[WIP] Static Awesome's Spaceplane parts of Awesomeness! (need a texture guy/gal!)

[StaticArcher]

This is my -very- first part, and I've only just downloaded blender a few days ago, so keep criticisms very constructive please!

In any case, I've noticed that even with the B9 Aerospace pack, there's just a lot missing from the MK2 size spaceplane area, so I'm going to try and fill this gap as best I can. I will be making a series of MK2 and possibly MK1 airplane parts.

My first part is this loosely F22-Raptor inspired fuselage+intake combo. It has the same weight as a standard MK2 fuselage, and the exact same Intake properties as two of the KSP stock intakes. This is just coincidence, and has -absolutely- nothing to do with them being copied and pasted configs.

In any case, I've got ideas of my own, but if anyone has anything that fits the whole "improve the MK1-2 spaceplane part set" theme, let me know! And if anyone would be so kind as to help me texture, that'd be appreciated, because I'm a crap artist.

Apparently you have to have a license, but... if anyone wants to modify or steal these in any way, just keep it in the KSP forum, and shoot me a message so I can see what you did with it!

And here's the download link, and a reserved post... JUST IN CASE.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-OqsRAALVzDME96Szc0TXhQeEU/edit?usp=sharing

Updated: 19DEC2013 @03:40AM EST

Edited January 31, 2015 by sal_vager

[DracovaXIV]

I've finally decided to register on this forum (first post, yay!) because your project is extremely close to what I'd like to work with, and you clearly have the functional basics of part creation down. It's better than my own attempts. Yes, I can do textures, at least in theory (it's been a while), and would gladly help you. I have some ideas for parts as well, and would probably rather contribute to someone's pack rather than go through the hurdles of starting my own.

Before I had ever heard of KSP, I used to play Orbiter, and I've always felt like KSP needed spaceplanes like the ones in that simulator (see here: http://vchamp.drivehq.com/orbiter/index.html). The B9 Aerospace pack helps out a great deal, and the parts in it are beautiful, but it's still lacking. I think Mk2 parts definitely need a two-seater cockpit with side seating, for one, and Mk1 needs a blunt cockpit with a .625m front stack mount, or built-in nose RCS.

I had taken a look at the B9 Aerospace textures. They seem to be roughly at half opacity, and use the background color of the part itself to finish the job. There's also a glow texture (cockpit lights, engine nozzles, etc). This is quite advanced, but I'd love to take a swing at it.

Do you know the correct dimensions/vertex counts for parts? In other words, will they stack seamlessly with others? I've been looking for that info, personally... Oh, by the way! These are spaceplane parts, where integrity is key. The parts need cavities on the stack faces (for internal strut connections). I can explain, if this sounds strange.

[bazz]

I will be watching in anticipation the mk2 series definitely needs some love.

Some suggestions to help your juices flow

- A fuselage part with 1.25m radius recess for attaching side tanks/engines.

- Mk2 fuselage cockpit with adapter as one part, if that makes sense? This I feel will look less derpy than the current options.

- Mk2 Passenger compartment

- Rocket fuel tank versions

- Rear piece, a twin engine adapter / mount with a raised tail boom in the middle

- Rear piece, a single engine adapter / mount with a double raised tail boom either side

[DracovaXIV]

A Mk2 passenger compartment is definitely among the high priority items I have in mind. Currently, you can add crew capacity to a fuselage section and transfer crew via Crew Manifest, but I definitely want crew sections with IVAs. Something small, with round portholes. Also, something more interesting than just seats... Maybe a couple of submarine-like sleeping bunks, to suggest long(er)-duration mission.

Judging from Static Archer's other posts, he's concerned about how B9 wing sections have ugly overlaps on Mk2 parts. I agree, Mk2 needs thinner wings! The way I fix this problem currently is with Taverio's conformal RCS tanks, they fill in those nooks and crannies pretty well. One way we could go is by designing a bunch of LFO tank sections based on the same concept (4m, 2m, 1m) which would serve as "spackle".

Mk2 also definitely needs a tail section with no engine mounts at all, if for no other reason than the fact that this doesn't exist yet. It'll be a flat, wide, horizontal taper, like on the XR2 in Orbiter. Another one would be a cockpit which perfectly mates with delta wings on each side (i.e. just like the delta gliders).

By the way, I've examined B9 parts for Mk1 and Mk2, and counted the vertices. Since B9 parts are very high quality, and virtually everyone uses them, they should be accepted as the standard. That said:

- Mk1 has 24 sides, and a flat top. The bottom 6 sides are the heatshield, the next 3 on each side are grey in color, and the top is white/silver.

- Mk2 has 20 sides (not 100% on this) and a flat top. I should draw a diagram for this one, since it's a complex shape. Likewise, the bottom 3 on each side are the heatshield, and the next 3 are grey. It's probably worth adding that the bottom of a Mk2 is identical to a Mk3 (maybe we could expand Mk3 as well? It's very much neglected).

