is to give the crew space one an option to have an airlock where clicking on the airlock brings up the option to bring out any of the Kerbals onboard.

 

[tophatrhino]

Any cylinder should have a length adjustment slider.

Procedural fuel tanks would be great!

[TheOtherDave]

1 hour ago, tophatrhino said:

Any cylinder should have a length adjustment slider.

Procedural fuel tanks would be great!

Including adapter segments, IMHO, but I realize that's much more complicated (especially when one size isn't just a bigger version of the other... like, mk1 to 2.5m is easy, but mk1 to mk2 isn't).

[Buzz313th]

Copy and pasted from another Procedural Parts request thread....

 

With KSP being a loose simulation of a space program, the method they have now with a selection of parts and procedural wings is much closer to real life.  The engineers at NASA, contractors and other space programs design parts to be used on complete space vehicles.  Believe it or not, most of the vehicles are not one offs and the same parts are used on many different vehicles to reduce manufacturing time and costs.  Some of the engine designs currently used have been around since the 60's.  The fuel tanks and SRB's from many old and newer vehicles are purposely used in current and future designs.   This same principal in KSP presents a nice engineering challenge to the player.   Making these parts procedural would dilute the experience for me as each vehicle would be a complete and custom one off.   I tried Juno, where almost everything is procedural and I lost interest. 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Buzz313th

[MarcAbaddon]

Sure, those are standard part, but NASA and contractors also do not simply stack the same fuel tank multiple times to get the amount of fuel they want when they design a new rocket. If anything the procedural + tooling approach from the realism mod is the closest to reality.

Edited March 1, 2023 by MarcAbaddon

[Buzz313th]

5 hours ago, MarcAbaddon said:

Sure, those are standard part, but NASA and contractors also do not simply stack the same fuel tank multiple times to get the amount of fuel they want when they design a new rocket.

Valid point. 

[TheOtherDave]

10 hours ago, MarcAbaddon said:

Sure, those are standard part, but NASA and contractors also do not simply stack the same fuel tank multiple times to get the amount of fuel they want when they design a new rocket.

That's more or less how solid rockets work, except without much wobbling because the segments are held together with more than their mutual gravity.

[MarcAbaddon]

1 hour ago, TheOtherDave said:

That's more or less how solid rockets work, except without much wobbling because the segments are held together with more than their mutual gravity.

Yes, well, amusingly in KSP solid rockets were the engines where you never could just adjust the fuel by stacking ^^

[TheOtherDave]

3 hours ago, MarcAbaddon said:

Yes, well, amusingly in KSP solid rockets were the engines where you never could just adjust the fuel by stacking ^^

IKR? The one place where their "stack 'em up" approach actually does mirror IRL and they don't do it!

[Superluminaut]

I would love to see this implemented.