Jump to content

[1.9.x] All Aboard! 1.0.1.1 (19/02/2020) - Allowing Kerbals to board through Docking Ports since 2020


Recommended Posts

s6lZ4ka.png

 

Inspired by this thread:

This mod allows Kerbals to board vessels through docking ports  - the smallest ports (Clamp-O-Tron Jr etc) are excluded.

Because docking ports don't actually have a crew capacity, it will pick a seat at random to deposit the boarding kerbal in.

Source: https://github.com/severedsolo/AllAboard

Download: https://github.com/severedsolo/AllAboard/releases (requires Module Manager)

License: MIT

Edited by severedsolo
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, severedsolo said:

Inspired by this thread:

This mod allows Kerbals to board vessels through docking ports  - the smallest ports (Clamp-O-Tron Jr etc) are excluded.

Because docking ports don't actually have a crew capacity, it will pick a seat at random to deposit the boarding kerbal in.

Source: https://github.com/severedsolo/AllAboard

Download: https://github.com/severedsolo/AllAboard/releases (requires Module Manager)

License: MIT

Thanks, I'll have to try that then.

 

ME

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could find a way to make it choose the closest empty crew cabin to the port, rather than random, that'd be even more awesome! (For people with Connected Living Space or the like)

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Inqie said:

If you could find a way to make it choose the closest empty crew cabin to the port, rather than random, that'd be even more awesome! (For people with Connected Living Space or the like)

I'm assuming by "closest empty crew cabin" you don't literally mean the closest one in distance, but the nearest one in the part tree? Either are doable, but just to be clear what it is you are asking for here.

Edited by severedsolo
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, severedsolo said:

I'm assuming by "closest empty crew cabin" you don't literally mean the closest one in distance, but the nearest one in the part tree? Either are doable, but just to be clear what it is you are asking for here.

:P ... Hmm.. *I* would have assumed that, yes, they probably *do* mean literally the closest in distance.... *as long as its the shortest physical (internal) route to it* ;) ... vOv
But then i have NO clue how the part tree works, or what the ramifications are of that choice... vOv

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Stone Blue said:

:P ... Hmm.. *I* would have assumed that, yes, they probably *do* mean literally the closest in distance.... *as long as its the shortest physical (internal) route to it* ;) ... vOv
But then i have NO clue how the part tree works, or what the ramifications are of that choice... vOv

That's kind of what I was getting at - excuse the oh so professional drawing but:

R5yaaXn.png

In terms of physical distance Cabin B is closer to the port, but logically, the Kerbal should end up in Cabin A.

Edited by severedsolo
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, severedsolo said:

That's kind of what I was getting at - excuse the oh so professional drawing but:

R5yaaXn.png

In terms of physical distance Cabin B is closer to the port, but logically, the Kerbal should end up in Cabin A.

LMAO... thats almost *exactly* the layout I was picturing in my head to explain what I was getting at :P
Just didnt know how I would illustrate it, much less explain it... lol

So, would using the "part tree" method select Cabin A before Cabin B?

Edited by Stone Blue
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Stone Blue said:

So, would using the "part tree" method select Cabin A before Cabin B?

Assuming the pseudo-code I have in my head works yes - it would work it's way up the "tree" (ie along the attachment nodes) until it finds a crewable part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stone Blue said:

Nice!
And can I also assume, like @Inqie, that it would support/be compatable with Connected Living Space?

That's something I would need to look at separately. I'm *assuming* that CLS either handles it's own crew transfers, or uses the stock transfer system with conditions. This basically completely bypasses that system because Docking ports aren't really hatches, so the mod fakes it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked for this for quite a long time, many thanks for releasing this mod! I plan to use this as an emergency feature: I'm not sure if realistic, but I think it should be possible to vent a spacecraft and open its docking port to allow entrance/exit.

I will not use your mod to "cheat" an airlock out of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell @severedsolo

I was playing with a few Kerbals on the Mun and I found a few perplexing things.

 

The mod is great and no offences are meant.

The first thing is the EVAed Kerbal seem to be able to get in from about 5 metres away. That seems a bit excessive.

Doesn't matter If I ever use it I intend to be touching the port before hitting "B".

The other thing is I had 2 Kerbals on the surface of Mun one flew to the top of the MEM where the Docking port was the other stayed on the surface by the ladder. I hit "B" and they both got in.

???

That was a bit surprising.

 

Now as I type this I am wondering what would happen if there are four Kerbals and only 3 seats.

 

To the VAB.

 

Thanks,

 

ME

Link to post
Share on other sites

This... is... awesome.

Without complicating matters this works well.   I assume this works for all docking ports, or stock only? can that be changed in a cfg?

Asking as this might allow the Pico ports to be used to enter a craft from miles away!

Also, this will make getting to the top of custom launch towers a little easier.

Thank you!

Peace.

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

The first thing is the EVAed Kerbal seem to be able to get in from about 5 metres away. That seems a bit excessive.

