[1.1.2] Kerbin-Side (v1.1.0) & Supplements

[Spacepetscompany]

The runway's shrunk by 50% now because of collider issues . Basically there's a limit to the size of a collider and number of faces and hard as I tried (pretty much all evening), I couldn't get it to behave. Shame but the good news is it's still 2.4 km long, 95m wide from boundary edge to boundary edge and 80m wide between boundaries. It's at least working now.

Thats sad to hear...... Though I agree with Virindi. Perhaps if the models are lined up well enough....

[Motokid600]

Is it possible to make stuff like this on other planets? Would it be possible to maybe fill in a concave area ( Mun north pole would be good ) of terrain with modded geometry? And then make caves.

[AlphaAsh]

Is it possible to make stuff like this on other planets? Would it be possible to maybe fill in a concave area ( Mun north pole would be good ) of terrain with modded geometry? And then make caves.

It's possible to make stuff on other planets. KerbTown allows placement of statics anywhere. You could fill in a concave area with modded geometry but 'terrain' is very tricky to model in the same way as conventional statics, especially if you want to blend it into existing terrain well. And caves is doable, although the camera in KSP tends to make 'under and inside' frustrating to play. Considering that Unity is a modern 3D engine and KSP a modern 3D game, I'm surprised that under and inside is so badly supported. It's a decade old limitation that should be gone by now. This isn't MechWarrior 4 anymore.

Perhaps you could have two models, lined up so that they are 'seamless'? Or perhaps crossing the boundary at high speed would be fatal. Seems worth testing...where is Jebediah?

You can place models together with total precision in Unity, so the boundary issue that used to be an issue isn't anymore. I'm going to see if I can widen the model a little then stick two end-to-end. Worth a shot.

Edited September 7, 2014 by AlphaAsh

[AlphaAsh]

The first version of Area 110011's runway is now available for testing at your leisure. Find it in the OP.

I'll be adding a lot more to this facility in future releases.

[Spacepetscompany]

The first version of Area 110011's runway is now available for testing at your leisure. Find it in the OP.

I'll be adding a lot more to this facility in future releases.

Great job! This will now become my primary Spaceplane landing facility!

[Mekan1k]

The shape of Area 110011 needs to be simplified. Decrease the detail, if possible- it kept crashing my game.

[123nick]

can you make a rover testing ground? basicly a really bumpy/mountainy/uneven ground to drive rovers over, someone else made one but i cant find it anywhere in the forums.. thanks in advance!

[AlphaAsh]

The shape of Area 110011 needs to be simplified. Decrease the detail, if possible- it kept crashing my game.

Chap, you've made a number of similar posts in this thread which suggests there's something going on with your install or your computer. Try the usual things - reinstalling the game and/or turning down graphics settings. The new runway is no more complex than many of the other models I've been producing and I'm not going to be changing it on the basis of a single report. Alternatively, uninstall it. Always back-up GameData before installing any new mod - then you can easily uninstall by rolling back to the back-up.

[Spacepetscompany]

can you make a rover testing ground? basicly a really bumpy/mountainy/uneven ground to drive rovers over, someone else made one but i cant find it anywhere in the forums.. thanks in advance!

Here you go!

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/75544-WIP-releases-my-Kerbtown-buildings-RELEASES-ARE-ON-THE-FIRST-POST

[Eskandare]

The shape of Area 110011 needs to be simplified. Decrease the detail, if possible- it kept crashing my game.

Questions: Are you running 64bit (x64) or 32bit (x86)? Are you running active texture management? What is your max available memory?

Answers: x64 is unstable and may crash at random. x86 can only have a maximum of 3.5GB loaded into ram 3.2 for safe running. Active Texture Management helps with maintaining a low ram foot print. Even if you are running x64 you must be aware of your maximum memory installed 8GB is recommended for fluid operation with active texture management, along with the operating system. On x86 only a few mods can be installed even with ATM running. With x64 the sky is the limit, given that you have enough RAM. Also, x64 has a little trouble with large amount of mods (I mean quite large). This has nothing to do with memory, per se, but the instability of the x64 version, which should be improved in future releases. Beware of incompatible mods, not all mods play well together.

