Apollo Mission Pack Development (Beta version released!)

[Redneck]

That's odd, when I imported with Blender, the polygons were all contorted, and crammed into a small box shape. Must have been using the wrong importer. Bah, I need to learn how to use Blender.

I changed the link to point to a different project....see my original post (it was edited prolly AFTER you saw it) Just make sure to get permission ok? Good luck!

[Razorcane]

I changed the link to point to a different project....see my original post (it was edited prolly AFTER you saw it) Just make sure to get permission ok? Good luck!

Well you see the thing is, the only way to reduce the polys is to completely redesign it, which is exactly what I'm doing.

[dimovski]

Razorcane, I can do the .cfgs for you, I beg you! Im bored and would love to help! I gained some expirience by all that "adapting stuff" I did...just tell me what you need, send me a PM or smth, and Im gonna do it for you!

[iamaphazael]

I changed the link to point to a different project....see my original post (it was edited prolly AFTER you saw it) Just make sure to get permission ok? Good luck!

As razorcane said, we're already working with models that were at least originally based on fairly accurate meshes (the nasa public domain models), but over the course of being de-polyed several times got a little simplified, so he's trying to get them a little more accurate again.

Thanks a bunch! I'll definitely have a go at that once I finish a couple more parts.

Also I hope you don't mind me changing the geometry a bit on certain things. On most of these I have to redo them completely, because of export derps, and on others they're just a tad bit inaccurate in terms of size, so I feel that I need to fix that. You don't have to use what you don't want. That being said, here's an update on the docking port!

{images}

I had to make this part shorter than the original, as it was a bit too tall. I also added more detail to the inside of the cap, as you can see in the picture. I'm hoping to turn the geometry down a bit more before I start texturing this, and I also need to do the parachutes and whatnot, which are going to be hard for me since i'm pretty sure I'm going to have to edit the part config.

That docking port looks great! Much nicer on the detail underneath the cap. Don't worry about the chute itself. That needs to be set up as an animation, so I can just bring your meshes back into blender and then re-do the animation. Just make sure that you keep the cap and the inner parts as separate objects/meshes.

By the way, just wanted to say again that it's great to have you working on the project. If you can do textures that look as good as these models (and judging by that SM, you can), these parts are going to look fantastic when they're all done!

Razorcane, I can do the .cfgs for you, I beg you! Im bored and would love to help! I gained some expirience by all that "adapting stuff" I did...just tell me what you need, send me a PM or smth, and Im gonna do it for you!

Most of the configs are already in place, but they will probably need a little tweaking at some point. If you want to mess around with the ones that are there and send me changes you make, I'll certainly consider using them

[Netris]

While I'm thinking about it. Are you going to make the fairings for the modified Saturn that launched Skylab ?

[iamaphazael]

While I'm thinking about it. Are you going to make the fairings for the modified Saturn that launched Skylab ?

One thing at a time

[dimovski]

After a short look:a)WAAAAAAY less thrust on the 1st stage, TWR should be 1.2

b)WAAAAAAAAAY less fuel on stage 1 and 2, currently, from what Ive seen, its a two-stage-to-orbit!

I really dont have time to look at everything else now, but tommorow Ill try to be more detailed, and try fixing all that myself

[Razorcane]

As razorcane said, we're already working with models that were at least originally based on fairly accurate meshes (the nasa public domain models), but over the course of being de-polyed several times got a little simplified, so he's trying to get them a little more accurate again.

That docking port looks great! Much nicer on the detail underneath the cap. Don't worry about the chute itself. That needs to be set up as an animation, so I can just bring your meshes back into blender and then re-do the animation. Just make sure that you keep the cap and the inner parts as separate objects/meshes.

By the way, just wanted to say again that it's great to have you working on the project. If you can do textures that look as good as these models (and judging by that SM, you can), these parts are going to look fantastic when they're all done!

Most of the configs are already in place, but they will probably need a little tweaking at some point. If you want to mess around with the ones that are there and send me changes you make, I'll certainly consider using them

That's incredibly nice to hear. I don't work on games, and have never done anything but architecture design, so this is pretty good experience. I think perhaps I can learn how to do configs, but I just don't have the time at the moment.

[Guest]

Any aesthetic or technical guidance you'd like, let me know. I've either seen, touched, or been in the live hardware at some point.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Jack Wolfe

[Razorcane]

Any aesthetic or technical guidance you'd like, let me know. I've either seen, touched, or been in the live hardware at some point.