Yes that is a bit excessive you are right, I forgot to turn the distance down after testing it - will fix that tonight when I get home from work. Edit: actually I'll probably expose it in the cfg file, in case the point it's checking from is buried deep in the port.
 

2 hours ago, Martian Emigrant said:

The other thing is I had 2 Kerbals on the surface of Mun one flew to the top of the MEM where the Docking port was the other stayed on the surface by the ladder. I hit "B" and they both got in.

Oh whoops :blush: - yes I know whats causing that. Will fix that tonight too (technical explanation in spoiler if anyone is interested).

 

Spoiler

So, this works by adding two "PartModules", one on the docking port, and one on every Kerbal on EVA. When a kerbal gets in range of a port, the first module fires an "Event" that tells the second module that the kerbal can board through that part. What I didn't take into account is that PartModules run on every vessel within physics range (and EVA kerbals are vessels).

This means that when the event fires, every EVA kerbal within the physics bubble is being told "prepare yourself for boarding". When the boarding event happens, they are all then trying to board themselves without checking that they are actually within range (because they assume the docking port has already checked this, or the event wouldn't have fired). Hilariously, this also means that a kerbal who was right on the edge of the physics bubble (2.5km away) will also board. It's a simple fix, I just need to tell the Kerbal "if you aren't the active vessel then ignore this".

  

2 hours ago, Martian Emigrant said:

The mod is great and no offences are meant.

Mate - you don't need to worry about offending me with bug reports :P that's exactly what this thread is for. This is a new mod, and (as you know) I threw it together in an afternoon, it's expected that there will be a few teething issues.

1 hour ago, theJesuit said:

Without complicating matters this works well.   I assume this works for all docking ports, or stock only? can that be changed in a cfg?

The mod is loaded using MM patch - it targets all parts with "ModuleDockingNode" that aren't size0 (Clamp-O-Tron Jr size) - but yes it can be changed in the cfg (actually you don't need a docking port at all, the MM patch could be adapted for any part you like.) I should probably do something about Pico ports anyway actually - you aren't the first person to mention it.

Edited by severedsolo
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, severedsolo said:

it targets all parts with "ModuleDockingNode" that aren't size0 (Clamp-O-Tron Jr size)

The unfortunate thing is... (which is very disagreeable for me) is that Making History made the Jr ports passable as canon by the MEM and top of the cone thing for the mk 1-3 command pod.

But I say keep them non passable.

Peace.

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

The unfortunate thing is... (which is very disagreeable for me) is that Making History made the Jr ports passable as canon by the MEM and top of the cone thing for the mk 1-3 command pod.

But I say keep them non passable.

Peace.

easy enough to add an option to the settings page / difficulty settings about jr's..... it's all about contortion ability. :O

Link to post
Share on other sites

All Aboard 1.0.1 Released

  • Kerbals will now actually check they are in range to board before doing so, rather than magically teleporting as soon as one of their comrades opens the hatch.
  • Default range to board reduced from 10m to 1m
  • Slightly increased the angle required to be considered "in front" of the hatch to 35 degrees.
  • Exposed range in the cfg file
  • Exposed "hatchDirection" in the cfg file (if you aren't a modder/writing a patch for AllAboard don't worry about this. I just know that someone, somewhere has made a docking port who's transform isn't facing the same way as the stock ones and am anticipating that problem early.)
  • Optimised performance critical code.
  • ModuleDockingPortAirlockEVA will now properly destroy it's Event Listeners when the PartModule is disabled.
Edited by severedsolo
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, theJesuit said:

The unfortunate thing is... (which is very disagreeable for me) is that Making History made the Jr ports passable as canon by the MEM and top of the cone thing for the mk 1-3 command pod.

But I say keep them non passable.

Peace.

I believe a couple of modders have gone through and tested with models, and shown that a Kerbal can fit through a Jr port - as long as they aren't wearing a helmet.

So they should be able to *transverse* them, but not *board* through them.  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DStaal said:

So they should be able to *transverse* them, but not *board* through them.  ;)

 

12 hours ago, theJesuit said:

The unfortunate thing is... (which is very disagreeable for me) is that Making History made the Jr ports passable as canon by the MEM and top of the cone thing for the mk 1-3 command pod.

If you think about it, the stock crew hatches make no sense anyway. The kerbal exists through the hatch of the capsule. What happens to the other kerbals (who aren't wearing helmets) when they decompress the capsule? It's established that kerbals cannot survive without their helmets (since the helmet removal became a thing anyway)

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

 

If you think about it, the stock crew hatches make no sense anyway. The kerbal exists through the hatch of the capsule. What happens to the other kerbals (who aren't wearing helmets) when they decompress the capsule? It's established that kerbals cannot survive without their helmets (since the helmet removal became a thing anyway)

The old fall back is "It is a game".;)

 

On the subject of making sense. I always thought hat it was a pity that when Kerbals go EVA that the hatch isn't opened.

Gemini 4

hqdefault.jpg

 

Apollo 9

260px-Gumdrop_Meets_Spider_-_GPN-2000-00

Apollo 16

spacewalk_lg.jpg

 

 

Edited by Martian Emigrant
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
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...