[WIP] Universal Storage

[Daishi]

A deployable ladder. I often find myself floating around collecting science on orbit and would appreciate a stowable ladder in a wedge.

RCS thrusters would be less useful but seriously cool. They need not deploy. Simply opening the doors to expose/activate some lateral thrusters would be original.

Ladders could work, I could always integrate some rungs into the structure of the new shroud part. Nertea's done it with batteries, so shouldn't be impossible

[Wolf Baginski]

what other utility would be useful to you as a wedge?

I don't have anything specifically in mind, and the whole thing might lead to an alternative core, but don't forget possible uses in-atmosphere and on the ground. I can see a 2-way core section as part of a rover. the spine forming a chassis component and and the two bays on the sides. Maybe 3-way; left, right, and top.

But you could do that with the existing 4-way spine, just not fit anything on the bottom. Although that does suggest an option for a flat-panel wedge, non-opening, to make a platform for the top of a rover. Need it contain anything? Perhaps use the internal space for a battery? That sort of flat-panel wedge could also allow the user to mount a flat solar panel or similar, whether on a rover or a spacecraft.

[Daishi]

I don't have anything specifically in mind, and the whole thing might lead to an alternative core, but don't forget possible uses in-atmosphere and on the ground. I can see a 2-way core section as part of a rover. the spine forming a chassis component and and the two bays on the sides. Maybe 3-way; left, right, and top.

But you could do that with the existing 4-way spine, just not fit anything on the bottom. Although that does suggest an option for a flat-panel wedge, non-opening, to make a platform for the top of a rover. Need it contain anything? Perhaps use the internal space for a battery? That sort of flat-panel wedge could also allow the user to mount a flat solar panel or similar, whether on a rover or a spacecraft.

Already planned, and half made! Will fit in a MK2 spaceplane kind of cross section, as well as flat-mountable on the base for rovers and things

[ModZero]

Drills for surface sampling?

No, mining - but yeah, it's probably still more DMagic's cup of tea ;-)

Not sure about RTGs - not keen on them as power sources

If it's about the balance and magicalpowermakingthingy, Nertea has a mod that makes them decay. Not sure if it's possible to keep the decay but limit power output to decayed state, though, and apparently the current heat mechanics hate generating heat while in time warp.

[Daishi]

No, mining - but yeah, it's probably still more DMagic's cup of tea ;-)

If it's about the balance and magicalpowermakingthingy, Nertea has a mod that makes them decay. Not sure if it's possible to keep the decay but limit power output to decayed state, though, and apparently the current heat mechanics hate generating heat while in time warp.

Yeah its kinda about balance, and if unlocked too early they sideline my fuelcells Feel like if I did make one, they'd have to be unique in functionality some way. Don't want to step on Nertea's toes though.

[TicTacToe!]

Came here straight on ModZero's recommendation!! a wedge to act as a storage bank for multiple experiments would be cool!

[Stoney3K]

Something I've been missing on US: Batteries. I build a lot of US setups inside cargo/service bays to keep my utility racks clean and organised, and I always need to stow my batteries somewhere else.

Also, I always wondered why there are no APU's in the entire game. Making a converter that eats MonoPropellant and spits out ElectricCharge shoudldn't be that difficult.

[ModZero]

Also, I always wondered why there are no APU's in the entire game. Making a converter that eats MonoPropellant and spits out ElectricCharge shoudldn't be that difficult.

There *are* fuel cells, though they eat L/OX, not mp. But mainly, no APU because there's no "need this much power to start this engine" requirement anywhere, in contrast to so-called "real" world, where you're unlikely to start a jet engine on battery alone (apparently, anyhow, I am not an aerospace engineer, I just played DCS a bit), so any wussy battery (or maybe a solar panel the size of a postage stamp to keep the probe core going) is fine.

EDIT: also, I remember Kerbal Foundries having an APU in the past.

[Stoney3K]

The Space Shuttle has both APUs and fuel cells, both of which serve a different purpose, actually.

The APUs are more meant to keep the mechanical systems on the orbiter going, like the fuel and cooling pumps and all of the hydraulics that make the engine gimbals move, while the fuel cells are purely an electrical power source. When the SSME's are running, the hydraulics and pumps run off the engine turbo pumps, with the APU's being backup. When on the pad, the ship is powered off APU until liftoff. Fuel cells are only used in orbit.

