Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, FlyMeToTheMinmus said:

It's an old bug which had a fix involving changes in the persistant save file, but this fix was found and written up pre-1.1, so due to how nodes work now some of the instructions are wrong, and there hasn't been an updated method I've found yet. In my experience, it hasn't just been cxg's parts that suffer from this, I've seen it happen with Tantares parts as well. It might be worth asking @Claw about this, as they produced the last guide for fixing this.

Yes, I saw EJ had the same problem last night but as I'm a 'noob' so to speak with code I'm not sure how he fixed it.

 

EDIT: It seems that it is a chance bug as I have been getting it and then it's fine, so fingers crossed something can be done.

Edited by Kram45
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, vandenberg said:

I was wondering does someone have a realism overhaul config for this mod

Have you tried asking in the RO thread? might get better exposure to your request there.

 

Also some quick progress updates. Long spacer truss and EETCS radiator are pretty far along in texturing. Debating if I want to do a similar blanket wrap job on the square truss segments, with holes cut out for where the EVA hand rails will be placed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yay, trusses for CxAerospace :D

 

Edit: Imo a perfect marriage would be CxAerospace + Habtech Trusses + Fustek CBM's :D, that's the way i have my station designed at the moment :wink:

Edited by Jasseji
Link to post
Share on other sites

@StarStreak2109 Your Ares program made me re-start my station build:

Parts Used:
- Trusses from NFT
- Station Parts from CxAerospace
- KOSMOS for Solar Sails and Saturn V Rocket
- SDHI Service Module for the Crewed Capsule
- Fustek IACBM's
- Visuals by SVE
- Ven's Stock Revamp

Build in Progress
 

Edited by Jasseji
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2016 at 7:12 AM, Jasseji said:

Edit: Imo a perfect marriage would be CxAerospace + Habtech Trusses + Fustek CBM's :D, that's the way i have my station designed at the moment :wink:

I think the perfect marriage will be CX modules, CX trusses and solar (pending), and CX CBMs :P.

 

@JoseEduardo, the endcaps might look conflicting when attached to other mods, but should be an easy part to include. Which texture for the endcap were you thinking? The KHM-style? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean the one without a hatch painted? that one would be the best, so it wouldn't make a difference if there is a docking port in it, but if there isn't it won't look as if they needed one :)

and they won't feel as conflicting as the stock short 2.5m-->1.25m adapters, that's for sure :P especially with the stock lab if they have the handrails

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cxg2827 said:

I think the perfect marriage will be CX modules, CX trusses and solar (pending), and CX CBMs :P.

 

@JoseEduardo, the endcaps might look conflicting when attached to other mods, but should be an easy part to include. Which texture for the endcap were you thinking? The KHM-style? 

 

I switched from Habtech Trusses now to NearFuture waiting for your trusses, but i still find the Fustek IACBM the best (because of the hatch installing and Active/Passive switching - helps in station planning a lot :P)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be starting to model the rectangular truss docking ports this weekend but want to hear some opinions.

With the grief that restricted angle docking has caused many people, I think these ports will need some form of guide fins to make the hard docking easy. But with guide fins, this brings up some issues.

 

Option 1:
non-gendered, androgynous ports that can toggle the guide fins so that you can still dock the trusses at 180 degree increments. No deployable soft docking feature.

Possible issues: with the guide fins, the docking port will need to be deep enough to allow the guide fin colliders to sit in the recess properly. Docking ports might not be as slim as i originally planned. If a slim port with short guide fins can still be doable, I might need to reduce the magnetic attraction force and distance since shorter guide fins means less wiggle room with being out of alignment. 

Option 2:

Gendered ports with similar appearance and operation as the Rocketdyne Truss Attachment System (RTAS). With these I could set up the Active port with a soft-dock feature.

(Figures 24 thru 27 in the PDF below, about half way through. Thanks @Teslamax for the link)

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110010964.pdf

Option 3:

Modified RTAS, androgynous ports that can toggle the guide pins. Possibly could make this have a form of soft docking.

This port will, for lack of better words, ride on the outside of the truss like a belt and have a very slim profile when docked. The one drawback of this version is it will only be compatible with the rectangular truss components, and would need another variant to be used more universally on other parts.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd vote for #2, I really don't mind it being too hard to dock, I use an robotic tug to make the assembly for me and all I need if it doesn't dock is a bit of fine-tuning :P

btw, speaking of docking ports and tugs, would it be possible to include a grappling fixture and a grappling mechanism? probably both as docking ports to simplify it, I've been using Kanadarm's ones in a special tug so I could dock the tugs to modules with one docking port so I could get them attached to the station, it is very helpful for Quest, Cupola and JEM :)

if no I'd understand :)

EDIT: sorry for asking for even "moar" stuff, but would it be possible to include a 1.25m passive APAS? :blush:

Edited by JoseEduardo
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JoseEduardo said:

would it be possible to include a grappling fixture and a grappling mechanism?

Sure

4 hours ago, JoseEduardo said:

EDIT: sorry for asking for even "moar" stuff, but would it be possible to include a 1.25m passive APAS?

The same base size as the active one? Yea I totally forgot to make one of those so thanks for reminding me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used your mod for quite a while but once I figured a way to fly your Joint Experiments Module up to my station I can't believe how op it is... with just 2 lv 2 science kerbals I'm getting like 200 science a day. I can't imagine how much I'd get if I put in a 3rd or even take them on a mission to lvl them up even higher...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2016 at 7:39 PM, subzero22 said:

I can't believe how op it is

I think i just realized why its OP. Looking at the Squad MPL CFG I realized there is one multiplier I forgot to include in my labs:

 

Quote

dataProcessingMultiplier = 0.5 // Multiplier to data processing rate and therefore science rate
 

I assume since I didn't include it, that it defaults to "1"  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

 

The entry cost and the purchase costs for the labs are fairly more expensive than the stock lab, and I boosted slightly some of the ModuleScienceConverter values to reflect in the cost. Hopefully after I add that line to both labs it should make it feel more balanced.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some dev shots of the truss docking ports based off the Modified Rocketdyne Truss Attachment System (MRTAS).

The docking ports have been modeled this way since I wanted them to work with the P5 truss sections. These will definitely be more of a challenge to dock with.

What will probably need to happen is have the docking magnetism be very weak, and kick in at a very short distance. I'm thinking at the point that the Passive port's coarse alignment guide's pin's are just starting to go in the coarse alignment cups. But I have testing ahead of me to figure out what will work best. 

Passive

Spoiler

OTOB3IW.png

 

 

Active

Spoiler

9DOgmiv.png

 

 

Proposed Magnetism engagement distance

Spoiler

WJPJhQC.png

 

 

Docked

Spoiler

EvrqnVo.png


 

Link to post
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...