[StaticArcher]

@DracovaXIV: Definitely good points. I haven't imported the B9 parts yet, but I know it's -perfectly- aligned with the Stock (KSP) Mk2 fuselage, even BETTER than the B9 parts actually! Take a B9 part and put it up to the fuselage, and then take one of mine. You'll notice it looks like the B9 parts are sitting just a tad too low, and maybe a little undersized (.05 or so scale-wise). As far as spaceplane parts, I'll look into what needs done code-wise to add RCS parts, but I'm pretty sure it's just transforms and a little code. I'll definitely be using the Orbiter craft as inspiration, because YES, there needs to be tail ends like the XR2, the XR5, and the TX. Putting mounts inside a part shouldn't be too difficult, but it would be up to the player not to put high-gimbal parts in there, I think. I hadn't thought of making "filler" or "spackle" parts before, but that's actually not a terrible idea, except for that TERRIBLY UGLY texture overlap thing that happens. So the angles would have to be right, but I'll play with it.

@Bazz: Exactly! The kind of parts I was looking at making, with a few new ideas I'll definitely take a poke at. I totally appreciate the ideas, they -will- be used.

I'll take those suggestions to heart this weekend, and see what I can come up with. It took me less than an hour to make this simple part, and only another three to figure out how UV maps work. (It won't take me -THAT- long ever again, I hope!) I'll make some posts if I find some time before the weekend to get started. Thanks for the interest!

[StaticArcher]

Oh, and also, to elaborate what I was saying in regards to the B9 versus Stock parts, here's an example:

KSP Stock MK2 fuselage (left) attached to B9 fuselage (right):

KSP Stock MK2 fuselage (left) attached to my prototype intake part (right):

[DracovaXIV]

I should probably add that I have yet been unable to get your part to show up in my parts list. Tried correcting the path for the model file (changed model = prototypes/Parts/TestPart1/NewModel to model = NewModel.mu, but that didn't do it either. Any ideas?

I'm well aware of that problem when trying to mate C7 Mk2 to the B9 Mk2. I haven't actually used those C7 parts in my creations, since they're redundant and B9 parts look better; but I'd imagine the problem can be covered with a .cfg hotfix that adjusts the nodes.

Here's the biggest problem I've had when trying to model parts (yes, I've dabbled): I don't know the exact vertex shape of these parts. Did you get a template from somewhere? Could you share it with me? Moreover... Is there any way to import .mu files, in order to measure them?

[StaticArcher]

Oh, I can definitely help you out in regards to templates. You see, I'm using the stock parts as a template, by importing them into blender and doing my editing after that.

I'm using this addon for blender, thanks to the wonderful user taniwha: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/43513-Blender-mu-import-export-addon

And my part won't show up, eh? That's.... disconcerting. I'll double check everything once I get home and see if I uploaded the wrong texture, wrong model, or wrong config.

edit: And make sure you check my .cfg for how to rescale those parts to make them fit!

edit2: Make sure you're checking "structural" because that's where I have them placed for now.

Edited December 19, 2013 by StaticArcher

[Read have Read]

I painted over the original textures in the style of B9. I managed to get the part loading, after renaming and changing half of the part.cfg to values from stock and B9 part. I have never seen a part.cfg like this before. I don't even want to see what the UVs look like, speaking of which, if the UVs for this part was the same as how Bac9 sets his up, you could probably use a b9 texture, you already use the same Creative Commons licence.

http://pastebin.com/3i3a5MFD

 PART
{
    // --- general parameters ---
    name = testpart1
    module = Part
    author = staticawesome

    // --- asset parameters ---
    mesh = model.mu		
    scale = 1.0
    rescaleFactor = 1

    // --- node definitions ---
    // definition format is Position X, Position Y, Position Z, Up X, Up Y, Up Z
node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.545, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -1.549, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0


node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, -0.8, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1

    // --- FX definitions ---

    // --- editor parameters ---
    TechRequired = aerospaceTech
    entryCost = 31725
    cost = 4350
    category = 2
    subcategory = 0
    title = testpart1
    manufacturer = staticawesome
    description = I HAZ MADE PART

    // attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
    attachRules = 1,0,1,1,0


    // --- standard part parameters ---
    mass = 0.87
    dragModelType = default
    maximum_drag = 0.2
    minimum_drag = 0.3
    angularDrag = 1
    crashTolerance = 30
    breakingForce = 180
    breakingTorque = 180
    maxTemp = 3000
    fuelCrossFeed = True

MODULE
{
  name = ModuleResourceIntake
  resourceName = IntakeAir
  checkForOxygen = true
  area = 0.004
  intakeSpeed = 10
  intakeTransformName = Intake1
}

