[WIP][1.2.2] Keridian Dynamics - Dev Thread [Last Update: 2017-01-21]

[Eleusis La Arwall]

6 hours ago, Gryphorim said:

Basic Idea for an expandable, self landing launchpad:

 .gif is from a source I cannot remember (I'm not taking credit for this design) But it is pretty cool

Thanks for the suggestions, these are pretty cool concepts. EL contains a somewhat similar part to the first concept ( Launch Pad 2 ), maybe this already suits your needs?

The second one is close to the concept I have in mind for the foldable Pad. Had to throw away the first concept because I couldn't get it working in unity  

Ramps are a general problem. They need colliders and if they hit uneven terrain I assume it gets messy pretty fast. This is one of the reasons I try to seperate the Launchpads in "rocket-pads" and "rover/plane-pads" (and maybe submarines) but I have to admit that I couldn't come up with a good concept for the latter yet.

4 hours ago, colmo said:

That's correct - it operates like a launch clamp in terms of the way it interacts with the ground and attaches to parts, but creates essentially a nice wide concrete slab, that merges neatly with the ground (bevelled or stepped to make it climbable by Kerbals) and should also be perfectly upright, ideal for building non-mobile craft on. In the VAB or SPH, you'd construct, say, a hut made of metal plates with a probe core or command pod, then attach the concrete foundation like a launchclamp to the bottom. When built using EPL (using survey stakes most likely), the slab would anchor the hut permanently to the ground, precisely level. It could either be available in a number or sizes, or with some kind of Tweakscale functionality.

It would be perfect for anchoring the recycler to the ground, for instance. The only way to shift them afterwards might be demolition. And any opportunity to use demolition in KSP can only be a good thing.

I'm not sure how launchclamp functionality works, but you could add nodes to it, which might not be affected by it, only the connection via surface attachment.

This mod would work very well with it:

It could spark interest in parts designed for static us - large command station, research and comms pods with IVAs, KAS pipes designed to pass underground (only the connectors at each end would be visible, ideal for fastening to the concrete slabs), and associated damage mods like Kerbal Krash System, which allows such installations to get rather battered looking without disappearing with a puff or boom.

I really like this. Spent the whole day experimenting with the LaunchClamps and I had a lot of fun. It seems like it does not matter if other parts are attached radial or via node, but when the LaunchClamp is activated, it only breaks its connection to the part, that the root-part is attached to (have a look at the pictures below for better visualisation). Other attached parts remain attached to the Clamp. So I attached the Clamp to the root-part and the metal-plates, hitchhiker and stuff to the Clamp (via node).

What I have not figured out yet is how to set the spawn height. Moving the craft up/down in the VAB does not affect the spawn height.

The levelness of the Clamp/spawned craft depends on the level of the Launchpad. During the tests I realised quickly that the deployment vessel needs to be very robust and symmetric  in order to make everything level.

I'll upload a test-config to GitHub as soon as I have a basic texture.

I've never done anything with IVAs but I'm interested in that too. Biggest problem will be the time-factor. Had a bit of free-time the last three weeks and could get a lot done but tomorrow RL kicks back in.

 

During the tests I had some strange observations with the new tanks. While building a craft, not all RocketParts tanks get actually drained. Some tanks just remained full. EL was still using/converting RocketParts (on the GUI) but the overall amount of RocketParts in the resource-panel did not change. I'm gonna investigate this further with a clean install tonight or tomorrow but maybe someone encountered this too.

[Third_OfFive]

Does anyone else get the Better Off Ted reference?

[colmo]

4 hours ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

What I have not figured out yet is how to set the spawn height. Moving the craft up/down in the VAB does not affect the spawn height.

The levelness of the Clamp/spawned craft depends on the level of the Launchpad. During the tests I realised quickly that the deployment vessel needs to be very robust and symmetric  in order to make everything level.

I'll upload a test-config to GitHub as soon as I have a basic texture.

Spawn height - doesn't it behave like normal launchclamps with EPL?

Levelness - this might be a job for survey stakes. If anything, you're building an ideal foundation to put a permanent launchpad on top of.

I presume you're trying to spawn the part lower than an office block, but it isn't playing ball? I think the visual I have is the concrete base for the tanks near the KSC runway - not rising much above the ground, but enough to keep the parts on top away from the terrain, and the explosions that often causes.

