Part generator Version 2.X release / open beta

[Lando]

THIS IS OLD, GOTO VERSION 3: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/48368-Part-Generator-Version-3-Win-Linux-Mac

This is an external tool, that will give you the power to create your own custom parts.

WIN / LINUX / MAC!

With this tool you will be able to:

- make the Tankes as large or small as you need them without woobely conections (large rockets often end up bending like a C )

- add extra resources to the tanks (add electric charge without stupid looking battery packs or change fuel/oxidizer ratio)

- anti cheat script: parts automaticly change their hight/drymass to fit stock part parameters (no 1000L fuel tank that’s small like a dime or batterys light as a feather)

- add sensors

- add RTG

- add Decoupler

- Different Textures to choose

- create own Textures

- create empty tanks

- different shapes

get VERSION 2.3 now!

Download: ---

Version 3.0 is out: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/48368-Part-Generator-Version-3-Win-Linux-Mac

windows: needs .net framework 2.0 or higher (most windows users shuld have this already installed)

mac and linux users can use mono:

get it here: http://www.go-mono.com/mono-downloads/download.html

then run in the command prompt: mono path/name.exe

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have created a cool Texture and want to share it?

contact me and your texture will be included in the next release

you will be credited!

you decide about the file name of the png. For example: "bestTexEver by Assassin_55.png" or what ever you like

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

special Thanks to: TheCardinal / ultimaterandombanana / Tommygun and all others helping me to improve this software

Edited September 1, 2013 by Lando

[princess venus]

wow ut how about ingame exsamples

[Nate072]

It would be nice to be able to make a SRB

[ALILOOOONG]

---Hey should this be in Apps and Tools?--- Nice Job!

[Speijker]

This looks shiny! Finally I can write my name on my ships and stations, so all kerbals may know who build this most awesome contraption.

Maybe it should be a default stock feature? A textbox on parts, so you can write something on the side, like NASA or ESA does

[TheCardinal]

This looks shiny! Finally I can write my name on my ships and stations, so all kerbals may know who build this most awesome contraption.

Maybe it should be a default stock feature? A textbox on parts, so you can write something on the side, like NASA or ESA does

I fully support this suggestion. This is a mod you really need (for specialised tanks).

[Lando]

The Text Label thing sounds cool... Will think about a way to make this...

Will make some of the models with more polys (like the cylinders)...

[trekkie_]

its a decent mod and I'm sure it took some work, but I personally just don't see too many uses for it. Maybe if it was released around the time of 0.13 it would have been much more useful. It's just simple shapes with a config setting; when it'd be almost just as easy for people to model these themselves even as a novice or simply alter existing parts and their configs. don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to belittle your efforts in the slightest, I just think your efforts could be better spent on better things.

One thing I could see you making that would be useful to all modders would be a detailed config file creator, covering various types of parts. for example, you make a checkbox and it adds the config settings for a docking port, or the ratio of an intake, or thrust/isp of an engine. something that allows you to quick preview attachment nodes and change them visually on the fly to add and align them outside of the game, or having a comparison of your models size to standard existing stock sizes. stuff like that. something like this could possibly become as commonly used as say, mechjeb.

Edited April 20, 2013 by trekkie_

[MAKC]

its a decent mod and I'm sure it took some work, but I personally just don't see too many uses for it. Maybe if it was released around the time of 0.13 it would have been much more useful. It's just simple shapes with a config setting; when it'd be almost just as easy for people to model these themselves even as a novice or simply alter existing parts and their configs. don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to belittle your efforts in the slightest, I just think your efforts could be better spent on better things.

One thing I could see you making that would be useful to all modders would be a detailed config file creator, covering various types of parts. for example, you make a checkbox and it adds the config settings for a docking port, or the ratio of an intake, or thrust/isp of an engine. something that allows you to quick preview attachment nodes and change them visually on the fly to add and align them outside of the game, or having a comparison of your models size to standard existing stock sizes. stuff like that. something like this could possibly become as commonly used as say, mechjeb.

like you said, thats your opinion. i find this very useful as i do not have experience in modeling and i can see why this is very useful for people like me who simply dont want to go through the effort of getting modeling programs, making the model and getting it to work ingame.

[rasheed]

Aw man i though u made the Adapter for the fuel tanks....

oh well more tanks for me

[Simplicity]

Well personally, I find this mod a GREAT help... it makes building things a lot easier as I don't have to worry so much now about wobbly rockets etc...

Here is a pic to show what I mean

This is a 50,000 litre tank with a JOOL V main engine

[Peaz Li]

its a decent mod and I'm sure it took some work, but I personally just don't see too many uses for it. Maybe if it was released around the time of 0.13 it would have been much more useful. It's just simple shapes with a config setting; when it'd be almost just as easy for people to model these themselves even as a novice or simply alter existing parts and their configs. don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to belittle your efforts in the slightest, I just think your efforts could be better spent on better things.

One thing I could see you making that would be useful to all modders would be a detailed config file creator, covering various types of parts. for example, you make a checkbox and it adds the config settings for a docking port, or the ratio of an intake, or thrust/isp of an engine. something that allows you to quick preview attachment nodes and change them visually on the fly to add and align them outside of the game, or having a comparison of your models size to standard existing stock sizes. stuff like that. something like this could possibly become as commonly used as say, mechjeb.

Keep sippin' that Haterade son.

[Eric S]

its a decent mod and I'm sure it took some work, but I personally just don't see too many uses for it. Maybe if it was released around the time of 0.13 it would have been much more useful. It's just simple shapes with a config setting; when it'd be almost just as easy for people to model these themselves even as a novice or simply alter existing parts and their configs. don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to belittle your efforts in the slightest, I just think your efforts could be better spent on better things.

