Jump to content

[1.1.2] Kerbin-Side (v1.1.0) & Supplements


AlphaAsh

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the fast update!

I'm not sure thanks for the array of lights at the West end of the KSC main runway... ;) My stopping distance sometimes exceeds even the already-very-generous runway...

I'm having second thoughts about the lights after I just fudged up a landing testing 1.0.4. What I might do is look at certain additions to KSC only appearing as related facilities get upgraded. It's something I need to do for the VAB helipad spawn point anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

v1.4 of Kerbin-SideJobs Contracts Pack now available from KerbalStuff.

Changelog:

- Contract sequence logic improvements.

- Jeb's Airport no longer generated as a destination.

- Many contract parameters more clearly labelled.

Feedback on challenge, failure and success and of course bugs appreciated. I'm still getting used to CC's functionality and need more testing than my own, so if you try any of these, come and let me know how it goes, thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear AlphaAsh,

I have a request (do you take requests?):launch sites in massive buildings, something like the crazy Japanese arcology visions that have pooped up over the years. Or maybe put one in a tall bulding, or even flying above somewhere. I love your work, but it does need one more thing: MOAR LAUNCHSITES

Edit: some inspirations:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimizu_Mega-City_Pyramid

Edited by Rory Yammomoto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you haven't noticed missing or corrupted textures, which is quite possible, then you're safe to not bother with this update.

KerbinSide (All of it In 1) v1.0.2 available from KerbalStuff.

Changelog:

- Added some missing textures.

- Fixed some corrupted textures.

- - - Updated - - -

...

I don't do requests, no, but will add your suggestions to the 'might be fun to do something like this' file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Alpha,

I'm the Dev for the Maritime Pack. A mutual user of both of our mods reported some compatibility issues between the two mods. Sorry it's taken me a few days but I thought perhaps that if I were going to post a compatibility issue that perhaps I should investigate myself, especially since you'd been courteous enough to do the same.

I can confirm that there are issues, exactly as the user described them. While some of the vessels created with my pack launch at the buoy just fine, others appear to be submerged several hundred meters. I've looked over the .craft files and I see nothing out of the ordinary. Since you know your mod better than I and since mine is a pure part pack (with the exception of FS and it's only used to spin the propellers) I thought I'd give you some craft files to test and see if you you can reproduce the same results.

RoRo Test.craft - This vessel seems to launch at the buoy without issue.

CVE Test.craft - This vessel immediately explodes upon launching.

KK Test.craft - This is a much stripped down copy of the CVE craft file and it launches many meters underwater. This is only 5 parts so it may be easier to diagnose the issue.

Here's some pics of my testing.

The RoRo with a non-issue launch at the buoy.

kk1.jpg

The CVE prior to launch

kk2.jpg

The CVE after launching at the buoy.

kk3.jpg

The KK test craft file several seconds after launch. Here it's just breaking the surface after being launched underwater.

kk4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eskandare's bouy launch works on a very simple principle. It sticks an invisible platform with a collider under the water, and the spawn point just above the water mark. I suspect what we're seeing here is an issue of clearance between the spawn point and the collider - the method just doesn't work for certain water vessels, in some cases with explosive consequences.

I appreciate the research Fengist. I don't think I need to explain my issue with the initial report I had to deal wth; my main concern was the report about the launch on KSC's runway, since I'd already come to the above conclusion I just made and really am not that worried about it. However, if firespitter's water launching system is used to get around the issue of the water bouys, then yes, very old compatibility issues between firespitter and Kerbal Konstructs may well crop up.

For your reference, this is the full report I got of the issues:

1.0 looks cool, but I don't think I'll reinstall as it seemed that KK was very much summoning the kraken when used with Fengist's Maritime Pack (look at page 11 and 12 of the thread and you can see what I mean).

I did take a look at page 11 and 12 of the thread but didn't spend time using all of the parts for my tests, so probably missed those that rely on code.

I still don't think this is a blanket case of your parts pack isn't compatible with Kerbal Konstructs however. And my disproving of issues with the KSC runway I'll still stand by. Hope that doesn't come off too blunt chap.

