Jump to content

[1.2.2] Stock Part Revamp, Update 1.9.6. Released Source Files!

Ven

By Ven
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

NathanKell

NathanKell

Posted
Posted

I for one very much like the idea of a plug nozzle aerospike rather than the full spike stock has (which, AFAIK, has never ever been used on a real aerospike engine).

GregroxMun: that sounds very strange. So let me get this straight: you have installed both this mod (stock revamp) and SXT, and then moved all the files from GameData in my zip into your GameData? My zip doesn't replace either mod.

Ven: the LV-909, what cycle is it supposed to be using? I don't see a preburner, but I also don't see an exhaust; it does have two turbopumps, so it's not pressure-fed...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sage

Sage

Posted
Posted (edited)

Damn, that new aerospike is looking really great :o Also, if you need ideas for the Ram air intake, why don't you do a...ram intake? Sort of the shock cone intake without the cone, just an hole. I know it's kind of plain, butthere isn't really that much of a choiche regarding intake designs, and the stock one is just too ugly to look at.

@temporalExile Well, if it's an aerospike it should be truncated. He even modelled the central hole were the turbine exhaust are expelled, which is excellent. In the worst case, if a lot of people ask for it I think that for Ven should be pretty easy to make an alternate version without too much hassle, as he just need to flip that exhaust outside out, model wise...

@Nathan I consider it an expander cycle. Seems that everything for that is sort of there...

Edited by Sage
responding to Nat
Link to comment
Share on other sites
temporalExile

temporalExile

Posted
Posted
Does anyone know what's causing the turbojet texture glitch? http://i.imgur.com/15vTZM8.png

Its hotrockets. Go into your gamedata file, go into hotrockets, and click on emmissives.cfg

Replace the contents of the text file with this

@PART[turboFanEngine]:FOR[HotRockets]

{

!mesh

MODEL

{

model = Squad/Parts/Engine/jetEngineTurbo/model

//position = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0

//scale = 0.8, 0.8, 0.8

//rotation = 0, 0, 0wd

//parent = anotherModelTransform

}

}

Link to comment
Share on other sites
temporalExile

temporalExile

Posted
Posted
Tried it, didn't do anything.

Whoops... I did a thing incorrectly...

Alright, so go into your gamedata, click on MP_Nazari, then FX, then emmissives, then click on the CFG folder, and paste this into it.

 @PART[turboFanEngine]:FOR[HotRockets]
{
    !mesh
MODEL
{
   model = Squad/Parts/Engine/jetEngineTurbo/model
   //position = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0
   //scale = 0.8, 0.8, 0.8
   //rotation = 0, 0, 0
   //parent = anotherModelTransform
}
}

If that doesn't work, then delete the emmissives fold in FX. That will definitely fix you problem, but it get rid of the awesome jet engine effects =/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whirligig Girl

Whirligig Girl

Posted
Posted
GregroxMun: that sounds very strange. So let me get this straight: you have installed both this mod (stock revamp) and SXT, and then moved all the files from GameData in my zip into your GameData? My zip doesn't replace either mod.

Yes. That is what I did. The white/glitchy STOCK part textures was just me having accidentally deleted the Stock Revamp config more MM. But almost none of the SXT parts have good textures after I installed your patch. (Or presumably before as well, I haven't tried)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whirligig Girl

Whirligig Girl

Posted
Posted

I suppose I should take a stance on the Aerospike. IMO, a Linear Aerospike doesn't make much sense on a cylindrical rocket. LinearSpikes are designed to be used on the backs of lifting-body spaceplanes. This does lead to the interesting idea of a Linear Aerospike fitted to a Mk2 fuselage. But yeah, I think the 1.25m Aerospike needs to be a Toroidal 'Spike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bs1110101

bs1110101

Posted
Posted
Whoops... I did a thing incorrectly...

Alright, so go into your gamedata, click on MP_Nazari, then FX, then emmissives, then click on the CFG folder, and paste this into it.

 @PART[turboFanEngine]:FOR[HotRockets]
{
    !mesh
MODEL
{
   model = Squad/Parts/Engine/jetEngineTurbo/model
   //position = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0
   //scale = 0.8, 0.8, 0.8
   //rotation = 0, 0, 0
   //parent = anotherModelTransform
}
}

If that doesn't work, then delete the emmissives fold in FX. That will definitely fix you problem, but it get rid of the awesome jet engine effects =/

Paste into? Replacing everything or just adding to it, and if adding to it, where?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
Posted
Paste into? Replacing everything or just adding to it, and if adding to it, where?

I think he left part of his instruction out. That's a Module Manager patch, you're probably meant to create a file with an extension of .cfg; could be named just about anything. (somefile.cfg). Edit the cfg file you created and paste his code into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whirligig Girl

Whirligig Girl

Posted
Posted
That is quite confusing, since it works perfectly for me. In GameData you have the folders 0RevampBak and zFinal, yes?

