cxg2827

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

Recommended Posts

Hi  @cxg2827 Will it be possible that you add CLS "passability" to the APAS(Passive)-Mk1-2?

I use this to connect my Zarya, Zvezda and Soyus with your PMA. I build a very pretty ISS (as I think) but the Crew can not move freely through the station because of this part beeing the only (it seems) that is not "passable". In conjunction with the Stations Parts Extended Mods "PTD-HEX Multi-Point Station Connector they are the perfect fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update live on SpaceDock

Apparently, the order of ModuleScienceContainer and ModuleScienceExperiment matters in the CFG, so JAXA modules transmit science now. Thanks @mikesm

@Dark_Dragon26 The SARJ would only work with the robotics mod. Nothing I can do currently with the stock KSP tools to make it work as intended.

@Rissa @Space_Coyote see below

 

Quote

v1.5.1

Fixes:

  • CLS patch updated to include APAS_P_Mk1-2.
  • JAXA Experiment Logistics Module (ELM) and Joint Experiments Module (JEM) CFG fixes to allow transmission of science

  • Added new attachment node to Experiment Logistics Module (ELM) on centerline opposite of existing node.

  • Added search tags to Unity and Destiny equivalent modules

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rory Yammomoto said:

How much RAM does it usually use?

About 9 give or take

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

About 9 give or take

I only have 8 GB in total... The low-quality configs help, right?

Edited by Rory Yammomoto

Share this post


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

9 RAMs or 9 cards??? I only have 2 RAM cards what do I do

I only have bean chip plugged into USB

Share this post


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

9 RAMs or 9 cards??? I only have 2 RAM cards what do I do

3 hours ago, Rory Yammomoto said:

I only have 8 in total... The low-quality configs help, right?

I just know you need 9 RAMs. Can't help you any more than that, I'm not a tech support hotline.

Share this post


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

I just know you need 9 RAMs. Can't help you any more than that, I'm not a tech support hotline.

Crud. I only have seven rams and two ewes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rory Yammomoto said:

I meant Gigabytes... I have 8 GB of RAM.

That's too much, you'll have to get rid of some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3/4 cups of RAM is the sweet spot for me. Make sure to pre-wash and let it soak for 15 minutes before installing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm... I would like to file a complaint.

I installed the mod with the low-quality version (Not sure if it makes a difference, and it will make KSP use 2 GB of RAM on a linux) and the docking ports won't dock. I tried docking the passive APAS ports with passive CADS ports , to (unsuprisingly) no avail, but even docking them to other passive APAS ports yields nothing. Given that this plagued the CADS ports before, I think the strength needs to be increased.

EDIT: Passive-Passive connections do not work, but Passive-Active ones do. I was using the APAS ports for station construction.

Edited by Rory Yammomoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may be labeled as "androgynous" but that is strictly off appearance. These need active/passive to dock at the moment.

The BDB CADS have the older/weaker magnetism before I increased the values on my CX port values in the 1.5 release. I didn't give cobaltwolf an updated cfg for the CADS yet 

Share this post


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

They may be labeled as "androgynous" but that is strictly off appearance. These need active/passive to dock at the moment.

The BDB CADS have the older/weaker magnetism before I increased the values on my CX port values in the 1.5 release. I didn't give cobaltwolf an updated cfg for the CADS yet 

For whatever it's worth, I just checked the numbers for the BDB Dev repo, and the numbers have been retuned to reflect the new values in CX, but only quite recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-02-24 at 9:31 PM, cxg2827 said:

They may be labeled as "androgynous" but that is strictly off appearance. These need active/passive to dock at the moment.

The BDB CADS have the older/weaker magnetism before I increased the values on my CX port values in the 1.5 release. I didn't give cobaltwolf an updated cfg for the CADS yet 

OK. But passive CADS on an active APAS does nothing. Did the CADS split off before they became gendered?

EDIT: Yes. I'm not entirely sure what to do with this - make APAS non-gendered, or make CADS gendered? As Far As I Know, APAS (And CADS) were made to be non-gendered - don't the configs defeat that purpose?

Edited by Rory Yammomoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Rory Yammomoto said:

OK. But passive CADS on an active APAS does nothing. Did the CADS split off before they became gendered?

That's a question for the BDB team. I just provided the model/texture and initial CFG. I believe they changed it to be non-gendered, but may still use the same docking node type as mine. Could be possible that there are docking conflicts due to a non-gendered with a gendered, even though the node type are the same.

Possible fix would be for a second docking node to be added to the Unity scene/CFG to be cross-compatible with BDB CADS/CX APAS.

 

 

 

Share this post


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

...I believe they changed it to be non-gendered, but may still use the same docking node type as mine...

they must have. That probably also explains the failure to dock between APAS and CADS - The Gendered-on-non-gendered conflict. My question is why you made it gendered in the first place - the CBM ports being mechanically different I understand, but the APAS system was specifically designed to be non-gendered - the name "Androgynous Peripheral Attachment System" derives from this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addendum:

Do people think that it's important to be able to dock two active APAS ports together, more so that the inability to dock two passive ports?

If so I can change the APAS to non-gendered in the next release.

Share this post


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

Addendum:

Do people think that it's important to be able to dock two active APAS ports together, more so that the inability to dock two passive ports?

If so I can change the APAS to non-gendered in the next release.

Personally, I prefer having the real-life counterpart behavior. It adds an element of design (albeit, a small one) to think of when putting your stuff together. So i.e.: passive-to-passive = no / active-to-active = no / active-to-passive = a good time :wink:

 

Share this post


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

Addendum:

Do people think that it's important to be able to dock two active APAS ports together, more so that the inability to dock two passive ports?

If so I can change the APAS to non-gendered in the next release.

No. Keep it the way it is. Just provide patches to remove the feature.

Edited by Rory Yammomoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Calvin_Maclure said:

active-to-active = yes

The APAS actually allow active to active docking. the only configuration that wouldn't work would be passive-passive.

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.