GLS
Well-known member
So that settles it then, the vents in the videos are hydrogen not oxygen.
Thanks!
Thanks!
SSU Development Thread (2.0 to 3.0)
- Thread starter Urwumpe
- Start date
- Status
GLS
Well-known member
I had some ideia it was removed, so for now I'm not doing it. Sometime in the future it will appear.
Donamy
Addon Developer
You could use the ones from the STS-118 addon.
SiameseCat
Addon Developer
I think a new release is a good idea. I'm busy for the next 2 weeks or so, so I won't be able to do any work (I'll keep an eye on the forums in case anyone has questions).
Regarding the new MPS stuff: does this require scenario changes? If we have to update scenarios to handle the new MPS, we should try to include the MPS stuff in the next release.
Regarding the new MPS stuff: does this require scenario changes? If we have to update scenarios to handle the new MPS, we should try to include the MPS stuff in the next release.
STS-118 didn't carry a EDO pallet. I think you're confusing the EDO pallet with the SpaceHAB module. The EDO pallet always occupied bays 12/13 of the PLB to provide extra LH2/LOX for the fuel cells to enable extended mission durations.
GLS
Well-known member
Yes, there are some changes. I have the "SSU" scenarios updated (in the mps branch for now) and I'll provide "canned" versions of the scenario blocks in question, so anyone can go there and copy what they need.
Yes, but the SpaceHAB textures are specifically tailored fit only the SpaceHAB module. I need one that fits the EDO pallet.
GLS
Well-known member
In terms of MPS, the scenarios currently in the trunk are old and (probably) won't work, and the ones in the mps branch are the standard (minus the ET update I'm finishing). I also did change the OMS assist mission file configuration to have the correct ON/OFF and duration values.
Urwumpe
Not funny anymore
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2008
- Messages
- 38,965
- Reaction score
- 3,937
- Points
- 203
- Location
- Wolfsburg
- Preferred Pronouns
- Sire
Thats not so much a problem, the question rather is: Does not make sense to already take the scenario blocks for the new MPS into the release, even if you might not be ready in time. We could then simply do the release process as planned, and later start a new release branch with your MPS. This is especially important should we do scenario creation tools along the way - we don't need to wait for the MPS to already include what is final.
GLS
Well-known member
Not sure I'm following you... you want to release what's on the trunk now and in a later release have the mps branch stuff? If that's the case I've no problem with that. At best I'll need 2-3 days to "finish" this... but there's always something to do. :lol:
SiameseCat
Addon Developer
GLS
Well-known member
OK, just uploaded the new stuff! Please play with it, especially everything that isn't launch, because I want to be sure I didn't break anything. Also, could someone check if I added libUltra correctly to the Atlantis_Tank project? It works but I'm not 100% sure it's done the right way.
Now I will put "outside" documentation together and hopefully upload it later today.
A (quick) request: could anyone at our "graphics department" do a little edge smoothing in the SSMEstream.dds texture? I think it should be somewhat ragged, but currently we can notice the edges of the texture and it doesn't look super.
---------- Post added at 01:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 PM ----------
I'm looking at the "Doc/Space Shuttle Ultra" folder and wondering if we shouldn't differentiate between "public documentation" and "developer documentation". The public docs would consist of help files and whatever is need to the user, and that is what goes in the releases. The dev docs would have more "technical" stuff and the doxygen output and would stay somewhere in the svn.
Good or bad this idea?
Now I will put "outside" documentation together and hopefully upload it later today.
A (quick) request: could anyone at our "graphics department" do a little edge smoothing in the SSMEstream.dds texture? I think it should be somewhat ragged, but currently we can notice the edges of the texture and it doesn't look super.
---------- Post added at 01:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 PM ----------
I'm looking at the "Doc/Space Shuttle Ultra" folder and wondering if we shouldn't differentiate between "public documentation" and "developer documentation". The public docs would consist of help files and whatever is need to the user, and that is what goes in the releases. The dev docs would have more "technical" stuff and the doxygen output and would stay somewhere in the svn.
Good or bad this idea?
As an SSU mesh developer, I think you might be interested in this: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/24122088/Orbiter payload bay.zip
With this you can ensure proper fitting of your payloads in AC3D. AC3D file and texture in dds included.
Donamy
Addon Developer
I do have one that I've been using, but a full orbiter mesh is needed for the release version. The one available now is distorted (see above post for pic). Also, the one available won't import to AC3D, so I couldn't fix it.
The PLB should be enough to size the payloads correctly. That PLB model is directly from the new orbiter so there's no difference between the AC3D version and the Orbiter version.
- Status
