PorkWorks dev thread [Habitat Pack] [SpaceplanePlus]

[NathanKell]

Yes.

10char.

[smunisto]

Not that I use them for planes, since they are not fully FAR compatible, and Porkjet mentioned they will not be until he fully finishes them(which may mean a long time).

I just want them to be a bit more FAR friendly, like - use them for spaceships, which would have to exit atmosphere vertically, without fairings.

[MaverickSawyer]

Any ideas on what the IVA of the SP+ cockpit will look like?

[wasmic]

I wonder if we delete the values for lift - will these parts act nicer with FAR?

Yes, but you'll also have to set

module = part

instead of

module = winglet

[Umlüx]

Any ideas on what the IVA of the SP+ cockpit will look like?

would it be possible to somehow add the beautiful B9 Cockpit to the part until the SP+ one is done?

[Ralathon]

would it be possible to somehow add the beautiful B9 Cockpit to the part until the SP+ one is done?

That's what I did. I gave it the internal of the space shuttle 2 man cockpit.

All you need to do is open both part configs and copy paste the relevant internal.

[Rockstar04]

I believe the main issue is with the wings. Wings need specific defintions to generate correct lift.

[Fraz86]

Porkjet, would you happen to have any preview pics for your upcoming inflatable hab update?

[Captain Sierra]

I believe the main issue is with the wings. Wings need specific defintions to generate correct lift.

No, the problem is that the fuselage parts are module = winglet. This makes the game treat them like wings and is porkjet's attempt to make a stock lifting body aircraft. This seriously screws over FAR, which can calculate lifting body physics without this and more in line with reality. Removing the lift parameters and changing it to module = part would fix the FAR compatibility. If I were a bit more versed in modulemanager, I'd do this for people.

[Lack]

No, the problem is that the fuselage parts are module = winglet. This makes the game treat them like wings and is porkjet's attempt to make a stock lifting body aircraft. This seriously screws over FAR, which can calculate lifting body physics without this and more in line with reality. Removing the lift parameters and changing it to module = part would fix the FAR compatibility. If I were a bit more versed in modulemanager, I'd do this for people.

MM does have the capacity to make changes depending on whether or not a .dll is present. So i should be possible to make a config that changes it from winglet to part if the FAR .dll is present.

Can't remember how it's done, though.

[Rockstar04]

No, the problem is that the fuselage parts are module = winglet. This makes the game treat them like wings and is porkjet's attempt to make a stock lifting body aircraft. This seriously screws over FAR, which can calculate lifting body physics without this and more in line with reality. Removing the lift parameters and changing it to module = part would fix the FAR compatibility. If I were a bit more versed in modulemanager, I'd do this for people.

My apologies.

[jrandom]

Is it just the removal of the lift parameters and changing the module type? I might be able to give that a shot.

[Raptor831]

The ModuleManager code for doing stuff only when FAR is present would be something like this:

@PART[partName]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]
{
   @module = part
}

It does require Module Manager 2.0.1 though.

EDIT: You'll need to define the wing parameters for each wing piece. See here: https://github.com/ferram4/Ferram-Aerospace-Research It's in the readme. I've just pulled similar stock/mod parts that have the stuff already defined. The numbers are a bit over my head...

[jrandom]

The ModuleManager code for doing stuff only when FAR is present would be something like this:

@PART[partName]:NEEDS[FerramAerospaceResearch]
{
   @module = part
}

It does require Module Manager 2.0.1 though.

EDIT: You'll need to define the wing parameters for each wing piece. See here: https://github.com/ferram4/Ferram-Aerospace-Research It's in the readme. I've just pulled similar stock/mod parts that have the stuff already defined. The numbers are a bit over my head...

I'll see what I can do. What about the drag parameters? Do I remove those as well?

Edit: I can probably perform size measurements using stretchytanks to get readings. We need a measuring tape tool!

Edit 2: Any idea if I need to set dragModelType to 'default'? We're not setting the drag by had so I'm unsure if it should be that or 'FARBasicDragModel', since FBDM takes a bunch of parameters I have no way of calculating.

Edited April 13, 2014 by jrandom

[Raptor831]

I'll see what I can do. What about the drag parameters? Do I remove those as well?

Edit: I can probably perform size measurements using stretchytanks to get readings. We need a measuring tape tool!

Edit 2: Any idea if I need to set dragModelType to 'default'? We're not setting the drag by had so I'm unsure if it should be that or 'FARBasicDragModel', since FBDM takes a bunch of parameters I have no way of calculating.

Yeah, the stock drag parameters can just be zeroed out. FAR ignores them, and having them in may cause odd things. The readme does an ok job of explaining the numbers, but I just stole them from B9 wings and Ferram's configs for the stock wings when I was making some MM edits for my saves. Check the FerramAerospaceResearch.cfg in the FAR folder, as that will give you the MM configs for adding all the appropriate things.

