[1.2 - 1.4] Lithobrake Exploration Technologies 0.4 (2016-10-12)

[NecroBones]

Yeah, I'm thinking I'll probably up the stats a little on the larger one. It'll have a little more mass, but more fuel too.

[Vahal]

Here my Necropolo (  ) mission 

 

[NecroBones]

3 hours ago, Vahal said:

Here my Necropolo (  ) mission
 

Nice! Good job!

 

[123nick]

hey i think this mod might cause some errors with FAR, when i place the smaller landing leg on my vessel, i got degenerate triangle errors from FAR, about triangles being unusable due too nan values or degeneracy, or something similar.

 

[NecroBones]

6 hours ago, 123nick said:

hey i think this mod might cause some errors with FAR, when i place the smaller landing leg on my vessel, i got degenerate triangle errors from FAR, about triangles being unusable due too nan values or degeneracy, or something similar.

 

For that one you might need to go to the FAR thread. FAR does a lot to replace the aerodynamics and is a pretty extensive plugin. There's nothing special about the landing legs (that I'm aware of) that could be causing FAR to break. If there is, ferram4 will probably have to tell me what to do, because I didn't do anything different on those parts than any other.

 

[123nick]

1 hour ago, NecroBones said:

For that one you might need to go to the FAR thread. FAR does a lot to replace the aerodynamics and is a pretty extensive plugin. There's nothing special about the landing legs (that I'm aware of) that could be causing FAR to break. If there is, ferram4 will probably have to tell me what to do, because I didn't do anything different on those parts than any other.

 

yeah, your right, its just a small error that doesent really have as much as a effect that i thought it had. i think it just happens with high polygon models or detailed models, like the smaller of your landing legs collision mesh seems to cause it, but other than some occasional log spam, nothing really too bad. everything works perfectly though. thanks for replying

 

[NecroBones]

Update posted:

 

0.3.1 (2016-01-11) - Tweaks.
 - X3 lander can mass increased.
 - Mass, fuel capacity, and cost increased for the "large" variant of the lander cargo bay.

 

[maculator]

Right now I started experimenting with this pack again, I love it.

I would liketo suggest a great idea:

A stackable cargobay wich has the ability to open at the bottom, like a bombbay, when you cleared the bottom node.

This way you could "drop" a rover or probe wich was attached to the ceiling of the bay from your lander to the ground.

Or if its technicallly possible: same as above but with a kind of "lifting platform" wich carrys your rover safe to the ground and back in again.

 

 

[NecroBones]

9 minutes ago, maculator said:

Right now I started experimenting with this pack again, I love it.

I would liketo suggest a great idea:

A stackable cargobay wich has the ability to open at the bottom, like a bombbay, when you cleared the bottom node.

This way you could "drop" a rover or probe wich was attached to the ceiling of the bay from your lander to the ground.

Or if its technicallly possible: same as above but with a kind of "lifting platform" wich carrys your rover safe to the ground and back in again.

 

Huh, those are some cool ideas. I'll think about how that might work. For the first, some sort of iris door might be possible.

[jcthemc]

Quick question; When i try to attach the Expanded Service Bay to  a pod, the bay stays translucent, and never becomes part of the final ship. What am i doing wrong here?

[NecroBones]

1 hour ago, jcthemc said:

Quick question; When i try to attach the Expanded Service Bay to  a pod, the bay stays translucent, and never becomes part of the final ship. What am i doing wrong here?

Are you building upward (stacking it on top), rather than downward (stacking it underneath something)? Sometimes the order of the attachment nodes gets goofy when nodes are close together. It's set to prioritize building downward, so when going upward it can be awkward. Usually it's best to align the camera so you're looking edge-on at the attachment point and try to snap it on with the mouse as far from the attachment node as you can get, and it you should be able to get it to light up green and attach. Another thing you can do is attach it somewhere else, and put something inside it on the internal nodes, move it where you want, then remove the thing you put inside.

 

It's just bugs with how KSP's "snap-to" works with attachment nodes, and prioritizing the wrong ones.

[jcthemc]

This has probably been answered before, but what Lithobrake Parachute can i use to safely recover an empty SpaceY S109 Heavy Lift SRB (Empty weight is 6 tons)?

Or, instead of giving this man a fish, Necro, could you tell me how to calculate the amount of Lithobrake parachute i need for x amount of mass?

Thanks in advance! 

Ps. Necro, When are your mods going to be available in CKAN again?

Edited February 18, 2016 by jcthemc

[NecroBones]

2 hours ago, jcthemc said:

This has probably been answered before, but what Lithobrake Parachute can i use to safely recover an empty SpaceY S109 Heavy Lift SRB (Empty weight is 6 tons)?

Or, instead of giving this man a fish, Necro, could you tell me how to calculate the amount of Lithobrake parachute i need for x amount of mass?

Thanks in advance! 

Ps. Necro, When are your mods going to be available in CKAN again?

 

You know, I don't know any good "rule of thumb" for deciding how much parachute is needed. I always did trial and error. If anyone has a calculator or something, that would be useful for me too, especially when balancing these. For these chutes, I just tried to make them safely land about 4x the mass of some of the stock ones, with some dummy loads. But since drag and descent speed aren't really linear, it's hard to know with any precision.