Recommendation: Back up all mods, craft files and saves. Reinstall KSP then install one mod at a time. If running x86 install Active Texture Management. Beware of your memory limitations.

Edit: I'm pretty dead certain it has nothing to do with the shape of the model in game.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Eskandare

[Virindi]

The first version of Area 110011's runway is now available for testing at your leisure. Find it in the OP.

I'll be adding a lot more to this facility in future releases.

Truly beautiful. All 'major' runways should be like this. Many of us are launching real life scale planes, with real life physics, but this is a mismatch with the runways in the game.

At 2.5km, the KSC runway would be a short length commercial runway in real life (this is more like the length of the main runway at a regional airport). The space shuttle runway at the real KSC is 4.5km long (plus an extra 300m emergency length at the end) and 91 meters wide. A fully loaded real life A380 would be incapable of taking off from kerbal KSC (runway length required ~2.8km). A fully loaded 747 similarly requires a runway 3km long. Kroom Lake is close to the correct scale now.

For comparison. Note that real life runways have emergency length off the end while Kerbal runways do not. Kerbin runways in bold, general aviation/executive airports in italics. Real life takeoff requirements are approximate; in real life, elevation, temperature, humidity, and wind all affect runway requirements. Real life limits also include a large safety margin. Aircraft can operate on shorter runways by limiting loaded weight, but in KSP due to less efficient engines and often the desire to reach space, this is not applicable.

(Length of longest runway) (Airport)

7.6km White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico* (4.57km marked length, 7.6km usable length in one direction)

5.5km Qamdo Bamda Airport, China (Elevation AMSL 4.4km)

4.87km Denver International Airport, Colorado (Elevation AMSL 1.6km)

4.87km Kennedy Space Center Shuttle Landing Facility, Florida* (4.57km marked length, 4.87km usable length in one direction)

4.7km Kroom Lake/Area 110011, Kerbin

4.57km Edwards Air Force Base, California* **

4.57km --- Safety margin design runway length for Space Shuttle ---

4.4km JFK International Airport, New York*

4.0km Narita International Airport, Tokyo, Japan

3.9km London Heathrow Airport, England

3.9km Miami International Airport, Florida

3.8km Cologne Bonn Airport, Germany*

3.8km Mojave Air and Space Port, California

3.8km --- Safety margin design runway length for SpaceShipTwo ---

3.7km Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Georgia (US)

3.6km Los Angeles International Airport, California

3.5km Washington Dulles International Airport, Virginia

3.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Aérospatiale-BAC Concorde @MTOW ---

3.3km Mataveri International Airport, Easter Island, Chile*

3.2km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing 747-400 @MTOW ---

3.1km Gander International Airport, Canada*

3.0km RAF Station Fairford, England*

3.0km Groom Lake Test Facility, Nevada

2.8km --- Minimum takeoff length for Airbus A380-800 @MTOW ---

2.5km Kerbal Spaceflight Center, Kerbin

2.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing 767-300ER @MTOW ---

2.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Lockheed C-5 Galaxy @MTOW ---

2.4km Opa-locka Executive Airport, Florida

2.4km Van Nuys Airport, California

2.3km Princess Juliana International Airport, Saint Martin, Netherlands

2.3km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing 737-300 @MTOW ---

2.1km Teterboro Airport, New Jersey

2.1km Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina* (Shortest official Space Shuttle landing site)

2.0km Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Virginia

2.0km --- Minimum takeoff length for Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit @MTOW ---

1.9km Lake Dermal Airfield, Kerbin

1.8km --- Minimum takeoff length for Gulfstream G550 @MTOW ---

1.7km Manassas Regional Airport, Virginia

1.6km Jebediah Island Ski-jump, Kerbin***

1.6km --- Minimum takeoff length for Bombardier CRJ700 @MTOW ---

1.5km South Pole Airstrip, Kerbin

1.4km Key West International Airport, Florida

1.4km Bitsandy Airport, Kerbin

1.3km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress @MTOW ---

1.2km KSC Island Airfield, Kerbin

0.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Cessna 172S @MTOW ---

0.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Lockheed F-22 Raptor @MTOW ---

~0.1km Ski-jump ramp, RFS Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier

*Approved space shuttle landing site.

