[Minimum KSP: 1.12.2] Heisenberg - Airships Part Pack

[Grease1991]

is there any chance for tweakscale support for this?

Forgive me if it's been covered before i only went back a few pages.

[smakkacow]

I CANNOT build an airship, there's no airship parts

[Krakatoa]

16 hours ago, smakkacow said:

I CANNOT build an airship, there's no airship parts

Like, none in your VAB/SPH? Gonna go out on a limb and say it's an install issue. Are you using MM 2.8.1 and 1.3 of KSP? File structure should be KerbalSpaceProgram/GameData/WildBlueIndustries/Heisenberg. Not GameData/Heisenberg or any other iterations.

[ClockworkAirship]

Hello! i have lil' problem.. whenever i launch my airship it just remain froze in place, i can not pilot it even if rcs, sas , and all the fins works perfectly and move. I made tweakscale avaible on the hull parts and also both gyros, the result is a quite large ship, in the hangar i placed the aircraft catapult and the arresting gear and that's it for non - Heisenberg related mod.  

 

[Shnyrik]

4 hours ago, ClockworkAirship said:

whenever i launch my airship it just remain froze in place

I see on the screenshot, that you use AirPark mod. Heisenberg itself has it's own version of air park included. When I tried to use both mods at once I had some conflicts. Try deleting AirPark.

BTW, interesting design

Edited July 29, 2017 by Shnyrik

[ClockworkAirship]

19 hours ago, Shnyrik said:

I see on the screenshot, that you use AirPark mod. Heisenberg itself has it's own version of air park included. When I tried to use both mods at once I had some conflicts. Try deleting AirPark.

BTW, interesting design

Thanks alot mate! in the end i figured out what caused the problem.. all my ships were secured with B9 invisible strut which i modified, once i removed everything i was able to fly freely again, same thing happened with planes. now i just need to build a bigger ship and pack it with planes :3

 

[Drew Kerman]

it's official!

It will be a few months still, but it's coming. Look forward to really digging into this pack.

[panarchist]

On 7/22/2017 at 9:11 AM, panarchist said:

I haven't needed much in the way of counterweights because like you, I have light planes and a heavy airship.  Another way to minimize it is having a lot of weight on the centerline at the bottom (I use long gondolas) - this counters the rotation tendency since that weight will want to stay at the bottom.

@Shnyrik - I spoke too soon. After doing a couple more "moving landings", I discovered that side rolls aren't my problem, but pitching forward or backward is a real issue. 

[Angelo Kerman]

Performing an experiment...

Gondolas are underwater, but otherwise she floats.

[njmksr]

Made lovingly with Heisenberg Airships. Not just for zeppelins anymore!

https://kerbalx.com/njmksr/SHARD-Helicarrier

 

Edited August 6, 2017 by njmksr

[Angelo Kerman]

1 hour ago, njmksr said:

Made lovingly with Heisenberg Airships. Not just for zeppelins anymore!

https://kerbalx.com/njmksr/SHARD-Helicarrier

 

Wow, looks great!

[njmksr]

27 minutes ago, Angel-125 said:

Wow, looks great!

Thanks, it could use further tweakscaling though. Do you intend to add tweakscale compatibility to the parts?

[Angelo Kerman]

9 minutes ago, njmksr said:

Thanks, it could use further tweakscaling though. Do you intend to add tweakscale compatibility to the parts?

Wasn't planning on it- 10m is plenty big for the airship hulls. But I do take pull requests.

[njmksr]

5 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

Wasn't planning on it- 10m is plenty big for the airship hulls. But I do take pull requests.

Sounds great. Is the 1.3 version compatible with 1.2.2?

[Angelo Kerman]

22 hours ago, njmksr said:

Sounds great. Is the 1.3 version compatible with 1.2.2?

The dll had to be recompiled to support 1.3, so likely no.

[adsii1970]

On 8/2/2017 at 2:53 PM, Angel-125 said:

Performing an experiment...

Gondolas are underwater, but otherwise she floats.

Nice - undersea observation ports... Think creatively...

[Creideiki]

Just tried this delightful mod last night, and I have to say: All of my yes.

They make really good transports for the Kerbin Side GAP contracts, and a general mobile lab. Now I just need to figure out a way to haul one to Laythe.

 

I (and a friend of mine) are having a problem with the Heisenberg mod though. Namely, the VAB acts really strange. In both cases (mine and my friend's) when can place parts, but then are unable to select them again; I've been able to figure a way around that issue by repeatedly swapping between the standard part placement mode and offset mode, and clicking and dropping new parts from the part list.

What would be needed to help in diagnosing the cause of the problem? I'm thinking I might spool up a second install and try adding mods one by one until the issue occurs again.

 

 

 

[Grease1991]

On 8/6/2017 at 9:57 AM, Angel-125 said:

Wasn't planning on it- 10m is plenty big for the airship hulls. But I do take pull requests.

To be fair, while 10m seems realitively big compared to most other parts, you do have to build something really small before you can actually get it into the lower flight decks.

