PorkWorks dev thread [Habitat Pack] [SpaceplanePlus]

[Starwaster]

I wouldn't have known how to design it without FAR. And I don't think AJE makes any sense without it, either. It's a fun combo -- high-speed vehicles are way trickier not just to design, but to fly.

This was the starting point. I worked my way up from that, resulting in that fifth iteration shown above.

Well, you still had part of a plane

[ultrasquid]

Testing the new parts before texturing.

…

That "0.625/1.25/0.625" adapter: Quite handy and looks better than radial attach whackjobs.

http://i.imgur.com/ELBW2C4.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Qudzeqi.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/c6FuJRX.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/4iip2Sv.jpg

These are some of the best parts to come along in a long time, but about that "0.625/1.25/0.625" adapter: I'd been hoping for something sort of backwards of that, for attaching a 1.25 cockpit module to a Mk 2 airframe with integrated jet air intakes. I know you already have some with underslung intakes, but I was thinking side-by-side, like on many fighter jets including this F-35:

[jrandom]

Well, you still had part of a plane

The 2nd version flew much better -- fixed the yaw stability issue and lack of roll authority at higher altitudes exhibited by the original:

Porkjet: Partswise, I wouldn't mind adapters (short and long) for connecting the SP+ pieces to B9's S2 pieces. Or heck, maybe just a re-imagining/replacement of the S2 pieces entirely. Go all out! Be the next B9! I'm... sure you've got nothing better to do, right?

[Starwaster]

The 2nd version flew much better -- fixed the yaw stability issue and lack of roll authority at higher altitudes exhibited by the original:

http://i.imgur.com/5ZY8Qsy.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XJeWzF1.jpg

Porkjet: Partswise, I wouldn't mind adapters (short and long) for connecting the SP+ pieces to B9's S2 pieces. Or heck, maybe just a re-imagining/replacement of the S2 pieces entirely. Go all out! Be the next B9! I'm... sure you've got nothing better to do, right?

I've made such an adapter but it doesnt blend smoothly from one to the other and as I no longer have a computer for decent modeling work I cant continue work on it.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Starwaster

[jrandom]

I've made such an adapter but it doesnt blend smoothly from one to the other and as I no longer have a computer for decent modeling work I cant continue work on it.]

Y'know, I've always wanted to try my hand at parts creation, but I suck at 3D modeling. What program did you use and what is your toolchain from mesh->kerbal? I could always see if I could refine your starting point.

[royying]

after I update to RPM 0.17, the standard cockpit only have 1 monitor works

[CptRichardson]

Say, Porkjet, is there any way we could help lighten the load by letting us have a crack at textures? Say, if a part's textures get done by somebody before you do them, then you don't have to do them and can focus on the other parts.

[Starwaster]

Y'know, I've always wanted to try my hand at parts creation, but I suck at 3D modeling. What program did you use and what is your toolchain from mesh->kerbal? I could always see if I could refine your starting point.

I used XSI Mod Tool. Except I'm not sure if it's really called that because it was purchased by Autodesk and I think they called it Softimage.

Except that it's also been discontinued. But I liked it because it was free and it didn't have Blender's convoluted steep learning cliff. (it's not a learning curve it's a CLIFF and you fall off and die)

So, I'd build the mesh in XSI, unwrap it and adjust the UV map there. Then export it using Crosswalk as a .dae which Unity's editor can read. Tangents are a pain; it seems like hit or miss if I build them and export them with the mesh as to whether Unity picks them up or not.

Also after unwrapping and adjusting the UV map, I 'stamp' it, which means that it saves the UV map as a texture which I use later when creating the part's texture

So I then load it up in Unity, open the stamped texture Photoshop and then I can edit the texture in Photoshop and alt-tab over to Unity to see how it looks.

Then I export it from Unity after adding collision mesh, KSP shader and any special colliders (like ladders or hatches). The texture I save while working on it as a psd so I can retain photoshop's layers. Unity can read the psd natively and later export it as a tga (or other texture) with the mesh.

I already have the part folder set up and export directly into the part folder (of my development copy of KSP)

And I guess that's about it...

Most of my textures look kind of bland; I lack experience. The one in the adapter above was a frankenstein creation mostly using Porkjet's SP+ textures. (otherwise I might have released that part)

[ArcFurnace]

after I update to RPM 0.17, the standard pit only have 1 monitor works

[...] the monitor model that previously came with RPM was removed. (Because it has broken colliders.) Most IVAs that say 'uses RasterPropMonitor' actually rely on that old model, and thus will be broken by the installation of RPM 0.17 until they are appropriately edited.

I'm using RPM 0.16 (the previous version) and it works fine; you can get the older version from the Github release page for RPM if you don't want to wait for Porkjet to fix the IVA (not sure how difficult it will actually be, might just consist of altering the IVA config file a bit so it uses the new models from 0.17).

[Angelo Kerman]

How did you make the lights in the pits glow? Is there a tutorial?

[Porkjet]

Say, Porkjet, is there any way we could help lighten the load by letting us have a crack at textures? Say, if a part's textures get done by somebody before you do them, then you don't have to do them and can focus on the other parts.

Sadly no, its not that simple, but thx for the offer. You can't really make a texture for a model without actually having a model.

And to be honest, I wouldn't even want it, having 100% control over the looks of this mod is just awesome!

How did you make the lights in the pits glow? Is there a tutorial?

It's an animation of the emissive color of the material. Basically, when the lights are off, the emissive is still active, but its colored black so its not visible.

