Tw1
-
Posts
4,552 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Tw1
-
-
Hi, I have a suggestion/ would like some help changing something.
The KIS container mount is the perfect size to also carry the stock storage boxes. It would be nice to have them be interchangeable for different tasks.
However, I tried adding the stock containers in the part file, but it didn't work. It still tells me part not allowed on mount.
Have I missed something, or is that not changeable that way?I would like to suggest making them able to take both by default, now we have both systems.
-
I have a very old water propeller mod (not mine) which I've been using and tweaking over the years. But a few years ago, KSP finally changed too much, and it stopped working. I've made it work again. (sorta) using firespitter to make it spin, and the stock ModuleEngineFx to give it thrust, but naturally, it gives thrust no matter the situation.
I would like it to not produce thrust when the part isn't touching water. (Or at least if the center isn't in water). Is there a way, using either the stock modules or a common mod, to stop all thrust when not in water?
If you wish to have a look, here's the part from the original mod.
This should be the version I bodged to make work, but I might have the links the wrong way around.
Alternatively, if you are able to, this is the source code from the original mod: Perhaps something here could be salvaged to make it work again? It also didn't support action groups, which was a bit of a downside...
But even then perhaps someone could get this to work with modern KSP?Spoiler===Version .2==== Change Log- Modified steering code to be more robust Should resume from save without needing to cycle Known issues- -Propellers do not "spool" if they are cut while in reverse -Not tested on Laythe or Eve -Activate via action group not supported Tips- -Reverse by making the pitch "Up" past the 50% mark. By default just hold "S" -Negative "MaxRPM" values in CFG will make prop spin counter-clockwise (looking forward), but will also cause thrust to go backwards. To solve this have the Z-axis for the transform face forwards (not tested, but should work). ====License==== This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. ====Source (For Reference)==== using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; using KSP.IO; using UnityEngine; public class ModuleSeaPropeller : PartModule { //////////////////// // // Variable Declaration // //////////////////// private Transform tCenter; private bool bHasFuel; //private float fCurrentRPS; private float deltaRPS; //private float requestedRPS; private float fSpoolRate; [KSPField(guiActive = true,guiName = "Current RPS",isPersistant = false)] private float fCurrentRPS; [KSPField(guiActive = true, guiName = "Commanded RPS", isPersistant = false)] private float requestedRPS; [KSPField] public float MaxThrust; [KSPField] public float MaxRPS; [KSPField] public float SpoolTime; [KSPField] public float MaxResourceRate; [KSPField] public string thrustTransformName; [KSPField] public string resourceName; //Turn on off engines [KSPField(isPersistant = true)] public bool bIsActive = false; [KSPEvent(guiActive = true, guiName = "Activate Engine", active = true)] public void ToggleEngineIsActive() { Events["ToggleEngineIsActive"].active = false; Events["ToggleEngineIsDisabled"].active = true; bIsActive = true; fCurrentRPS = 0; fSpoolRate = MaxRPS / SpoolTime; } [KSPEvent(guiActive = true, guiName = "Disable Engine", active = false)] public void ToggleEngineIsDisabled() { Events["ToggleEngineIsActive"].active = true; Events["ToggleEngineIsDisabled"].active = false; bIsActive = false; } //////////////////// // // Update Cycle // //////////////////// public void FixedUpdate() { if (bIsActive && this.vessel.isActiveVessel) { if (fSpoolRate < .001) ToggleEngineIsActive(); RunEngine(); } } public void RunEngine() { requestedRPS = FlightInputHandler.state.mainThrottle * MaxRPS; CheckFuel(); CheckYaw(); CheckReverse(); CheckRPS(); tCenter = this.part.FindModelTransform(thrustTransformName); AnimateEngine(); if (this.part.WaterContact) { part.Rigidbody.AddForceAtPosition(-tCenter.forward * (fCurrentRPS/MaxRPS) * MaxThrust, tCenter.position); //part.Rigidbody.AddForceAtPosition(-tCenter.forward * FlightInputHandler.state.mainThrottle * MaxThrust / 60, tCenter.position); } } public void AnimateEngine() { tCenter.transform.RotateAround(tCenter.forward, fCurrentRPS * TimeWarp.fixedDeltaTime); } public void CheckFuel() { bHasFuel = false; if(this.part.RequestResource(resourceName, MaxResourceRate * FlightInputHandler.state.mainThrottle * TimeWarp.fixedDeltaTime) >0) { bHasFuel = true; } } public void CheckRPS() { deltaRPS = requestedRPS - fCurrentRPS; int iCaseSwitch = 0; //following two statements will regulate prop spool if (deltaRPS > .05 * fSpoolRate) iCaseSwitch = 1; if (deltaRPS < -.05 * fSpoolRate) iCaseSwitch = -1; if (bHasFuel == false) iCaseSwitch = -2; switch (iCaseSwitch) { case 1: //prop needs to speed up, restricted fCurrentRPS = fCurrentRPS + fSpoolRate * TimeWarp.fixedDeltaTime; //check to ensure no overshoot if (fCurrentRPS > requestedRPS) fCurrentRPS = requestedRPS; break; case 0: //no difference fCurrentRPS = requestedRPS; break; case -1: //prop needs to slow down, restricted fCurrentRPS = fCurrentRPS - fSpoolRate * TimeWarp.fixedDeltaTime; //check to ensure no overshoot if (fCurrentRPS < requestedRPS) //sudden stop when engine spinning reverse fCurrentRPS = requestedRPS; break; case -2: //prop needs to slow down, restricted fCurrentRPS = fCurrentRPS - fSpoolRate * TimeWarp.fixedDeltaTime * 1.5f; //check to ensure no overshoot if (fCurrentRPS < requestedRPS) fCurrentRPS = requestedRPS; break; } } public void CheckYaw() { //this commented block worked okay in .1, could be improved //if (Mathf.Abs(FlightInputHandler.state.yaw) < .01) // return; //if (FlightInputHandler.state.yaw > -0.1) //inside engine, sharp turn right //{ // if (Mathf.Sign(this.part.orgPos.x) == 1 && Mathf.Abs(this.part.orgPos.x) > .5) // requestedRPS = -(Mathf.Abs(FlightInputHandler.state.yaw) - .5f) * 2; //} //if (FlightInputHandler.state.yaw < 0.1) //inside engine, sharp turn left //{ // if (Mathf.Sign(this.part.orgPos.x) == -1 && Mathf.Abs(this.part.orgPos.x) > .5) // requestedRPS = -(Mathf.Abs(FlightInputHandler.state.yaw) - .5f) * 2; //} if (Mathf.Abs(FlightInputHandler.state.yaw) < .01) return; if (FlightInputHandler.state.yaw > -0.1) //inside engine, sharp turn right { //if (Mathf.Sign(this.part.orgPos.x) == 1 && Mathf.Abs(this.part.orgPos.x) > .5) if (this.part.transform.InverseTransformPoint(vessel.CoM).x > .5f) requestedRPS = -(Mathf.Abs(FlightInputHandler.state.yaw) - .5f) * 2 * MaxRPS; } if (FlightInputHandler.state.yaw < 0.1) //inside engine, sharp turn left { //if (Mathf.Sign(this.part.orgPos.x) == -1 && Mathf.Abs(this.part.orgPos.x) > .5) if (this.part.transform.InverseTransformPoint(vessel.CoM).x < -.5f) requestedRPS = -(Mathf.Abs(FlightInputHandler.state.yaw) - .5f) * 2 * MaxRPS; } //constrain to maxRPS if (requestedRPS > MaxRPS) requestedRPS = MaxRPS; if (requestedRPS < -MaxRPS) requestedRPS = -MaxRPS; } public void CheckReverse() { if (FlightInputHandler.state.pitch > .5) { requestedRPS = -requestedRPS; if (requestedRPS > 0) requestedRPS = 0; } } }
-
I must say, your compositing in these is top notch.