I've watched hundreds of videos, but never been near actual hardware. Where did you see it?

[Aphox]

Before I go telling you what's wrong with it, I just want to say that I absolutely adore everyone involved for making this. The Saturn V is easily my favorite vehicle and I LOVE that I can recreate the Apollo missions with this beautiful piece of magnificence. Please, keep up the good work.

Please note that the following are not complaints, simply letting you know what I've noticed so far.

I know you're not really worrying about the configs at the moment and that's fine, but I just wanted to know if there are plans to "fix" the cfg files so that the fuel tanks for the CSM and LM don't appear as 0.14 era ASAS modules with the blue torque bars on the staging dialogue. I've "fixed" this locally by changing their module type to Part from what they were. I don't think the LM ascent module itself is fixable in that regard because of the way it works as both an engine and a pod. However, I do suggest lowering the roll force on it to 5 from 25. It's a bit crazy to control

And this isn't a gripe so much as a "Hey I found a bug." There's this strange white blob that follows the LM ascent module around and can only been seen from a certain angle. It appears seemingly randomly in-flight and flies into the distance as a static object, but appears to be "attached" to the LM. It can be seen as a static either on the pad (as seen in the screenshot) or during timewarp. I don't know crap about modelling otherwise I'd probably tell you what it actually was. I'm just going to assume it's a ghost.

[Guest]

I've watched hundreds of videos, but never been near actual hardware. Where did you see it?

My dad was a NASA engineer, so I got to watch them mating the stacks of a few of the rockets plus see the launches in person. In college I worked at the Alabama Space & Rocket Center as a docent and a Space Camp instructor.

[SyncV2]

I used the .craft file from the AMP and the LM controls are totally messed up and when I line up the navball for a retro-burn, the LM is actually pointed sideways?

[iamaphazael]

Before I go telling you what's wrong with it, I just want to say that I absolutely adore everyone involved for making this. The Saturn V is easily my favorite vehicle and I LOVE that I can recreate the Apollo missions with this beautiful piece of magnificence. Please, keep up the good work.

Please note that the following are not complaints, simply letting you know what I've noticed so far.

I know you're not really worrying about the configs at the moment and that's fine, but I just wanted to know if there are plans to "fix" the cfg files so that the fuel tanks for the CSM and LM don't appear as 0.14 era ASAS modules with the blue torque bars on the staging dialogue. I've "fixed" this locally by changing their module type to Part from what they were. I don't think the LM ascent module itself is fixable in that regard because of the way it works as both an engine and a pod. However, I do suggest lowering the roll force on it to 5 from 25. It's a bit crazy to control

And this isn't a gripe so much as a "Hey I found a bug." There's this strange white blob that follows the LM ascent module around and can only been seen from a certain angle. It appears seemingly randomly in-flight and flies into the distance as a static object, but appears to be "attached" to the LM. It can be seen as a static either on the pad (as seen in the screenshot) or during timewarp. I don't know crap about modelling otherwise I'd probably tell you what it actually was. I'm just going to assume it's a ghost.

First of all, thank you so much for the support and encouragement. It's great to get so much positive feedback from everyone in the community, and also great to have talented people excited about the project and willing to help out. I hope that we can keep this momentum going and end up with a really fantastic mod for everyone to play with.

Secondly, thank you also for the critique. As it turns out, these are both things that I have noticed, but please continue to point things like these out as you notice them, as I don't get as much time to playtest as I would like.

Currently, I've got both the LM and SM tanks set up as advSASModules under the old system, because as far as I know there isn't and advancedSAS partmodule set up yet. So, even though I tried to force them to use the decoupler icon in the configs, it apparently is overridden by the base part type. Once there is an advanced sas partmodule, I'll start using that, and also switch it over so it's part of the command pods themselves, which is where they should be anyay (It can't be that way right now because the pods have to be assigned the CommandPod part type). You're definitely right about the LM pod being over-torqued. I noticed that it was really touchy to maneuver when I did my test flight, but forgot to turn it down for the release. I'll dial that down a bit before the final version.

That little floating orb thing is the back wall of the LM interior that for some reason is getting rendered in the flight scene. I had broken that face away from the rest of the model so that I could hide it in blender in order to be able to work on the rest of the mesh without zooming all the way in, and I think that caused it to no longer have the proper layer applied to it in Unity. It should be an easy fix.