Look up engine emissives, theres tutorials here on the forum. in the CFG the pit lights are then simply used with a ModuleAnimateGeneric, or firespitter FSanimateGeneric.

EDIT:

I'm considering adding a Monopropellant fuselage after all.

Question: Do you want a Xenon Fuselage in addition to that?

Edited July 3, 2014 by Porkjet

[MOARdV]

EDIT:

I'm considering adding a Monopropellant fuselage after all.

Question: Do you want a Xenon Fuselage in addition to that?

I'd be happy with just a Mono fuselage part. Although I've rediscovered Ion drives recently, since Squad changed them up in 23 or 23.5 (whichever it was), but *I* don't see making spaceplanes with ion drives.

[Albert VDS]

Well the new tri-coupler is ideal for a dual ion-drive, so yes.

[Porkjet]

Basically, I'm going to split the top texture of the small fuselages in two halves so I'll be able to have 4 different texture combinations for that mesh:

1) Liquid Fuel

2) LFO

3) Monoprop

4) ??? (your vote here)

I'll be using Firespitter texture switcher to put them all into a single editor entry.

[BudgetHedgehog]

Electric charge? Would be handy to have a Mk2 shaped battery instead of carting some around in the cargo bay.

[Prime flux]

Basically, I'm going to split the top texture of the small fuselages in two halves so I'll be able to have 4 different texture combinations for that mesh:

1) Liquid Fuel

2) LFO

3) Monoprop

4) ??? (your vote here)

I'll be using Firespitter texture switcher to put them all into a single editor entry.

???= lifesupport ?

[BudgetHedgehog]

???= lifesupport ?

If you're going to add mod resources, there's no end to the possibilities. Kethane, Water, Life Support, ArgonGas, Uranium, WasteHeat.. not to mention all the Real Fuel options. No, I think it'd be best to stick with stock resources, which means either Oxidiser, Electric Charge, XenonGas, SolidFuel or EVA Propellant.

[CptRichardson]

Basically, I'm going to split the top texture of the small fuselages in two halves so I'll be able to have 4 different texture combinations for that mesh:

1) Liquid Fuel

2) LFO

3) Monoprop

4) ??? (your vote here)

I'll be using Firespitter texture switcher to put them all into a single editor entry.

4: Combined Monoprop/RTG/Battery/Xenon multipurpose deep space support module for interplanetary drone flights. (With Mechjeb 'unlock features as you unlock tech' functions so it can come earlier in the tech tree and still be useful without being overpowering yet)

Edited July 3, 2014 by CptRichardson

[mrmcp1]

I think a Xenon container would be good especially with that tricoupler you have shown us.

[Damaske]

I think a Zenon/battery part would fit the Ion engine friendly triple adapter nicely.

[sharpspoonful]

If you're going to add mod resources, there's no end to the possibilities. Kethane, Water, Life Support, ArgonGas, Uranium, WasteHeat.. not to mention all the Real Fuel options. No, I think it'd be best to stick with stock resources, which means either Oxidiser, Electric Charge, XenonGas, SolidFuel or EVA Propellant.

Ooor package Modular Fuel tanks. That way you could make a general purpose tank that could be modified as the user sees fit. This way, it's only a relatively light plugin compared to multiple parts, models, textures, etc.

[jrandom]

I'm considering adding a Monopropellant fuselage after all.

Question: Do you want a Xenon Fuselage in addition to that?

Since I use RSS I've got RealFuels and can fill the parts with whatever, but I'd love to see a SAS part. That would be handy for those suborbital hoppers I've been trying to build. (I've given up on SSTOs for the time-being -- they're incredibly difficult to pull off on an Earth-sized Kerbin.)

[jazzman13]

Basically, I'm going to split the top texture of the small fuselages in two halves so I'll be able to have 4 different texture combinations for that mesh:

1) Liquid Fuel

2) LFO

3) Monoprop

4) ??? (your vote here)

I vote combined xenon/electric charge. With liquid fuel, LFO, monoprop and ion supplies, you cover all the bases for stock. Solid fuel storage wouldn't work IRL so it would feel weird to have it in here.

[BudgetHedgehog]

All these people suggesting xenon to go with the tricoupler are forgetting one thing, I think - ion engines have very low thrust. They can almost give a light weight probe a useable TWR. You're putting two (how are you going to power both?) one the back of a plane. Yes, SSTO planes are going to be light but really, you're pushing either 3 engines (one central and two on the wings) or 1 (RAPIER? Or a nuke? Because there's no way ion thrusters can be used as your orbital insertion engines), all the wings, a command pod.. they'd only be useful for very small OMS, not for interplanetary travel, the thrust is too damned low. And you'd need to create about 18 E/s - that's one Gigantor or 9 of the smaller extendible ones. And they have to always be in direct sunlight. Ion thrusters don't make much sense to put on the back of a heavy cargo plane. On one that's made of cubic struts, massless batteries and solar panels, sure, but not an SSTO.

Ooor package Modular Fuel tanks. That way you could make a general purpose tank that could be modified as the user sees fit. This way, it's only a relatively light plugin compared to multiple parts, models, textures, etc.

I think this could be the best idea, as much as I'm hesitant to install yet another mod that's only there because of a dependency.

EDIT: If Pork doesn't want to implement that, my vote stays resolutely at 'a battery'.

Edited July 4, 2014 by ObsessedWithKSP

[Highlad]

Dude, you should put together a 3m capsule as part of your habitat pack. I really think we need one what with the new bigger tanks.