Edited by AlphaAsh
bouy bouy bouy; edit 2 - clarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4...the method just doesn't work for certain water vessels, in some cases with explosive consequences.

..I still don't think this is a blanket case of your parts pack isn't compatible with Kerbal Konstructs however. And my disproving of issues with the KSC runway I'll still stand by. Hope that doesn't come off too blunt chap.

I did not test with any location other than the buoy, which was enough evidence for me. Oh, I did launch a ship on the carrier successfully. It sounds like there are known issues with the buoy location and that some ships created with Maritime may have problems with it. I'll just make a note in my OP that there are issues with Oceania. Thanks for your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why isn't ocean odyssey platform at the equator? Isn't that the whole point of Sea Launch?

I don't know. What was the point of what? I only work here. You're welcome? I need another letter Bob. If I got any more random this post would degenerate into elephants. Large elephants.

Edited by AlphaAsh
I forgot why I was editing this post. I need my pills.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm having second thoughts about the lights after I just fudged up a landing testing 1.0.4. What I might do is look at certain additions to KSC only appearing as related facilities get upgraded. It's something I need to do for the VAB helipad spawn point anyway.

Heh... It was a lightly "kidding" question about the lights, but a large number of aircraft users will have the same thoughts. I like the idea of having them, though -- maybe space the whole array way, way out, and leave a path down the middle (with a nice shrubbery!)? That would solve the not-enough runway issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, you don't do requests, but how about one or two other equatorial launch sites? One in the continent across Booster Bay to recovery suborbital and failed flights and another which isn't next to a body of water so water landing isn't a problem if you overshoot the destination

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, you don't do requests, but how about one or two other equatorial launch sites? One in the continent across Booster Bay to recovery suborbital and failed flights and another which isn't next to a body of water so water landing isn't a problem if you overshoot the destination

Seems reasonable. I think there's a few bases that are 'near-equatorial' already and the common request is for more global coverage and less equatorial but that's a goal that can ever really be achieved to everyones satisfaction, unless I start using a repetitive template which I'd get very bored with.

- - - Updated - - -

Heh... It was a lightly "kidding" question about the lights, but a large number of aircraft users will have the same thoughts. I like the idea of having them, though -- maybe space the whole array way, way out, and leave a path down the middle (with a nice shrubbery!)? That would solve the not-enough runway issue.

Good idea. A light array with a gap down the middle. I'll probably do something like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is maybe more for Konstructs, but are there any bridge assets in development? There's a few river gorges that would look the part with a bridge over them, especially once the new system allowing seamless roads and rails happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is maybe more for Konstructs, but are there any bridge assets in development? There's a few river gorges that would look the part with a bridge over them, especially once the new system allowing seamless roads and rails happens.

Bridges would look cool but there are two problems with them:

1) They're almost exclusively aesthetic, with little practical use for things you'd actually do in KSP

2) They have to be fit to the terrain very carefully, which is difficult because there's no way to see KSP's terrain in a modeling program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bridges would look cool but there are two problems with them:

1) They're almost exclusively aesthetic, with little practical use for things you'd actually do in KSP

2) They have to be fit to the terrain very carefully, which is difficult because there's no way to see KSP's terrain in a modeling program.

I perceived the ends of the bridge as simply clipping into the terrain. Getting the length right is trickier, maybe requiring multiple sections, reliant on the seamless feature update. Height isn't an issue, just give it long pillars sufficient to clip into sea/riverbed.

Edit: I asked about this 6 months ago then forgot! Still, with the snappoint system, much more feasible now.

Edited by colmo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello

With KSP 1.04 coming up I installed KerbinSide again to have some places to fly at. AlphaAsh, very nice work, Thanks for sharing.

The mod adds that, what is really missing in KSP.

As I tested all runways to have a look what is new to have fun with I had weird behavior starting a newly spawned plane from eg. Lushlands or Lodnie Isles.

When hitting the "s" key to pull the plane up it began to roll. The logfile is clean.

