[1.0.X - Experimental] [On Hold] FusTek Station Parts (WIPs on GitHub)

[Moon Goddess]

Any chance you could make some fustek themed ladders? Just like the radial attached static ladders from stock, just Fustek themed, and perhaps a bit longer

[sumghai]

I got it into my head to build something decidedly unstationlike and ended up with this:

-snip-

Hawt damn! Very Millennium Falcon-esque, especially near the side airlocks and the wing-like structures.

Any chance you could make some fustek themed ladders? Just like the radial attached static ladders from stock, just Fustek themed, and perhaps a bit longer

Possibly in the hypothetical R0.06a - I've also been thinking about a special type of landing leg that would allow modules to be landed horizontally.

[somnambulist]

Legs would be fantastic. I like the look of Bac9's landing legs -- low profile when extended -- but they're just too large to mount on a 2.5m module.

[Frederf]

Regarding the crash on scene change I had the same problem it was because I had both the original fustek parts and the new ones at the same time. The second I switched to the new ones only the crashing stopped.

I'm enjoying these parts immensely except for two small irksome factors:

1. Generator is so powerful and consumes zero resources so feels very cheaty and means my station has no solar panels which just looks wrong. Please make it toggle-able and take some suitable resource.

2. Forced MechJeb is bad. A glue-on part should add MJ optionally.

Additionally some kind of "bridge" ladder part could mean that EVAs entirely on ladders would be possible.

Everything else about this mod is fantastic.

[sumghai]

Regarding the crash on scene change I had the same problem it was because I had both the original fustek parts and the new ones at the same time. The second I switched to the new ones only the crashing stopped.

Interesting observation - thanks for the heads-up.

Generator is so powerful and consumes zero resources so feels very cheaty and means my station has no solar panels which just looks wrong. Please make it toggle-able and take some suitable resource.

I'm definitely planning on tweaking the generator output. However, I'm not sure if I want to be dealing with resources at this stage.

2. Forced MechJeb is bad. A glue-on part should add MJ optionally.

I don't see anything wrong with integrated MechJeb support, as it would allow modules to have Smart A.S.S. functionailty whilst keeping part counts down.

If you insist, you could always add the AR-202 case included in the main MechJeb mod.

Additionally some kind of "bridge" ladder part could mean that EVAs entirely on ladders would be possible.

EVA handle strips could be interesting, although I'll need to mull over that a bit more as well.

[praskieva]

I love the parts pack, but I have observed the same performance issues some others have mentioned. When these parts are used in the VAB sometimes when dragging one of the parts the game starts dropping frames pretty bad. And on seemingly random occasions the game crashes when launching a ship with these parts. My PC specs are:

Core I7 3770k

16GB RAM

Radeon 7970

Windows 7 x64

KSP .20.2

[sumghai]

I love the parts pack, but I have observed the same performance issues some others have mentioned. When these parts are used in the VAB sometimes when dragging one of the parts the game starts dropping frames pretty bad. And on seemingly random occasions the game crashes when launching a ship with these parts. My PC specs are:

I'll admit I've the dragging-in-VAB slow down as well even on my system. I have no idea what may be causing this, though.

Not to be petty, but is this the reason I'm getting low thread ratings?

[scottholio]

Is it possible for you to make a version with the textures as .png files as an alternative? Maybe I'm crazy but it seems to me (on my machine at least) that mods that are using .tga textures seem to utilize more RAM than you would expect them to. I measured a fresh install of KSP with and without this mod. The difference in RAM usage was ~400MB. Maybe it's just my computer or something I did wrong?

In any case I still think you have done a great job with this and I will continue to use it.

Cheers

[sumghai]

PNG/MBM textures and Blender source files now available - see first post for download link

There's a fairly extensive thread discussing increased RAM usage in 0.20 and 0.20.2 - as expected, more people have problem using PNG textures than anything else even in 0.20.2, hence the reason the main download contains TGAs by default.

That said, after some (decidedly vocal and persistent) complaints, I've included PNG and MBM versions for folks to compare. I'm going to go on record by saying that I did not enjoy republishing textures in those formats. At all.

I've also put up source Blender files for people who want to have a look at how I've reverse-engineered fusty's modules. Note that most of the parts have a vertical offset of 0.675m downwards - it was the only way to keep the top hatch EVA-able while avoiding the exploding hatch bug (Don't ask me to move the hatch somewhere else; escape hatches on space station modules look quite silly).

