Jump to content

[1.12.x] Landertrons (Automatic Landing Retro-Rockets) v1.3.0 (02021 Sep 06)


Kerbas_ad_astra

Recommended Posts

I must be missing something, I really can't find the  "Landertron Box"  or any way of setting the mode of the rockets. All I have in my parts is XT-L1, XT-L2, XT-L2B and a XT-L-KRAB. Unlocked most of the science tree and can't see the box anywhere in the unlocked parts either?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Naesstrom said:

I must be missing something, I really can't find the  "Landertron Box"  or any way of setting the mode of the rockets. All I have in my parts is XT-L1, XT-L2, XT-L2B and a XT-L-KRAB. Unlocked most of the science tree and can't see the box anywhere in the unlocked parts either?

should be under Control, it looks like the Atomospheric sensor.

 

---------------

@Kerbas_ad_astra yeah, that's what I figured with ModuleDeployableEngines. I can't figure it out, which is sort of why I picked on Landertron. Sorry.

I also made the "discovery-not-a-discovery" that arming Landertron's in a fuel-less Taurus HCV will cause Landertron to throw NRE's because it can't calculate minimum necessary thrust or something along those lines (I forgot to add fuel to the engines and tried to do a controlled landing).

Also, I used portions of your HGR Landertron patch (with attribution, currently just in the thread) in the Taurus HCV update I just released. I hope that is okay - I know the license allows for it. Do I need to do anything specific to comply with it?

 

You can find it here if curious. I've since added a bit at the top about parts being from you. Well, the patch is almost verbatim if I were being honest.:wink:

Cheers.

 

Edited by Deimos Rast
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

As long as the derivative work is also released under the GPL, yes.

Was that meant for me regarding the CKAN addition, I made a pull request to include into your git if you want it there! No idea how github works really :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

As long as the derivative work is also released under the GPL, yes.

I didn't state a license on the patches; is stating "Portions of the patches licensed under GPL v3" with that specifically mentioned in the Landertron patch sufficient?

 

9 minutes ago, Naesstrom said:

Nope, started a new game in sandbox just if I missed something in the tree, this is what I have in Control...

 

That's it. Looks like something changed your model, or it got updated when I wasn't looking. The version I have is a welded combination of the Atmospheric Sensor and the Inline Reaction wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The LKRAB is the new Landertron Box (and fills the same functionality), with a fancy unique model by @steedcrugeon.  It's not been properly released yet, but I'm guessing @Naesstrom cloned my repo directly rather than a zip release.  (If so, you may not have the DLL required to make it all work.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

The LKRAB is the new Landertron Box (and fills the same functionality), with a fancy unique model by @steedcrugeon.  It's not been properly released yet, but I'm guessing @Naesstrom cloned my repo directly rather than a zip release.  (If so, you may not have the DLL required to make it all work.)

Yup, must have done that by accident, reinstalled it from the zip and now it's working! Thanks for all the help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kerbas_ad_astra

Hi there, your mod is fantastic! I just tested it with combined LF engines and refueled the Solids with KIS after landing, its just great! :D

JEZ9DcJ.png

This is by far the most handy mod for people with... errm... "precious" career Kerbals...

RfHwkrU.png

In my Opinion its ready for 1.0, just make a custom Landertron computer maybe?
(I pulled the Github zip, is there any else?) 

Edited by Mikki
Github zip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
On 2017. 01. 02. at 10:34 PM, Brainpop14 said:

Does this work in 1.2.2?

It works.

However I recently tested the computer and the larger SF engine on a simple return vehicle on Kerbin and the SoftLanding functionality is not working properly.

Maybe the problem is with my KSP, but landertron fires the engines too late and the return vehicle crashes at a speed of 60-90 m/s (couldn't log the exact number). DV budget and surface TWR of the various configurations should be enough for landing the pod softly and safely. (I tried putting more engines on the pod, but the result is the same.) If I just make a free fall from lower heights the same engine configurations softly land the pod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017. 03. 20. at 2:18 AM, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

Can you post a craft file and describe more precisely the situation?  (E.g. the orbit state at reentry.)

Sorry, no craft file, I haven't saved it.

Different configurations on the same 4 part pod (heat shield, LFO tank, pod, docking port)

  • A: 4 radially attached XT-L2 Landertron Retrorocket
  • B: 4 SuperDraco Engines from Kerbal Reusability Expansion mod + landertron computer
  • C: 6 SuperDraco Engines + landertron computer

In each case after reentry the pod crashed into surface while the engines were working.