It would be cool to build super massive ships and then park them in around 10000m and use it as a jumping point to orbit. 

[Angelo Kerman]

2 hours ago, Creideiki said:

Just tried this delightful mod last night, and I have to say: All of my yes.

They make really good transports for the Kerbin Side GAP contracts, and a general mobile lab. Now I just need to figure out a way to haul one to Laythe.

 

I (and a friend of mine) are having a problem with the Heisenberg mod though. Namely, the VAB acts really strange. In both cases (mine and my friend's) when can place parts, but then are unable to select them again; I've been able to figure a way around that issue by repeatedly swapping between the standard part placement mode and offset mode, and clicking and dropping new parts from the part list.

What would be needed to help in diagnosing the cause of the problem? I'm thinking I might spool up a second install and try adding mods one by one until the issue occurs again.

 

 

 

I suggest building airships in the SPH, not VAB. I've not had any issues with placing and replacing parts.

 

2 minutes ago, Grease1991 said:

To be fair, while 10m seems realitively big compared to most other parts, you do have to build something really small before you can actually get it into the lower flight decks.

It would be cool to build super massive ships and then park them in around 10000m and use it as a jumping point to orbit. 

I can fit tiltrotors into the airship hangar bay:

Heisenberg also already has parts that let you make truly large hangar bays if desired. Simply string several hangar decks side by side and use the single-sided flight deck parts and the no-side flight deck parts.

[panarchist]

37 minutes ago, Grease1991 said:

To be fair, while 10m seems realitively big compared to most other parts, you do have to build something really small before you can actually get it into the lower flight decks.

It would be cool to build super massive ships and then park them in around 10000m and use it as a jumping point to orbit. 

You wouldn't need to get it onto the hangar deck to use it for a refueling point - just put it on the flight deck and refuel there using KAS. Not sure it would be practical, though - the real problem with using it as a 10km jump-off point is landing on it in the first place without burning a boatload of fuel. (and it will be *hard* - hovering is difficult at 10km, and relative approach speed needs to be less than 50m/s to safely land) Also, it's only going to move at 150 m/s, so that limits your approach speed to, at best, 200 m/s.  Which maybe all that is enough - but it would be as easy to stick another booster on your LV and call it good.

But the midair refuel platform base would be (and look) a whole lot cooler.

[Grease1991]

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

I suggest building airships in the SPH, not VAB. I've not had any issues with placing and replacing parts.

 

I can fit tiltrotors into the airship hangar bay:

Heisenberg also already has parts that let you make truly large hangar bays if desired. Simply string several hangar decks side by side and use the single-sided flight deck parts and the no-side flight deck parts.

but that tilt rotor is still fairly small, and i'm sure there are plenty of people other than me that want to land full sized spaceplanes on these carriers, also worth mentioning is that the carrier accessories pack that is linked in the OP those parts are way too big to actual be used on these carrier in any non kraken calling way, 

With that said i'm kinda working on a mm patch that would get these to work with tweakscale for testing purposes and i'll definitly post it here when i'm sure that its all good.

 

1 hour ago, panarchist said:

You wouldn't need to get it onto the hangar deck to use it for a refueling point - just put it on the flight deck and refuel there using KAS. Not sure it would be practical, though - the real problem with using it as a 10km jump-off point is landing on it in the first place without burning a boatload of fuel. (and it will be *hard* - hovering is difficult at 10km, and relative approach speed needs to be less than 50m/s to safely land) Also, it's only going to move at 150 m/s, so that limits your approach speed to, at best, 200 m/s.  Which maybe all that is enough - but it would be as easy to stick another booster on your LV and call it good.

But the midair refuel platform base would be (and look) a whole lot cooler.

My thought would be just throwing the carrier in the ocean, making a quick take-off landing run with the space craft to the carrier, then moving the carrier to the altitude i want, and then taking off with my craft, I've also just edited the parts so it has a tolerance of 150 instead of 50, to facilitate the higher landing speeds of bigger planes. 

[panarchist]

28 minutes ago, Grease1991 said:

but that tilt rotor is still fairly small, and i'm sure there are plenty of people other than me that want to land full sized spaceplanes on these carriers, also worth mentioning is that the carrier accessories pack that is linked in the OP those parts are way too big to actual be used on these carrier in any non kraken calling way, 

With that said i'm kinda working on a mm patch that would get these to work with tweakscale for testing purposes and i'll definitly post it here when i'm sure that its all good.

 

My thought would be just throwing the carrier in the ocean, making a quick take-off landing run with the space craft to the carrier, then moving the carrier to the altitude i want, and then taking off with my craft, I've also just edited the parts so it has a tolerance of 150 instead of 50, to facilitate the higher landing speeds of bigger planes. 

ACA works fine if you resize the parts to 27% of their "normal" size.  That can be done through Tweakscale, or by hand-editing the cfg file for the parts in ACA.  I'd recommend the tailhook be 50% instead of 27%, though.  Used it fine for over a month with no Kraken. If you're using a "3-wide" catamaran-type design, resize to 75%.