[jrandom]

Yeah, the stock drag parameters can just be zeroed out. FAR ignores them, and having them in may cause odd things. The readme does an ok job of explaining the numbers, but I just stole them from B9 wings and Ferram's configs for the stock wings when I was making some MM edits for my saves. Check the FerramAerospaceResearch.cfg in the FAR folder, as that will give you the MM configs for adding all the appropriate things.

I've got partial working support for FAR (and full support for RealFuels) implemented, but there are... issues. The strake and all the control surfaces exhibit way too much lift, and I think maybe something about how the plane parts are defined are conflicting horribly with Kerbal Joint Reinforcement -- some parts are not only wobbly, but they're wobbly in very strange ways.

I'll keep pegging away at it, but it's trickier than it looks.

[tychochallenge]

are there plans for a bigger centrifuge? I'm not sure if I can fit all my Kerbals in for my upcoming epic Jool mission

[Tangle]

Tycho, add radial attachment points and put a centrifuge each via multiples of four. If you can't handle that, just spin the ship while you're not burning.

[123nick]

can you remove the winglet / lift modules on the mk2 parts? they seem to do something with my game where if i play with the parts, launch a ship with the parts, and start to take off, the entire world turns black, hud still visible, but the navball is also entirely erased, and altitude glitch out. im certain its the winglet module.

[Starwaster]

can you remove the winglet / lift modules on the mk2 parts? they seem to do something with my game where if i play with the parts, launch a ship with the parts, and start to take off, the entire world turns black, hud still visible, but the navball is also entirely erased, and altitude glitch out. im certain its the winglet module.

That's not enough to do what you're describing.

You should post your output_log.txt file, located in the KSP_Data folder.

Not the ksp.log. output_log.txt

An easy way to do it for you and us is to use dropbox and share the link here. If you don't use dropbox you should. Very handy.

Alternatively you could use pastebin but if it's a very large file (lots of errors) then that could be a problem.

[royying]

I found the MK2 cockpit and fuselage look like the SR-71 Blackbird

So I decide to clone it to KSP

This is SR-71 Whitebird

With cargo bay and 6 crew capacity

SSTO ability

Dock with Space Station

[Justin Kerbice]

Nice set of plane parts, good work Porkjet.

Don't know if it's the plane part themselves or the turbojet engine but with this cockpit, a "basic" plane turn to a SR-71 like superman (fastest speed 2151 m/s near 21000 m). I beat character played by Clint Eastwood in Firefox I guess by achieving a bit more than 1 Mm in 12 minutes sharp.

Does anyone else have fuel issue with mk2 bicoupler ? Using it alone + two turbojet engines (with part clipping enabled to do so), it doesn't work :| engines flame-out with "liquid fuel deprived" reason.

[Captain Sierra]

Okay, so I took inventory of what I feel like I'm fundamentally missing when building with this pack and here's where it stands. In order to feel complete, we (read: I) need the following:

• High performance surface mounted radial intake (matching heat tiles as I find myself wanting them on the ventral side rather than the dorsal side)
  
• SAS unit
  
• Really flat Mk2-1.25m adapter (half meter or less, I can pound out a quick model for this myself)
  
• Monoprop tank (I already pounded out a model for this, needs texturing)
  

That makes the pack fully playable without any future maintenance (IMO). To make it mostly complete, I would also go for the following:

• inline docking port (so I don't have to make my own with small bays and other parts)
  
• inline battery (not super necessary, but good to have)
  
• ventral opening bay (because building bombers is fun )
  
• B9 style landing gear (because the stock ones sometimes don't give enough clearance and don't look as pretty)
  
• mk2 structural tail connector
  
• inline cockpit (purely for completeness here)
  
• varied cargo bays such as some mounting laterally (sidesaddle plane bays) and some mounting on their heat tiles (for non-plane freighters)
  
• canards, tail fins, and winglets
  

I think that's everything.

Porkjet, I pounded out a monoprop tank model that should theoretically hold 100-120 units of monoprop (won't know until I see it in game). I still need to UV wrap it to a texture sheer (one of yours that I tweaked some colors on). It's derived straight from your models so it's guaranteed compatibility. What file format do you want it in?

[Justin Kerbice]

@Captain Sierra: what about airbrakes ? It's good to have some sometimes, FS have one, I know B9 have too, it can saves distance on landing .

I really would like to have good looking air brakes (maybe one could be a combo with liquid fuel tank or air intake in the shape of a short mk2 fuselage).

[Captain Sierra]

@Captain Sierra: what about airbrakes ? It's good to have some sometimes, FS have one, I know B9 have too, it can saves distance on landing .

I really would like to have good looking air brakes (maybe one could be a combo with liquid fuel tank or air intake in the shape of a short mk2 fuselage).

I personally have never had the need for them. Nice to have tho.

I guess that's really up to Porkjet.