MODULE
{
  name = ModuleResourceIntake
  resourceName = IntakeAir
  checkForOxygen = true
  area = 0.004
  intakeSpeed = 10
  intakeTransformName = Intake2
}

RESOURCE
{
 name = IntakeAir
 amount = 0.5
 maxAmount = 1.0
}

}

[StaticArcher]

I used the new NODE format brought in by the new part-tools, so I can set up my attach points in unity rather than blender, so that's one reason why the configs are different. See this thread for details:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/36455-Partially-Solved-New-Node-System-Unable-to-get-it-working?highlight=node+size

I'm also using the new (0.20+) version of the model loader. At least for that portion maybe I'll have to fall back to the old. And the UVs are... the same as the texture. Which I thought was always the case. Unless you're copying portions of the texture over to another portion (overlapping faces on the UV wrap), which I'm not advanced enough to use yet.

AND apparently I'm completely stupid and uploaded the wrong asset folder. >.<

Editing OP to fix that.

EDIT: Apparently it was because I went from my 'working directory' (prototypes/Parts) and then changed the folder name to "StaticAwesome" without renaming the model path in the config. Changing that now. Can also confirm that everything else in the .cfg is fine, even if a bit sloppy and unconventional.

Edited December 19, 2013 by StaticArcher

[DracovaXIV]

I had no idea there was an addon to import .mu into Blender! This is terrific! I thought it didn't exist yet, and that was my reasoning for why there are so few mods that mate with "unusual" part shapes. I'm going to try reverse-engineering a few parts in order to produce neutral Blender templates. That ought to make work easier.

As regarding the use of B9 textures: it's not at all that simple! If you open one of those textures in a Raster editor, you will see what I mean. The basic texture is translucent. There's another texture (a smaller file) which determines how the part glows (inside of engine nozzles, cockpit lights, etc). Overlaying these results in something that looks weird; much darker than how it looks in-game. I suspect there is another color (navy gray? Kind of like Hatsune Miku's top) which is the base color of the model, and some kind of bloom effect that gives it the vibrant, light color that it has. I don't know how wrong I am in these assertions (yet). I wish I could figure it out.

[StaticArcher]

Edit: Replied again thinking my post was deleted. That's okay, it showed me DracovaXIV posted again!

Yep, that was my thoughts exactly as far as the .mu importing goes. And yes, I saw that B9 uses normal maps, and I don't know how they work at -all-. It's a set of textures that apply a weight (or amount) of effect to a texture/model based on color, and I'm not exactly sure how they work either. But my textures are pure simpleness, and don't have that 2nd effect layer.

Edited December 19, 2013 by StaticArcher

[StaticArcher]

I'd like to mention again that I literally just downloaded Blender last week, and haven't done 3d modelling before. So forgive my sloppiness. In the meantime, here's a little bit of work I've done in my sparse leisure time:

The start of a bi-coupler with tail boom!

[StaticArcher]

Ugh. Progress is slowing because I have -no idea- how to UV unwrap objects this complex. Adding more seams isn't working, but I'll keep trying!

[KhaosCorp]

Couple things...

You do realize that Unity defined attach nodes are only about 1/2 working atm? Your honestly better off using config defined attach points for now.

For something like the model above dont try to unwrrap the whole thing at once, rather pick sections and unwrap just that section. Sometimes it helps to keep your meshes seperate for this, but not required.

Try unwrapping the tail boom on its own, the 2 rear attach points on their own, can do the main body as its own, and then unwrap any bits left after all that. Typically anything more complex than a box or cyliner is gonna give you a headache is you try to unwrap it all at once.

Even people that have been doing this for years and years typicaly break complex geometry objects down like this (though, I have seen a few badasses that can unwrap stuff like that at once and map it perfect).

[st3rv]

I've been trying to find someone to collaborate with in order to get some of my own parts into the game, I was wondering if you would be interested in a skill exchange; If I was to model and texture the parts, could you implement the into the game? I've had limited success but I find getting the scaling correct and setting up nodes too difficult and time consuming for me now (just got a new job). Let me know if you're interested, It would be nice to pass my project on to someone capable of finishing it and since I'm already experienced in modelling and texturing it should save you plenty of time with the early parts of addon creation.

Project thread is here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55960-Red-Rooster-Industries-Aerospace-Pack-%28WIP%29?p=744164#post744164

Just send me a PM if you're interested,

Cheers

[StaticArcher]

In regards to the unity-defined attach nodes... they work fine, just not the "size" parameter. Other than that... works fine so far. Surface attach and everything else is still defined the old way.

@st3rv, I'd be more than happy to take any models you want and try to balance them the best I can, and write configs/do up the attach points. It's pretty easy for me, so sounds pretty mutually beneficial to me!

[st3rv]

Glad to hear it mate, I'll PM you some details with which you can contact me.