PorkWorks dev thread [Habitat Pack] [SpaceplanePlus]

[royying]

In cockpit action group menu, there are two "toggle" option,

one is controlling the reaction wheel, another one is controlling the light

it is quite confusing...

[sharpspoonful]

I'll keep my request simple; matching tail fins. I can't keep using the KSO parts because of RAM restrictions.

[Starwaster]

In cockpit action group menu, there are two "toggle" option,

one is controlling the reaction wheel, another one is controlling the light

it is quite confusing...

Complain to Squad and ask for the ability to rename the GUI for those modules via config.

[Neutrinovore]

I'll keep my request simple; matching tail fins. I can't keep using the KSO parts because of RAM restrictions.

But you CAN keep just the KSO tailfin and delete all the other parts. That's what I did. After playing around with the KSO for a while, I decided it was just a wee bit too small to be useful for carrying anything other than its own bespoke space station parts, so I got rid of everything having to do with the shuttle itself, except the rudder, I think the part is called. Now that the Super 25 is out, I find THAT useful as a real shuttle, so I'm keeping that one. But for small probes and whatnot, and for crew transfers to and from LKO, I most definitely use SpacePlane+.

Anyway, just be sure to keep the relevant texture and .MU files, and I'm pretty sure you'll still need Firespitter, but that takes you down from, what, a few dozen parts to one. That should fit under any RAM cap.

Sorry for digressing (slightly) off-topic.

[sharpspoonful]

But you CAN keep just the KSO tailfin and delete all the other parts. That's what I did. After playing around with the KSO for a while, I decided it was just a wee bit too small to be useful for carrying anything other than its own bespoke space station parts, so I got rid of everything having to do with the shuttle itself, except the rudder, I think the part is called. Now that the Super 25 is out, I find THAT useful as a real shuttle, so I'm keeping that one. But for small probes and whatnot, and for crew transfers to and from LKO, I most definitely use SpacePlane+.

Anyway, just be sure to keep the relevant texture and .MU files, and I'm pretty sure you'll still need Firespitter, but that takes you down from, what, a few dozen parts to one. That should fit under any RAM cap.

Sorry for digressing (slightly) off-topic.

I also found out that Helldiver edited the ATM files so that it wouldn't compress his NRM's, emissions, textures and IVA's at all...which in turn meant that my 30+ mods with the huge global textures that he has for all of his parts equated to a RAM depletion.

[Starwaster]

I also found out that Helldiver edited the ATM files so that it wouldn't compress his NRM's, emissions, textures and IVA's at all...which in turn meant that my 30+ mods with the huge global textures that he has for all of his parts equated to a RAM depletion.

Isnt it just a config node? Make a tweak config for it and make sure it uses uses :FINAL

And yeah, dat huge monolithic texture file....

[Porkjet]

And yeah, dat huge monolithic texture file....

It's actually very efficient to do this. Instead of a bunch of seperate textures he merged em into one big file, that way it's easier to re-use parts of the texture for multiple models and also lay out all the things more efficiently with less space wasted. I'm doing this on a smaller scale too with SP+, all the adapters textures are on one file for example. They all have the same mk2 and mk1 end piece texture and parts of the heatshield, so basically it would be even more efficient if I moved all the fuselages onto that file too so a single copy of that texture could be applied to all parts that need it. I havn't done it yet for reasons of convenience, because my parts keep comming out one by one so and I can't take into account parts that don't exist yet when arranging the UV maps.

[Porkjet]

Testing the new parts before texturing.

Long Nose/Tail thing: very pointy, careful where you point this.

Flat plane tail: good for flying wing and radial booster designs. Much lift.

1.25m Engine Shroud: this is just supposed to look cool

Mk2 short Nose (-cone?): good to have one around

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

Edited June 26, 2014 by Porkjet

[angusmcbeth]

i can see a dreamchaser copy on the cards with those new parts! Nice work!

[CptRichardson]

Oh. Oh my.

Um, do you need any flavor text for these?

Edited June 26, 2014 by CptRichardson

[Porkjet]

Yeah, ideas allways welcome!

[ZodiusInfuser]

Wow! Just wow!

[jrandom]

Fantastic work! This is shaping up to be a great set of parts.

[CptRichardson]

Hypersonic Nose/Tailcone: When scientists developed the Mk2 fuselage system, Kerbals finally had a way to punch the skies. When pilots hit Mach 3, the skies punched back. So, scientists came up with the K2-PM 'PunchMAX' nosecone in order to punch the skies even harder, steal the skies lunch money and get away before the skies could call the physics police to report the rocket propelled mugging. Comes in Liquid Fuel/Oxidizer, Liquid Fuel, Air Intake, and reduced weight structural variants for all your skypunching needs.

Or would you prefer a more factual and boring flavor-text type?

Edited June 26, 2014 by CptRichardson

[StEligius]

Wow Porkjet, very Ho-229. Can't wait to play around. <3

[MOARdV]

Testing the new parts before texturing.

Long Nose/Tail thing: very pointy, careful where you point this.

