[WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

[Streetwind]

There's no real need to provide much in the way of FAR support anymore, because FAR itself has changed a lot. It scans the shape of the finished vessel with a voxel grid and lets the shape decide the aerodynamics... meaning, the shape alone takes care of 99% of what FAR needs to know about a part. And any part you can place is just as scannable as any other.

I haven't looked into the details, but I would be surprised if these parts weren't compatible out of the box.

[BudgetHedgehog]

AFAIK, the only thing that needs actual support for FAR is wings and stuff. Structural elements are, as you say, compatible out the box, so long as Nertea hasn't done anything weird with colliders or meshes etc.

EDIT: Totally forgot to comment on the parts! They're looking excellent, I really like the texture Is it using InterstellarFuelSwitch or Firespitter?

[Captain Sierra]

AFAIK, the only thing that needs actual support for FAR is wings and stuff. Structural elements are, as you say, compatible out the box, so long as Nertea hasn't done anything weird with colliders or meshes etc.

EDIT: Totally forgot to comment on the parts! They're looking excellent, I really like the texture Is it using InterstellarFuelSwitch or Firespitter?

Guessing by Nertea's preference of ISmeshswitch over Firespitter with NFConstruction and cryo engines, I'm gonna say IFS.

[Nertea]

is looking good nertea.. good work..

I dint understand some things.. You are making this version a bit more procedural to save parts menu and memory?

What about the intakes, rsc, aero cone or none? it will be possible to config those extentions as we do with the fuels?

It will be compatible with FAR?

I will not design for FAR, but I will ensure it's compatible somehow. Basically fuel swapping will be used to save the parts list, and better texture practices will save your memory.

AFAIK, the only thing that needs actual support for FAR is wings and stuff. Structural elements are, as you say, compatible out the box, so long as Nertea hasn't done anything weird with colliders or meshes etc.

EDIT: Totally forgot to comment on the parts! They're looking excellent, I really like the texture Is it using InterstellarFuelSwitch or Firespitter?

ISFuelSwitch, has useful features for me.

So cargo bays! More interesting hinge than before, and yes, that's a size 3 tank just scraping in. All the bays can swap their side fuel tanks between nothing, LF, LF/O and MP. Also, I set up the other lengths of bays/fuselages. They match the lengths of the Mk3 parts.

Going to sink some time into finishing the textures for these parts now. In the meantime, some things I've been considering:

1. Drone core/ reaction wheel is hollow now, so it can be placed down a vargo bay easily
   
2. The service bay is less useful now that everything can carry monoprop. Considering ideas to rework it, though the 1/3
   
3. Drop bays (cargo bays with opening floors) are now in the list. Don't know how many lengths to do though, the full set seems wasteful.
   
4. With the new texture optimizations, cargo bay sections that don't open are quite feasible with a small footprint. As with drop bays, don't know how many sizes to do though.
   
5. The inline crew cabin should be reworked so that it the part containing it can be hollow (cabin will be 1 level with ~8 kerbal capacity)
   
6. All the adapters are going to have to be completely reworked.
   
7. A 2.5m jet engine and 2.5m rapier are totally required.
   

Opinions welcome!

Edited June 21, 2015 by Nertea

[Captain Sierra]

On the hollow parts and drop bays/cargo bays . . .

Could you do a shared texture and mesh switch between non-opening bay, drop bay, and standard bay? That gives you three parts (standard, short, and long) for 9 total useable parts.

Far as the service bay, perhaps adding a small section top center (or bottom center w/mesh switching option) for a docking port. For these monstrosities of planes, sr ports might be preferable. Easy solutions for docking outside of the nose port (which I never found appealing) were always lacking here. Just tossing ideas.

and WOW are those hinges glorious.

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

I think it would be cool to have a couple more shoulder pieces - I can imagine using a cargo bay variant for stashing antennas, sensors, solar panels, and such. Maybe a ladder to let my pilots climb up to the...huh. Is there going to be an external door?

[Nertea]

I think it would be cool to have a couple more shoulder pieces - I can imagine using a cargo bay variant for stashing antennas, sensors, solar panels, and such. Maybe a ladder to let my pilots climb up to the...huh. Is there going to be an external door?

The door is where it has always been, on the underside. I do plan an actual purpose-build ladder for it this time... and yeah, service shoulder piece is an idea I've been tossing around. Left space on the uv map for it too.

On the hollow parts and drop bays/cargo bays . . .

Could you do a shared texture and mesh switch between non-opening bay, drop bay, and standard bay? That gives you three parts (standard, short, and long) for 9 total useable parts.

Far as the service bay, perhaps adding a small section top center (or bottom center w/mesh switching option) for a docking port. For these monstrosities of planes, sr ports might be preferable. Easy solutions for docking outside of the nose port (which I never found appealing) were always lacking here. Just tossing ideas.

and WOW are those hinges glorious.

Those mesh switching ideas are unfortunately out, as mesh switching colliders/multiple animations per part is going to be buggy as heck.

[GabrielG.A.B.Fonseca]

Just popping up to say, nice job as always, Nertea! Looking forward to see what you come up with this time.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Those mesh switching ideas are unfortunately out, as mesh switching colliders/multiple animations per part is going to be buggy as heck.

Would a single part that can open both ways (individually, not always both) be too terribly realism-breaking?

[AngelLestat]

ok thanks for the answers guys..

That cargo bay looks amazing.

[Captain Sierra]

The door is where it has always been, on the underside. I do plan an actual purpose-build ladder for it this time... and yeah, service shoulder piece is an idea I've been tossing around. Left space on the uv map for it too.

Those mesh switching ideas are unfortunately out, as mesh switching colliders/multiple animations per part is going to be buggy as heck.

Part 1: sounds cool.

Part 2: So you're damned if you do, damned if you don't huh? Can't switch colliders & animations without taunting the Kraken and really shouldn't have 3 parts of every bay type to avoid VAB clutter.

EDIT: Possible use for the service bay: something that opens on the sides. It could open like that to allow easy access for kerbals and small rovers. This doesn't make a lot of sense so lemme work on some crappy MSpaint diagram to make it more clear.

Edited June 22, 2015 by Captain Sierra

[Nothalogh]

There will be a big honkin 2.5m RAPIER to go with this, right?

[Captain Sierra]

There will be a big honkin 2.5m RAPIER to go with this, right?

A 3.75m RAPIER engine would be equally apreciated. While the more powerful SCIMITAR had its moments, these would be leaps and bounds more useful.

[Nothalogh]

A 3.75m RAPIER

That would almost be silly

[billkerbinsky]

2.5m would be BROADSWORD. 3.75m would be CLAYMORE.

[MaverickSawyer]

2.5m would be BROADSWORD. 3.75m would be CLAYMORE.

If that's the case, we need a little sticker near the exhaust end that reads "This side towards Kraken."

[Nothalogh]

If that's the case, we need a little sticker near the exhaust end that reads "This side towards Kraken."

I like it, but I think there's only one thing that truly deserves those words stamped on it, Project Orion

[Streetwind]

@Nothalogh: that's actually a joke on the "Claymore" anti-personel mine.

[Captain Sierra]

2.5m would be BROADSWORD. 3.75m would be CLAYMORE.

If that's the case, we need a little sticker near the exhaust end that reads "This side towards Kraken."

I approve of these notions.

[ThatGuyWithALongUsername]

There will be a big honkin 2.5m RAPIER to go with this, right?

Yep.

A 2.5m jet engine and 2.5m rapier are totally required.

10char. Wait, do you even need 10char here, or do the quotes count?

[ModZero]

A 3.75m RAPIER engine would be equally apreciated. While the more powerful SCIMITAR had its moments, these would be leaps and bounds more useful.

While at it, can we please get a 5m FLAMBERGE sw^Wengine, please?

I'm so sorry...

[Immashift]

So cargo bays! More interesting hinge than before, and yes, that's a size 3 tank just scraping in. All the bays can swap their side fuel tanks between nothing, LF, LF/O and MP. Also, I set up the other lengths of bays/fuselages. They match the lengths of the Mk3 parts.

Opinions welcome!

I like! You said the side tanks for the bays can switch to nothing... Does that mean they disappear and the mesh on the sides is flat? Or do they just drop mass and become part of a sort of dummy fuselage? The reason I ask is that it might be... Interesting attaching things like wings to a fuselage with that sort of curve to it.

The bays look really good though. I like how wide you've made them. I wonder how you'd feel about double jointed doors. Ones that fold again in the middle to become -relatively- flat with the fuselage I might have a use for. The extra clearance above the bay can come in handy.

[ZewelVonLelek]

And here we go!

http://nertea.the3rdage.net/ksp/mk4reduxW1.jpg

Starting off with the revised cockpit again. Note 1: this form factor is now huge (can barely carry 3.75m containers)! Textures are just blocking out, but I'm already pretty pleased.

Top left and top middle: mesh and fuel switching. Most fuel-containing parts (and even cargo bays) can now swap their fuels out. There's 4 combinations - LF, LF/MP, LF/OX, LF/OX/MP. There's texture and mesh variations for each... Those two images show a LF/OX/MP fuselage and a pure LF one.

Top right: yes, we can eat Mk3 parts for lunch .

Bottom: shoulder pieces for the cockpit. These also mesh well with the new version of the 1x2.5m + 2x1.25m adapter. Three at the moment. Intake, basic aerodynamic and RCS. They can also be surface-attached to make a shuttle-shoulder-like engine mount.

Nice work as always, Nertea

may I ask though, how would pilots be able to see the runway?

Considering that you have the model and texture ready, I probably shouldn't suggest another remodelling and rerigging of the cockpit, yet maybe the windows should be closer to the front of the part, and a bit lower, instead of being nearly at the top...

[Nertea]

I like! You said the side tanks for the bays can switch to nothing... Does that mean they disappear and the mesh on the sides is flat? Or do they just drop mass and become part of a sort of dummy fuselage? The reason I ask is that it might be... Interesting attaching things like wings to a fuselage with that sort of curve to it.

The bays look really good though. I like how wide you've made them. I wonder how you'd feel about double jointed doors. Ones that fold again in the middle to become -relatively- flat with the fuselage I might have a use for. The extra clearance above the bay can come in handy.

It just means that the tank mesh in the side pod disappears and is replaced by a frame. I feel poorly about double jointed doors, though they will probably happen for any ventral cargo bays.

2.5m would be BROADSWORD. 3.75m would be CLAYMORE.

Nice work as always, Nertea

may I ask though, how would pilots be able to see the runway?

Considering that you have the model and texture ready, I probably shouldn't suggest another remodelling and rerigging of the cockpit, yet maybe the windows should be closer to the front of the part, and a bit lower, instead of being nearly at the top...

Hard to see on the pictures thus released, but I did improve the visibility from the windows - they're more vertical now and have a slice for pilots to see down.

But anyways, here are some new pictures: I have mostly completed the textures for the cockpit, cargo bays and fuselages, and in addition did the drone core. Probably going to knock out the service bay and start work on some adapter next, though I won't have time to do anything until the weekend.

New comments required: I need to completely change the adapters from the last version - the hull is just too large to be compatible with the previous layouts. I also want to keep them to a minimum number, because they're very boring to make and take time out of more interesting parts.

I have confirmed for sure:

• Mk4 to 2x 1.25 m (on the sides) and 2x 2.5 m
  
• Mk4 to 2x 1.25 m (on the sides) and 1x 3.75 m
  

These have the same profile as the cockpit, so the shoulder pieces can mount on the 1.25m nodes nicely. I'm for sure deprecating the Mk4 to 2x 1.25m and 1x 2.5m, it just doesn't work at all. So I guess... what else? I'll allow perhaps two more.

Also, did anyone really use the Iguana adapter (short fat one)?

[Captain Sierra]

Also, did anyone really use the Iguana adapter (short fat one)?

I did from time to time. Definitely not the most popular part in the pack, but I found it useful, especially as an end cap when creating large fuel pods or cargo bays (the old size fit nicely onto the octo-girders, which won't be doable anymore).

You know what we need really, bigger wings.

As for adapters, is it possible to make it go Mk4-->2.5mX2? If so that'd be useful. Somehow transitioning to Mk2 might be nice too, but that'd be highly situational at best.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Captain Sierra