-
On 8/10/2019 at 2:07 AM, GregroxMun said:
Merbals are probably the folks in Laythe Space Program
(Under da sea..
I definitely need to do something with this thought some day
-
18 hours ago, Jestersage said:
How about updating the rest of Vanilla engines?
I hope they give it a break for a while. I know I've been harping on about this, but I'm quite disappointed with some of the remade parts. Some are great, they've all been skillfully made, but some have lost what made the original part stand out, and be visually interesting in the first place.
On 8/7/2019 at 9:25 AM, Scorpiodude said:It is not that I don't like the stripes it is just that they don't fit in with anything anymore. This means they look rather out of place.
There are stripes on the radial decouplers, and doors, and similar colouration on other parts- yellow on the batteries and xenon engines, similar grays on tanks. It looks fine.
-
The 2019 rebuild of the Amphibious Eve Ocean Explore-O-Pod (Evepod) now has usable wheels! As in modded wheels which can actually handle slopes.
Built for Evian atmosphere and gravity, it's a little bouncy on Kerbin.
But that didn't stop testing crews hooking prototypes one and two together and going on an overland trip of the hills South West of KSC.
As this is an Amphibious vehicle, it was also put through its paces on the KSP race route.
Made it to the end in (in game time) about an hour and ten minutes.
Those water props needed their thrust aligned very carefully.
Aquatic development has not been without problems.
Crashed vehicles have left a few kerbals stranded along the way.
They weren't too happy about it.
The new vehicle's science capabilities were tested too.
A technical error caused that arm to fail, and get stuck while retracting. The test was completed using the second arm.
A few more kinks must be worked on it seems. -
Well, I got it working. This is much better, it took a little tweaking, and I did end up doubling the performance of some wheels in the config, but I can finally go roving through the hills again. Thanks!
The Eve Explorer feels like a landrover again, not a pedal car.
Setting it up manually was tricky at first, and while driving, having to adjust gears per wheel seemed a bit weird. But I made it work.
The wheel scaling function is really clever - It's a great way to fit the wheel to your vehicle.I like the way it handles electricity. I demand higher performing wheels, it wants more power. Seems a fair trade,
The dust effect is pretty cool tooIt's built for Eve, hence the large amount of wheels.
Although I think someone needs to go sweep the paths around the space center...The only thing that's a little annoying is mechjeb autopilot doesn't seem to recognise the wheels, would be nice if fixed someday, but on balance I think the change is still worth it
-
1 hour ago, steve_v said:
3 posts up, patches to make stock wheels use KSPWheel modules.
Nice. May I suggest the inclusion of this in the prominently first post? I did not read the whole thread, hence my post, but now I see others also are interested in this.
Also, question: Is there an easy way to download these, or do I copy the contents to files manually?
-
Hey, just wondering, has anyone made an implementation of this using the stock wheels, or something which looks very very close?
I would like to have the look of the stock wheels, but they do do some pretty silly stuff, and I want a rover which can actually go uphill.
-
On 8/5/2013 at 3:02 PM, Tw1 said:
Here's one of me, bit small, this was when I visited the world's largest (by area) scale model of the solar system.
On 3/23/2015 at 3:47 PM, Tw1 said:Well, in a similar vein, here's me with a well known Australian astronomer and science communicator, who also happens to be the head of the observatory I visited in the last photo I posted here.
And this is me now:
Recent graduated from the time lord academy, now just got to find some work (designing things) and plan some further research.
Might fight some daleks along the way.
Despite this, I am yet to get my Tardis licence, and have to take the train everywhere.
-
Welcome to the forums!
-
This is peak creative gamer.
-
I think it will include
- Docking
- Flight Planning
- Improved Map UI
- New Vessel Types and Vessel Renaming
- Automatic Fairings
- Much Improved Models and Textures
- A slew of new part types
- Unmanned Probes
- New Input Modes
- Two new celestial bodies
- New Resources System
- Electricity
- Lights
- Functional Air Intakes
- Music
- Much improved planets
- Performance Tweaks
4 hours ago, Scorpiodude said:I REEAAALLYY want the reaction wheels remodeled especially the 1.25m one with those ugly stripes.