Again, thanks for the input, and don't hesitate to mention anything else you may notice. Happy landings!

[iamaphazael]

I used the .craft file from the AMP and the LM controls are totally messed up and when I line up the navball for a retro-burn, the LM is actually pointed sideways?

Hmm. I haven't noticed that. Which craft file are you using? The one that's just the LM, or the one with the full stack? Or does it happen on both?

[Aphox]

First of all, thank you so much for the support and encouragement. It's great to get so much positive feedback from everyone in the community, and also great to have talented people excited about the project and willing to help out. I hope that we can keep this momentum going and end up with a really fantastic mod for everyone to play with.

Secondly, thank you also for the critique. As it turns out, these are both things that I have noticed, but please continue to point things like these out as you notice them, as I don't get as much time to playtest as I would like.

Currently, I've got both the LM and SM tanks set up as advSASModules under the old system, because as far as I know there isn't and advancedSAS partmodule set up yet. So, even though I tried to force them to use the decoupler icon in the configs, it apparently is overridden by the base part type. Once there is an advanced sas partmodule, I'll start using that, and also switch it over so it's part of the command pods themselves, which is where they should be anyay (It can't be that way right now because the pods have to be assigned the CommandPod part type). You're definitely right about the LM pod being over-torqued. I noticed that it was really touchy to maneuver when I did my test flight, but forgot to turn it down for the release. I'll dial that down a bit before the final version.

That little floating orb thing is the back wall of the LM interior that for some reason is getting rendered in the flight scene. I had broken that face away from the rest of the model so that I could hide it in blender in order to be able to work on the rest of the mesh without zooming all the way in, and I think that caused it to no longer have the proper layer applied to it in Unity. It should be an easy fix.

Again, thanks for the input, and don't hesitate to mention anything else you may notice. Happy landings!

Well, due to my inexperience in modding, I've noticed that my changes to the configurations make the vehicle spin uncontrollably during flight (not completely uncontrollable, but lots of unwanted rotation). I guess they'll have to stay how they are for now until the advSASModule thing is figured out.

What confuses me about that issue is that the game's stock ASAS module is exactly what yours are in the default configs, which is module = AdvSASModule, yet they still show up in the staging menu, while ASAS doesn't.

And I'll be flying this thing a lot, so I'll keep you updated on any more discrepancies that I come across.

Edit: I'm kind of a tard when it comes to this stuff. I'm going to assume it's being given an icon because it's also doubling as a decoupler, which the game auto-assigns icons to, but since it's an ASAS module by specification, it displays the old style ASAS icon instead.

Obviously, it's no more than a superficial thing and adding more parts to remedy it would only make things harder. I think I'm starting to understand how the game assigns things though, which is good.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Aphox

[Razorcane]

Before I go telling you what's wrong with it, I just want to say that I absolutely adore everyone involved for making this. The Saturn V is easily my favorite vehicle and I LOVE that I can recreate the Apollo missions with this beautiful piece of magnificence. Please, keep up the good work.

Please note that the following are not complaints, simply letting you know what I've noticed so far.

I know you're not really worrying about the configs at the moment and that's fine, but I just wanted to know if there are plans to "fix" the cfg files so that the fuel tanks for the CSM and LM don't appear as 0.14 era ASAS modules with the blue torque bars on the staging dialogue. I've "fixed" this locally by changing their module type to Part from what they were. I don't think the LM ascent module itself is fixable in that regard because of the way it works as both an engine and a pod. However, I do suggest lowering the roll force on it to 5 from 25. It's a bit crazy to control

And this isn't a gripe so much as a "Hey I found a bug." There's this strange white blob that follows the LM ascent module around and can only been seen from a certain angle. It appears seemingly randomly in-flight and flies into the distance as a static object, but appears to be "attached" to the LM. It can be seen as a static either on the pad (as seen in the screenshot) or during timewarp. I don't know crap about modelling otherwise I'd probably tell you what it actually was. I'm just going to assume it's a ghost.

I'm probably going to redo the LEM, so that should fix that. If it's a game error, I don't know what I could do I'm afraid.

Also, iam, I noticed that on the actual rocket, the interstage ring decouples with the first stage. On the actual rocket, the decouple separately. Is it possible to add a decouple effect to the first stage fuel tank? Also, the interstage ring has ullage rockets on it, which I will get to once the apollo spacecraft is sorted out.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Razorcane

[iamaphazael]

Edit: I'm kind of a tard when it comes to this stuff. I'm going to assume it's being given an icon because it's also doubling as a decoupler, which the game auto-assigns icons to, but since it's an ASAS module by specification, it displays the old style ASAS icon instead.

