cxg2827

[DEV HALTED][1.3] CxAerospace: Stations Parts Pack v1.6.2 [2017-5-24]

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, alaykitty said:

Just wanted to say your changes to the docking ports make it so much more enjoyable to use!  I love them now!

Glad I did something right :P

 

3 hours ago, alaykitty said:

Are there any plans for a "covered" truss texture like the ISS has, or a mounting truss like the S0 ITS?

Yup, check the roadmap in the OP or in my sig.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, cxg2827 said:

Glad I did something right :P

 

Yup, check the roadmap in the OP or in my sig.

 

Oops feel like a ditz for missing the roadmap!  Awesome :)

Thanks again for all your hard work on this mod it's easily one of the best parts mods for KSP in my opinion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are absolutely gorgeous! 

Quick question though! Is there any potential conflict with these parts and Kerbalism? I have a career I just started, but would love to try them out (without having to make another copy of my game files... again... xD) on it. I didn't see anything about it in any of the posts I read or anything so far. 

Nice work! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @EssjayC, I'm not sure if there will be any incompatibilities with Kerbalism. I plan on providing an MM patch after i get around to playing the game again, as I plan to use Kerbalism when I do. But for now I guess you'll have to check it in a test save.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2016-09-08 at 10:29 AM, cxg2827 said:

@AndrewHere, are you referring to the new RTAS ones? I'm making a a guide for that tonight.

Typical troubleshooting, make sure you are docking active-passive. The acquire force is pretty small for these, so it gives you some more time during magnetism to properly align the alignment pins into the passive capture cups.

These ports are pretty unforgiving, so you might have to use RCS to back us a smidge for re-alignment if you miss.

Any word on this guide?  I've look around for it but can't find it.  I've messed around with it for 1/2 and hour and can't get them to mate.  I know it's Active/Passive as the were already connected and I just undocked, backed away a bit and am trying to redock again to try them out.  Are they compatible with Docking Port Alignment Indicator mod?  it works fairly well but the velocity vector goes all squirly when you get close.  like it should be up and to the right rather than centred for perfect alignment.   They are stuck together magnetically but just won't mate.  It looks like the pins are hitting the holes, but again, just not mating.  Any help would be appreciated.

Love this mod BTW keep up the great work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2017 at 10:56 AM, DarthVader said:

Can you move Cupola up to a sooner update?

Coupla will be in the first update after the Truss complex is finished (so v2.1).

@Eugene Moreau, sorry I completely forgot to create that guide. I'll try to get that pushed out this week. I'm not sure on DPAI compatibility as I never used/tested it. The RTAS ports are by far the biggest PITA ports to use due to their very small profile and tiny colliders. Most times disabling SAS on both crafts helps them settle and click in. You might get some better results tweaking the CFG so that the [captureMinRollDot = 0.999].

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, cxg2827 said:

Coupla will be in the first update after the Truss complex is finished (so v2.1).

@Eugene Moreau, sorry I completely forgot to create that guide. I'll try to get that pushed out this week. I'm not sure on DPAI compatibility as I never used/tested it. The RTAS ports are by far the biggest PITA ports to use due to their very small profile and tiny colliders. Most times disabling SAS on both crafts helps them settle and click in. You might get some better results tweaking the CFG so that the [captureMinRollDot = 0.999].

 

No worries.  Wanted to make sure I wasn't completely crazy in not being able to find it.  Real life has a nasty habit of getting in the way.  Will give the no SAS a try too.

Couple other questions I haven't been able to figure out.

Is there a best practice as to which vessel should have the active and passive?  As far as I can tell from looking at some RL examples and the descriptions of the parts, it seems the active is always on the "station" or facing out and the docking vessel (whether it be a ship or another component being installed) has the passive.  

What is the intended difference between the APAS and the CBM and how come the Z1 True has it's own specific CBM, is that so no opens the hatch into the void?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Eugene Moreau said:

Is there a best practice as to which vessel should have the active and passive?

My thought is that any "core" modules with 4+ nodes would be mostly active ports, and just (1) passive port for the connection to the the existing station (unless it is truly the first station module, then all can be active). So basically, the active ports are operation from the station.

Modules with (2) nodes will have 1 active/1 passive. But of course, this is if you are giving yourself a personal restriction to follow. Otherwise just pick and chose based on the situation's needs.

28 minutes ago, Eugene Moreau said:

What is the intended difference between the APAS and the CBM and how come the Z1 True has it's own specific CBM, is that so no opens the hatch into the void?