Just as long as they are
- Still recognisable, but not worse
- Still all different so you can identify them at a glance.
What's wrong with the stripes though? Without little touches like that, most parts would be non-descript cylinders.
4 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:Based solely on a one-word update to a bug report I filed months ago, I'm now guessing 1.8 is going to totally revamp science.
No, but I think something is changing, as my bug is now listed as "Moot." not fixed. Moot.
If only. I always thought click to collect science and follow the instruction contracts were such shallow ways to implement career mode. They've slowly been changing career, which I never found to be worth playing. I never wanted a game which tells me what to do, like in contracts. I wanted a game which gives me reasons to do things.
-
10 hours ago, Lisias said:
Of course, not! We will puff them first! Vaporized Kerbals are ideal to feed gas engines!
Oh yes, good old Kethane mod, it included the Waitnostop blender. That part was savage.
-
Hey, do you use a file sharing service, like dropbox, google drive, etc? If you put up your save files, someone might be able to have a look at what's going on with them.
They might be damaged beyond repair, but at least you will know for sure. But who knows, there is a chance it's something else entirely, or there might be a trick or two that could get stuff working again.
Find where your KSP is installed, in there, there will be a folder named saves. TBH you might as well share the whole folder. Someone might be able to verify if they're working or not by putting them in their installation. -
9 minutes ago, Geschosskopf said:
It took me 6 stations in kerbostationary orbit, due to sun-synchronous orbits being impossible in KSP. How you'd do it with 1 ?
Ye olde cart mod. The lights on the big one were powerful, and I used a few. I don't really remember much of the details, just that it lit up half the planet and I was disappointed to discover it wasn't visible from the ground.
-
I decided to science it up. Let's get us some data on how much thrust one kerbal makes, and what the interaction between kerbal and part is like.
I teleported the Eve ascension vehicle to a high orbit, and measured the acceleration using graphotron. At first, I wasn't quite sure what to make of the results.
You can clearly see the wiggles as the kerbal's heat pushes against the frame. Here's that zoomed in. Note it lessens, but does not fall to zero.
Vessel mass 139kg + kerbal mass 94 kg = total mass 233kg
According the data, it was around 20m/s/s on average, so
F = maAbout 4660 Newtons of force per kerbal?
Science theory needs experiment to back it up, so
That's really close, especially considering that I had an extra kilo on this test rig.
This was the last after a series of slightly frustrating experiments, which got me to double check my numbers a few times.
There we go. A kerbal on the ladder makes aprox 4.66 kN of thrust.The raw data is here. I used a time interval of 0.05 seconds per data point.
That's far to much force to just move a kerbal along a ladder. I'm still not convinced it's K-drive like clipping, but it could be. I'm curious about what the strength of a kerbals grip on a ladder is. My current hypothesis is that this is the force a kerbal can withstand on a ladder before slipping.
-
I did a single launch stock parts Eve return mission.
Yep. You look at the size of my fairings and think, must be some compact, external seat with asparagus staged aerospikes thing. Perhaps it uses those new propellers, and ISRU.
Nope. That's mostly the mothership, the orbital cruise vessel.
This bit holds the lander:
"What trickery is this?" you yell, baffled, and maybe even outraged.
Let me show you.
Get yourself off Eve with this one weird trick!
Kerbal player discovers physics hack, rocket scientists hate him?
In other news, I crashed Bob into a tree.
Did you know Kerbals could climb trees? I didn't either.
-
Here are those craft files:
Here for anyone to take for a ride, and/or verify everything here.
17 hours ago, RealKerbal3x said:It’s amazing that this exploit hasn’t been patched out yet!
Now you’ve got me wondering if the Breaking Ground robotic parts have any extensions into the kraken’s realm that could be used to build a reactionless drive...
Have you seen @dnbattley's Battery-less movement thread? They've got the latest in Kraken-Drives, and some cool experiments mixing the robotic parts with the small scanners.