With the stock fuel cells that run off LF/OX, there's no real necessity for an APU that produces nothing but ElectricCharge. However, it could be a valuable addition to the game dynamics if auxilliary systems like cooling and control are added (I can think of resources like CoolantPressure or HydraulicPressure that could do that, losing either would cause the engine to overheat or the gimbals to fail, for example).

[Daishi]

Came here straight on ModZero's recommendation!! a wedge to act as a storage bank for multiple experiments would be cool!

Replied in the other thread

Something I've been missing on US: Batteries. I build a lot of US setups inside cargo/service bays to keep my utility racks clean and organised, and I always need to stow my batteries somewhere else.

Also, I always wondered why there are no APU's in the entire game. Making a converter that eats MonoPropellant and spits out ElectricCharge shoudldn't be that difficult.

Batteries are a big yep, not sure about another power generator. I was thinking of having them tweakable in the future with more advanced variants (if Firespitter allows you to adjust the parameters of resource generator modules when you switch meshes) but i think that's asking a bit much. Early days yet though.

...however, it could be a valuable addition to the game dynamics if auxilliary systems like cooling and control are added (I can think of resources like CoolantPressure or HydraulicPressure that could do that, losing either would cause the engine to overheat or the gimbals to fail, for example).

Interesting - that's really getting into the realms of hard-mode KSP If a mod emerges that can create that sort of a system, i'm sure i could make a few parts for it.

[Daishi]

http://i.imgur.com/X4aUAvF.gifv

Door mechanism tests. The other side will have its base kick out further, so its door mechanism folds over the first. It'll result in a fair lump on the side of the craft - but its deployed cross-section will be smaller than what we have now. All wedge bays are accessible too.

[Daishi]

Insulation foil on the inside of the bays? Yay or nay? This is just a copy-paste from an existing texture, i'd have to make sure the real thing is handpainted and matches the rest of the style of US\stockish KSP. Not sure if it'll look too flat without normal maps (which i'm reluctant to add), or extra geo suggesting folds in the foil.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Daishi

[rambokai]

Hi there, just signed up to follow this thread as it is one of my favorite mods

These new pictures look great. I do like the foil, but I also like how it normally looks with all the warning labels and techy bits.

Could you kindly direct me to the post detailing some of the new features you are working on? I am read back several pages and I wasn't able to find them?

As for new features that I would be excited to see:

Batteries! (I understand these are coming! yay!)

Ladders, or... somewhere to attach them to. I saw another person post about flat panels with exterior attachment points - these would be awesome. As would some sort of capping module with hand holds that ring around the ship and/or provide a place to place things.

Flat attachment modules would also less you install RCS thrusters amongst your service equipment which would work in place of having a RCS module for US!

Another request would be - and ill preface with asking how complicated it would be? - an option, perhaps using the fuel switch mod - to change the look of the modules? I like the black and white stripes, but having the option for all black modules or all white/different designs would be really cool for those of us that end up stacking 3 or 4 or 5 nodes in series.

Thanks, and keep up the great work!

[Daishi]

Welcome to the forums! I'll just go over everything quickly, i've got info all over the place and can't be bothered tracking it down either

US2 came about as a push to revise the mod to have more customization, funnily enough (I feel the same way as you, the stripes don't look right in every situation). Started off when the guy who authored our animation plugin in US1 eventually ran out of time for modding and gave up, and I realized Paul and I were in a bit of trouble if it ever broke between KSP versions. So we decided to switch to firespitter, and discovering what it could do, planned to set up the wedges to have multiple appearances you can tweak in the VAB (with the fuel\meshswitcher thing). This was a massive job, because every wedge had to be made with new meshes and textures, which also meant breaking the current models and re-animating them. And then re-exporting everything again through unity... enlarging the texture maps... bloating the mod... blah :|

That, and it would be incredibly tedious for the end user too. Right clicking every wedge just to switch colors would mean you'd be there screwing around in the VAB all day, and accidentally pulling wedges off trying to tweak them. And if you did that, and the attachment nodes disappeared (a stock bug), you'd have to delete what you'd done, remake your stack, and be back to square one. Not fun.

So, what to do? Remove the exterior structures from the wedges and outsource them to a new part - a shroud\cargo bay\fairing cover. Doing this means there is a single part to customize, and by enclosing things in an aerodynamic cylinder, we finally have something that is compatible with FAR. Squad then rolled in their own heating\aero model as stock, and I had to follow through just to keep the mod usable. If you fly with wedges outside a fairing, drag losses will ruin your day.

