Open Source Construction Techniques for Craft Aesthetics

[Majorjim!]

Hi all,

I have discovered how to attach a stack separator to an engine and have it not apply a faring.

I think this will be great to use with the fairing release methods I have seen discussed in this thread.

Here is a video that shows how its done.

MJ

[GusTurbo]

Oh, nice! Does that work with the other sizes as well? What about regular decouplers?

[Giggleplex777]

Oh, nice! Does that work with the other sizes as well? What about regular decouplers?

Regular decouplers don't decouple.

[GusTurbo]

Ahhh, I see why it works now.

[Woopert]

Very cool? But how does it even work? I was having a hard time following along somehwo

[sgt_flyer]

It works with the help of enabled alt+f12 clipping it seems, woopert, if i followed the video correctly. Basically, he attached the decoupler as usual to the engine's node then he attached the fuel tank also to the engine's node, thanks to the alt+f12 clipping. When he removed the tank, the game considers that he removed the part attached to the engine, and thus remove the engine's fairing.

This technique can be very interesting for saturn V builders

[GusTurbo]

It works with the help of enabled alt+f12 clipping it seems, woopert, if i followed the video correctly. Basically, he attached the decoupler as usual to the engine's node then he attached the fuel tank also to the engine's node, thanks to the alt+f12 clipping. When he removed the tank, the game considers that he removed the part attached to the engine, and thus remove the engine's fairing.

This technique can be very interesting for saturn V builders

What's your thinking on that?

[sgt_flyer]

@gusturbo it can be used between the various stages (S-IC and S-II middle J2 engine, S-II and S-IVb's j2) and where it's the mostly interesting, between the CSM and the lander (which in turn would allow a perfectly symmetric 4-way fairing separation) so we end up with a rocket with stronger interstages (if you want to include a full interstage ring) and easier to make lander fairing - without single engine fairings in the way

[Majorjim!]

@gusturbo it can be used between the various stages (S-IC and S-II middle J2 engine, S-II and S-IVb's j2) and where it's the mostly interesting, between the CSM and the lander (which in turn would allow a perfectly symmetric 4-way fairing separation) so we end up with a rocket with stronger interstages (if you want to include a full interstage ring) and easier to make lander fairing - without single engine fairings in the way

Thats exactly what I thought. This happened completely by accident on my Selene apollo craft. No fairing between the lander engine and second stage.

Im so happy I rediscovered it as I had no idea how it happened! It must work with smaller engines and decouplers.

MJ

[Gue__1]

Hey guys, I don't know if I should post this here but I found something interesting. If you use a lot of structural fuselages, keep reading.

As aesthetic builders we spent a lot of parts trying to make our craft clean, this can have some disadvantages compared to mass.

It seems that a empty Mk1 Fuselage weights less than a Structural Fuselage 0.35 vs 0.4 tons. If used in great amount this could save a ton() of weight.

So check your craft and see the difference.

Gue

[Captain Sierra]

Hey guys, I don't know if I should post this here but I found something interesting. If you use a lot of structural fuselages, keep reading.

As aesthetic builders we spent a lot of parts trying to make our craft clean, this can have some disadvantages compared to mass.

It seems that a empty Mk1 Fuselage weights less than a Structural Fuselage 0.35 vs 0.4 tons. If used in great amount this could save a ton() of weight.

So check your craft and see the difference.

Gue

THe flip-side is that a Mk 1 fuselage has an impact tolerance of 7 (or is it 8?) and the structural fuselage has one of 70.

[Gue__1]

THe flip-side is that a Mk 1 fuselage has an impact tolerance of 7 (or is it 8?) and the structural fuselage has one of 70.

Good point, didn't look at that...

Gue

[Woopert]

@gusturbo it can be used between the various stages (S-IC and S-II middle J2 engine, S-II and S-IVb's j2) and where it's the mostly interesting, between the CSM and the lander (which in turn would allow a perfectly symmetric 4-way fairing separation) so we end up with a rocket with stronger interstages (if you want to include a full interstage ring) and easier to make lander fairing - without single engine fairings in the way

Thanks for explaining it

However, on a real Saturn V the lander is not connected to the Apollo spacecraft. The fairings connect the Apollo spacecraft to the rest of the rocket.

[GusTurbo]

Hey guys, I don't know if I should post this here but I found something interesting. If you use a lot of structural fuselages, keep reading.

As aesthetic builders we spent a lot of parts trying to make our craft clean, this can have some disadvantages compared to mass.

It seems that a empty Mk1 Fuselage weights less than a Structural Fuselage 0.35 vs 0.4 tons. If used in great amount this could save a ton() of weight.

So check your craft and see the difference.

Gue

Structural fuselages also have the disadvantage of not connecting to things properly. They always leave an unsightly gap.

[Sgt. Cookie]

Harken! I return bearing the gift of inline RCS! (But not understanding of the Imgur tags)

http://imgur.com/a/86pXa#8

[Gue__1]

Harken! I return bearing the gift of inline RCS! (But not understanding of the Imgur tags)

wait, is that going to decouple all the parts inside.....?

space debris here I come!

Edited February 23, 2014 by Gue__1

[Sgt. Cookie]

Sadly, yes. You might be able to avoid it if you use two decouplers instead, but I haven't tested that. I've tried making a non-detachable version, but so far it's been a failure. Whelp, back to the drawing board.

[Captain Sierra]

Sadly, yes. You might be able to avoid it if you use two decouplers instead, but I haven't tested that. I've tried making a non-detachable version, but so far it's been a failure. Whelp, back to the drawing board.

