Castun Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 EDIT: Never mind, I'm an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phredward Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Great update, and thanks for making the source available!I'm wondering if it's possible to get the old keyboard-based sizing UI back in addition to the tweakable UI controls? I find that when I'm prototyping a rocket, it's easier to just slide with the keyboard and mouse to get things around the right size. In addition, I noticed that in a previous version the minimum "additional height" when using the tweakable UI was greater than 0. Like if I wanted an additional height of 0.02 or some small value, I had to use the keyboard and not the tweakable ui. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAKC Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Great update, and thanks for making the source available!I'm wondering if it's possible to get the old keyboard-based sizing UI back in addition to the tweakable UI controls? I find that when I'm prototyping a rocket, it's easier to just slide with the keyboard and mouse to get things around the right size. In addition, I noticed that in a previous version the minimum "additional height" when using the tweakable UI was greater than 0. Like if I wanted an additional height of 0.02 or some small value, I had to use the keyboard and not the tweakable ui.Agreed. And the smallest tweakable step size is still too big for smaller scale work like tiny probes, missiles & sounding rockets. This wasn't really a problem when we had keyboard/mouse controls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokmo Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I guess Procedural Parts need a rebuild with the new KSPAPIExtensions.dll.Yup, and it's being worked on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woot Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 What's the best way to use the thrust plate on an upper stage? I still haven't figured out a way to put the multiple engines in a fairing. It seems like the interstage adapter should work, but I can't seem to get it to attach on the central node. At larger sizes, procedural interstages are also many times heavier than regular decouplers, which creates an unfortunate decision between aesthetics and function. Is there a way to tweak the weight curve to be more in line with other mods and stock parts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castun Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Procedural Fairings has multiple textures? What is this madness? I sense black magic at work.The P Fairings don't AFAIK by themselves, but blackheart made other textures that work with them. Unfortunately they're all listed as extra parts in the VAB list as there's still no support to change them on the fly like Procedural tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mipe Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 What's the best way to use the thrust plate on an upper stage? I still haven't figured out a way to put the multiple engines in a fairing. It seems like the interstage adapter should work, but I can't seem to get it to attach on the central node.What about a girder or couple to that central node? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softweir Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 One of my favourite mods, I use it for all sorts of things!I wonder... would it be possible to scale the fairing bases in the X and Z dimensions but not in the Y dimension? In my eyes they look ridiculously thick when scaled up to large sizes!Alternatively, perhaps you could redesign the base to appear as a number of "brackets". As the base is rescaled they would appear to slide along the part the base is attached to, and won't look so odd. If you moved the upper node so it is at the same point as the lower node then it would appear that parts added to it (such as decouplers and docking ports) are attached to the parent part which would look neat.It's not a biggy, I will carry on using this mod however it appears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castun Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I agree, they've too thick with larger bases, whereas they never used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 The P Fairings don't AFAIK by themselves, but blackheart made other textures that work with them. Unfortunately they're all listed as extra parts in the VAB list as there's still no support to change them on the fly like Procedural tanks.has anyone tried Firespitter's texture switcher? There's no reason I can think of why that wouldnt work.One of my favourite mods, I use it for all sorts of things!I wonder... would it be possible to scale the fairing bases in the X and Z dimensions but not in the Y dimension? In my eyes they look ridiculously thick when scaled up to large sizes!Alternatively, perhaps you could redesign the base to appear as a number of "brackets". As the base is rescaled they would appear to slide along the part the base is attached to, and won't look so odd. If you moved the upper node so it is at the same point as the lower node then it would appear that parts added to it (such as decouplers and docking ports) are attached to the parent part which would look neat.It's not a biggy, I will carry on using this mod however it appears. I agree, they've too thick with larger bases, whereas they never used to be.pre-3.x, I used several scaled up bases that also cut Y scaling by half or so. Also repositioned the attachment nodes. Since I was doing my scaling in the model node, something like that will work fine with the procedurally sized bases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e-dog Posted May 17, 2014 Author Share Posted May 17, 2014 You should attach topmost node of the interstage adapter to the central node of the thrust plate.What are those "larger sizes" exactly, and what is the weight of interstage and regular decouplers at them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanKell Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 e-dog: a request regarding weight for bases: allow setting (in KSPField) not only the multiplier, but also the power, since interstages (IIRC) don't grow quite by the cube of the radius, but by something like the 2.25 power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woot Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 What are those "larger sizes" exactly, and what is the weight of interstage and regular decouplers at them?At 3.75m, the interstage adapter weighs 1.35t, and the side fairings (3m tall) add another .487t, for a total of 1.837t. Compare with the stock one, which I think is .8t (I don't have it in front of me)At 5m, the interstage adapter weighs 3.2t, and side fairings (3m tall) add another .867t, for a total of 4.067t. The only other 5m decouplers I have are from FASA and Nova Punch, and they are both 1.2t. Auto-fairings tend to be massless, which exacerbates the imbalance. I assume yours are more realistically massive, but