So in a nutshell, you make your stack, then connect the base of the shroud to the core, and extend the shroud upwards until your wedges are covered. If you like your exposed structureless wedges, just don't use the part. No need to toggle anything in the VAB, and we save a ton of memory and GPU processing by trimming the wedges down to have no individual animations, and 3\4 less of a texture map (what was used for each wedges unique structure).

Doing this means losing the unique decals each wedge had for its inner door though - we can no longer customize the structure on a per-wedge basis. It's a shame, but i'll try work in those stickers somewhere else in the parts.

So having sorted that out, i realized that if i could get the structural fairing to lengthen with FSmeshswitch - why not the wedges themselves? We can save part count by having each wedge extend on its vertical axis, meaning you no longer need to bog down your computer with hundreds of parts just to get anywhere. Monoprop, O2 and Hydrogen are pictured there, both with single and double height variants. They'll go up to 4x capacity, any more and EVA'ing kerbals will have a tough time handling them for refits.

The cores benefit exactly the same way, up to four high.

And new parts, of course. The ACD is a decoupler with a built in reaction wheel, some form of radiator will help keep heat in check, and i might make some kind of heat shield thing because the stock ones are pretty fugly. Batteries are a given, and i'll ask Nertea about adding rungs to parts so they can be climbed on. RCS ports will attach properly to the fairing shroud now that it's a proper cylinder, so no worries there either.

So its a pretty big revision - I think I've covered everything so far. Chugging along slowly

Edited July 18, 2015 by Daishi

[Paul Kingtiger]

I like it without the foil, simple and clean looking.

[DMagic]

I like it without the foil, simple and clean looking.

Me too. I've never liked the foil look. It's hard to get it to resemble an actual surface rather than a flat texture, even with a normal map.

[Vorg]

Foil with bump map might look nice esp if done in the NASA heat shield foil gold, but the non foil version does look good too.

[Daishi]

I like it without the foil, simple and clean looking.

Me too. I've never liked the foil look. It's hard to get it to resemble an actual surface rather than a flat texture, even with a normal map.

Foil with bump map might look nice esp if done in the NASA heat shield foil gold, but the non foil version does look good too.

Will keep it simple then. As a single part it's not too hard to make changes later on down the track

[rambokai]

Wow. That all sounds amazing.

What is the ACD module? is that the shroud base?

New heat shields would be awesome. I've had several ship designs where the heat shield is directly at against the top of the US stack and it looks really goofy. Others have had issues with playing RCS points mid stack.. or making ladders long enough - it sounds like these will be mitigated.

Thanks guys!

[Daishi]

Thinking of doing a limited 0.625 profile. This will have a shroud and a single, three resource TAC part. This will solve the issues of having hundreds of days of lifesupport on short-range flights, and wasting the space in a quadcore stack for three individual lifesupport pieces. Because it'll be so small, the shroud will have a mounting point built into it.

Is this feature creep, or a gap i should have filled in the mod a while back?

[Daishi]

Wow. That all sounds amazing.

What is the ACD module? is that the shroud base?

New heat shields would be awesome. I've had several ship designs where the heat shield is directly at against the top of the US stack and it looks really goofy. Others have had issues with playing RCS points mid stack.. or making ladders long enough - it sounds like these will be mitigated.

Thanks guys!

The ACD (attitude control decoupler) is a combination reaction wheel\decoupler. I've always avoided using the stock ones because they're far too tall and stick out like a sore thumb. Its kinda OP, but I'll probably make it super power hungry, expensive or late in the tech tree. It'll be designed for capping off the top of US stacks, so it'll have extendable fairings that sit snug against the base of capsules and (my planned) heatsheilds. The warning stripes will be tweakable if you'd rather a craft that isn't too bright

[rambokai]

Very cool.

Should it be at the top or the bottom of the stack?

Im starting to find (in career mode) that large stacks of science modules can be REALLY expensive (the last probe I launched had 350,000 of science modules on it... and is currently flying back to LKO from Eve) I tried to design it to be reusable (given the cost), currently it can fly back and forth to my space station (no docking ports sadly...) or to a rendevous with a Scientist kerbal in EVA to reset its un-resetable experiments and offload all its data.

I am thinking myself (and others) might want to build a capsule who's heat shield is mounted below some of their US modules, so that the modules themselves can be saved from fiery destruction and recouple some of the costs mentioned above. But maybe this is hyper unrealistic?

Would it be possible to make the de-coupler toggle at launch to avoid staging accidents in this situation (if it is intended to be used as a cap to the US2 stack)?

