FusTek Station Parts Dev Thread (continuation of fusty's original work)

[sumghai]

Sumghai, will you make smaller and lighter version that could be a better fit for interplanetary motherships? For example by cutting Warehouse module to half its lenght?

Not for R0.04a, but a shortened version of the Warehouse would be quite nice somewhere down the line.

[softweir]

I know this may be a bit late to suggest... but it seems to me that if you rotate the locating fins (lugs? Guides?) on the IACBMs through 22.5° then they will mate without any Active/Passive animation.

Anyway - I'm having a lot of fun with the current version and I'm very much looking forward to the new one!

[sumghai]

it seems to me that if you rotate the locating fins (lugs? Guides?) on the IACBMs through 22.5° then they will mate without any Active/Passive animation.

I'm not sure what you mean - the rotational offset of the fins between the Active and Passive states are 45°.

Could you provide a quick diagram or a sketch?

---

Progress Report, 3 November 2013

Got a rudimentary animated model for the Karmony Warehouse Module into the game, with some not-so-dinki-di-aussie placeholder inner textures:

Fig 43 - (WIP) FusTek Karmony Warehouse Module (2)

One neat feature I've managed to put in is the ability for Kerbals on EVA to also directly open/close the bay doors, instead of having to switch back to the vessel to do so. I'll probably need to add a couple of control panel models to the bulkheads, but that's not hugely critical right now.

As for the horrid red "ENG TEST ARTICLE" test plastered all over the module, you guys will have to keep an eye out for my next blog entry (as well as the download for the first dev build!) to find out

[nothke]

Woops, something is wrong. If Fustek parts are 2m, then it's wrong. I did not count in the 1.25 rescale for example into the measurements. If you look at the first picture in OP you can see that 4 kaspars barely fit in 2m (middle scheme, http://i.imgur.com/pT24apN.jpg). You also missed the second revision where I shortened the racks a bit so they could fit nicely around stock 0.5 girders.

But since you are impatient =P, I am sending you the model, check the mail.

Edited November 3, 2013 by nothke

[StEligius]

Progress Report, 2 November 2013

Fig 42 - (WIP) FusTek Karmony Warehouse Module (revised)

Yeah, I guess that looks about right.

sumghai,

Have I told you told I love you lately?

Devo,

Don't care what you think!

[Sparkle]

Just a little note of love to say thank you for the modules, they look great in orbit

[sharpspoonful]

Woops, something is wrong. If Fustek parts are 2m, then it's wrong. I did not count in the 1.25 rescale for example into the measurements. If you look at the first picture in OP you can see that 4 kaspars barely fit in 2m (middle scheme, http://i.imgur.com/pT24apN.jpg). You also missed the second revision where I shortened the racks a bit so they could fit nicely around stock 0.5 girders.

But since you are impatient =P, I am sending you the model, check the mail.

Ruht-roh, shaggy.

[sumghai]

Woops, something is wrong. If Fustek parts are 2m, then it's wrong. I did not count in the 1.25 rescale for example into the measurements. If you look at the first picture in OP you can see that 4 kaspars barely fit in 2m (middle scheme, http://i.imgur.com/pT24apN.jpg). You also missed the second revision where I shortened the racks a bit so they could fit nicely around stock 0.5 girders.

But since you are impatient =P, I am sending you the model, check the mail.

Oops!

Thanks for the heads-up and the email - originally, I did work at 1 / 2m and used the 1.25 rescaleFactor, but after some (rather scary) stuff about IVAs, I decided to work directly at 1.25 / 2.5m and a rescaleFactor of 1 instead. I'll definitely remember to scale up your model to 1.25x, though.

I'll probably release the WIP Warehouse as-is in X0.04-1 later today or tomorrow, and update the dimensions in X0.04-2.

[sumghai]

X0.04-1 DEV BUILD released - refer to the blog post for download link

Warning: This is a craft and save-breaking update. Please refer to the appropriate migration procedures in the blog post.

X0.04-1 DEV BUILD  4 November 2013
---------------------------

Changes
 - Compatibility Patch for KSP 0.22+
 - All parts assigned to the Composites node in the R&D Tech Tree
 - Overhauled and optimized all parts to take advantage of MODEL{} node calls as well as common texture atlases
    - All crewed compartments also now temporarily use stock SQUAD internals
    - Proper FusTek internals will be implemented in X0.04-2 DEV BUILD
 - Renamed Karmony Parts Warehouse Modules to Karmony Warehouse Modules, and revised model
    - Warehouses now come with animated bay doors, toggleable both when directly controlling the vessel and when on EVA
    - These are just placeholders; rotating KASPAR rack functionality will come in future updates

[softweir]

I'm not sure what you mean - the rotational offset of the fins between the Active and Passive states are 45°.

Could you provide a quick diagram or a sketch?

Sorry I missed your query first time round!

On the left, the current system as a head-on view of a docking port in Active mode, with the fins in grey, and locations for the fins of the passive docking port in pink. ("Dorsal" side is top.)