APAS/CBMs are just different sized ports for variety/role-playing with no real functional differences. IRL APAS has a smaller passageway while the CBMs have a much larger opening to allow the payload racks to pass through.

the manual CBM for the Z1 is a special case that really will only be used on the Z1. It's collider is modeled so you can pass through it on EVA and is only modeled as a ring to recreate the one on the ISS. Doubtful it would be used on anything else besides ISS recreations in game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

Coupla will be in the first update after the Truss complex is finished (so v2.1).

@Eugene Moreau, sorry I completely forgot to create that guide. I'll try to get that pushed out this week. I'm not sure on DPAI compatibility as I never used/tested it. The RTAS ports are by far the biggest PITA ports to use due to their very small profile and tiny colliders. Most times disabling SAS on both crafts helps them settle and click in. You might get some better results tweaking the CFG so that the [captureMinRollDot = 0.999].

 

Another stupid(ish) question re the RTAS.  Which was is in and which way is out?  it's pretty easy to tell with other ports.  I assume holes go out on active one and pins go out on the passive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Refer to the album linked in the first post. The RTAS have two white circles on each corner. That is the mating surface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect.  Thank you.  I had the pins and holes in the right orientations, but the pins kept hitting what ever was behind because I discovered that I had them rotated off by 90 degrees.  duh.  Just assumed the orientation of the rectangle on the RTAS and on the truss should match.

Thanks again for you help.  It is much appreciated!  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Eugene Moreau said:

Just assumed the orientation of the rectangle on the RTAS and on the truss should match

This is correct. Here is an old screengrab of a development shot. Shows how they should be oriented.

WJPJhQC.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

Refer to the album linked in the first post. The RTAS have two white circles on each corner. That is the mating surface.

 

11 minutes ago, cxg2827 said:

This is correct. Here is an old screengrab of a development shot. Shows how they should be oriented.

WJPJhQC.png

That works great from truss to truss, but if you put one on the z-truss in that orientation the pins hit the surface below and won't mate.  If you rotate them by 90 degrees on then they mate.  Either way it figured out how to get it to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, the Z1 threw me a curveball when I first made it. I had to add small stand-offs to mount the RTAS since I didnt catch that from the reference pics when I first modeled it.

YVaqkZQ.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the parts' thermal durability so abysmally bad? KSP likes to rise he temperature of a whole craft up to maximum temperature of hottest part, e.g. ISRU operation at 1000K - especially when you approach with another craft and enter physics bubble that way - and in that case, every single part of CxAerospace goes boom! I'd love to build more  bases and stations based on this mod, but I currently only dare to use the solar panels - and even then, my recent arrival at Gilly base was welcomed with six explosions when all solar panels (and exactly nothing else) exploded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sharpy said:

Why is the parts' thermal durability so abysmally bad? KSP likes to rise he temperature of a whole craft up to maximum temperature of hottest part, e.g. ISRU operation at 1000K - especially when you approach with another craft and enter physics bubble that way - and in that case, every single part of CxAerospace goes boom! I'd love to build more  bases and stations based on this mod, but I currently only dare to use the solar panels - and even then, my recent arrival at Gilly base was welcomed with six explosions when all solar panels (and exactly nothing else) exploded.

Well, these parts are meant as orbital station parts, and had to be balanced so they could not survive atmospheric reentry without heavy sheilding. @cxg2827 *might* be able to use the new seprate internal/external temps, keeping the external tolerance down but increasing the internal tolerance. Other than that, nothing can really be done without "ruining the feel" so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sharpy said:

Why is the parts' thermal durability so abysmally bad? KSP likes to rise he temperature of a whole craft up to maximum temperature of hottest part, e.g. ISRU operation at 1000K - especially when you approach with another craft and enter physics bubble that way - and in that case, every single part of CxAerospace goes boom! I'd love to build more  bases and stations based on this mod, but I currently only dare to use the solar panels - and even then, my recent arrival at Gilly base was welcomed with six explosions when all solar panels (and exactly nothing else) exploded.

Doesn't this pack have/support having big radiators like on the ISS? They're supposed to be fragile station parts. I don't see why they'd need good heat tolerance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Doesn't this pack have/support having big radiators like on the ISS? They're supposed to be fragile station parts. I don't see why they'd need good heat tolerance.

Radiators very quickly reduce the temperature of the parts that didn't explode. They don't work when the base is outside current craft's physics bubble and they need some time to lower the temperature once the base is spawned overheated already.

I can assure you my Gilly base has more than enough cooling capacity.

