Update Arrow Freighter version 2012 updated (screenshots)

[Izack]

Could I suggest making the material for the interior of the docking bay emissive? It does have lighting baked into the texture already; playing on 0 ambient lighting (realistic for outer space) has the docking bay looking awkward at most angles.

 

[dansteph]

Old "trapezoid" DGIV cargoes are released at the appropriate crawl but UCGO crates are given a pretty big push.

Bug solved, now it's smooth as a silk and perfectly regular in any case at about 0.10 m/s.
(Will update the dgIV also)

Could I suggest making the material for the interior of the docking bay emissive? It does have lighting baked into the texture already; playing on 0 ambient lighting (realistic for outer space) has the docking bay looking awkward at most angles.

Not a bad idea I'll have a look but no promise.

Dan

---------- Post added at 10:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 PM ----------

And now as Cargo release work like a charm I've added two new buttons for speed release.

You can set from 0.01 m/s (almost still) to 4 m/s (rocket). Default is 0.04 m/s.

---------- Post added at 11:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:07 PM ----------

Could I suggest making the material for the interior of the docking bay emissive? It does have lighting baked into the texture already; playing on 0 ambient lighting (realistic for outer space) has the docking bay looking awkward at most angles.

Here you are sir... The level is okay, how does it look ? (screen calibration)

 

[N_Molson]

Maybe it could be interesting to have (switchable) spotlights that illuminate the flanks of the beast (like it is done on big seaships). That would be useful at night, for smaller vessels, and any cargo operations.

 

[EnDSchultz]

The bay lighting looks pretty spiffy, and I agree maybe some external floodlights couldn't hurt while you're at it.

 

[dansteph]

Maybe it could be interesting to have (switchable) spotlights that illuminate the flanks of the beast (like it is done on big seaships). That would be useful at night, for smaller vessels, and any cargo operations.

That would require a texture switch, would be cool also for windows lights and other but I'm already out of time and at max of what I allowed me as ressource.

I was always very sparse with ressource to be framerate friendly, yet I decided that after 9 years I can spend more (with 2048 textures and more poly) but I don't want to go too far. This said it run at 400-600 FPS on my (medium) computer but I know some still run stone age computer.

Same apply for the 3 pilots in the VC (displayed in outside view), they will display even with 0 peoples aboard because it would require 3 more material switch and stone age graphic card don't like that.

 

[Izack]

Here you are sir... The level is okay, how does it look ? (screen calibration)

It looks great! :thumbup:

 

[Aeadar]

All of this looks truly excellent!

I suppose it's too late to ask for an outside docking port for the XR5 so we could transfer more crew at a time?


:tiphat:

 

[Keatah]

I love all these little features getting added in. This is great.

It is also important to put a stop to feature-creep and get down to business of actually making a release. I know of way too many projects that couldn't catch-up to themselves and as a result have been in "development" for several years, with not even a beta in sight.

Besides, you have to have something to work on for next version!

---------- Post added at 08:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:11 PM ----------

All of this looks truly excellent!

I suppose it's too late to ask for an outside docking port for the XR5 so we could transfer more crew at a time?
:tiphat:

Do it like Starflight One with the rubber hose!

 

[dansteph]

All of this looks truly excellent!

I suppose it's too late to ask for an outside docking port for the XR5 so we could transfer more crew at a time?


:tiphat:

I balance since a long time about this:

con: Eva system more complicated for (somes) users, new "exit" selection button, code a bit more complicated, texture rework etc. etc.
pro: well, more fun.

But sorry I don't think I'll make it for this release.

---------- Post added at 01:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:14 AM ----------

It is also important to put a stop to feature-creep and get down to business of actually making a release.

Orbiter teached me years ago how to finish big project, so that is not actually a problem for me.

Rome wasn't built in one day but I'm near beta release. (Could be 4-5 days as well)

Dan

 

[N_Molson]

That would require a texture switch

Not necessarily, I was thinking to the local lights feature.

 

[dansteph]

Not necessarily, I was thinking to the local lights feature.

Vertex lighting ? sorry I personally think it suck. With one vertex "illuminated" every 15m you get only horrible shade and not the nice light effect you wait.

 

[Matrix Aran]

...Rome wasn't built in one day but I'm near beta release. (Could be 4-5 days as well)

Dan

Would this be an open beta release?

 

[SPACE dude]

WOW dansteph Cant wait

 

[Ripley]

...But sorry I don't think I'll make it for this release...

Ok, we'll wait 'til next one, then

 

[Urwumpe]

Vertex lighting ? sorry I personally think it suck. With one vertex "illuminated" every 15m you get only horrible shade and not the nice light effect you wait.

vertex lighting is still better than nothing at all though and I suspect from his description of the feature, that he meant illuminating other vessels(UMMUs, UCGO boxes, spacecraft) near the Arrow during such operations, similar to the flood lights of the Space Shuttle Payload Bay.

An ergonomy optimization would be weak EVA orientation lights along the hull... could be done either by emissive texture or Orbiter light beacons... but that can wait for a few versions IMHO.

 

[n122vu]

An ergonomy optimization would be weak EVA orientation lights along the hull... could be done either by emissive texture or Orbiter light beacons... but that can wait for a few versions IMHO.

I agree. This would benefit EVA operations around the Arrow at the outer planets or orbital dark side. But I also agree it is a "nice to have" and doesn't need to be included this go-round.

 

[dansteph]

Well... it's not too time consuming so I have a few question.

Would a dock here and with this orientation fit ? (XR5?)
I suppose it's just for crew transfer or for carrier transport ?

---------- Post added at 09:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 PM ----------

And one more, useful for EVA engine inspection.

 

[Frogisis]

I like it, but since it was on my mind already: What if the forward dock were oriented so the docked vessel was flipped the other way, so that a spaceplane's bay would open facing the Arrow's cargo rack?

 

[dansteph]

I like it, but since it was on my mind already: What if the forward dock were oriented so the docked vessel was flipped the other way, so that a spaceplane's bay would open facing the Arrow's cargo rack?

Good idea but I must thinks about the Xr5, just tested, the better seem this ?

Also the bay of a DGIV- XR2 would be on the side, not too far.

Dan

 

[C3PO]

Would a dock here and with this orientation fit ? (XR5?)
I suppose it's just for crew transfer or for carrier transport ?

Getting a XR-5 would be a tight squeeze.

How about moving the port 90° down on the side? That way there should be room enough for most craft. If it was on the port side, the trip from the EVA port would be short.

And since this is for crew/cargo transfer only, would it be hard to make the dock "fail" during propulsion? Just undock any craft if main or hover engines are engaged.