On the right, my suggestion. Again, a head-on view with fins in grey, and locations for fins of another port in pink. This is very much the same diagram, but the grey fins are permanently rotated 22.5deg into the suggested orientation. With this arrangement, the the docking ports simply connect, without the need for moving the fins.

If you want I could try and do a 3d version of this.

[sumghai]

Sorry I missed your query first time round!

On the left, the current system as a head-on view of a docking port in Active mode, with the fins in grey, and locations for the fins of the passive docking port in pink. ("Dorsal" side is top.)

On the right, my suggestion. Again, a head-on view with fins in grey, and locations for fins of another port in pink. This is very much the same diagram, but the grey fins are permanently rotated 22.5deg into the suggested orientation. With this arrangement, the the docking ports simply connect, without the need for moving the fins.

If you want I could try and do a 3d version of this.

I see what you mean.

I sort of prefer having to manually rotate the fins, to resemble the real-life ISS CBMs; also, setting ports to passive is a good way of identifying ones designated for berthing of visit spacecraft (at least for in-game roleplay).

[BioSehnsucht]

I think the point was in both active and passive, neither set of fins will visually occlude the airlock door? (from the overlap in the first image and no overlap in the second - everything is 22.5deg rotated, not just the start position, I'm thinking?)

[sumghai]

I think the point was in both active and passive, neither set of fins will visually occlude the airlock door? (from the overlap in the first image and no overlap in the second - everything is 22.5deg rotated, not just the start position, I'm thinking?)

Active / Passive positions have absolutely no bearing on EVA, as the Docking / Hatch mode toggle is a separate system.

[kaldak]

Those docking fins are entirely cosmetic, right? I seem to remember playing around with it and they don't force alignment.

[sumghai]

Those docking fins are entirely cosmetic, right? I seem to remember playing around with it and they don't force alignment.

Correct - purely cosmetic, because as soon as the magnets for ModuleDockingNode kick in, any colliders are ignored.

[joxford]

Hey sumghai do you think it would ever be possible to have Kerbals doing IVA actions?

For example:

With what we have now, you go on IVA and see Jeb just sitting in a seat with a little arm and leg movement and some facial expressions.

With IVA actions, you could switch to say, Bob, and you will see Jeb floating about maybe hitting things with a hammer, trying to juggle, or just enjoying some snacks in mircrogravitiy.

These could of course just be pre-animated actions that will either be randomized or subject to module(i.e. Habitation Module, Bill is sleeping or on a computer, Science Module, Jeb is working on experiments, Bob is hanging out in the Kupola taking pictures, and a 4th crew member may be in the utilities module...well... ya know...).

This could work well with the new tech and science system because you could have Kerbals working on different tasks. So if Jeb and Bill are working in the science module then you will generate science points, whereas Bob may be sleeping generating no science points. This could bring new dynamic to KSP where maybe you could eventually integrate a "wear and tear" system so you may have to assign maintenance duties in order to keep the Logistics module from spontaneously combusting.

Most of this is me just blowing in the wind, but I think at least the IVA animations could be a possibility. What do you think? Do you think it would need to be integrated into the game by the Squad first to support IVA animations on that scale?

[Moon Goddess]

It was a stated goal of the devs at one point in the past, I think they have dropped that goal now as we've not seen anything about that direction.

(I'm still wondering what happened to those wonderful Kerbal EVA animations we saw before and the EVA tool box that was previewed.

[softweir]

I see what you mean.

I sort of prefer having to manually rotate the fins, to resemble the real-life ISS CBMs; also, setting ports to passive is a good way of identifying ones designated for berthing of visit spacecraft (at least for in-game roleplay).

Good points!

[sumghai]

Hey sumghai do you think it would ever be possible to have Kerbals doing IVA actions?

For example:

With what we have now, you go on IVA and see Jeb just sitting in a seat with a little arm and leg movement and some facial expressions.

With IVA actions, you could switch to say, Bob, and you will see Jeb floating about maybe hitting things with a hammer, trying to juggle, or just enjoying some snacks in mircrogravitiy.

These could of course just be pre-animated actions that will either be randomized or subject to module(i.e. Habitation Module, Bill is sleeping or on a computer, Science Module, Jeb is working on experiments, Bob is hanging out in the Kupola taking pictures, and a 4th crew member may be in the utilities module...well... ya know...).

This could work well with the new tech and science system because you could have Kerbals working on different tasks. So if Jeb and Bill are working in the science module then you will generate science points, whereas Bob may be sleeping generating no science points. This could bring new dynamic to KSP where maybe you could eventually integrate a "wear and tear" system so you may have to assign maintenance duties in order to keep the Logistics module from spontaneously combusting.

Most of this is me just blowing in the wind, but I think at least the IVA animations could be a possibility. What do you think? Do you think it would need to be integrated into the game by the Squad first to support IVA animations on that scale?