**The main runway at Edwards also has an arrestor system at the end. Edwards also has longer, currently unused runways.

***1.5km from spawn to jump.

As you can see, the standard runway length for non-emergency operations of the Space Shuttle was designated at 4.57km. Actual length needed is ~2.1km assuming no damage to the spacecraft, but with a $2 billion orbiter and no go-around capability, extra length is a good idea. Assuming no safety margin, heavy jet airliners require more runway for takeoff than the Space Shuttle does for landing.

Plus, if the Shuttle had actually aborted to Cherry Point, shipping it home would have been an ordeal.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Virindi

[Eskandare]

Truly beautiful. All 'major' runways should be like this. Many of us are launching real life scale planes, with real life physics, but this is a mismatch with the runways in the game.

At 2.5km, the KSC runway would be a short length commercial runway in real life (this is more like the length of the main runway at a regional airport). The space shuttle runway at the real KSC is 4.5km long (plus an extra 300m emergency length at the end) and 91 meters wide. A fully loaded real life A380 would be incapable of taking off from kerbal KSC (runway length required ~2.8km). A fully loaded 747 similarly requires a runway 3km long. Kroom Lake is close to the correct scale now.

For comparison. Note that real life runways have emergency length off the end while Kerbal runways do not. Kerbin runways in bold, general aviation/executive airports in italics. Real life takeoff requirements are approximate; in real life, elevation, temperature, humidity, and wind all affect runway requirements. Real life limits also include a large safety margin. Aircraft can operate on shorter runways by limiting loaded weight, but in KSP due to less efficient engines and often the desire to reach space, this is not applicable.

(Length of longest runway) (Airport)

7.6km White Sands Space Harbor, New Mexico* (4.57km marked length, 7.6km usable length in one direction)

5.5km Qamdo Bamda Airport, China (Elevation AMSL 4.4km)

4.87km Denver International Airport, Colorado (Elevation AMSL 1.6km)

4.87km Kennedy Space Center Shuttle Landing Facility, Florida* (4.57km marked length, 4.87km usable length in one direction)

4.7km Kroom Lake/Area 110011, Kerbin

4.57km Edwards Air Force Base, California* **

4.57km --- Safety margin design runway length for Space Shuttle ---

4.4km JFK International Airport, New York*

4.0km Narita International Airport, Tokyo, Japan

3.9km London Heathrow Airport, England

3.9km Miami International Airport, Florida

3.8km Cologne Bonn Airport, Germany*

3.8km Mojave Air and Space Port, California

3.8km --- Safety margin design runway length for SpaceShipTwo ---

3.7km Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Georgia (US)

3.6km Los Angeles International Airport, California

3.5km Washington Dulles International Airport, Virginia

3.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Aérospatiale-BAC Concorde @MTOW ---

3.3km Mataveri International Airport, Easter Island, Chile*

3.2km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing 747-400 @MTOW ---

3.1km Gander International Airport, Canada*

3.0km RAF Station Fairford, England*

3.0km Groom Lake Test Facility, Nevada

2.8km --- Minimum takeoff length for Airbus A380-800 @MTOW ---

2.5km Kerbal Spaceflight Center, Kerbin

2.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing 767-300ER @MTOW ---

2.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Lockheed C-5 Galaxy @MTOW ---

2.4km Opa-locka Executive Airport, Florida

2.4km Van Nuys Airport, California

2.3km Princess Juliana International Airport, Saint Martin, Netherlands

2.3km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing 737-300 @MTOW ---

2.1km Teterboro Airport, New Jersey

2.1km Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina* (Shortest official Space Shuttle landing site)

2.0km Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Virginia

2.0km --- Minimum takeoff length for Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit @MTOW ---