All I found is this entry when spawning a vessel at Lodnie Isles: [LOG 19:44:20.424] [RA1.1]: ground contact! - error: -1.044m

Looked into ksideairstripv24.cfg and there is an entry: mesh = ksairstripv24.mu. But this file is missing. Is this mesh file needed or did I mess up the installation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bridges would look cool but there are two problems with them:

1) They're almost exclusively aesthetic, with little practical use for things you'd actually do in KSP

2) They have to be fit to the terrain very carefully, which is difficult because there's no way to see KSP's terrain in a modeling program.

3 - They look a little daft without a road or similar connection at each end. But then any statics do and this isn't really a problem I'm likely to ever fix :)

I like bridges a lot and they've been on the 'to do' list for a long time. I'll probably bump them up that list though.

- - - Updated - - -

...

All I found is this entry when spawning a vessel at Lodnie Isles: [LOG 19:44:20.424] [RA1.1]: ground contact! - error: -1.044m

Looked into ksideairstripv24.cfg and there is an entry: mesh = ksairstripv24.mu. But this file is missing. Is this mesh file needed or did I mess up the installation?

That is an odd one. Let me just check the file inventory and I'll get back to you.

EDIT - Hmm. That file is in the latest KerbinSide release (1.0.2) so I think you may have b0rked your install. Fish the file out of the zip, put it where it should be and then see if you can reproduce the error.

Edited by AlphaAsh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 - They look a little daft without a road or similar connection at each end.

The snappoint system could allow flush fitting of roads to bridge ends, instead of clipping into terrain.

Then there's railway bridges... We've been trying to nail trains for years, and this would help a lot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I perceived the ends of the bridge as simply clipping into the terrain. Getting the length right is trickier, maybe requiring multiple sections, reliant on the seamless feature update. Height isn't an issue, just give it long pillars sufficient to clip into sea/riverbed.

Edit: I asked about this 6 months ago then forgot! Still, with the snappoint system, much more feasible now.

You're sort of right. Unfortunately the snappoint system is very limited with origin to origin only at the moment and I'm taking a break from trying to improve it whilst I repair the damage to my study caused by my last rage-quit and get therapy and anger-management classes. Yeah, it's been like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.........

EDIT - Hmm. That file is in the latest KerbinSide release (1.0.2) so I think you may have b0rked your install. Fish the file out of the zip, put it where it should be and then see if you can reproduce the error.

Thanks for your advise. It seems that I deleted the file from the zip. Downloaded it again and hey there it is. Sorry for taking your time. My fault.

So now it´s time to launch.

Edit:

I´m using mechjeb2 and so I wrote a custom "LandingSites.cfg" for all Kerbinside runways to have some autopilot guidance.

Also includes 1 Kerbinside Helipad for the landing guidance as an example how to create such.

Most runways tested and optimized for 3° landing (when it´s possible due to landscape) in both ways.

Now I´m a little bit short in time, so I think the 2 or 3 unoptimized (MJ2 does its job) and the optimised will give you

a good autopilot guidance with MJ2/Kerbinside. Have fun testing these.


