Jump to content

[1.1] SXT - Lack's Stock Extension [SXT-25-10APR16] - Basic 1.1 compatibilty

Lack

By Lack
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Olympic1

Olympic1

Posted
Posted
Huh, how odd. I'll ask about it on the CKAN thread, because half the parts won't work or are disabled without it.

Edit:

Okay, I've submitted a pull request to have Firespittercore, the resource config and module manager added as dependencies for SXT-23.

I'm not sure how I'd go around having this done automatically every time I release a new update though.

Edit 2:

Found the netkan thingy, so made a request for that as well. Hopefully once they're approved it should work.

Seen it, you just need to add a comma at the and of line 5 to be able to merge the changes

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lack

Lack

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I understand why the new Mk3 ramp is better (having an opening that's as large as the bay itself), but I'll still miss yours. RIP SXTmk3CargoBayRamp.

Thanks, I might put the old ramp out as a patch for those who'd like it back. It was one of the models that didn't like not having the textures in the same folder, so I figured I'd shave a few MB off the install (plus it was a bit buggy for some people).

@The Pfaffanater,

You just need FirespitterCore and FirespitterResourcesConfig, not the full mod.

EDIT:

I'm wondering; would it be possible to use this so people could manage their SXT installation, say just pick aero or rocket parts?

Edit 2:

Screenshot summary of some of the changes in v23.

6nzAwoK.png

Edited by Lack
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yemo

Yemo

Posted
Posted
Thanks, I might put the old ramp out as a patch for those who'd like it back. It was one of the models that didn't like not having the textures in the same folder, so I figured I'd shave a few MB off the install (plus it was a bit buggy for some people).

[...]

I'm wondering; would it be possible to use this so people could manage their SXT installation, say just pick aero or rocket parts?

[...]

I liked the old cargo ramp as well, especially because of the Mk2 node connection. It was easily possible to eg put a mk2 cockpit (there are some great ones from mods) and make a giant construction rover/vtol lifter etc.

For something as big as SXT I would propose the following:

One manual install package, but with different structure.

The zip file contains the folder Firespitter and SXT as before.

But the internal structure of the SXT folder is adjusted to a modular concept.

One "sharedassets/utilities" folder where the stuff goes which is used by multiple/all "part packs".

And then just separate part packs, eg one for aero stuff, one for lfo stuff and so on.

Then you can make different netkan entries.

One for the sharedassets/utilities.

And then one for each part pack, where you set the sharedassets/utilities and firespitter (and module manager) as a dependency.

So everyone can decide which part pack to install (CKAN) or which to uninstall (manual), while you still only have one zip file containing everything, thus keeping the maintenance effort low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lack

Lack

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Lack, any chance of integrating RasterPropMonitor for the IVA's? That's the only thing missing. Other than that, good job.

There is for some of them (Kossak series cockpits, Entente, trucks, etc). They're in the works for the others.

@SpaceBadger007,

the last version (SXT 22.4) worked for 1.0.0/1.0.4, so presumably should work for 1.0.2. You can get it off the Releases page on the Github.

@Hellbrand,

Opps, forgot to copy over the new .cfg for the Bonny with the internals set. I'll upload a fix.

@Kagame,

Not quite, it works in the same was as the EAS-1, i.e. an external command seat (KerbalSeat module), not as a regular pod.

@Yemo,

Hmm, this sounds like a bit of a project (took ages when MrWizard and myself worked on the reshuffle of LLL). Thanks for the info though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lack

Lack

Posted
  • Author
Posted
My folding wings animation is bugged (The ailerons) instead of going up and down the ailerons rotate left and right....

Stock aero or FAR? I think I built them using FAR, but I recall having something like this previously where the rotation axis changes. I had to make a separate model for FAR/non-FAR before, so may have to do that here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kagame

Kagame

Posted
Posted

Oh, alright. ^.^ Might be worth updating the part description to reflect this...

Quick parts request (yes, yes, I know): A double-length Mk. 1 passenger cabin would be a moment's work and would really cut down on flex in my Mk. 1 airliner designs. And a short retractable ladder for the new Mk. 1 cockpit setup would be excellent, too...

A couple balance quibbles:

- Lordy lordy, do the EDFs (Electric Ducted Fans) need to draw more power. I get that they're anemically thrusty, but still, 1 charge/s sounds like a good figure. As it is, you can supply an entire plane with just one static solar panel.