1.9km Lake Dermal Airfield, Kerbin

1.8km --- Minimum takeoff length for Gulfstream G550 @MTOW ---

1.7km Manassas Regional Airport, Virginia

1.6km Jebediah Island Ski-jump, Kerbin***

1.6km --- Minimum takeoff length for Bombardier CRJ700 @MTOW ---

1.5km South Pole Airstrip, Kerbin

1.4km Key West International Airport, Florida

1.4km Bitsandy Airport, Kerbin

1.3km --- Minimum takeoff length for Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress @MTOW ---

1.2km KSC Island Airfield, Kerbin

0.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Cessna 172S @MTOW ---

0.5km --- Minimum takeoff length for Lockheed F-22 Raptor @MTOW ---

~0.1km Ski-jump ramp, RFS Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier

*Approved space shuttle landing site.

**The main runway at Edwards also has an arrestor system at the end. Edwards also has longer, currently unused runways.

***1.5km from spawn to jump.

As you can see, the standard runway length for non-emergency operations of the Space Shuttle was designated at 4.57km. Actual length needed is ~2.1km assuming no damage to the spacecraft, but with a $2 billion orbiter and no go-around capability, extra length is a good idea. Assuming no safety margin, heavy jet airliners require more runway for takeoff than the Space Shuttle does for landing.

Plus, if the Shuttle had actually aborted to Cherry Point, shipping it home would have been an ordeal.

KSP has close to real life physics (meaning no 'n' body physics and unrealistic aerodynamics [stock], slightly better aerodynamics [FAR]), but also keep in mind that Kerbin is actually scaled down to about approximately 1/3 the size of Earth.

That is a fantastic comparison list.

[Spacepetscompany]

, but also keep in mind that Kerbin is actually scaled down to about approximately 1/3 the size of Earth

actually it's 1/10 chap

[Eskandare]

Oops! I miss calculated. Mind you I was guessing.

Correction, 1/10.

Edit: Certainly explains how I can fly around it in 45 minutes at roughly mach 8.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Eskandare

[Virindi]

KSP has close to real life physics (meaning no 'n' body physics and unrealistic aerodynamics [stock], slightly better aerodynamics [FAR]), but also keep in mind that Kerbin is actually scaled down to about approximately 1/3 the size of Earth.

Yeah, but gravity is the same. The smaller size of the planet just makes it easier to attain orbit once you are in the air (orbital speed reduced by approximately 3x). Obviously, how well you can compare to real life depends on what mods you are running, but with FAR you're going to need approximately realistic sized runways to takeoff realistic sized craft. If you are taking an Aeris 4A to orbit you clearly don't need such a long runway; its TWR and size make it more comparable to a fighter jet than to an airliner.

But how many of us limit ourselves to small craft?

As for landing...

I, for one, have certainly encountered the circumstance where I am landing a gliding shuttle and touch down perfectly at the near end of the runway, but the brakes won't stop me and I end up flying off the other end. This is a big problem with high speed landings unless you have airbrakes (separate mod) or drogue chutes after landing (separate mod), especially since the braking force of landing gear was nerfed. I put large B9 airbrakes on every plane now because of this. The Space Shuttle had both of those as well, but they made the main runways so long in case they failed. Mojave was lengthened for SpaceShipTwo because in the event of the rocket failing to ignite, the ship may end up doing a high speed landing.

That is a fantastic comparison list.

Thanks, I actually spent all afternoon researching it. The project got a little out of control

Edited September 8, 2014 by Virindi

[Virindi]

BTW, here is a runway config with the new runway: http://www.virindi.net/junk/kerbinside_035a_rwy.cfg

I have been working on a way to make the runway config data more accurate as well (in addition to fixing the poles issue) but I haven't completed it, so right now the markers for Area 110011 are right at the end of the runway.

[Eskandare]

Yeah, but gravity is the same. The smaller size of the planet just makes it easier to attain orbit once you are in the air (orbital speed reduced by approximately 3x). Obviously, how well you can compare to real life depends on what mods you are running, but with FAR you're going to need approximately realistic sized runways to takeoff realistic sized craft. If you are taking an Aeris 4A to orbit you clearly don't need such a long runway; its TWR and size make it more comparable to a fighter jet than to an airliner.

But how many of us limit ourselves to small craft?

As for landing...