MechJeb2Landing
{
LandingSites
{
Site
{
name = KSHP Blue Bay
latitude = 1.887987
longitude = -11.213193
body = Kerbin
}
}
Runways
{
Runway
{
name = Dundards Edge Runway
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 44.271561
longitude = -132.002904
altitude = 526.30
}
end
{
latitude = 44.119533
longitude = -132.013210
altitude = 528.49
}
}
Runway
{
name = Kerman Lake
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 11.278595
longitude = -63.526002
altitude = 36.49
}
end
{
latitude = 11.139395
longitude = -63.430394
altitude = 39.05
}
}
Runway
{
name = Lushlands
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 2.156206
longitude = 26.611079
altitude = 772.01
}
end
{
latitude = 2.320603
longitude = 26.645560
altitude = 774.57
}
}
Runway
{
name = Lake Dermal
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 22.704161
longitude = -120.939559
altitude = 559.84
}
end
{
latitude = 22.826780
longitude = -121.063813
altitude = 562.41
}
}
Runway
{
name = Lodnie Isles
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 29.738522
longitude = 14.198230
altitude = 437.63
}
end
{
latitude = 29.596387
longitude = 14.301934
altitude = 440.21
}
}
Runway
{
name = South Pole Station
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -84.739485
longitude = 142.730562
altitude = 28.81
}
end
{
latitude = -84.659649
longitude = 143.843950
altitude = 30.36
}
}
Runway
{
name = Kerbins Bottom
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -50.489709
longitude = 170.580098
altitude = 104.16
}
end
{
latitude = -50.475496
longitude = 170.670272
altitude = 104.51
}
}
Runway
{
name = Black Krags
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 11.319460
longitude = -87.687574
altitude = 322.96
}
end
{
latitude = 11.259869
longitude = -87.695432
altitude = 323.30
}
}
Runway
{
name = The Shelf
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -53.816164
longitude = -162.094996
altitude = 313.56
}
end
{
latitude = -53.853296
longitude = -162.013609
altitude = 313.89
}
}
Runway
{
name = South Point
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -17.821461
longitude = 166.427243
altitude = 233.53
}
end
{
latitude = -17.865181
longitude = 166.384622
altitude = 233.86
}
}
Runway
{
name = Coaler Crater
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 35.428186
longitude = -98.906384
altitude = 66.86
}
end
{
latitude = 35.389337
longitude = -98.965460
altitude = 67.22
}
}
Runway
{
name = KSC_2A
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 20.652931
longitude = -146.438953
altitude = 426.36
}
end
{
latitude = 20.526399
longitude = -146.477948
altitude = 427.84
}
}
Runway
{
name = KSC_2B
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 20.679779
longitude = -146.587277
altitude = 428.65
}
end
{
latitude = 20.520335
longitude = -146.569801
altitude = 429.68
}
}
Runway
{
name = Area 110011
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 10.650725
longitude = -132.094433
altitude = 330.16
}
end
{
latitude = 10.311736
longitude = -132.342986
altitude = 345.77
}
}
Runway
{
name = Green Coast
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -3.493135
longitude = 179.090357
altitude = 220.38
}
end
{
latitude = -3.423834
longitude = 179.208385
altitude = 221.98
}
}
Runway
{
name = Polar RC
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 79.568807
longitude = -77.414464
altitude = 31.28
}
end
{
latitude = 79.463209
longitude = -77.543363
altitude = 32.43
}
}
Runway
{
name = South Hope
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -49.790065
longitude = 16.993573
altitude = 257.27
}
end
{
latitude = -49.579636
longitude = 16.958705
altitude = 260.80
}
}
Runway
{
name = Round Range
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -6.012029
longitude = 99.388810
altitude = 1246.81
}
end
{
latitude = -6.030616
longitude = 99.534557
altitude = 1248.46
}
}
Runway
{
name = Seas End
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -34.119058
longitude = 79.805124
altitude = 4.43
}
end
{
latitude = -34.136687
longitude = 79.929093
altitude = 5.65
}
}
Runway
{
name = Dull Spot
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 63.890455
longitude = -172.43606
altitude = 424.02
}
end
{
latitude = 63.975787
longitude = -172.294374
altitude = 425.21
}
}
Runway
{
name = Goldpool
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -1.101231
longitude = 17.367110
altitude = 10.55
}
end
{
latitude = -0.995405
longitude = 17.371496
altitude = 11.79
}
}
Runway
{
name = Hanbert Cape
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = -22.603277
longitude = -140.253017
altitude = 1.78
}
end
{
latitude = -22.498952
longitude = -140.233645
altitude = 2.95
}
}
Runway
{
name = Sanctuary Mouth
body = Kerbin
start
{
latitude = 23.680483
longitude = -39.953439
altitude = 11.06
}
end
{
latitude = 23.671297
longitude = -40.068590
altitude = 12.28
}
}
}
}

Edited by Dante Montana
added 5 runways that are found under "other"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a licence update, which you can find in the OP.

This will allow distribution of your own base packs using the assets of KerbinSide.

If you have any queries concerning this, post in this thread or feel free to PM me.

Official plug-in support for exporting and importing of custom bases is still in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...