When I droped from below 10 km, landertron successfully decelarated the vessel, only heat shield were crashed in some cases.

There seems to be a delay of the landertron kicking in. Kerbal Engineer calculates the height of the suicide burn, and it seems landertron fires below or just right at the height showed by Kerbal Engineer. My hypothesis is that it reaches the calculated height then initiates the engines, but the real height when the engines actually thrust is a little lower than the neccessary hence the 80-90m/s impact velocity. Howeve when I drop from below 10 km, vehicle doesn't seem to accelerate as fast downward as after atmospheric reentry. This slightly slower acceleration/deceleration gives enough time for the landertron engines to thrust.

Maybe my game settings of physical calculation time or what is too long for landertron?

It may need more extensive testing. I had time only to figure out it really has a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found in testing that, while a lander with four SuperDracos (TWR 4) fired too late, it fired right on time when there were twenty (TWR 14).  Additionally, in the 4SD case, the impact velocity on the ground was ~25 m/s or 2.5s * g, which is about the burn duration.  I think there's an issue in the way that the soft-landing handler accounts for gravity (which would have a greater impact on longer burns, which is exacerbated by increased altitude or reduced number of engines).

The handler doesn't ignore gravity, but it accounts for it in a different way from Kerbal Engineer (essentially, it bookkeeps gravity as a penalty to TWR, whereas KER uses conservation of energy), so I'm going to tinker with that to see what comes of it.

Edited by Kerbas_ad_astra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, with energy conservation, the vehicle now starts firing shortly before the deadline.  Be advised that, as solid rocket motors cannot throttle down for a soft landing, they will bring the vehicle to zero velocity several meters off the ground, so be prepared for a bit of a drop!  Bring airbags, girders, or something crushable to land on...

(The Landertron Box behaves the same way, but if it cuts out more than a meter or so above the ground, it will rearm itself and perform another landing burn at the appropriate time.)

My goal is to have this released next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Landertrons Version 1.0.0: Terminal Burn is here!

  • New XT-L-KRAB model to replace the XT-LB, from steedcrugeon. (The old model has been made unresearchable, and will be removed in the next release.)
  • Changed SoftLanding calculation so that it no longer fires late in landers with TWRs below 5 or so. Again, be advised that solid rocket motors do not throttle, so there will be a drop after they cut out! Bring airbags, girders, or something crushable to land on...
  • Adjusted rearm/settle conditions for landertron box to be less 'bouncy'.
  • Added subtle up-arrows to XT-L2, to clarify which way to orient it.

Now that the Landertron Box has a proper model, I consider this mod 'feature-complete' and ready to be called version 1.0.0.  Of course, I can't call it a proper 'full release' without a nifty logo!

Landertron-logo.png

I will update it for new KSP releases, but otherwise I don't expect to devote much time to it.  It does what I want it to do, and doesn't do anything I don't want it to do (though I'm certainly amenable to persuasion).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

First, awesome mod, love how the layer of dust on my chutes is growing thicker and thicker :-) 

Second, Is it a bug or a feature, that the vessel (landertron solids with softlanding) has a little acceleration towards the sky, and thus increases the final landing speed unnecessarily? Can we adjust the height and targetspeed? Like 1m above ground it should have -1m/s vertical speed, or 0m and 0m/s?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Blackline said:

First, awesome mod, love how the layer of dust on my chutes is growing thicker and thicker :-) 

Second, Is it a bug or a feature, that the vessel (landertron solids with softlanding) has a little acceleration towards the sky, and thus increases the final landing speed unnecessarily? Can we adjust the height and targetspeed? Like 1m above ground it should have -1m/s vertical speed, or 0m and 0m/s?

Solid rockets do not throttle - that includes to zero, I believe...  Try reducing the amount of solid fuel they store slightly, so they burn out quicker.

(I'll admit I rarely work with the solid rocket landertrons - the ships I want landertrons on tend to have engines already.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought, that the landertron not only decides when to fire the solids, but also for how long (pretending it was setup apriori)??

Think about, if that wouldn't be the case, you'd need to have the very exact amount of fuel/thrust before takeof.

Edited by Blackline
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.

×
×
  • Create New...