 

As for CKAN, they should be starting to show up again. I got most of the updates to point to Spacedock committed in the CKAN GitHub last night, one more went through this morning, and two more are in standby. I think this mod was one of the ones that got pushed last night.

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

The latest version of StageRecovery includes a terminal velocity calculator -- it will split up the rocket into stages, tally up the parachutes on each, and determine what their terminal velocities are (when full and when empty).

[Vahal]

I usually placed 4 radial chutes for my heavier 5m stages/boosters and that was more than enough:

Here a quick example, my Olympus mothership lifter

You can see on the first screen 2 of the 4 radial chutes I placed on the LFO boosters

And here Stage Recovery indicating the speed for the empty booster speed (and its tremendous cost)


so for a little 6t booster, one will be more than enough but as Kerbas ad astra pointed, Stage Recovery is THE mod you  (we all) need to know how many chutes are enough 

[eberkain]

Anyone made a RealChute config for the chutes?  I did some searching and didn't find anything.  Not sure how to go about making one myself, or I would do that.  

[NecroBones]

2 hours ago, eberkain said:

Anyone made a RealChute config for the chutes?  I did some searching and didn't find anything.  Not sure how to go about making one myself, or I would do that.  

 

Not that I'm aware of. I was kinda hoping it would get added from the RealChute side, but I could try adding it too. I may not get an update out until after KSP 1.1 now though, since it's getting into the final weeks, and I know I'll have to rework a lot of stuff as a result anyway.

 

[NecroBones]

 

Posted:  (flagged as being for KSP 1.0.5 on the download sites, until I can fix that)

 

0.3.2 (2016-03-29) - KSP 1.1 Hotfix
 - Landing legs updated to not be 100% deadly. Suspension still doesn't work, legs are rigid for now.
 - Moved MM configs to "Patches" folder.

[Jivaii]

Will this one be getting updated landing legs along with the rest of your modset?

[NecroBones]

54 minutes ago, Jivaii said:

Will this one be getting updated landing legs along with the rest of your modset?

 

Yep, I just need to repair the legs first.

 

[Rushligh]

I don't know what you mean with legs not working; they're perfect for me. I use them for landing airships because unlike EVERYTHING ELSE they don't buckle. I'm not to familiar with KSP's mechanic for landing gear, but it seems every other landing gear except yours breaks and won't retract if it takes hardly any horizontal force, or too much vertical force. and by 'too much' vertical force i mean 100 tonnes of metal landing at 10m/s

[NecroBones]

Just now, Rushligh said:

I don't know what you mean with legs not working; they're perfect for me. I use them for landing airships because unlike EVERYTHING ELSE they don't buckle. I'm not to familiar with KSP's mechanic for landing gear, but it seems every other landing gear except yours breaks and won't retract if it takes hardly any horizontal force, or too much vertical force. and by 'too much' vertical force i mean 100 tonnes of metal landing at 10m/s

 

KSP 1.1 changes the way wheels and suspension systems work. As a stop-gap, I released an update 2 days ago that simply made the suspension rigid, until I could figure out how to make it work correctly in 1.1. If I did nothing, the vehicles would flip out whenever the feet would touch the ground. Now that I know how to fix the suspension for 1.1, I'm working on that to get a release out. If you're still using KSP 1.0.5, you won't want the new update for the mod until you upgrade.

 

[Rushligh]

Just now, NecroBones said:

 

KSP 1.1 changes the way wheels and suspension systems work. As a stop-gap, I released an update 2 days ago that simply made the suspension rigid, until I could figure out how to make it work correctly in 1.1. If I did nothing, the vehicles would flip out whenever the feet would touch the ground. Now that I know how to fix the suspension for 1.1, I'm working on that to get a release out. If you're still using KSP 1.0.5, you won't want the new update for the mod until you upgrade.

 

ooohhhh. okay. that makes sense. im still on 1.0.5 and will probability remain there for a while till my fav mods catch up. btw, this is what I'm using your glorious landing legs for. they're perfect and retract into the Mk2 air intakes. they also take the weight and force of repeated landings at imperfect angles. (the ship lands rear first at a 15 degree angle to reduce momentum- vtol engines push backward and main thrust pushes forward)

[NecroBones]

 

Just an update. The legs are being problematic. I can't get rid of the "hover-foot syndrome" so far. I may end up releasing anyway, since I can almost get it working, and it's probably better than rigid legs. But man, who would have thought that this would still be so difficult even after figuring out how to update the legs.

 

19 hours ago, Rushligh said:

ooohhhh. okay. that makes sense. im still on 1.0.5 and will probability remain there for a while till my fav mods catch up. btw, this is what I'm using your glorious landing legs for. they're perfect and retract into the Mk2 air intakes. they also take the weight and force of repeated landings at imperfect angles. (the ship lands rear first at a 15 degree angle to reduce momentum- vtol engines push backward and main thrust pushes forward)

 

 

Looks great! Yeah, the big legs help for all sorts of scenarios where the stock legs just aren't adequate.

 

[NecroBones]

 

Posted:  (Legs will probably need more tuning later)

 

0.3.3 (2016-04-01) - KSP 1.1 Hotfix
 - Landing leg suspension systems working again. Known issue: Feet float slightly.
 - Added search tags to parts.