I love this sort of glitch, it's the sort that brings out inventiveness and creativity, and kinds of engineering specific to video games. It's not that useful if you aren't really patient, I hear people still use it for gliders though. I hope the devs continue to overlook it.15 hours ago, fulgur said:One of the things I discovered when testing my own ladder drive was that if you make it the right size, the Kerbal will constantly hit his head without [W] being held and so you can switch to the probe and make a controlled ascent with a gravity turn and everything.
That's interesting. This gives evidence to the theory this works more like a kraken drive (part clip) drive than just force from moving along a ladder. How much acceleration where you getting for about how much mass?
I am pretty certain the force from a kerbal plays a role, and I've used that to move things in water - a kerbal walking was used to push my Apollo capsule close to my boat in my Apollo reenactment. But the exact nature of this, and its relationship to kraken drives and the FTL egg remains uncertain.
-
It is now 2019, and I am here to reclaim my crown as designer of the lightest Eve ascent vehicle Ever.
Yep, that's right, this still works.
It's far more limited in the stuff you can lift, but it works. Reentry makes landing difficult now, but a ladder and some struts is still a very acceptable way to get yourself up there in the first place. In some ways, it's easier with parachutes built into kerbals, and smarter SAS for holding retrograde during powered landings. Plus, nodes persist through vessel changes, and you can climb a ladder while in map view now.
Here I am taking a one way trip from Kerbin to the Mun with only ladder power
By lightly tapping, I could slow myself down for an easy landing, thanks to SAS holding retrograde for me.
After some refinement, I developed a variant which can sort of survive reentry, at least from LKO using both one drogue chute, and the kerbal parachute.
TBH, I'm not sure how much I trust it. It works, but is not as well as it used to. A powered deceleration and landing though, that is still entirely possible.
But now, the main event: Eve.
By stripping it down, I've built an Eve ascender that's only 124 kilograms. That's 218 if you include the kerbal. I stripped off the legs which give it stability, so launching it requires following an exact procedure:0. Before you start, this should be done from a flattish location, with a good angle to the sun for power, and with a communications relay already in place.
1. Climb up from the descent stage to the ascender, and get your kerbal right up under the probe core.
2. Switch to the lander, activate SAS, and decouple the ascender.
3. Switch to the ascender, carefully adjust attitude so it is facing directly up
4. Switch to the kerbal, brace yourself and hold down W.
It's about a 20 minute climb to the top of the atmosphere.
Once you have gained at apoapsis of about 200km ish, (or few minutes ahead of you, you can open map and keep climbing to check,) it should be plenty safe to switch to the ascender, rotate in the direction you want to go, and start pushing your way to orbit. Probably want to extend your antenna at this point to get probe control.
And that's that. How to leave Eve the cheap way.
This is a full mission from Kerbin, to Eve, and Back, with an earlier version of the ascender.
SpoilerLift off on the EVE RETURN mission. Imaginatively named yeah, but KSC really wanted to stress the return part.
Fairings drop away, revealing the cruise vessel. Our mothership, and comms relay for this mission.
Our path to Eve, achieved using one perikerb kick.
I call the current configuration of the vessel "firefly mode". Here, it's making a correction burn
Aerocapture at Eve, the engines tucked in behind the shield.
Three passes where used. TBH, the transfer was pretty good, I'm not sure I saved that much doing it this way.
On one, we lost a small tank to overheating.
About one month in,
The lander separates. Solid rocket boosters fire, the lander is spun up for stability.
Dudvey Kerman is going to Eve.
The protective aeroshell was kept until we passed the clouds. Then,
Parachute time!
The Lander was drifting down so nice and gently, so Dudvey decided he'd go and look from a better spot:
and...
Touchdown! The site was near level, perfect for the return, and a hotspot of geological interest. It was perfect.
Dudvey spent something like a year doing stuff on Eve.
One month before the return window, it was time to leave. He gathered up the science, stretched his gravity-strengthened muscles one more time, and climbed the ladder:
Released the decoupler,
Rock once again placed carefully on my keyboard....