The issue isn't part tolerance, it's aim.  It's really hard to land on that deck at 150 m/s.  I have extreme difficulty with 100 m/s - it just comes up too fast.  50 m/s is manageable. A "2-wide" or "3-wide" deck would definitely allow higher speeds, but I haven't tested those yet to get a good idea on what's practical.  YMMV, as with all things.

Flying the aircraft up to altitude is a good plan, but in order to lift a good amount of weight up to 10km, I'd recommend no hangar, and using all full 10m envelopes on your airship - or using a catamaran-type design.  You're going to need at least 6 10m sections to lift any significant weight to 10,000m - probably more. My "Essex" airship carrier is a decent example - without aircraft, it can reach 9,200m. If the hangar deck sections were replaced with full gasbag/envelope sections, it would easily reach 12,000m.

Edited August 13, 2017 by panarchist

[Grease1991]

9 minutes ago, panarchist said:

ACA works fine if you resize the parts to 27% of their "normal" size.  That can be done through Tweakscale, or by hand-editing the cfg file for the parts in ACA.  I'd recommend the tailhook be 50% instead of 27%, though.  Used it fine for over a month with no Kraken. If you're using a "3-wide" catamaran-type design, resize to 75%.

The issue isn't part tolerance, it's aim.  It's really hard to land on that deck at 150 m/s.  I have extreme difficulty with 100 m/s - it just comes up too fast.  50 m/s is manageable. A "2-wide" or "3-wide" deck would definitely allow higher speeds, but I haven't tested those yet to get a good idea on what's practical.  YMMV, as with all things.

Flying the aircraft up to altitude is a good plan, but in order to lift a good amount of weight up to 10km, I'd recommend no hangar, and using all full 10m envelopes on your airship - or using a catamaran-type design.  You're going to need at least 6 10m sections to lift any significant weight to 10,000m - probably more. My "Essex" airship carrier is a decent example - without aircraft, it can reach 9,200m. If the hangar deck sections were replaced with full gasbag/envelope sections, it would easily reach 12,000m.

I was just using 10k as a rough example,
Also i haven't got ACA parts to work with tweakscales and when resized with a mm patch is messes with the OLS part and the catapult as well, (the wires work fine and i didn't see a need to resize the hook,)

My other point is still that all the planes on your carrier, are still extremely small and compact and by that have a very narrow use case,
also I have tried just using a lot of parts to build massive carriers but it gets to the point where it no long acts as a solid unit. (even with KJR) and it eats up a lot of FPS even on a top end system (7700k + 1080ti + 32 gigs of ram)

 

 

Also when the parts are bigger it makes it vastly easier to land at 100-150ms but again you have modify the config so it does blow up instantly regardless of how light you touch down at that speed

[Creideiki]

3 hours ago, Angel-125 said:

I suggest building airships in the SPH, not VAB. I've not had any issues with placing and replacing parts.

Also helps if I could proofread better... but yeah where I said VAB, I meant the SPH. I've not tried building a zeppelin in the VAB, and probably won't. I've actually not gone into the VAB since installing Heisenberg, because the zeppelins are way too fun to build.

 

But yeah, the issue with part placement and replacement continues in mine and my friend's game. I've absolutely no idea why though. Guessing I'll have to see which mod combination is making everything unhappy in the SPH.

[panarchist]

53 minutes ago, Grease1991 said:

I was just using 10k as a rough example,
Also i haven't got ACA parts to work with tweakscales and when resized with a mm patch is messes with the OLS part and the catapult as well, (the wires work fine and i didn't see a need to resize the hook,)

My other point is still that all the planes on your carrier, are still extremely small and compact and by that have a very narrow use case,
also I have tried just using a lot of parts to build massive carriers but it gets to the point where it no long acts as a solid unit. (even with KJR) and it eats up a lot of FPS even on a top end system (7700k + 1080ti + 32 gigs of ram)

Also when the parts are bigger it makes it vastly easier to land at 100-150ms but again you have modify the config so it does blow up instantly regardless of how light you touch down at that speed

Did your MM patch change "scale"? Or "rescale factor"?  If you change scale, it should be fine.  If you change rescale factor, then you will definitely have issues.  Rescaled parts also work better if you have the Physics Range Extender from BD Armory - a lot of the OLS issues I've seen seem to kick in because of coincidence with when physics kicks in.

Respectfully, I think you missed *my* point.  The aircraft on the deck are irrelevant - I was showing the deck as an example of how wide a 3-wide design is - plenty of room to hold a large aircraft. (caveat - size will still be a problem because of the weight and airship balance issues - as Shnyrik has pointed out in several posts in this thread.

You can always try creating a MM patch to change the Heisenberg parts to 20m or 30m by modifying the scale node in the part.cfg.  It *should* work, Angel-125 hasn't done anything out of the ordinary with the parts.  I might give that a shot myself, sounds like it'd be fun to play around with a larger design and see what the issues are - your point about the part count is a good one - the "Essex" gets a lot of lag when loaded.

Edited August 13, 2017 by panarchist