Jump to content

PorkWorks dev thread [Habitat Pack] [SpaceplanePlus]

Porkjet

By Porkjet
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

mellojoe

mellojoe

Posted
Posted

Did you break my favorite plane? The old jet fusealge is now a new name? So my most favoriteist plane I've ever made is now dead? :(

But WAIT! That means I get to make it ALL OVER AGAIN. :):D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mellojoe

mellojoe

Posted
Posted

Porkjet,

Do the open bay doors have collision mesh? Playing with the docking port, it looks like even when extended it still is slightly below the outstretched arms of the open doors. Which means, mating two of them will have the doors clipping through each other. Or mating one to a mostly flat surface will end up with the doors just hitting the surface. Will this interfere with actual docking?

((edit))

And yes, my favorite plane is now dead. But I'll get it back up and running soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RidingTheFlow

RidingTheFlow

Posted
Posted (edited)

Whoa, these packs are awesome. I was huge fan of habitat module pack, and now it has my favourite spaceplane form factor too! And the lifting body works so well!

Some part suggestions if you don't mind:

- 2x1.25 split adapter is great, but also would be very helpful to have 1.25+2x0.6 and/or 1.25+4x0.6 adapters - for mounting aux engines(OMS) for small-ish planes in nice fashion without using octostruts

- I think instead of having whole docking port part as now, it would be more flexible to have just â€Âinnards" (RCA tanks and telescoping port), which could be placed inside cargo bay - this would help making modular plane configurable per mission requirements. Space Shuttle docking adapters is made this way

- not so sure since not exactly mk2, but to replace b9 we need some spaceplane RCS - more aerodynamic than stock & with additional top thruster (to allow for just top/bottom placement without additional solitary nozzles)

Keep the great work!

Edited by RidingTheFlow
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Porkjet

Porkjet

Posted
  • Author
Posted

updated FAR support


@PART[mk2Cockpit_Standard]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2Cockpit_Inline]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2CrewCabin]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2_1m_Adapter]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2_1m_AdapterLong]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2_1m_Bicoupler]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2Fuselage_L]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2Fuselage_LFO]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2Fuselage_Short_L]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2Fuselage_Short_LFO]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[mk2CargoBayS]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
}
@PART[mk2CargoBayL]
{
	@module = Part
	!dragCoeff = DELETE
	!deflectionLiftCoeff = DELETE
	@dragModelType = default
}
@PART[deltaWingX]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 2.16 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 26 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 3.76 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 0.08 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[deltaWing_small]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 1.26 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 26 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 1.88 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 0.08 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[wingStrake]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 2.16 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 63 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 0.94 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 0.08 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[structuralWing1]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 2.16 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 45 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 1.88 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 0.08 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[structuralWing2]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 1.24 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 14 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 3.76 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 0.16 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[structuralWing3]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 0.80 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 7 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 3.76 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 0.08 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[wingConnector1]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 4 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 0 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 1.88 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 1 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[wingConnector2]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 2 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 0 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 3.76 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 1 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}

@PART[wingConnector3]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 1 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 0 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 1.88 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 1 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}

@PART[wingConnector4]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARWingAerodynamicModel
		MAC = 1 //Mean chord length in meters
		e = 0.75 //Drag per lift, lower equals more drag
		MidChordSweep = 0 //Angle of line from mid root chord to mid tip chord
		b_2 = 0.95 //Root to tip in meters
		TaperRatio = 1 //Ratio of tip chord to root chord
	}
}
@PART[elevon1]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceRange = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceArea = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARControllableSurface
		MAC = 0.5
		e = 0.9
		nonSideAttach = 1
		maxdeflect = 20
		MidChordSweep = 0
		b_2 = 1.8
		TaperRatio = 1
	}
}
@PART[elevon2]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceRange = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceArea = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARControllableSurface
		MAC = 0.62
		e = 0.9
		nonSideAttach = 1
		maxdeflect = 20
		MidChordSweep = -4
		b_2 = 1.8
		TaperRatio = 0.67
	}
}
@PART[elevon3]
{
	@module = Part
	@maximum_drag = 0
	@minimum_drag = 0
	@angularDrag = 0
	@dragCoeff = 0
	@deflectionLiftCoeff = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceRange = 0
	@ctrlSurfaceArea = 0
	MODULE
	{
		name = FARControllableSurface
		MAC = 0.86
		e = 0.9
		nonSideAttach = 1
		maxdeflect = 20
		MidChordSweep = -4
		b_2 = 1.8
		TaperRatio = 0.75
	}
}

FAR is a mean thing. It makes my planes stall so damn quickly. And I have not been able to recover from a stall yet. Nose up a tiny bit too much means DEATH!

Porkjet,

Do the open bay doors have collision mesh? Playing with the docking port, it looks like even when extended it still is slightly below the outstretched arms of the open doors. Which means, mating two of them will have the doors clipping through each other. Or mating one to a mostly flat surface will end up with the doors just hitting the surface. Will this interfere with actual docking?