[Gryphorim]

Pics that I posted were from an old project I was working on, a 2.5m (stowed) launchpad that worked like the small one in EPL, but bigger, designed to use as much of the 2.5m cylindrical space as possible, then unfurl to the widest practical pad size on deployment, around 5m or so. .Gif was the inspiration for the stowage of the pad itself, which would sit between the landing-leg/engine armatures in transit. Whole unit used similar mechanism as the ARM claw to lock to the ground. Also planned a 3.75m sized unit, with three armatures and a hexagonal pad shape.

As for Pad levelness, why not give the pad itself a command pod capability, with very high torque, and have it fix to the ground Klaw-style, on a gimbal. you set gimbal to unlock, steer pad so it's facing straight up using navball, then lock the pad gimbal.

Sorry, misread what levelness discussion was about

Edited April 18, 2016 by Gryphorim

[Eleusis La Arwall]

16 hours ago, Third_OfFive said:

Does anyone else get the Better Off Ted reference?

Almost gave up hope that someone would recognize it

16 hours ago, colmo said:

Spawn height - doesn't it behave like normal launchclamps with EPL?

Levelness - this might be a job for survey stakes. If anything, you're building an ideal foundation to put a permanent launchpad on top of.

I presume you're trying to spawn the part lower than an office block, but it isn't playing ball? I think the visual I have is the concrete base for the tanks near the KSC runway - not rising much above the ground, but enough to keep the parts on top away from the terrain, and the explosions that often causes.

The Survey Stakes were a great hint. Never actually used them before.

Made an experimental pack available on GitHub that contains 3 sizes (diameter= 4, 16 and 32 m): Download

 

Usage:
- In VAB/SOH: Create a root part (not the sockels!) and attach the sockel to the root part (all parts between root part and sockel will be dropped!). Now attach the base-parts to the sockel via node or radial attach. Save the file but don't launch it from VAB/SPH.
- IN VAB/SPH: Create a new craft with a Launchpad/Survey Stake (latter is recommended for level sockels). When done, launch it and bring the Launchpad/Stake in position. Build the craft with the sockels attached from first step. Finalize/Release.
- Focus the new craft with the Sockel and activate the "launchclamp". The Root part and stuff will fall off as described in the first step.

Limitations:
- It is possibe to connect mupltiple bases created that way with KAS but as soon as two vessels get attached the launchclamp is reenabled! Activating the "launchclamp" afterwards will result in connection break between both bases. (During my tests only the KAS-connector was seperated, the bases did not detach from the sockel, but no warranty)
- On uneven terrain: find a spot as flat as possible with very low slope. In some cases I was able to spawn "level" Sockels but weired things may happen: Fail-collection

Untested:
-Near/in water
-Docking
-A lot more

Warranty:
This is highly experimental - No warranty if it breaks craft- or save-files. Make backups in time!

Nevertheless I hope you still have some fun with the parts

[colmo]

Brilliant! Fantastic to see a year+ old figment of my imagination in the...er...flesh? Concrete? Better models than I pictured, too.

I had no idea what a sockel was...Google is still my friend

Interesting about the KAS interaction bug/feature. If it does get reenabled, a workaround is to make sure there's plenty of empty stages before you get to them.

KAS has the ability to use nodes as well as surface attachment (see the Surface Experiment pack) - perhaps a few of those around the edges would provide safe connection points for KAS users?

If this idea catches on, perhaps Squad would be kind enough to expose enough of the API to disable launchclamp decoupling or split it from the ground attachment behaviour, which is what we want, entirely.

[wasml]

1 hour ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

Almost gave up hope that someone would recognize it

I was half expecting a weaponized pumpkin mod for Halloween.

[colmo]

Have you tried changing the root part and then removing the original one, using the editor widget?

This behaviour with KAS might be worth reporting to the KAS team. They may be able to fix it from their end.

Do the 'sockels' extend in height like a launch clamp does? Haven't had a chance to try them yet, and won't for a few days.

Edited April 19, 2016 by colmo

[Eleusis La Arwall]

14 hours ago, colmo said:

Brilliant! Fantastic to see a year+ old figment of my imagination in the...er...flesh? Concrete? Better models than I pictured, too.

I had no idea what a sockel was...Google is still my friend

Interesting about the KAS interaction bug/feature. If it does get reenabled, a workaround is to make sure there's plenty of empty stages before you get to them.

KAS has the ability to use nodes as well as surface attachment (see the Surface Experiment pack) - perhaps a few of those around the edges would provide safe connection points for KAS users?