I think others have mentioned this before, but I would also love to see a data storage module...

[Daishi]

Very cool.

Should it be at the top or the bottom of the stack?

Im starting to find (in career mode) that large stacks of science modules can be REALLY expensive (the last probe I launched had 350,000 of science modules on it... and is currently flying back to LKO from Eve) I tried to design it to be reusable (given the cost), currently it can fly back and forth to my space station (no docking ports sadly...) or to a rendevous with a Scientist kerbal in EVA to reset its un-resetable experiments and offload all its data.

I am thinking myself (and others) might want to build a capsule who's heat shield is mounted below some of their US modules, so that the modules themselves can be saved from fiery destruction and recouple some of the costs mentioned above. But maybe this is hyper unrealistic?

Would it be possible to make the de-coupler toggle at launch to avoid staging accidents in this situation (if it is intended to be used as a cap to the US2 stack)?

I think others have mentioned this before, but I would also love to see a data storage module...

It'll probably fit better on the top of the stack, as a kind of cap. We used to have our older decouplers as un-stagable by default (they still made noise and a plume of smoke when done with the spacebar), but removed it the functionality when it confused a few people on re-entry.

[rambokai]

Gotcha. Will certainly be useful. What makes you think it will be OP? If the weight is the same as equivalent modules - perhaps it takes up less physical space. Is that a problem? (Often times I think my rockets look excessively large and bulky, Id generally prefer much more streamlined-multifunction parts. This is one of the reasons I love US so much for making science modules. Gone are the days trying to slap science jr's to a 3m rocket with struts everywhere...

Have you thought much about a data storage wedge? is it too OP?

I could have certainly used one last night while transferring data off my Recon probe (the 350,000 credit one I mentioned above...) - I ended up having to make 3 trips to my science station and back - leaving a poor kerbal orbiting in his EVA suit because he couldn't board the capsule with the duplicate readings. In a case like that - it seems reasonable, but if you are using it in a lander and collecting *all the science* from a single landing by bringing along a stack full of data storage - maybe that is not appropriate.

That said, my issue could have been solved by a better/different design. I ended up leaving docking ports off of my probe - which prevented it from docking and dumping the reports directly into the lab. I think I am going to install KAS tonight, relaunch a new probe with empty US-cores and move the wedges in orbit during EVA. The new design will swap out the Sentinel telescope on its nose for a pair of docking ports so I can make a modular science pod that can be adjusted as needed (and even removed from the probe)

Edited July 21, 2015 by rambokai

[Daishi]

Gotcha. Will certainly be useful. What makes you think it will be OP? If the weight is the same as equivalent modules - perhaps it takes up less physical space. Is that a problem? (Often times I think my rockets look excessively large and bulky, Id generally prefer much more streamlined-multifunction parts. This is one of the reasons I love US so much for making science modules. Gone are the days trying to slap science jr's to a 3m rocket with struts everywhere...

Have you thought much about a data storage wedge? is it too OP?

I could have certainly used one last night while transferring data off my Recon probe (the 350,000 credit one I mentioned above...) - I ended up having to make 3 trips to my science station and back - leaving a poor kerbal orbiting in his EVA suit because he couldn't board the capsule with the duplicate readings. In a case like that - it seems reasonable, but if you are using it in a lander and collecting *all the science* from a single landing by bringing along a stack full of data storage - maybe that is not appropriate.

That said, my issue could have been solved by a better/different design. I ended up leaving docking ports off of my probe - which prevented it from docking and dumping the reports directly into the lab. I think I am going to install KAS tonight, relaunch a new probe with empty US-cores and move the wedges in orbit during EVA. The new design will swap out the Sentinel telescope on its nose for a pair of docking ports so I can make a modular science pod that can be adjusted as needed (and even removed from the probe)

Well, it's not really a problem, but still it's awfully convenient and does away with the challenge of strategically hiding wheels and decouplers everywhere Will have to do a lot of balance passes when this is done and stick the ACD somewhere meaningful, before it's released. And yep, will get some kind of flight\storage computer part made, especially now upcoming KSP versions are going to have a bigger focus on remote control and networking.

Small 1.25m metal CSM-esque shroud concept. Currently at a 2 core height, trying to keep it faithful to the real thing, while simplifying it enough to fit within the aesthetic of KSP. Rungs for EVA data retrieval are currently accessible once the doors are open, and lie on the inner beams that flank the sides of each wedge.