Edited September 24, 2013 by sumghai

[Read have Read]

I'll admit I've the dragging-in-VAB slow down as well even on my system. I have no idea what may be causing this, though.

Not to be petty, but is this the reason I'm getting low thread ratings?

I have noticed that before, but never opened the debugger until now and this is what it is filled with

[Error]: Actor::updateMassFromShapes: Compute mesh inertia tensor failed for one of the actor's mesh shapes! Please change mesh geometry or supply a tensor manually!

[mrsinister]

I am curious to know how the .png version is running for people that had the issues.....

[sumghai]

I have noticed that before, but never opened the debugger until now and this is what it is filled with

[Error]: Actor::updateMassFromShapes: Compute mesh inertia tensor failed for one of the actor's mesh shapes! Please change mesh geometry or supply a tensor manually!

According to the Unity docs, this basically means that the collider mesh could not be properly calculated because there were isolated flat (zero-thickness) planes in said mesh. I was able to replicate the observed effects and error as well under these circumstances.

After examining some of my parts a bit more, I've determined that the issue is present only in the crewed modules, due to some rather hamfisted reuse of imported meshes in Blender. I might know how to fix and simplify the colliders for the next update, but there is no guarantee it would fix everyone's problems, and this means any newer updates (cupola, IVAs) are very likely to be pushed back by month(s).

I am curious to know how the .png version is running for people that had the issues.....

By the looks of things it might not make much difference, especially if the performance issues were mainly linked to the apparently borked colliders.

[scottholio]

Thanks sumghai, for uploading the .png textures. It has made a big difference, at least on my computer. I once again did a vanilla install and monitored RAM usage of various flight. Then I added your mod and flew with some of the parts. It only impacted the RAM usage by about ~90MB. That's versus ~400MB with the .tga textures. So thanks for your work

[sumghai]

Thanks sumghai, for uploading the .png textures. It has made a big difference, at least on my computer. I once again did a vanilla install and monitored RAM usage of various flight. Then I added your mod and flew with some of the parts. It only impacted the RAM usage by about ~90MB. That's versus ~400MB with the .tga textures. So thanks for your work

Sounds good.

Perhaps everyone who has been having similar issues should try the alternative textures, and report back on the following?:

- Your system specs

- Your KSP version

- KSP startup loading time for each texture set (MBM/PNG/TGA)

- KSP total memory usage with each texture set (MBM/PNG/TGA)

The more data I get, the better I can determine whether to officially switch back to PNGs (since Nova's post on PNG compression still lingers in my mind)

[Read have Read]

So I docked a space plane to off load the crew before I take part my mostly FusTek station

I suspect the K1 truss is generating most of the lag so I am replacing it with a Tri-hex Strut.

[Mekan1k]

Actually, I found the solar panels generate most of the lag on my stations.

[sumghai]

So I docked a space plane to off load the crew before I take part my mostly FusTek station

-snip-

I suspect the K1 truss is generating most of the lag so I am replacing it with a Tri-hex Strut.

Just to clarify, my pack does NOT include the K1 Truss, and I am NOT its author. Fusty made the K1 Truss.

[Read have Read]

Just to clarify, my pack does NOT include the K1 Truss, and I am NOT its author. Fusty made the K1 Truss.

Oh yes, I am quite aware of that fact - it is not your issue. It is good to avoid confusion though.

[mrsinister]

By the looks of things it might not make much difference, especially if the performance issues were mainly linked to the apparently borked colliders.

right on...but a little more load time vs ram impact is a better trade off. I personally could care less how long it takes, I was in 19.x and had over 587 parts...my load time was around 3-4min. longer than stock....but when I was in, it ran like a dream.

[Railgunner2160]

What are those octagonal sections on that station?? They look like they match the FusTek parts, but I Don't recognize them.....

[Mecha Pants]

That's the K1 Truss section from Fusty's original Fustek station parts pack.

[Srilania]

Problem I am runing into, for some reason, I can't enter through the hatches at all, they just sit there when trying to do it.

[Montieth]

Are you using the Airlock? The regular hatches are just for looks at this point.

[Srilania]

Are you using the Airlock? The regular hatches are just for looks at this point.

ahh, so how do I get an EVA kerbal into the station parts?

[Mecha Pants]

You enter through the hatch on the airlock, and then use the Kerbal crew manifest mod (available here) to move them between modules as a substitute for IVA movement.