[WIP] Aerojet Kerbodyne (Released Service Module Pack)

[blackheart612]

Hmm, I'll see what I can do about that.

[Lack]

Here is the new RCS Thrusters, Kerbodyne AKS-74-U (If you know that name, tell me. hehehe)

*snip*

Please don't hammer me with the accuracy shenanigans, these aren't meant to be replicas, just based off them. Now we can do that space dance.

If that's the 'U' version of the AKS, I'd like to see the full length thruster. Looks very nice though and well said on the replica vs. inspired-by point.

[736]

Good job, i can't do much modeling myself. Do you have any plans for an RL-10?

[blackheart612]

Hmmm, you mean the SMX's engine? This? If this is it, I am unwrapping the UVs as of now.

It's a cool 1.25m engine that turns into a 1.84 engine when mounted on the right node (it's really challenging to get the node correctly mounted on the modular tank though.

A more powerful engine to push the whole extension round and round. Better than HG10. Meet the HG10-B

[15nelsoc]

Are you planning on adding fairings between here also to cover the service module?

[brooklyn666]

Great work so far! Do you plan on making a realism overhaul version of these? If not. I'm happy to do it, with your permission!

[CaptainKipard]

When you were making those RCS thrusters, how many faces did your starting cylinder have?

[Captain_Party]

I dont reccomend calling it the AKS-74-U, its the name of a russian carbine.

[NathanKell]

Man, you just keep pumping this stuff out! Impressive!

A pretty-please request, though: could you make the engines without baseplates? (As you did for the earlier ones.) That way they can be used on any size tank (or clustered easily).

[Guest]

Yeah, I'd really like an engine without thrust plate, too. Also, does the nozzle extension actually move? You can do that, it's perhaps the coolest thing ever.

[blackheart612]

http://i.imgur.com/lVM4olo.png

Are you planning on adding fairings between here also to cover the service module?

Yep. Patience, my friend.

Great work so far! Do you plan on making a realism overhaul version of these? If not. I'm happy to do it, with your permission!

I don't mind if you do (I don't have final configs, just copies of existing configs edited a little bit enough to import things and be tested in the game.)

When you were making those RCS thrusters, how many faces did your starting cylinder have?

Hmmm, what do yo mean? I'm a noob, please consider. But I know faces.

I dont reccomend calling it the AKS-74-U, its the name of a russian carbine.

That's the reason why I called it like that though. I'm going to rename it because you do't want it

Man, you just keep pumping this stuff out! Impressive!

A pretty-please request, though: could you make the engines without baseplates? (As you did for the earlier ones.) That way they can be used on any size tank (or clustered easily).

The HG-10B is supposed to have that baseplate because it matches with the fairing on the top (the 1.84 adapter). The KR-1 is suppose to be mainsail like, it will have the plate. Mostly I will really not add baseplates though, never liked them (most of the time). Maybe I should add fairing baseplates? It would be fun if you decouple the top and the engine drops down and the plates are the ones left. XD

Yeah, I'd really like an engine without thrust plate, too. Also, does the nozzle extension actually move? You can do that, it's perhaps the coolest thing ever.

Hmmm, well, the nozzle and the extension move at the same time... does that count?

[Sauron]

@The Number of Faces on an RCS thruster: Generally, detail parts like a small RCS port don't call for a lot of faces on the cylinder--especially after they get a texture pass. The guideline for 1.25m parts is between 24 and 32 faces. For something as small as an RCS thruster block 8 faces is more than enough. Certainly anything more than 16 is excessive.

[blackheart612]

Hmmm, afaik, more faces = more tricounts = more physics calc, right? I didn't really care about the poly that much, I prefer the high poly though, so that's why it's more than 8 faces. Maybe more than 12. I dunno, didn't count, really. Think I should do some optimization?

[Sauron]

Not just physics (which isn't a huge issue for RCS) also renders. You have to remember that nobody will be looking at an RCS block that closely. It probably doesn't matter too much, for a few parts, but things add up after a while. Also, at a certain point things stop matching all the other parts.

FWW I can see the faces well enough to count them in your close-up (too lazy to though )--you have at least 16 by the looks of it. Probably more.

[blackheart612]

I have no idea how to reduce yet as of yet. o.O Anyways, looks like Im the only one that looks up that close to RCS blocks

[NathanKell]

Since your collision mesh will hopefully be a different, custom made mesh, not your actual part's mesh, the facecount of the visual mesh shouldn't matter for physics.

[Sauron]

Can't help you with Blender, sadly (I was tearing my hair out trying to figure it out while I got 3ds up and running again--not fun). But it'll probably be helpful to know

You've inspired me to make PPTS RCS thrusters now...

[blackheart612]

Since your collision mesh will hopefully be a different, custom made mesh, not your actual part's mesh, the facecount of the visual mesh shouldn't matter for physics.

Well, the collision mesh is just the block, like.... a box. yet. that's right, a box. Does that mean it's ok?

Can't help you with Blender, sadly (I was tearing my hair out trying to figure it out while I got 3ds up and running again--not fun). But it'll probably be helpful to know

You've inspired me to make PPTS RCS thrusters now...

Cool. I was actually Trying to make the Dragon's mount below for Mk1-2 but meh, I was lazy.

[CaptainKipard]

I have no idea how to reduce yet as of yet. o.O Anyways, looks like Im the only one that looks up that close to RCS blocks

I would just re-do it now before it gets too far. 12 sides is ok. Also If I were you I'd create a separate simple mesh for the collider,

[blackheart612]

I would just re-do it now before it gets too far. 12 sides is ok. Also If I were you I'd create a separate simple mesh for the collider,

It has a simple collider. I would redo it if I have done the texturing of other parts for now. Doesn't look like a very big problem as of yet.

[DasBananenbrot]

Ahh the wait is killing me

[blackheart612]

Ahh the wait is killing me

Really? Here's a wallpaper for you, then

(Next post will be update)

[DasBananenbrot]

Really? Here's a wallpaper for you, then

(Next post will be update)

https://i.imgur.com/gEb76XN.png

Thanks , new desktop background for now

[blackheart612]

Update:

A close up of HG-10B (I really like this engine) Flexible Engine.

That's the XSM right there.

It can be used... well, as XSM and as an Alternate Service Module.

Decided I'd put RCS with the lower tank, upper one would be LFO.

I'd do the fairings, do a little fiddly widdly with cfgs and I might be done if I haven't forgotten something. For the Service Pack at least.

Edit: The modular tanks are 1.84 and 2.5m in size, they can be used normally, they get covered in the right node placement and again, I'll say this, it is VERY challenging to place them. Unless you use it for other purposes other than XSM

Wallpaper Reference: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Orion_Service_Module.jpg

Edited April 7, 2014 by blackheart612

[wasmic]

Looks great!