I'm going to try this again. Documenting what occurs.

Start: Gamedata folder has NASAmission, Part Revamp Extras, Squad, ModuleManager.2.5.1.dll, and Part Revamp-MM.cfg

Everything works fine.

Downloading SXT from THIS link http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/24906-WIP-LLL-Lack-Luster-Labs-LLL-12-2-10MAY2014-SXT-PATCH-09OCT2014-KSC-v3

(The fix for 0.25)

Now SXT is added in Gamedata between Squad and ModuleManager.2.5.1.dll.

Starting KSP to see how it works without your patch.

KSP Stops loading parts (But is still technically running, not frozen) at SXT/Parts/Engine/NERVA/part/SXTNERVA

Module Manager has applied 95 patches.

Closing KSP.

Removing part.cfg from Gamedata/SXT/Parts/Engine/NERVA

KSP stops loading on SXT/Parts/Engine/NERVA/partFatmun/SXTNERVAB

Removing Gamedata/SXT/Parts/Engines/NERVA entirely. This usually allows KSP to load fine in past experiments.

KSP loads to Main Menu.

Going into VAB, Parts look stupid and horrible, the same as when i tried using this before.

Closing KSP.

Downloading the Stock eXTension Patch from the OP of this (Stock Part Revamp) Thread.

Putting the stuff in GameData into GameData.

0RevampBak and zFinal are in GameData

Launching KSP.

Many parts look the same as they did before the Patch, except some of them have this crazy redness. However, surprisingly to me, some part DO look fine this time! (Mostly the engines) Stock parts look fine. (And revamped!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwhip

Starwhip

Posted
Posted

Lovely, lovely mod. I'd really like to see those engines put into the stock game, if nothing else! Perhaps at least getting rid of the ugly "bottom of the fuel tank" bit on the topmost part of the engine, like in this mod?

Also, the new MK1-2 Command Pod is nice, gotta have those 3d ladders :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ven

Ven

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Ven, could you perhaps release that first SciLab IVA you showed us earlier, just so we could have SOMETHING? (And also a way to EVA Kerbals without hatch finding)

If you really really want it, It's in the base models folder in the OP. You'll need to export it yourself though.

Ohhh nice Ven vewy Nice indeed cant wait to see more of it and using the IVR for the Mk 2 cockpit is a great idea and will save you some work as well, cant wait to test it.

Are you still thinking of doing the liner aerospike at all?

To me, linear aerospikes look odd when mounted to circular bases, so I quickly dropped the idea.

I wonder, could you do a bit higher-res/cleaner texture for Kerbodyne parts? Also, I found stock tanks too dark and too gray. IMO, they should be mostly white, like real rocket tanks usually are.

Unfortunately, the ARM parts are at the bottom of the list of things to do (even know, It's a BIG list). For now I don't plan to do them, but once this mod nears completion I may may a look at them.

Ven: the LV-909, what cycle is it supposed to be using? I don't see a preburner, but I also don't see an exhaust; it does have two turbopumps, so it's not pressure-fed...

I don't even know.:blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NathanKell

NathanKell

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ven: in that case, you might add an exhaust pipe for it (so it looks like the 11D33M), or maybe make an alternate model of it without the two pumps (which would look a good deal like the AJ10 from Able/Delta, at least the nozzle portion with the rest hidden: Vanguard's install and Delta's). Or you might consider making the 48-7S look like the latter...

Edited by NathanKell
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwhip

Starwhip

Posted
Posted
Ooh, that'd be a cool.... wait. Stay tuned in the Mod suggestions thread.
Ooh, that'd be a cool.... wait. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99498-NoTorque-RCS-for-Command-Pods?p=1528988#post1528988 You've given me this bad bad bad horrible awesome idea.

Ven, you must read this! [/crazy]

Gregrox, ye have a double post, mate. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BudgetHedgehog

BudgetHedgehog

Posted
Posted (edited)

Two things:

1, the wheel looks a bit odd sticking out the bottom there... not entirely realistic either. If it's a question of the wheel being just too big for the bay, why not make it just pivot over 90 degrees? I do like the swinging doors though.. hate the stock ones, I always think they look like a pair of trousers from behind or something.

2, consider using/borrowing the texture from KSPRC for the panels, or at least making it easy for me to keep them. Unless you can do something better... ;)

Edited by ObsessedWithKSP
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ferram4

ferram4

Posted
Posted

Actually, as odd as the wheel sticking out the bottom looks, it has been done. In particular, that's what the A-10's main gear does (look at the fairing poking out of the front of the wing). There have been a few other things like that, such as the way the 737 lacks doors to protect its landing gear. It's not the most common setup, but it does have a basis in reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...