I, for one, have certainly encountered the circumstance where I am landing a gliding shuttle and touch down perfectly at the near end of the runway, but the brakes won't stop me and I end up flying off the other end. This is a big problem with high speed landings unless you have airbrakes (separate mod) or drogue chutes after landing (separate mod), especially since the braking force of landing gear was nerfed. I put large B9 airbrakes on every plane now because of this. The Space Shuttle had both of those as well, but they made the main runways so long in case they failed. Mojave was lengthened for SpaceShipTwo because in the event of the rocket failing to ignite, the ship may end up doing a high speed landing.

Thanks, I actually spent all afternoon researching it. The project got a little out of control

The largest plane I had ever made, using Tweakable Scale, B9, MK IV fuselage, procedural wings, and LLL. Takes the whole runway to takeoff.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edit: That being the KSC runway.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Eskandare

[AlphaAsh]

That is a big plane

Been busy today putting together the telescope maintenance sheds and a new helipad for the KKVLA.

Have I ever mentioned how much I hate staircases? These ones worked straight off the bat (Bob got to the top without having to jump at all) but oh my, I'd forgotten how much stairs bloat a model. It's 4 bloody meg! And that's optimised to all heck.

This will eventually sit on top of the control centre for the VLA. Obviously for choppers only and no rovers

[Virindi]

That is a big plane

Been busy today putting together the telescope maintenance sheds and a new helipad for the KKVLA.

http://www.kashcorp.co.uk/raisedhelipad.jpg

Have I ever mentioned how much I hate staircases? These ones worked straight off the bat (Bob got to the top without having to jump at all) but oh my, I'd forgotten how much stairs bloat a model. It's 4 bloody meg! And that's optimised to all heck.

This will eventually sit on top of the control centre for the VLA. Obviously for choppers only and no rovers

How about using slopes with a stair texture instead?

[Spacepetscompany]

How about using slopes with a stair texture instead?

I would actually prefer modeled stairs, as just a stair texture would look very cheap and rushed.The KSC buildings all have "real" stairs and since this mod is meant to mimic the high quality "Kerbal" architecture, which is only represented in game by the KSC, I'd prefer real stairs. I however perfectly understand and respect the amount of work that goes into these and if you feel that Virindis suggestion would work fine, go right ahead, this is just my preference. Great job on the Helipad by the way!

[Virindi]

I would actually prefer modeled stairs, as just a stair texture would look very cheap and rushed.The KSC buildings all have "real" stairs and since this mod is meant to mimic the high quality "Kerbal" architecture, which is only represented in game by the KSC, I'd prefer real stairs. I however perfectly understand and respect the amount of work that goes into these and if you feel that Virindis suggestion would work fine, go right ahead, this is just my preference. Great job on the Helipad by the way!

I don't want it to look cheap either, but resource use is a required tradeoff :\

[Mekan1k]

The multi-kilometer runway still needs to be simplified. I know you like bridges, but... The runway tends to make my computer crash...

[Spacepetscompany]

You know, you have been replied to multiple times asking about mods, computer specs, ksp versions, etc, however we cannot help you if you keep ignoring us! AND Alphaash has already stated that he is not planning on changing Area 110011. I hope you solve your problem but you cannot expect everyone on here, who DOES NOT have problems with this to conform to your wishes. I am sorry, but this is the crystal truth.

[Chadley123]

Kerbinside is an excellent mod, and I have noticed the "tracking station time warp lag" issue has been greatly reduced. Well done!

[AlphaAsh]

medsouz is working on a wonderful new feature for KerbTown and I'm looking for some help to make the most of it.

Each of KerbinSide's launch locations, ie bases, needs a small 'blurb', a nice concise description, approximately 100-200 words, describing what it is, what its features are and any limitations it might have.

I'm looking for submissions from the players for this. The grammar and spelling must, of course, be impeccable. A little humour is appropriate for this but don't go mad with that. And obviously you'll get appropriate credit for your work.

If you want to help, choose a base, write up a blurb and PM it to me. Please don't be too disappointed if I don't use a submission.

Edited September 9, 2014 by AlphaAsh