It was a stated goal of the devs at one point in the past, I think they have dropped that goal now as we've not seen anything about that direction.

(I'm still wondering what happened to those wonderful Kerbal EVA animations we saw before and the EVA tool box that was previewed.

IVA animations for individual Kerbals would be quite fun!

However, I'm not sure if add-on authors have access to any API that gives them control over character rigging in-game.

[sorcerymon]

I belive you talked about making a shorter version of the node module some time ago, to serve sort of the same function as a stock 6-way adapter.

Is this still part of your plan?

[sumghai]

I belive you talked about making a shorter version of the node module some time ago, to serve sort of the same function as a stock 6-way adapter.

Is this still part of your plan?

Eventually, yes.

---

Progress Report, 11 November 2013

I'm still waiting for more feedback regarding X0.04-1.

In the meantime, I finally got started on the internals. I'm starting off with the Kirs Docking Module, as its size and relative simplicity serves as good foundation for learning how to do internals in KSP before I tackle the larger (and potentially more complicated) Karmony modules.

Fig 44 - (WIP) FusTek Kirs Docking Module - Internals

The interior of the Kirs will be very loosely based on that of the Mir Docking Module, and so will have meaningful (if mostly non-functional) interior props, with frequently-used berthing-related equipment on the starboard side and less-frequently used utilities on the port side:

- The sole Kerbal occupant will be seated sideways, as if s/he is monitoring the berthing of a visiting spacecraft from inside the Docking Module. There will definitely be some sort of stool usable in both microgravity and on planetary surfaces; I haven't decided whether to depict the stool as stowable (obviously, IVA animations are out of the question).

- More likely than not, I'll be using one of Mihara's RasterPropMonitors to display the docking camera view of any incoming spacecraft; since most docking cameras assume a centerline view, I might have to add a mesh representing an actual camera on a swing arm that looks out of the hatch porthole, much like what was used in the Mir Docking Module. (I'm also very tempted to scatter multiple monitors throughout various FusTek modules, but that's another story.)

- Three equalisation valves/gauges will be required; one set is to show the current internal pressure in the (docked) visiting spacecraft, another set will monitor the intermediate space within the two latched docking ports, and a third set will be for the Docking Module itself.

- The gas mask props are intended for use in case the visiting vehicle happens to be an unmanned cargo vessel accidentally filled with noxious fumes. This was sort of inspired by a live video of the SpaceX Dragon berthing at the ISS, where crew members wore PPE while initially opening the hatch between the station and the resupply vessel as a precaution.

I suspect that common elements in the internal fuselage itself, such as the hatches and their frames, would also be better off as props in their own right - while an admittedly unorthodox and untested method, asset reuse is always nice.

[kaldak]

I'm still waiting for more feedback regarding X0.04-1.

I haven't run into any problems yet, though it's possible the parts don't see quite as much use now that they have ugly red text all over them The only comment I have is that the names of the "Logistics" and "Utilities" modules have always seemed backwards to me. Specifically, a logistics pod sounds like a command module and a utilities pod doesn't. To me at least. Since this update is save-breaking anyway, I figured it couldn't hurt to bring it up.

I'm looking forward to the new IVAs!

[JDobs]

Just a quick question, may have already been answered in this post (I tried searching but no luck):

Are these parts compatible with career mode? I recently installed this mod and couldn't find them in career mode but only in sandbox mode. I really hope career mode is open and I'm just doing something wring with the files.

Thanks!

[Dave7]

I'm still waiting for more feedback regarding X0.04-1.

I haven't found any problems yet either.

Are these parts compatible with career mode?

The parts are unlocked with composites tech.

[johnsonwax]

I haven't run into any problems yet, though it's possible the parts don't see quite as much use now that they have ugly red text all over them The only comment I have is that the names of the "Logistics" and "Utilities" modules have always seemed backwards to me. Specifically, a logistics pod sounds like a command module and a utilities pod doesn't. To me at least. Since this update is save-breaking anyway, I figured it couldn't hurt to bring it up.

I'm looking forward to the new IVAs!

Yes, the external aesthetics is a bit of a deterrent, but my real excuse is that I restarted career mode with RT2 and haven't quite gotten these parts unlocked yet. I should be getting things built soon, though. I plan on rebuilding my sandbox station which included pretty near all of your parts, so that should be a good test.

And I agree on the naming of those two modules. Neither name is particularly clear on the purpose. Logistics tends to refer to coordination of many people or things, and we don't really have a concept like that in the game. Mission Control is where all logistics takes place, really. I think I would just call it 'Storage' and 'Life Support'. Anyone that wants to use TAC or any other life support extension of the game would just add it into that module anyway, so I think eventually it will become that as Squad adds it to the game. NASA would call them Logistics and Utilities, but that's really just so things sound better when they talk to Congress about money. Kerbals should be more plain-spoken and they've clearly determined they have no need for a legislature given that the first building they constructed as a society was the VAB.