If this idea catches on, perhaps Squad would be kind enough to expose enough of the API to disable launchclamp decoupling or split it from the ground attachment behaviour, which is what we want, entirely.

 

6 hours ago, colmo said:

Have you tried changing the root part and then removing the original one, using the editor widget?

This behaviour with KAS might be worth reporting to the KAS team. They may be able to fix it from their end.

Do the 'sockels' extend in height like a launch clamp does? Haven't had a chance to try them yet, and won't for a few days.

Glad you like it

Woops, somehow I thought sockel was an english word too but as it turns out it is not. Will change that in the future. Suggestions?

The launchclamp also gets re-enabled by merging 2 vessels with the claw, so I think it is related to the launchclamp module.

Regarding the nodes, I had planned to have a small section in the middle of each edge that has no slope but therefore connection possibilities. I'm not really good with words but I'll upload a pic when I can.

Thought a bit about other forms. Triangular, hexagonal and round (24faces) are the most obvious I could come up with so far. Maybe some rounded corners.

During some more tests I figured out some things to increase propabilty for a successful deployment on uneven terrain:
1. The survey stake should be the highest point in the "deployment area". Spawning downhill had much less violent desintegrations than mixed/uphill.
2. Attach a Ground base (from KIS) to the surface. Attach a plate to the Ground base and "level" it by eye. It doesn't need to be 100% accurate. Now place a survey stake on the plate. Pics

All 3 bases in the pictures are perfectly leveled (Had a Kerbal sit in all 4 corners and the height was identical with KER).

I almost forgot, it does not like water at all. Most of the time everything exploded. Had not one successful deployment.

14 hours ago, wasml said:

I was half expecting a weaponized pumpkin mod for Halloween.

We'll have to see if Dr. Kamba Kerman can continue his work on this project after he has solved his "issues"

I always wanted to make the company motto "Money before Kerbals" in latin. Unfortunately I never learned latin and wasn't sure about the web-based translations, but if someone could/would translate that, I'd be glad to add it.

[DaniDE]

On 19.4.2016 at 7:12 PM, Eleusis La Arwall said:

 

 

Woops, somehow I thought sockel was an english word too but as it turns out it is not. Will change that in the future. Suggestions?

"socket" or "base" or even "foundation" (fundament) should all work

 

About that latin thing, its been like 20 years since school, but maybe this is a bit of inspiration - :

Money - over/through - (kerbal-)rights -> pecunia per (or super) civitas

Money over folk/populace -> pecunia per populus

Kerbalized versions might be "pecunia per kerbulus / kivitas" or something like that. Just don't use "Kopulus" or it might get weird quickly.

If you want literally "before" in the sense of time you can use "ante" instead of "per" but it does not make sense in this particular case imho.

 

Thanks, hope to be able to use your great mod it in the current game version soonish

Edited April 27, 2016 by DaniDE

[Eleusis La Arwall]

Version 0.6.1 is released! (for KSP 1.1.2)

Download from SpaceDock

Download from GitHub

The models are now reexported with Unity 5 and the new PartTools. Otherwise there are no big changes to version 0.6. The update took a bit longer than expected because I wanted to finish some new parts but now I realized that it will take some more time. Experimental versions of the new parts are included in the download for those who want to give them a try (must be installed seperatly).

Hope you all have fun and enjoy the update!

 

Spoiler

2016-05-01 - PECUNIA PER KERBULUS - v0.6.1
    -Reexported models with Unity 5 and PartTools 1.1.
    -New Company Motto: PECUNIA PER KERBULUS. (Thanks to DaniDE for translation!)
    -Reworked Logo and Flags.
    -Used "Icon_Hidden" tag. (Thanks to Badsector for the hint!)
    -Added ExperimentalSection (needs KIS).
    -New experimental part: KD-Fundament. (Thanks to colmo for the suggestion!)
    -New experimental part: KD-LaunchSite.
    -New experimental part: KD-SledgeHammer "Susie".

 

 

On 26/04/2016 at 6:17 AM, DaniDE said:

"socket" or "base" or even "foundation" (fundament) should all work

 

About that latin thing, its been like 20 years since school, but maybe this is a bit of inspiration - :

Money - over/through - (kerbal-)rights -> pecunia per (or super) civitas

Money over folk/populace -> pecunia per populus

Kerbalized versions might be "pecunia per kerbulus / kivitas" or something like that. Just don't use "Kopulus" or it might get weird quickly.