((edit))

And yes, my favorite plane is now dead. But I'll get it back up and running soon.

Yes the doors have collision. Mating two of em probably won't work, I dont really know why one would want to do this tho.

Whoa, these packs are awesome. I was huge fan of habitat module pack, and now it has my favourite spaceplane form factor too! And the lifting body works so well!

Some part suggestions if you don't mind:

- 2x1.25 split adapter is great, but also would be very helpful to have 1.25+2x0.6 and/or 1.25+4x0.6 adapters - for mounting aux engines(OMS) for small-ish planes in nice fashion without using octostruts

- I think instead of having whole docking port part as now, it would be more flexible to have just â€Âinnards" (RCA tanks and telescoping port), which could be placed inside cargo bay - this would help making modular plane configurable per mission requirements. Space Shuttle docking adapters is made this way

- not so sure since not exactly mk2, but to replace b9 we need some spaceplane RCS - more aerodynamic than stock & with additional top thruster (to allow for just top/bottom placement without additional solitary nozzles)

Keep the great work!

Glad you like the lift effect! Some sleek RCS blocks are a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
philly_idle

philly_idle

Posted
Posted
Right then. Looked at the DREC and I see what you're talking about; several spaceplane parts use +Z for the shield directional. That's almost certainly wrong unless there's something weird going on with the models. I also notice a few places where someone tried to do exactly what I'm suggesting now, which is to change the shield direction to point at an angle that reflects a typical reentry orientation instead of being perfectly perpendicular to the bottom of the plane. It's just not consistent.

Now... WHY would I suggest doing something like this? See the below image. Blue is the +Z for all of the parts used. -Z (not shown) points out the bottom.

Yellow represents a reentry velocity vector. The direction the plane is traveling in. Orange vectors are +-45 degree orientations. A ghosted partial plane appears for reference in an orientation that more closely approximates a real life reentry orientation.

But we want to concentrate on the one that is oriented perpendicular to its velocity vector. That orientation makes no sense and in real life would lead to tragedy. If you fly with FAR the results would likely be loss of control followed by inability to orient shield and/or breakup due to stress factors if you have that enabled in recent versions of FAR. However, that is the orientation you would have to maintain to gain the full 25% reflectivity. If you maintain a 45 degree orientation (top orange vector) then you are only reflecting 12.5% of incoming heat.

The ghosted plane is approx 35 degrees and would only get 38% reflection, or 9.5% of incoming heat. That's aerodynamically more stable but would result in quite a bit of overheating.

But... also look at the bottom orange vector which represents the plane coming in with its tail oriented along that vector and its nose pointing back. That's a totally unrealistic reentry vector that you would likely never do, but here's the thing: a shield direction of 0,0,-1 means that a plane on that orientation reflects exactly the same amount of heat as one oriented +45 degrees. That does not make sense. Assuming a real space plane wasn't instantly torn apart by aerodynamic forces, it probably would not have sufficient shielding for its aft surfaces and would burn up.

So not only are you not rewarded for flying your plane in a realistic manner but you're rewarded for totally unrealistic reentry orientations. Is there really any part of this that does not make sense?

http://i.imgur.com/1HKYnn8l.png

Starwaster you're awesome, thanks a lot for this detailed explanation!

To summarize: For maximum reflection, the heatshield vector has to point in the same direction as the velocity vector. Assuming an (unrealistic) reentry with an attitude perpendicular to the trajectory as shown in your picture (belly forward), the heatshield vector should be the yellow one in your picture for max reflection (i.e. -Z and NOT the blue one).

Or in mathematical terms: the unit vector of velocity (v) is the same as the unit vector of heatshield (s) and they're the negative of the incoming heat unity vector (h):

v / |v| = s / |s| = (-1) * h / |h|

Did I understand you correctly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
Posted
Starwaster you're awesome, thanks a lot for this detailed explanation!

To summarize: For maximum reflection, the heatshield vector has to point in the same direction as the velocity vector. Assuming an (unrealistic) reentry with an attitude perpendicular to the trajectory as shown in your picture (belly forward), the heatshield vector should be the yellow one in your picture for max reflection (i.e. -Z and NOT the blue one).

Or in mathematical terms: the unit vector of velocity (v) is the same as the unit vector of heatshield (s) and they're the negative of the incoming heat unity vector (h):

v / |v| = s / |s| = (-1) * h / |h|

Did I understand you correctly?

not exactly because heat doesnt actually have a vector and shield effectiveness is using the dot product of velocity & shield direction (negative values count as zero). There's a special case for shield direction 0,0,0 which means 360 shielding

but yeah thats basically it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quiana

Quiana

Posted
Posted

Just a heads-up for you PorkJet, may want to ensure that you use a custom model on the cargobay. Having unattached nodes can cause some fun FAR issues too without one. Though I'm not sure if that applies if the nodes in question are 'shielded' or not. I haven't studied FAR's mechanics beyond finding out how it treats normal parts in drag.