What if . . . . you use mods *gasps* and place some RCS in 4x symmetry inside a 6S service tube. That could work and give you space for some monoprop tanks. BUT you'd have to be pretty clever in your building to get it centered like that.

[Sgt. Cookie]

Service Tubes? That's one of my default mods, they're pretty damn useful for things like that. But I'm trying to do a stock version, as befits the thread. So, a KSPing I will go. Wish me the luck of Jebadiah!

EDIT: Ok, as it turns out, Stack Seperators will cause extra debris, while a Stack Decoupler (provided that they both point away from each other) won't. So, I'll update the album later with this new discovery later. But first, stock Service Tubes...

SECOND EDIT: No longer needed.

THIRD EDIT: SUCCESS! I've got a smaller version! They're both surprisingly simple, so I'll get a tutorial on them shortly.

FOURTH EDIT: Here's the Small Service Compartments: http://imgur.com/a/JH9vc

Large ones coming, in about 20 minutes or less.

FIFTH EDIT: As promised, one large 100% stock Service Compartment.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Sgt. Cookie

[Tankbuster32]

why don't you turn the "lids" upside down for a much cleaner look?

[Sgt. Cookie]

For the small one, you can get away with it. But on the larger one, it prevents the walls from being seamless.

EDIT: Unless you mean the top one? Yeah, JUST the top one would work. But the bottom one has to be flat.

Edited February 27, 2014 by Sgt. Cookie

[Rune]

Service Tubes? That's one of my default mods, they're pretty damn useful for things like that. But I'm trying to do a stock version, as befits the thread. So, a KSPing I will go. Wish me the luck of Jebadiah!

EDIT: Ok, as it turns out, Stack Seperators will cause extra debris, while a Stack Decoupler (provided that they both point away from each other) won't. So, I'll update the album later with this new discovery later. But first, stock Service Tubes...

SECOND EDIT: No longer needed.

THIRD EDIT: SUCCESS! I've got a smaller version! They're both surprisingly simple, so I'll get a tutorial on them shortly.

FOURTH EDIT: Here's the Small Service Compartments: http://imgur.com/a/JH9vc

Large ones coming, in about 20 minutes or less.

FIFTH EDIT: As promised, one large 100% stock Service Compartment.

Hey! Nice idea. I've been doing the same in my latest builds, and I have a couple of very nice capsules with all the gear hidden by 2.5m rockomax decouplers (you have to turn part clipping on, but you can stick a lot of stuff in there, and as long as the tip of the nozzle in just outside the collision mesh of the decoupler, stuff will still work). You basically stick the stuff (one T200 tank and a toroidal one will put a 48-7s at just the right height). But recently I have discovered large ASAS units also do the work a bit lighter, though you have to then put separate decoupler/separators, so it's a bit less part-efficient. A couple of examples, looking form below, follow.

Building them is dirt simple, I first built the service modules, remove them temporarily , then placed the decoupler/ASAS, then the important stuff back on inside them with part clipping on to make the used attachment node of the upper part of the decouplers usable again. It helps a lot for that last part to have editor tools to disable surface attachment, but you could actually place it with surface attachment activated too, it just would take a lot of extra effort, or putting the toroidal fuel tank on top (because it doesn't have surface attachment on itself). For the ASAS example, it is even easier, just built a service module under whatever you want (a decoupler, usually, if you want to detach the service module later), then stick with part clipping on the ASAS modules around it.

And now the technique I actually wanted to show off: Mini-lander upper stage! With >500m/s, RCS subsystem with 30 units of monopropellant, enough battery to do the job, and a very cool look fitting inside a 2.5m radius (i.e, a fairing made of small panels with x8 symmetry), this thing is perfect for Apollo replicas. Just 12 parts!

This is what we will need. As you can see, the root part is the upper docking port, and apart from that we have three oscar tanks, a toroidal one, and the awesome 48-7s. Note how the cabins are oriented so they stick the right way when surface-attached, and they have each two RCS ports placed one by one. You can't do radial symmetry later and expect it work, that's a downside.

And now comes the tricky part. With editor tools, that's as easy as ALT+R to activate surface attachment. Without them, you will have to use two small cubic struts to create attachment nodes on the surface of the oscar tanks at the right height. Which come to think of it, might allow you some symmetry options. BUT. That is two more parts than needed Note that the placing the second cabin is a pain in the ass, since to see the oscar tanks through the lander cabin you have to clip the camera very close to them and can't see how high or low the result is. A lot of trial and error here will get the two cabins aligned, and this is what you get in the end, with just enough juice for munar ascent:

Rune. Happy building!

Edited February 28, 2014 by Rune

[Tankbuster32]

I meant both but if you say so. Still, it would probably improve the look of things.

[Woopert]

Making engines appear larger + giving them more power! This technique allows for just that, it fills the gap for bell sizes not taken by the stock parts, and of course since it is a compound engine it will have more power! It is also for those moments when you know an engine of that size SHOULD have the power in real life but has limitations because of the game stats. Here is an Imgur album

I figured this out while revising the Atlas V for Majorjim's SNC Dream Chaser (Picture of the Altas V KSP rocket below). The other rocket is my Midi Scale Ariane 5. Enjoy!

Link to Majorjim's SNC Dream Chaser: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/69179-SNC-Dream-Chaser-*Video-by-Woopert*

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited March 1, 2014 by Woopert

[sgt_flyer]

@Woopert - i don't think you need your fuel lines cubic struts are fuel crossfeed capable, and will pump fuel from whatever they are radially attached to (given that the part they are connected to can get fuel from tanks) (although i hope you have enough struts ^^)