That's exactly right!

Also, iam, I noticed that on the actual rocket, the interstage ring decouples with the first stage. On the actual rocket, the decouple separately. Is it possible to add a decouple effect to the first stage fuel tank? Also, the interstage ring has ullage rockets on it, which I will get to once the apollo spacecraft is sorted out.

Yeah, we'll have to think about that. I was just kind of assuming that the action of the ullage rockets would be simulated by modifying the ejectionForce property on the decoupler itself. If people wanted, we could add an explicit srb module to the decouplers. If I remember correctly, the real-world procedure was that the stage separated and then the ullage rockets fired sometime after that? That would be difficult to achieve without making two action groups for each staging event, or to have a separate part to act as the ullage booster, which I'd rather try to avoid. Getting that right will take some further thinking. Anyone have any thoughts?

[Razorcane]

That's exactly right!

Yeah, we'll have to think about that. I was just kind of assuming that the action of the ullage rockets would be simulated by modifying the ejectionForce property on the decoupler itself. If people wanted, we could add an explicit srb module to the decouplers. If I remember correctly, the real-world procedure was that the stage separated and then the ullage rockets fired sometime after that? That would be difficult to achieve without making two action groups for each staging event, or to have a separate part to act as the ullage booster, which I'd rather try to avoid. Getting that right will take some further thinking. Anyone have any thoughts?

They do fire after the decouple, but due to the lack of action group macros(with delays and key presses and whatnot, which I think someone should make) I think it would be better if they just fired as soon as it decoupled. Also, I think it's a good idea, when the mod is nearly finished to have a version with mechjeb support for people like me, who want the assistance of mechjeb without the eyesore SAS piece sticking somewhere on the ship.

[SyncV2]

Hmm. I haven't noticed that. Which craft file are you using? The one that's just the LM, or the one with the full stack? Or does it happen on both?

The full Saturn V stack. Didn't try it later, I guess it's just me.

[Razorcane]

aphazael, I think the electric charge on the lunar module should be doubled. There just isn't enough for me to descend/ascend and rendezvous with an orbit of 30k. Also, I'm about to leave work, so I'll be able to start texturing the docking ring. I think that we can get away with using the previous chute animations if you can't be bothered to make a new one. I'll probably also start on the command module itself. The model is pretty good, it only needs a few alterations. I'm still a bit torn about the LES. I want there to be a cap over the command module, like there is on the actual spacecraft, but I'm not sure if we can sacrifice the geometry. Would like some other opinions.

[iamaphazael]

The full Saturn V stack. Didn't try it later, I guess it's just me.

I'll have to look into that. Had you been in IVA at all before it happened?

aphazael, I think the electric charge on the lunar module should be doubled. There just isn't enough for me to descend/ascend and rendezvous with an orbit of 30k. Also, I'm about to leave work, so I'll be able to start texturing the docking ring. I think that we can get away with using the previous chute animations if you can't be bothered to make a new one. I'll probably also start on the command module itself. The model is pretty good, it only needs a few alterations. I'm still a bit torn about the LES. I want there to be a cap over the command module, like there is on the actual spacecraft, but I'm not sure if we can sacrifice the geometry. Would like some other opinions.

The cap on the LES was one of those things that I had noticed only after the model was done, and didn't see the need to go back and add it. But if you feel like going in and putting one on there, I don't see any reason not to. I don't think that the extra coule-of-dozen faces that that will add is going to break us.

[Razorcane]

I'll have to look into that. Had you been in IVA at all before it happened?

The cap on the LES was one of those things that I had noticed only after the model was done, and didn't see the need to go back and add it. But if you feel like going in and putting one on there, I don't see any reason not to. I don't think that the extra coule-of-dozen faces that that will add is going to break us.

Well it would probably be a lot more than a couple dozen, probably more like a couple of hundred. Also, check you PMs.

[bigdad84]

I don't know if you've been asked this before.... But do you plan on making little floaties for the Apollo capsule when it lands in the water

[SyncV2]

I'll have to look into that. Had you been in IVA at all before it happened?

Yeah. Don't worry about it, I suppose it was a one time thing. Sorry, I'm just too lazy to try it again, I did that one flight and deleted the parts and decided to wait for the full release. Good job so far.