it does present a gameplay conundrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e-dog Posted May 18, 2014 Author Share Posted May 18, 2014 e-dog: a request regarding weight for bases: allow setting (in KSPField) not only the multiplier, but also the power, since interstages (IIRC) don't grow quite by the cube of the radius, but by something like the 2.25 power.Maybe it's a mix of square and cube? I'll check it.At 3.75m, the interstage adapter weighs 1.35t, and the side fairings (3m tall) add another .487t, for a total of 1.837t. Compare with the stock one, which I think is .8t (I don't have it in front of me)At 5m, the interstage adapter weighs 3.2t, and side fairings (3m tall) add another .867t, for a total of 4.067t. The only other 5m decouplers I have are from FASA and Nova Punch, and they are both 1.2t. Auto-fairings tend to be massless, which exacerbates the imbalance. I assume yours are more realistically massive, but it does present a gameplay conundrum.Thanks for the numbers. I'll see what can be done about it. Also, I'm going to add decoupler with shroud for engine clusters and similar stuff, like KW Rocketry ones, but procedural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki117 Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 has anyone tried Firespitter's texture switcher? There's no reason I can think of why that wouldnt work.THIS! So much this! I love Blackhearts textures, but I like the curvature of the egg shaped side fairing, so it would be awesomely amazing to have the curvature I like with the texture I like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix_ca Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 It would be a nice way to ditch some part spammyness. One part for each shape, any texture you want. That'd be swell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woot Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 (edited) Maybe it's a mix of square and cube? I'll check it.Thanks for the numbers. I'll see what can be done about it. Also, I'm going to add decoupler with shroud for engine clusters and similar stuff, like KW Rocketry ones, but procedural.That would be great.While I think the interstage adapter can become too thick at larger sizes, the KW-style version doesn't seem thick enough to prevent tons of issues with overlapping attachment points, making it impossible to use in some setups. The KW one is a bit lighter, making it advantageous, but with so many nodes all crammed together its functionality becomes unreliable. This game just doesn't seem set up to deal with thin parts, especially ones with multiple additional attachment nodes. Procedural engine shrouds might fix this problem entirely though.Another thing I wonder about is whether it'd be possible to have two rings of nodes on a thrust plate. At larger sizes, having a ring of engines around the outside with nothing to fill in the middle is unfortunate. There are ways around it though so no big deal. Edited May 18, 2014 by woot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e-dog Posted May 18, 2014 Author Share Posted May 18, 2014 It would be a nice way to ditch some part spammyness. One part for each shape, any texture you want. That'd be swell.I can switch the fairing shape as well as textures, that's planned for future updates.Another thing I wonder about is whether it'd be possible to have two rings of nodes on a thrust plate. At larger sizes, having a ring of engines around the outside with nothing to fill in the middle is unfortunate. There are ways around it though so no big deal.Just attach another thrust plate to fill the middle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix_ca Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 I can switch the fairing shape as well as textures, that's planned for future updates.Oh hoh hoh! Well aren't we special! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanKell Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Maybe it's a mix of square and cube? I'll check it.The best source I've found for fairing and interstage masses: http://www.spaceflight101.com/launch-vehicle-library.htmlI've written a best-fit formula for fairing mass, you can find it on the Misc page of Calcs, starting in cell M30. It lists fairing base mass and then fairing side and fairing nose mass (each x2 = total fairing mass) and then again for expanded fairings, of the given height (This was to set mass for KW fairings.) You can change diameter and height and get new mass values.It's designed to roughly fit modern rockets and composite fairings; if you're trying to replicate older fairing tech things will obviously be heavier. IIRC the N-1s Stage 1-2 interstage was about 11 tons, but that was about 8m in diameter and had to carry the weight of everything but the first stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phredward Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 I came here to say what NathanKell said. The page I found lists atlas v interstage mass http://www.spaceflight101.com/atlas-v-401.html at 3.8m diameter at just 947kg. I would also think that mass does not grow as the cube of the size, since it's not a solid structure (although larger size would imply that it supports a larger mass from above and thrust from below). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castun Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Having an odd issue, that I posted about in the PParts thread also. But it seems that with the latest versions of PParts & PFairings, they don't seem to play nicely together.This is what it looks like when I load up a craft in the VAB. This uses both tanks from PParts and the PFairings bases.And this is how it SHOULD look. The gold foil pieces are just PParts structural pieces. Originally, they were built with StretchySRB parts, and even before I swapped them out with the new PParts, this would happen when loading up the craft (or with pre 3.x version of PFairings for that matter..) Note that it doesn't matter how many times I reload the craft, it never fixes itself and it always seems to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAKC Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 This happens with StretchySRB's as well and my guess is that it has something to do with PF loading earlier than Stretchies before the nodes have been moved to their proper place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castun Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 Yeah, if I remove the fairing bases the problem doesn't happen, though the craft is still shifted upwards several meters every time I modify and reload the design in the VAB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woot Posted May 19, 2014 Share Posted May 19, 2014 I'm also still using SSRB and can confirm it's an issue. In my current build, I have to move a thrust plate w/ engines and two interstage fairings to their proper position every time I load my craft (The payload fairing ends up in the right place each time for some reason). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts