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

[Nertea]

Do you mean the 10m spherical isohedral hydrogen tank?

[Sciencek]

3 hours ago, Saltshaker said:

In the imgur album of FFT, there's a ship that looks that looks like the Discovery from 2001: A Space Odyssey. At the front is a large spheroid that looks like the Discovery's command center, ahead of the radiators. Do you know what mod that's from?

That's the largest cryogenic hydrogen tank.

With isohedral texture.

 

EDIT: the gracious mod author has beat me to it.

Edited December 7, 2017 by Sciencek

[BRAAAP_STUTUTU]

Hmm far future tech seems to constantly spam "Far Future Tech Is Available" in my console for some reason...

[AndrewHere]

14 hours ago, Nertea said:

You might need to be more specific, I don't have any such command centre

You need to have the latest NFProps development branch if using SSPXr

Didn't see this, sorry. Use the DBS release from NFE/CE/KA, there was a bug. 

 

The problem it's still there but my fps improved a lot.  

[Saltshaker]

10 hours ago, Nertea said:

Do you mean the 10m spherical isohedral hydrogen tank?

Ohhh...so its more an Enzmann than a Discovery.

 

EDIT: Speaking of things that look like big command centers, does anyone know what mod makes use of the Command Centers/Specialized Command Centers in CTT?

Edited December 7, 2017 by Saltshaker
knowledge

[AmpCat]

Not sure if this has been brought up yet (I can't read through all 89 pages of posts!), but I noticed when using the fusion and other engines which require charging, it makes them very difficult to use with automated waypoint execution tools like MechJeb. It forces you to manually activate the engine. Is this intended? If not, is there a way to be able to activate the engine without losing the charge, so MechJeb can execute a node?

 

[Nertea]

On 12/7/2017 at 5:33 AM, Saltshaker said:

Ohhh...so its more an Enzmann than a Discovery.

 

EDIT: Speaking of things that look like big command centers, does anyone know what mod makes use of the Command Centers/Specialized Command Centers in CTT?

I had them added to CTT for Stevie_D, who wanted them for Superluminal, I think. 

15 hours ago, AmpCat said:

Not sure if this has been brought up yet (I can't read through all 89 pages of posts!), but I noticed when using the fusion and other engines which require charging, it makes them very difficult to use with automated waypoint execution tools like MechJeb. It forces you to manually activate the engine. Is this intended? If not, is there a way to be able to activate the engine without losing the charge, so MechJeb can execute a node?

Having it stay charged while the throttle is at zero is possibly an option that I'll investigate in the future. 

[AmpCat]

That'd be real nice. Perhaps have it consume charge as a fuel with the throttle (very quickly) and regenerate its own to refill it? Not sure how the fuel system works to that level of detail. But then you wouldn't have to charge it to full first. Hm.

Edit: Ug. Not being able to use mechjeb for automatic node execution sucks. I always use it. Makes me consider having two separate engines. One fission/nuke for maneuvering and one fusion for long burns. 

Edited December 13, 2017 by AmpCat

[Saltshaker]

On 12/12/2017 at 3:36 PM, Nertea said:

I had them added to CTT for Stevie_D, who wanted them for Superluminal, I think. 

*snip*

Thanks! *looks at superluminal* Double thanks!

[AmpCat]

On 12/13/2017 at 10:56 PM, Saltshaker said:

Thanks! *looks at superluminal* Double thanks!

Shame that mod seems to be dead.  

Here's my dual-thrust interplanetary drive section. I'll make a hab and science section, then a lander and dock them all for a trip. I'm sure this is why @Nertea made big square radiators. One fusion for interplanetary and two heavy saltwater engines for maneuvering. 

Need some 60 degree angled wedges of those radiators for proper TIE wings.

[Saltshaker]

5 hours ago, AmpCat said:

Shame that mod seems to be dead.  

Here's my dual-thrust interplanetary drive section. I'll make a hab and science section, then a lander and dock them all for a trip. I'm sure this is why @Nertea made big square radiators. One fusion for interplanetary and two heavy saltwater engines for maneuvering. 

*snip*

Need some 60 degree angled wedges of those radiators for proper TIE wings.

Yea, I was thinking that looked like a TIE Advanced or whatever its called

Edited December 15, 2017 by Saltshaker
shorter

[AmpCat]

19 minutes ago, Saltshaker said:

Yea, I was thinking that looked like a TIE Advanced or whatever its called

I have a simpler saltwater drive ship like this, with radiators between the wings and the main hull instead of a pair of engines.. it looks a lot like a TIE Advanced. I want to try a TIE Bomber next. One side be a cargo bay, the other the fuel. But I need to get a reliable thrust balancer for asymmetric ships, that works with MechJeb. I have one, but it's quirky. I need to test it more to make sure it'll work right for me. And given the complexities of the charging drives, I'm even less excited about trying that on an asymmetric ship.

[Nertea]

7 hours ago, AmpCat said:

Shame that mod seems to be dead.  

Here's my dual-thrust interplanetary drive section. I'll make a hab and science section, then a lander and dock them all for a trip. I'm sure this is why @Nertea made big square radiators. One fusion for interplanetary and two heavy saltwater engines for maneuvering. 

 

Need some 60 degree angled wedges of those radiators for proper TIE wings.

That looks cool! I would point out that that's about the use case for those engines - main propulsion. The chargeup limits their use for precision maneuvering, which helps to balance out the immense efficiency. As you've noted, certain engine types are more flexible for that, typically the ones that have a bit lower Isp, exotic fuel types,  or higher tech. 

[AmpCat]

At first I was bummed about the new thermal limits and these seemingly 'useless' square radiators, but among them and the half squares, I've actually made some cool radiator shells around some fairly interesting rockets now. The TIE Bomber/Advanced wing arrangement actually works out well, since it's fairly conformal and symmetrical. It would be nice to get some angled ones that come down to half a width on one side (quarter panel, or 30/60/90 angles) and then one that's a 1:2 30/60/90, or full area triangle for some better TIE Bomber/TIE Interceptor shapes.  

[AmpCat]

@Nertea, I am having an issue in the VAB (not tried it in the SPH), where using mirror symmetry doesn't work right. For the triangles it flips them after you try to tweak something made with mirror symmetry, and for the squares, it does likewise, along the attachment node.

[Messernacht]

Greetings all,

 

I've been having a dig through, and I can't seem to locate where I can find the dev version of the SSPX parts. If anyone could direct me to a page number, it'd be appreciated. I'm aware that it's still very much WIP.

 

Cheers,

Edited December 16, 2017 by Messernacht
Because I can't spell. Or proofread. My fine dining and breathing skills are on-point though.

[Akira_R]

7 hours ago, Messernacht said:

Greetings all,

 

I've been having a dig through, and I can't seem to locate where I can find the dev version of the SSPX parts. If anyone could direct me to a page number, it'd be appreciated. I'm aware that it's still very much WIP.

 

Cheers,

Nertea hasn't posted anything on SSPXr in here yet. The project is up on GitHub but there are no releases for it yet, you could still DL it from there but that will likely very much be 'use at your own risk', I suspect that once Nertea is ready for people to start testing that he will provide a testing release.

[AmpCat]

Dare I ask what SSPXr is?

[makkz]

21 hours ago, AmpCat said:

Dare I ask what SSPXr is?

A revamp of the Stockalike Station Parts Expansion. You can find it on GitHub. It's not released, so don't expect it to work and expect it to change and break.

[RocketRaccoon]

Any plans to make a warp drive for this mod?

Exactly how futuristic is Far Future?

[Nertea]

Nah, you can find the complete roadmap on the git repo. 

[WuphonsReach]

https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/NearFutureElectrical/blob/master/Source/NearFutureElectrical/FissionReactor.cs#L703-L719

Feels like that value in the condition "(rate < 0.0000001)" is too large.  For the small USI reactors, running at fractional rates (10-17%), it means you can't get a good estimate of core life remaining given the current fuel load for smaller reactors.  The 0.625m USI reactors have a rate of 0.000000126785 at 100% with a fuel amount of 2.00 (730.3 days).  Running at 10% would be 7 zeros before any non-zeros and a lifespan of 7300 days (about 17 years).

Given that a C# double has 15-16 significant digits, changing that line to add one or two more zeros should not cause issues.  This logic will give an answer if you have between 0d and 25y of fuel left based on current consumption.  Below a certain rate of consumption, it assumes a minimum to avoid a possible divide by zero.

const double veryLong = 3600 * 6 * 426 * 25;
const double minimumCalculationRate = 0.000000001;
rate = (rate < minimumCalculationRate) ? minimumCalculationRate : rate;
var remaining = amount / rate;

if (remaining > veryLong)
    return Localizer.Format("#LOC_NFElectrical_ModuleFissionReactor_Field_FuelStatus_VeryLong");
else if (remaining > 0)
    return Utils.FormatTimeString(remaining);
else
    return Localizer.Format("#LOC_NFElectrical_ModuleFissionReactor_Field_FuelStatus_Exhausted");

 

[Nertea]

7 minutes ago, WuphonsReach said:

https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/NearFutureElectrical/blob/master/Source/NearFutureElectrical/FissionReactor.cs#L703-L719

Feels like that value in the condition "(rate < 0.0000001)" is too large.  For the small USI reactors, running at fractional rates (10-17%), it means you can't get a good estimate of core life remaining given the current fuel load for smaller reactors.  The 0.625m USI reactors have a rate of 0.000000126785 at 100% with a fuel amount of 2.00 (730.3 days).  Running at 10% would be 7 zeros before any non-zeros and a lifespan of 7300 days (about 17 years).

Given that a C# double has 15-16 significant digits, changing that line to add one or two more zeros should not cause issues.  This logic will give an answer if you have between 0d and 25y of fuel left based on current consumption.  Below a certain rate of consumption, it assumes a minimum to avoid a possible divide by zero.

const double veryLong = 3600 * 6 * 426 * 25;
const double minimumCalculationRate = 0.000000001;
rate = (rate < minimumCalculationRate) ? minimumCalculationRate : rate;
var remaining = amount / rate;

if (remaining > veryLong)
    return Localizer.Format("#LOC_NFElectrical_ModuleFissionReactor_Field_FuelStatus_VeryLong");
else if (remaining > 0)
    return Utils.FormatTimeString(remaining);
else
    return Localizer.Format("#LOC_NFElectrical_ModuleFissionReactor_Field_FuelStatus_Exhausted");

 

Well, aside from the fact that this surely belongs in the NFT thread, I do indeed accept these ;). 

[Electrocutor]

Here's a quick TexturesUnlimited cfg for FarFutureTech for those chomping at the bit.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1QTIOa_OIah0i7oU-1qOKUndzQweiA3Gl

A quick comment about my observations: The really shiny/smooth parts have proper specular, but the rougher metal specular is too low right now (with some exceptions). The AA-F1 and AEX-25 are currently missing specular completely, so I just defaulted those to be forced metal so they don't look strange.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Electrocutor

[Nertea]

Time for some more structured, more public testing of the new station parts pack.

Highlights

• Completely redone textures, models, configs for the mod
• Full set of new 1.25m station parts, including several inflatable modules
• Full set of 2.5m station parts, including several inflatable modules
• Full set of 3.75m station parts, including some large expandable centrifuges
• Logistics and container modules to store consumables, with support for many mod resources (eg. USI, EPL, TAC-LS)
• Several self-levelling ground base components in stack and radial sizes
• Extendable grappling tubes for connecting bases
• A vague commitment to IVAs for all crew-containing parts

Known Issues:

• Please look here first.
• A significant amount of IVA components exist in a ~kinda done~ state. This means:
  • Kerbal transforms are incorrect in many cases 
  • Some textures are missing (down to two parts)
  • Prop layouts are incomplete
  • If you want to help me with prop layouts I would be greatly obliged!!!

Git it here (ha): Stockalike Station Parts Expansion Redux - 1.0.0.A1