[WIP] Coatl Aerospace ProbesPlus Dev Thread [Beta] 10/19/2020 (1.8-1.10)

[MaverickSawyer]

Could be due to an offset CoM on the part, too.

[MaverickSawyer]

Field report time!

Surveyor has proven to be a remarkably robust and capable little lander. Adding additional instruments to the chassis is quite easy, though adding much more battery power is a major challenge that requires some... creative thinking. (I'll add a screenshot of the current mid-tree setup I'm using when I get home.) As for durability, I've managed to bounce one of these on Minimus at better than 15 m/s lateral speed, so it's quite forgiving.

On the subject of Minmus, the Surveyor is capable of a direct landing, gathering data, and then taking off and relocating to at least two more biomes before running dry. Great science grinder when paired with an orbiter.

[rasta013]

13 hours ago, CarnageINC said:

*snip* This created an error in MechJeb that basically doubled my Delta/V of what it actually was.

I can tell you how to recreate it. Add a probe core, tank and engine.  Then add a 2nd probe core.  Then detach the 2nd core but don't throw it away.  Then detach the fuel tank and engine and throw them away.  Now add a new fuel tank and new engine.  Then reattach the 2nd probe core that's been hanging around.  Now change the root order so that the first probe core is root again.  At this point you should have doubled dV.  It won't trigger it 100% of the time but it does about 95% of the time.  

It's caused by a limitation of the root tool and it loses its mind and starts reporting where it's at in the staging order incorrectly to MJ.  This is my understanding of the problem anyway.  The best way to avoid it is to always throw away anything that has command capability either manned or unmanned if you remove it from a craft - engines/tanks too.  Also, if you start messing around with staging orders after loading any subassembly you're likely to face it again as well.  You can sometimes force MJ to show the proper dV by playing around with some decouplers along the stage even if you remove them afterwards.  I've been experiencing and replicating this error for a while now - definitely more than a year.

Edited February 24, 2017 by rasta013

[akron]

@rasta013 @MaverickSawyer Thank you for the thorough troubleshooting. I did find a tiny rotation offset in the engine model, but it was zeroed out and should not have caused any problems. To test, I just remodeled the whole nozzle assembly. You can test it out when you get a chance. Files are now up on Github.

I am also experimenting with fairings for the Surveyor SRM, so that it can be used on other crafts. The top fairing that it leaves behind might be too big, but it's up for testing so anyone can give me their opinion. Here is a Unity screenshot:

I am itching to fast-track a couple of SCANsat parts for this release because I want more variety in my own career save. IDK. It's been a while a I'd like a release out though... I'll think about it.

 

~cheers

Edited February 24, 2017 by akron

[Cdw2468]

@akron Cassini in the next release or we riot Kappa

[akron]

13 minutes ago, Cdw2468 said:

@akron Cassini in the next release or we riot Kappa

Cassini has already been announced for the next release, you must have missed it. There's even some progress on it. Check the last couple of pages 

 

[rasta013]

2 hours ago, akron said:

You can test it out when you get a chance. Files are now up on Github.

Yup will do.  Working hard on a test for Shadowmage and KSPWheel/KF but I've already moved your new parts into my sandbox fun install to check out the changes this weekend.  Will specifically look at that fairing since I like that little part and would enjoy using it in other places more easily.

[MaverickSawyer]

Hmmm... I have to admit that the whole "cage" setup doesn't look quite right. Perhaps a load-bearing ring at the top and bottom instead, like those from BDB's kick motors?

[CarnageINC]

7 hours ago, rasta013 said:

I can tell you how to recreate it. Add a probe core, tank and engine.  Then add a 2nd probe core.  Then detach the 2nd core but don't throw it away.  Then detach the fuel tank and engine and throw them away.  Now add a new fuel tank and new engine.  Then reattach the 2nd probe core that's been hanging around.  Now change the root order so that the first probe core is root again.  At this point you should have doubled dV.  It won't trigger it 100% of the time but it does about 95% of the time.  