Flat plane tail: good for flying wing and radial booster designs. Much lift.

1.25m Engine Shroud: this is just supposed to look cool

Mk2 short Nose (-cone?): good to have one around

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

I was just about to comment about the parts that were missing from the collection, and here you are listing almost all of them. The only thing I think you don't have in this list is "Mk2 monopropellant tank". Just a short one (about 3x as long as the drone core, with a small amount of monoprop) would be enough for orbital space plane operations, based on what I've done lately.

[Wren]

The docking part has 150 monoprop, that isn't good enough for you?

[CptRichardson]

The docking part has 150 monoprop, that isn't good enough for you?

For a serious spaceplane? Not really, no. If you're launching a major payload with the thing, or building it for deep space operations, 150 monoprop isn't NEARLY enough. For a tiny spaceplane crew ferry or microsat launch? It's okay, but kinda iffy. But if you've got to have engine nacelles for extra thrust, it isn't anywhere near enough delta v.

[BudgetHedgehog]

For a serious spaceplane? Not really, no. If you're launching a major payload with the thing, or building it for deep space operations, 150 monoprop isn't NEARLY enough. For a tiny spaceplane crew ferry or microsat launch? It's okay, but kinda iffy. But if you've got to have engine nacelles for extra thrust, it isn't anywhere near enough delta v.

I'm sorry, but really?! I've docked megastructures with less than 50 units of MP before - docking a spaceplane with a payload can be done with 50 units or less. If you're using almost 150 units of MP to dock a tiny crew ferry, the problem is with your docking procedure, not the amount of MP in the docking module.

[ArcFurnace]

Crude workaround: stuff monopropellant tanks inside a cargo bay. Can fit 3x FL-25 RCS tanks + 2 Stratus-V Cylindrified tanks inside a short cargo bay without clipping through the bay doors if you use shift+Q to angle the Stratus-V tanks downwards from a horizontal mounting point. Stores 600 monopropellant.

I do agree that a dedicated monopropellant tank might be worth it. Certainly not more than one size, though, no need for more. That's where B9 got a lot of its part-screen bloat, multiple lengths of tank for all tank types for all fuselage shapes ... combinatorics adds up quick.

[CptRichardson]

Crude workaround: stuff monopropellant tanks inside a cargo bay. Can fit 3x FL-25 RCS tanks + 2 Stratus-V Cylindrified tanks inside a short cargo bay without clipping through the bay doors if you use shift+Q to angle the Stratus-V tanks downwards from a horizontal mounting point. Stores 600 monopropellant.

I do agree that a dedicated monopropellant tank might be worth it. Certainly not more than one size, though, no need for more. That's where B9 got a lot of its part-screen bloat, multiple lengths of tank for all tank types for all fuselage shapes ... combinatorics adds up quick.

I've already floated the concept of turning the SP+ pack into mission sub-packs so that people can get what they want without the stuff they don't need.

[Starwaster]

I'm sorry, but really?! I've docked megastructures with less than 50 units of MP before - docking a spaceplane with a payload can be done with 50 units or less. If you're using almost 150 units of MP to dock a tiny crew ferry, the problem is with your docking procedure, not the amount of MP in the docking module.

he said a serious spaceplane mission. FYI, the space shuttle carried over 20 metric tons of propellant shared by both its OMS and RCS motors. And I'm not even clear if that was ALL of it. (RCS had its own propellant not shared by OMS but the OMS could be shared by both)

Edit: this is what MFT is good for. No need for separate Monoprop tanks.

[CptRichardson]

he said a serious spaceplane mission. FYI, the space shuttle carried over 20 metric tons of propellant shared by both its OMS and RCS motors. And I'm not even clear if that was ALL of it. (RCS had its own propellant not shared by OMS but the OMS could be shared by both)

Like I said, for a micro-shuttle throwing a sat into orbit, you can get away with the stock docking module's RCS. If you're flying a big monster for lifting a major truss into orbit, or doing anything that involves leaving Kerbin orbit, 150 units of monopropellant is nowhere near enough for most work. Even with the new ion drive system. (though we really need a short fuselage section with xenon, battery, and an RTG to be set aside for a deep space mission pack.) And yes, theoretically, any shuttle could get away with an itty-bitty amount, but I'm not crazy enough to do docking without a pretty massive margin for error.

[Kitworks]

Porkjet, I've loved your inflatable habitats for a long time, but I've always avoided the SP+ because I've never been one for planes. But man, I was missing out! I don't know why, but your parts just make it easy. Love them.

[jrandom]

Porkjet, I've loved your inflatable habitats for a long time, but I've always avoided the SP+ because I've never been one for planes. But man, I was missing out! I don't know why, but your parts just make it easy. Love them.

I didn't really like planes that much until I got a flightstick (Logitech Extreme 3D Pro). It gets even better if you add the Improved Chase Camera mod. Either way, any kind of analog game controller will give you a much better flying experience with planes. Oh, and Environmental Visual Enhancements! Nothing like flying through volumetric clouds.