Up we go!
This version if the ascender was more draggy and slow. By this point, he was still barely doing 12m/s.
Some 40 minutes latter:
A maneuver node was used to help align with the mothership. This helped overcome the complications the polar orbit added.
A joint effort between ascender and mothership, rendezvous was completed,
And Dudvey ditched the ascender
About a month later, it was time to leave.
Two PeriEve kicks and one inclination adjustment were performed before the final burn
Our plotted path back to Kerbin:
I call this configuration "The chandelure mushroom"
Arriving back at Kerbin, we performed an aerocapture, with one additional aerobraking maneuver. That second one was a little iffy. Things got a little heated.
But everything was fine, and one final burn put us in a stable parking orbit around Kerbin.
Mission successful. A run of the mill shuttle craft will pick up the astronauts, and return them home.
I will also be adding a pack of craft files so anyone can check my work. They should be stock, though I might have left a mechjeb in there.
-
On 4/12/2019 at 8:43 AM, 5thHorseman said:
I don't want you to be able to climb a ladder and propel your craft into orbit.
Just saying. You can still get up there if you're determined enough. It's very much still a thing.
Getting down nowdays, that's the hard part.
On 8/2/2019 at 3:22 AM, Geschosskopf said:- REALLY wobbly joints (way worse than now) so you needed SCADs of struts to make anything substantial. Even to the point of building out-riggers mid-rocket to run stays from top to bottom on the rocket.
- The spotlights having infinite range so a ship in orbit could illuminate the night hemisphere of the planet below brighter than the sun.
- The original look and feel of the 2.5m parts. So big and clunky, so covered with rivets. Totally Kerbal. I preferred that to the overhauled versions we now have (and especially prefer the 1-nozzle Poodle).
This is a great list but... especially these. I remember having to make a spiderweb just to hold some BACC solid boosters in place. Kids these days complain if their rocket even wobbles. I built a station for the purposes of illuminating Kerbin. And I really want some more variants which bring back the charm of the original parts. We could have your sleak rocket on which everything looks the same, or your tin can bucket of bolts too.
And the showerhead version of the 24-77. I want that as a variant. -
2 hours ago, Fraktal said:
I hope they continue the old part remodeling. Been thinking yesterday that the Swivel, Reliant and Thumper are in need of a Terrier-style facelift.
Oh please no. Leave the parts alone. They are fine, at most they need a touch up. I'd rather they do new models, but keep the parts looking much the same.
They should be doing something that will improve the game, not pointless changes. If they do anything with the parts, they should add more variants, in particular, adding some character back to parts they took it away from.
Like the decouplers. All the decouplers look the same now, and you can't just pick which is which at a glance. -
On 8/1/2019 at 11:32 PM, Geschosskopf said:
Yet another epic build! I really enjoy your projects, @Tw1
Thank you! That is great to hear.
As someone currently on my way to a career in architecture, it's nice to hear that when I'm treating the game like minecraft creative mode. -
It is a slightly different shape too. It's another thing that still slightly bugs me about the new one, it's much closer to a flat cylinder, it looks less like it's own thing than the old one which had that bottom curve, being done before we had heat shields.
(Under da sea..
No, but I think something is changing, as my bug is now listed as "Moot." not fixed. Moot.
[Minimum KSP version - 1.12] Kerbal Inventory System (KIS) v1.29
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
It would still be nice to attach it there. Technically, you can just stack attach the KIS container.
The stock parts do have top and bottom nodes though, and as seen in the image I added, the game seems to position it fine, it just won't go through with attaching. Later experiments confirm this
With the following modifications to the CFG, it will allow the small one to attach, just not the big one.
MODULE { name = ModuleKISPartMount mountedPartNode = bottom sndStorePath = KIS/Sounds/containerMount allowRelease = true MOUNT { attachNode = top allowedPartName = KIS_Container1 allowedPartName = smallCargoContainer allowedPartName = cargoContainer } }I'm pretty confident the part names are right. Could there be something else preventing it working?