As far as altering existing parts, not always an option. The one time I used this program was to create fuel tanks for my apollo-style munar excursion modules. The stock 1.25m tanks looked wrong under a mk 2 command pod, and the smallest 2.5m tank is large enough that two of them plus the engines made the lander look wrong. Instead, I used this to crank out 2.5m tanks that were just about the exact amount of fuel I needed, and they were an excellent size for the project.

Yes, I could have taken the time to learn blender, and some day I probably will, but this let me get the results I wanted right away.

[frizzank]

awesome mod. extremely useful for when you want to create custom tanks real quick.

[ultimaterandombanana]

Right........I'm back!

(my account was lost and i have finally got round to making a new one )

[souza]

Awesome tool ! a suggestion : Like mentioned before I would really like to be able to make my own SRB's. Being able to tweak between size, thrust and burn time. Mainly because I think the stock SRB's are to short, both in lenght and burn time. I'd like a for instance a SRB about the lenght of 2 orange tanks with 2 minutes of burn time.

[White Owl]

Out of curiosity, what is an I-Struct (beta)?

[Peenvogel]

This looks useful and fun. I think it's a real nice idea to balance out the rockets manually, fiddle with the numbers to get everything as stable as possible. I'll give it a shot and see how it works together with the extra weight parts mod. A text box editor would be awesome!

Any chance you will ever do a similar mod for the engines?

[sproginator]

I would like for there to be some way of adding more than one model piece to it? and have a user interface, 3D obviously, So i can place parts

[Chebalu]

I have a suggestion: It would be great if we can do rectangle fuel tanks!

[Lando]

Out of curiosity, what is an I-Struct (beta)?

Its a I Beam (like the stock one...just mixed up the name)

This was created for testing reasons it will get improved for the next release.

I wan't to add more Structural stuff ,too.

Any chance you will ever do a similar mod for the engines?

Yes, I planed this, but I don't know yet, how the look of the engine should change if you change the values.

Alsow I did not make the Thrust vs SPI vs Weight calculations yet (the formula on paper, programming would be the secound step) becouse the stock engines don't folow strict rules (or I am to stupid to get them...)

There realy is a lag of 2,5m engines in KSP stock parts

Like mentioned before I would really like to be able to make my own SRB's

This will come after engines, because a SRB is kind of an engine tank combo in KSP

I have a suggestion: It would be great if we can do rectangle fuel tanks!

ok, will add this...

but I am realy busy atm, cause I am studying Physics at the university and thats a lot of work... (at least in Germany)

EDIT: Hmmm... how did SRB's work again?

taller -> more Thrust

larger diameter -> longer burn time

right?

Edited April 24, 2013 by Lando

[colmo]

Yes, I planed this, but I don't know yet, how the look of the engine should change if you change the values.

Alsow I did not make the Thrust vs SPI vs Weight calculations yet (the formula on paper, programming would be the secound step) becouse the stock engines don't folow strict rules (or I am to stupid to get them...)

There realy is a lag of 2,5m engines in KSP stock parts

This will come after engines, because a SRB is kind of an engine tank combo in KSP

ok, will add this...

but I am realy busy atm, cause I am studying Physics at the university and thats a lot of work... (at least in Germany)

EDIT: Hmmm... how did SRB's work again?

taller -> more Thrust

larger diameter -> longer burn time

right?

Looking forward to the SRB maker.

For engines, instead of scaling them up, use dynamic clusters - custom configurations of existing engines in combination. Advantage over doing it manually is to keep part count down.

[Capt.Joseph Kerbertson]

Can anyone translate the size difference? I tried to emulate the 50,000 liter tank and the thing ended up being obscenely tall... and thin. It's in centimeters, should we size down 3.5 meter tanks equals 350 centimeters etc?

[TheCardinal]

....

Yes, I planed this, but I don't know yet, how the look of the engine should change if you change the values.

Alsow I did not make the Thrust vs SPI vs Weight calculations yet (the formula on paper, programming would be the secound step) becouse the stock engines don't folow strict rules (or I am to stupid to get them...)

There realy is a lag of 2,5m engines in KSP stock parts

As an approximation you could use: dimensions times 2 gives weight times 8 and thrust times 4.

EDIT: Hmmm... how did SRB's work again?

taller -> more Thrust

larger diameter -> longer burn time

right?

Presuming the same size of burncorridor is used at the start:

taller -> more Thrust? Yes

larger diameter -> longer burn time, yes but also more thrust when the same amount of fuel has been burnt as in the smaller SRB. In practice a different sized burncorridor will be needed to keep the thrust constant from start till the end. This will result in a higher thrust from start till burnout.

Can anyone translate the size difference? I tried to emulate the 50,000 liter tank and the thing ended up being obscenely tall... and thin. It's in centimeters, should we size down 3.5 meter tanks equals 350 centimeters etc?

Yes. If you could enter 3.5, it would assume centimeters and calculate a tank of over 30 kilometers long. At 3.5 meters (350 cm) it's just 29 meters which is quite normal.

Lando, the part generator 2.1 crashes when incorrect values (such as withh this example) are given. You really need to revise the errorhandling in the part generator.

Edited April 24, 2013 by TheCardinal

[Lando]

if i try to enter a "." or "," on my PC it is just not possible, no Crash...

so please step by step, what keys did you press fokusing what Box?

I can't reproduce your Crash atm.

1m = 100cm !

I did this, becouse in Germany and some other countrys 1,500 = 1 + 1/2 what would be 1.500 for you. and we use a "." where you use the ","

But as I said, I am realy busy