[1.2] Procedural Fairings 3.20 (November 8)

[jrandom]

Love this!

[jrandom]

Uh oh... wait, how do you feed fuel through these? I ran fuel lines from fairing base -> girder -> fairing base but my engines still have no fuel.

[e-dog]

Uh oh... wait, how do you feed fuel through these? I ran fuel lines from fairing base -> girder -> fairing base but my engines still have no fuel.

Press G to toggle crossfeed for the base. It's in readme.txt and part tooltip text as well.

[jrandom]

What, read the documentation? Are you mad??

I'll go read it now in shame and embarrassment.

[MDBenson]

Oh. My. Days. This is MEGA! No more ugly lumpy service modules with RCS and batteries all over them! My only question is can I surface-attach items to the outside?

A suggestion for a possible further goal is a procedural side-shell to radially attach over existing parts (to cover solar arrays, aerials, RCS/engine ports etc. until out of the atmosphere). Will be tricky, perhaps.

Edited July 31, 2013 by MDBenson

[JuggernautOfWar]

My only question is can I surface-attach items to the outside?

Yes.

procedural side-shell to radially attach over existing parts

You mean like the included procedural fuselage?

[colmo]

Oh. My. Days. This is MEGA! No more ugly lumpy service modules with RCS and batteries all over them! My only question is can I surface-attach items to the outside?

A suggestion for a possible further goal is a procedural side-shell to radially attach over existing parts (to cover solar arrays, aerials, RCS/engine ports etc. until out of the atmosphere). Will be tricky, perhaps.

Yes, fairings and fuselage are surface attachable. i note symmetry is not properly supported in SPH yet. I'm fairly certain you can make side shells already with inline bases and fairings. They must completely envelop the structural piece within, though.

[Starwaster]

Thanks for the help. Turns out the struts were causing this. Is this a known issue?

Now I have a wobbly payload, but things aren't blowing up as much.

Yeah, pretty much.

There is a way to mitigate the issue, a bit. Cut thrust so forward acceleration ceases, then eject them. With KW fairings I've had slightly better results if I bind the fairing decouple to action groups instead of staging, but that might just be a placebo effect. (I mention KW because it's an issue with just about any decoupler sort of part but mostly with the fairing type objects)

[Starwaster]

I made copies of each of the part *.cfg files, added _decoupler at the end of the part's name property in the file (just for uniqueness so that KSP can tell them apart) then put this in each PART

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleDecouple
		ejectionForce = 250
		explosiveNodeID = top
	}

Now I have decoupler versions of each ring and fairing base...

[ymir9]

I'm seriously loving the new fuselage parts, but they don't seem to be FAR compatible yet, is that correct?

[e-dog]

I'm seriously loving the new fuselage parts, but they don't seem to be FAR compatible yet, is that correct?

Yeah, I forgot that. I'll fix it in the next version. Meanwhile, you can add this to fuselage1.cfg (at the end, just before the final "}"):

MODULE
{
  name=FARPayloadFairingModule
}

This should fix it. It won't break anything without FAR too.

[ymir9]

Yeah, I forgot that. I'll fix it in the next version. Meanwhile, you can add this to fuselage1.cfg (at the end, just before the final "}"):

MODULE
{
  name=FARPayloadFairingModule
}

This should fix it. It won't break anything without FAR too.

Wonderful! Thank you!

[e-dog]

Just checked, and it doesn't work

The better way is to add "payload", "fairing" or "shroud" to the part title. So I guess it'll be "fuselage shroud".

But it doesn't work after that change too, because FAR has issues with inline fairing quarters. If you use higher bases, not rings, it works.

So, how do you people feel about changing base rings to 2 side nodes, instead of four?

The problem is, it'll break your launched vessels, and it makes the editor unusable for me when I load a saved ship with fairings attached to ring bases (just ring bases without sides are fine).

[jrandom]

I'd consider the fuselage to be an experimental feature -- I'd rather it get implemented right than worry about breaking existing ships.

[e-dog]

But it'll break ships with inline fairings too, if they use ring bases.

[jrandom]

But it'll break ships with inline fairings too, if they use ring bases.

I am okay with this. The ring bases are brand new, so I'd say the priority is getting the design nailed down so everything's correct.

[MDBenson]

You mean like the included procedural fuselage?

No, I mean like the radial covers on the SpaceX Dragon solar arrays on the truck section. Something you can stick to the outside of a tank or service module, or even a piece of procedural fuselage, to cover something non-aerodynamic. You;d have to size it by hand as I'm pretty sure sizing it dynamically would be near-on impossible, but it'd be handy

[jrandom]

No, I mean like the radial covers on the SpaceX Dragon solar arrays on the truck section. Something you can stick to the outside of a tank or service module, or even a piece of procedural fuselage, to cover something non-aerodynamic. You;d have to size it by hand as I'm pretty sure sizing it dynamically would be near-on impossible, but it'd be handy

Procedural radially-mounted cargo bays!

I maintain the idea that we need procedural everything.

[The Lone Wolfling]

Procedural radially-mounted cargo bays!

I maintain the idea that we need procedural everything.

Agreed.

My two most wanted parts would be control surfaces and landing gear / wheels, though.

Most everything else you can simulate with other parts.

[astropapi1]

Hey, I place the fairings and all, but there's no decouplers on the staging list.

I've used it many times before, but now it simply ignores them.

[e-dog]

Hey, I place the fairings and all, but there's no decouplers on the staging list.

I've used it many times before, but now it simply ignores them.

Are you sure you are not placing the new fuselage instead?

[astropapi1]

Are you sure you are not placing the new fuselage instead?

I'm placing the egg-shaped fairing thingies on the 1.25 fairing base.

Edited August 1, 2013 by astropapi1

[sidfu]

wouldnt it be better instead of having a whole base to make the fuselage conning instead have like a small part u raidaily attach in a group of 4. it may raise part count but keeps the texture size smaller overall.also that would let u have a smother fuselage and shorther also

[astropapi1]

wouldnt it be better instead of having a whole base to make the fuselage conning instead have like a small part u raidaily attach in a group of 4. it may raise part count but keeps the texture size smaller overall.also that would let u have a smother fuselage and shorther also

*You. (10char)

[e-dog]

I'm placing the egg-shaped fairing thingies on the 1.25 fairing base.

I just checked, and it works for me.

What mod version are you using?

Could you post a minimal .craft file (just stock parts and fairings)?