EDIT: I do know that multiple nodes from HGR has caused some fun times with that and FAR until they used a custom model for the Radish capsule (they make cute drop-pods).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ArXen42

ArXen42

Posted
Posted

Thank you for you mod, but i think that cockpits is too heavy. Stock mk1/mk2 weigh 1.25/1.0 tons and have a seats for 1/2 kerbals. Your cockpits weigh 2.0 tons and had 2 seats for kerbals, very heavy to small spaceplanes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mellojoe

mellojoe

Posted
Posted

Porkjet, have you ever considered asking one of the other talented mod developers for help with making the Internals? Some really great internal views have been made on many different mods, and I'm sure someone would love to collaborate with you to make some internals to match your excellent parts.

Currently, I added the Mk3 internal to the cockpits (the stock is unfinished, but at least it fixes portraits) and I added the hitchhiker can to the inline crew cabin (it makes for a weird internal view, but at least it fixes portraits).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RidingTheFlow

RidingTheFlow

Posted
Posted
Thank you for you mod, but i think that cockpits is too heavy. Stock mk1/mk2 weigh 1.25/1.0 tons and have a seats for 1/2 kerbals. Your cockpits weigh 2.0 tons and had 2 seats for kerbals, very heavy to small spaceplanes.

You mixing up mk2 cockpit ant mk2 fuselage. There is no stock cockpit for mk2 fuselage. Neither there is stock cockpit for 2 kerbals. The only way to fit 2 kerbals by using stock is mk1+mk2 together, and this will be above 2 tons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
Posted
How do I install the FAR and DR config?

They are Module Manager patches. You have to have Module Manager installed.

Then copy and paste the configs into any file that has an extension of cfg. Like, PJ_spaceplane_FAR.cfg then edit and paste the config into that file.

It goes anywhere in your KSP Gamedata folder. I usually keep such configs in a folder named MyTweaks. That folder is always copied by me to new KSP installations (like updates).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSaint

TheSaint

Posted
Posted

Spaceplane Plus is an awesome mod. I've never been interested in making spaceplanes before (the stock options are too limited, and B9 is too blocky). In addition to the suggestions about nosecones and RCS thrusters above, I would also request some better landing gear options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
Posted
I suggest a nose cone part that shape like the MK2 standard cockpit

I think the drone core and inline cockpit need a nose cone to make a complete plane:)

Something similar to the cockpit he has now but without the windows. Might be able to get by with a retexturing of that part... maybe put little sensor... cameras.... lens thingies where the 'glass' is....?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Porkjet

Porkjet

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have a part half finished that is probably what you're looking for. It's a really long and pointy end bit, twice as long as the big fuel tanks.

Of course you could also just use the long adaptor and add an intake or nosecone of your choice to the front of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RidingTheFlow

RidingTheFlow

Posted
Posted

I am a bit concerned that part count/mod size will start to increase.

It seems that for a lot of suggestions (drone cores, science, ets) could be implemented by placing 1.25m relevant parts inside hollow mk2-shaped "fairing", without making a separate mk2-shaped part for everything.

Or maybe just make another "cargo bay" or "maintenance bay" which is even shorter - and, if, for example, you need "drone core", you could just place 1.25 core in this bay, along with whatever you also need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mellojoe

mellojoe

Posted
Posted
I suggest a nose cone part that shape like the MK2 standard cockpit

I think the drone core and inline cockpit need a nose cone to make a complete plane:)

What I do for my nosecone is to use the stock Mk2 adapter (that goes from the MK2 shape to the 1.25m circular) and then empty all the fuel out of it. Works fine as a nosecone. I usually end up putting the shielded docking port on front of that even to make a useable nosecone, but you could easily add a simple aerodynamic nosecone and be done with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSaint

TheSaint

Posted
Posted (edited)
I am a bit concerned that part count/mod size will start to increase.

It seems that for a lot of suggestions (drone cores, science, ets) could be implemented by placing 1.25m relevant parts inside hollow mk2-shaped "fairing", without making a separate mk2-shaped part for everything.

Or maybe just make another "cargo bay" or "maintenance bay" which is even shorter - and, if, for example, you need "drone core", you could just place 1.25 core in this bay, along with whatever you also need.

The only problem with a closed fairing is that you can't right-click on the enclosed parts while you're in flight. So if you want to transfer fuel or change the probe core settings, you're out of luck. The cargo bays are better, because you can open them in flight for access.

What I do for my nosecone is to use the stock Mk2 adapter (that goes from the MK2 shape to the 1.25m circular) and then empty all the fuel out of it. Works fine as a nosecone. I usually end up putting the shielded docking port on front of that even to make a useable nosecone, but you could easily add a simple aerodynamic nosecone and be done with it.

This is sort of what I do now. I use the Mk2>1.25m adapter, then put the 1.25m nosecone from B9 on it. But it's awkward. The black/white color division doesn't match, and the curves don't match up well either. It sounds like a nice 1.25m nosecone that matched well with the shape and texture of the Mk2 adapters would be a really flexible solution.

Edited by TheSaint
Added a response
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...