If you want literally "before" in the sense of time you can use "ante" instead of "per" but it does not make sense in this particular case imho.

 

Thanks, hope to be able to use your great mod it in the current game version soonish

Thank you very much for the suggestion and translation! As you might have seen in the changelog, the update is called PECUNIA PER KERBULUS

The sentence is already included in the latest version and I think it's pretty easy to find

"Sockels" are now replaced by the "Fundament" and It behaves a bit different. The strechable part is now angeled and the closer the Fundament spawns to the ground , the flatter the slope of the Fundament will be. This makes it really easy to walk and/or drive from surface onto the Fundament. The downside is that the texture becomes squeezed with higher Fundaments.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Eleusis La Arwall
edited changelog, added pics

[Joshwoo70]

The original post's gallary is a bit outdated...

[Eleusis La Arwall]

On 02/05/2016 at 8:21 AM, Joshwoo69 said:

The original post's gallary is a bit outdated...

Yeah you got me there Was a bit lazy and hoped I get away with it but now the gallery in the OP and on Spacedock are up to date.

[Joshwoo70]

6 hours ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

Yeah you got me there Was a bit lazy and hoped I get away with it but now the gallery in the OP and on Spacedock are up to date.

cool! Can I also makw a request for a orbital port? the EPL one is bad :/

[Eleusis La Arwall]

14 hours ago, Joshwoo69 said:

cool! Can I also makw a request for a orbital port? the EPL one is bad :/

Sure, I'm always open for suggestions. If you mean ELs Orbital Construction Dock, there is already the OrbitalPad (it works the same way; it's just heavier). If you mean something else let me know!

[Joshwoo70]

15 hours ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

Sure, I'm always open for suggestions. If you mean ELs Orbital Construction Dock, there is already the OrbitalPad (it works the same way; it's just heavier). If you mean something else let me know!

no i am not mentioning the Construction dock i mean the Stock ExtraPlanetary Launchpads orbital construction. 

[Eleusis La Arwall]

11 hours ago, Joshwoo69 said:

no i am not mentioning the Construction dock i mean the Stock ExtraPlanetary Launchpads orbital construction. 

I'm sorry but I can't find the part you are mentioning Could you provide a picture or a link to the part on ELs GitHub? 

[Joshwoo70]

The blue thingy to the docking node.

[Eleusis La Arwall]

On 06/05/2016 at 3:53 PM, Joshwoo69 said:

The blue thingy to the docking node.

The blue thingy on top is actually ELs Orbital Construction Dock I was mentioning before.

So I'd guess the OrbitalPad does not suit your needs? If that is true, what kind of Construction Port do you have in mind? I need to have a ruff picture/perception in my head to start and at the moment it would end in a part rather similar to the OrbitalPad.

[Joshwoo70]

something like this : Infernal robotics video

or this pic

[Eleusis La Arwall]

4 hours ago, Joshwoo69 said:

something like this : Infernal robotics video

or this pic

OK I see what you mean. The video gave me some ideas and I do like the hexagonal symmetry. Added to the list.

The picture reminds me of IXSs Spacedocks (forum post). They are very nicely done but I haven't used them in a while and don't know if they are 1.1 compatible.

[Joshwoo70]

12 hours ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

OK I see what you mean. The video gave me some ideas and I do like the hexagonal symmetry. Added to the list.

The picture reminds me of IXSs Spacedocks (forum post). They are very nicely done but I haven't used them in a while and don't know if they are 1.1 compatible.

yeah not sure if it is 1.1 compatible.. still but yeah I was kinda goig for that. was thinking that you can make the middle open space fully passable.

[Andem]

Ok, so say I want to use just the launchpad as a regular part, would I still need EPL? Is it possible to make this work with OSE Workshop?

[Eleusis La Arwall]

9 hours ago, Andem said:

Ok, so say I want to use just the launchpad as a regular part, would I still need EPL? Is it possible to make this work with OSE Workshop?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "regular part" but all the EPL modules are loaded with ModuleManager if EPL is installed. Without EPL the LaunchPads are pretty much dead weight

I'll have a look into OSE Workshop and see what I can do to make it work.

[Andem]

27 minutes ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "regular part" but all the EPL modules are loaded with ModuleManager if EPL is installed. Without EPL the LaunchPads are pretty much dead weight

I'll have a look into OSE Workshop and see what I can do to make it work.

Regular part as in It could potentially be used as a landing pad fr a Mun base, or something.