- Saturn payload bay is too heavy- 0.5 tons would be a more reasonable figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davidy12

davidy12

Posted
Posted

Oh, Lack, here's a suggestion for a Hab description:

"The Hitchhiker wasn’t the best for Kerbals who wanted to die,-I mean live and explore on another planet. Note: Return or Ascent Vehicle NOT included."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lack

Lack

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Oh, alright. ^.^ Might be worth updating the part description to reflect this...

Quick parts request (yes, yes, I know): A double-length Mk. 1 passenger cabin would be a moment's work and would really cut down on flex in my Mk. 1 airliner designs. And a short retractable ladder for the new Mk. 1 cockpit setup would be excellent, too...

A couple balance quibbles:

- Lordy lordy, do the EDFs (Electric Ducted Fans) need to draw more power. I get that they're anemically thrusty, but still, 1 charge/s sounds like a good figure. As it is, you can supply an entire plane with just one static solar panel.

- Saturn payload bay is too heavy- 0.5 tons would be a more reasonable figure.

I did in the 23.1 patch, but I suspect people might still miss it. Perhaps still a little vague

The EAS 316 is a lightweight observation pod that works in the same was as the EAS-1 External Command Seat. Features a 'No key' start button, though that just means that the pilots have normally gone back to the KSC to find the non-existent keys on launch.

That could probably be whipped up via config, though you wouldn't have a double length IVA. But using imported IVAs essentially 'as is' is never quite as simple as you'd think, things get lost in translation in the whole .mu->Blender->Unity->.mu

The EDF's usage I worked out with some back of the napkin calculations involving the Airbus e-Fan's performance/weight with a similar craft in KSP. But I seemingly didn't account for just how overpowered the solar panels in KSP are.

Yeah, you're probably right. At the time it was to counter 'woobly noodle' syndrome, but the stock joints have improved some since then, so it can probably get by with a lower mass.

@davidy12,

I like the idea, but I fear the 'die' may make it a little bit too morbid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cerbis

Cerbis

Posted
Posted

I was playing around with the foldable wings, and I couldn't get the deployment state to make a difference for the aerodynamics. All forces (gleaned from the aerodynamics overlay) seemed to be applied just the same to the attachment point of the part regardless of the wings being folded or not. This also had the effect of making the control surfaces very ineffective for rolling, as the game thought the control surfaces were right at the fuselage.

Is this normal behaviour for stock aerodynamics? Is FAR a required/suggested mod for SXT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StevieC

StevieC

Posted
Posted

Small request: A part that allows the Osaul "Massive Aircraft Cargo Bay" to connect smoothly into the new Mk3 rear cargo-ramp, and have the cargo-space be continuous in the nose out the tail? (er, that came out sounding wrong, but you get my gist, like the C-5 Galaxy or the Antonov 124's cargo-holds, allowing both ends of the fuselage to open)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lack

Lack

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@Lemur,

That'd be a problem on Kerbal Konstruct's side. Not much I can do about it (or even KSC++, can't get any assets I export to load with it now).

@Franklin,

No, they used to be tied to the landing leg module, but that got changed in 1.0. So the module genericAnimation doesn't tie to the staging (though there were some changes to staging in the last update, I'll have to check with Nathen).

@Cerbis,

Same happens with FAR (lift point is correct though), there's some discussion a few pages back. The stock aero probably calculates from part origin. It'll likely require a different model. The folding will have to operate on an honour-system.

@Stevie,

Ah yes, I had been planning to make that part. Well, after I've played some FO4, now that I've found out that you can turn off the god-awful mouse-acceleration and change the FOV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nansuchao

Nansuchao

Posted
Posted

Hi Lack, I would like to do a little request. I'm from a long time in love with your airbags parts and I was wondering if it will be much difficult to re-config them as inflatable fuel tank, to be used with ISRU.

Thanks for yours beautiful mods!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cerbis

Cerbis

Posted
Posted

@Lack: Ah, I missed that page when checking if anyone had mentioned it already, d'oh! And I can confirm that stock aero calculates from the folding wing part origin... at least, if that's right at the attachment point. Some aero forces for you; http://i.imgur.com/N9wgnBu.jpg

Having folding wings is great, even if the mechanics don't quite match the visuals!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...