Edited by Sharpy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just getting back into KSP after a very long time, saw this mod and "had to have"...   So I started a new career, and unlocked the Specialized Construction node, there are quite a few of the parts from the mod there, but I don't find the Zarya equivalent?   Am I doing something wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it is only modeling the American / European / Japanese parts of the ISS. For (K)Russian modules, Tantares is a good bet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, StarStreak2109 said:

Because it is only modeling the American / European / Japanese parts of the ISS. For (K)Russian modules, Tantares is a good bet.

 

Thank you!    I ended up making a Zarya with Tantares (do you know why this doesn't show up on ckan ?)  ,  anyway I made this:

Any advice on Solar Panel mod?  At this stage of career those are the biggest panels I have unlocked.

 

PgILKuW.png

 

 

Edited by rottielover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rottielover said:

Thank you!    I ended up making a Zarya with Tantares (do you know why this doesn't show up on ckan ?)  ,  anyway I made this:

Any advice on Solar Panel mod?  At this stage of career those are the biggest panels I have unlocked.

 

PgILKuW.png

 

 

Near Future Solar has some big panels. Also, Near Future Electrical has nuclear reactors!

I also think SSTU has some panels, and so does Habtech.

I thought Cx had the ISS ones? Or was it only Habtech?

Edited by minepagan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rottielover said:

Any advice on Solar Panel mod?

 

1 hour ago, minepagan said:

I thought Cx had the ISS ones? Or was it only Habtech?

Both mine and Habtech have Solar Array Wings, though Habtechs have dual Axis Tracking.

rottielover might be looking for larger solar panels to make the Zarya I believe. Those are in the Tantares pack. @rottielover you might need to unlock a later tech node.

On 1/13/2017 at 10:22 PM, Sharpy said:

Why is the parts' thermal durability so abysmally bad? KSP likes to rise he temperature of a whole craft up to maximum temperature of hottest part, e.g. ISRU operation at 1000K - especially when you approach with another craft and enter physics bubble that way - and in that case, every single part of CxAerospace goes boom! I'd love to build more  bases and stations based on this mod, but I currently only dare to use the solar panels - and even then, my recent arrival at Gilly base was welcomed with six explosions when all solar panels (and exactly nothing else) exploded.

I have no idea how the heating effects work in the game. If someone could provide me with a link or 2 that explains how the various variables work then I can probably do a balance pass to make the parts work a little better.

One reason why most of the parts have a low heat tolerance is to prevent unrealistic aerobraking/aerocapturing with these parts. Though the thermal mass modifier, conductivity, and  emmissive contants can be modified to prevent random exploding.

@Sharpy, so the SAWs explode? I have those matching the same properties as the stock Gigantor XL Solar Arrays, except with ~3x the charge rate. So I'm not sure why those are causing issues.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cxg2827 said:

 

One reason why most of the parts have a low heat tolerance is to prevent unrealistic aerobraking/aerocapturing with these parts. Though the thermal mass modifier, conductivity, and  emmissive contants can be modified to prevent random exploding.

@Sharpy, so the SAWs explode? I have those matching the same properties as the stock Gigantor XL Solar Arrays, except with ~3x the charge rate. So I'm not sure why those are causing issues.

 

I'm afraid this won't help  - and doing the opposite might; making them more thermally durable but obscenely absorbant to convective heat. Or to hope Squad fixes the issue (it IS a bug after all!). The problem is the vessel/base sometimes *spawns* with temperatures way high, if it has any "core heat" modules on board. Even entirely inactive. 

Say, my "disposable RCS" uses that for "self-destruct". They are thrusters that have a "converter" module that converts EC to EC, producing obscene amounts of heat and has extra-lousy heat removal capabilities. The effect is you click "self-destruct", a second later you see the heat bar filling rapidly and next second the thruster explodes in a puff of smoke, the rest of the vessel unaffected. So, I had them on a rover - as the only modules with CoreHeat - and one day the whole rover was literally covered with red stripes of heat (most parts on it tolerate 1200K). And obviously it still had the RCS modules on it and they didn't try to explode. Simply presence of inactive heat generator caused trouble.

It's not only the SAW panels. I had used the disposable RCS on Minmus station (they are meant for station assembly; dispose of once assembly is complete) and I tarried with their removal... I used one of CxAerospace docking ports (these four little nubs, forgot the name) to hold the propulsion module. So, one day a dinghy returns with a rescuee and is greeted with the sight of the propulsion module floating away into space. The station is in orange and yellow bars, but  F3 log shows the docking ports overheated and exploded. After getting rid of the thrusters the station never showed a glimpse of a heat bar.

No vessel with no CoreHeat ever overheats, and these with RTG and nukes are hardly affected, probably due to low heat generated by their modules, but if you have ISRU or drills on board, you'd better not have any <1200K parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.