It's caused by a limitation of the root tool and it loses its mind and starts reporting where it's at in the staging order incorrectly to MJ.  This is my understanding of the problem anyway.  The best way to avoid it is to always throw away anything that has command capability either manned or unmanned if you remove it from a craft - engines/tanks too.  Also, if you start messing around with staging orders after loading any subassembly you're likely to face it again as well.  You can sometimes force MJ to show the proper dV by playing around with some decouplers along the stage even if you remove them afterwards.  I've been experiencing and replicating this error for a while now - definitely more than a year.

Oh cool!   Thanks for that follow up, I'll be sure not to do that again.

[akron]

On 2/24/2017 at 1:32 AM, MaverickSawyer said:

Hmmm... I have to admit that the whole "cage" setup doesn't look quite right. Perhaps a load-bearing ring at the top and bottom instead, like those from BDB's kick motors?

So, I tested this a little bit, and the structure just looks too flimsy. I may try out a solid fairing like stock parts, just to see. It's a small part tho, 0.625m.

Have any of you guys seen any offset thrust on the new Lahar engine model?

tiny update

I was not able to do mod work this weekend until tonight, so there's little to show and still no release  (Moot point to some extent, because the beta is out on Github anyway ). So I'm using SCANSat in my own career save again, and I forgot from last time that I wanted some variety on parts to compliment those in that mod. Some of them are also a little unwieldy for small probes so, for my sake, I got started on those for this release. Here is some WIP:

 

It's a render out of Maya, so apologies if it's a little dark. I'll figure out why they look fine on my monitor eventually. Anyway. the stove-looking thing on the left is a GPS receiver system based on the GRACE satellites. Its primary gameplay reason will be to add KerbNet access to a craft, but I'll toss in a short-range omni antenna on it. On the right, is the first of my SCANsat parts, the laser altimeter from Mars Global Surveyor (MOLA). The texture is not done, I just colored it to get some thoughts. I may not give it a stripe, or if I do it will be much thinner. Not sure yet what to make it do if you don't have SCANsat installed.

I have several scansat parts planned, but for this first run I may only do 2-3 (maybe one for each scanner type). I'm thinking I'll also toss in the MetOp Radar Scatterometer as a SCANsat SAR (Not the same technology, just some variety of parts). I'm still debating on something for a biome scan. It's got to be a multispectral imager, or some sort of combo set. I've got my eye on the CALIPSO imaging system, but... I don't want to do it without doing a CALIPSO/CloudSAT bus and solar panel. C'est la vie

 

I'm also working on some Mission Controller stuff, but that will be for another day and another thread  

~cheers

[Rodger]

I'd love some alternate SCANsat parts! even just the lowres/highres altimeter first would be good, as the DMagic multispec is quite nice as a replacement for the SCANsat multispec. And for the laser altimeter without SCANsat, it could just be a higher stats version of kerbnet, like high anom detection, or enhanced in orbit situations or something?

And you could totally add the CALIPSO imaging system ahead of the other parts for that satellite  lol

[akron]

7 hours ago, Rodger said:

I'd love some alternate SCANsat parts! even just the lowres/highres altimeter first would be good, as the DMagic multispec is quite nice as a replacement for the SCANsat multispec. And for the laser altimeter without SCANsat, it could just be a higher stats version of kerbnet, like high anom detection, or enhanced in orbit situations or something?

And you could totally add the CALIPSO imaging system ahead of the other parts for that satellite  lol

I could maybe use it as a KerbNet device. I don't know how accurate MOLA would have been at mapping lidar details like "anomalies" but it could work, thanks. The reason I am debating on including the CALIPSO instruments is that I don't think I have a probe part where it would look decent given the size. I'd have to block out its dimension and see how it looks with other parts. That probe bus is pretty cool anyway. I think I can do the parts pretty quick.

[rasta013]

@akron

For the parts you're adding where someone may not have SCANsat installed an MM config could be written that adds the SCANsat abilities but removes a baseline science experiment that is part of the default config.  Then, when someone is using that part as part of SCANsat if it's tied into the mapping system you can award science for completion of the scan.  I'd have to look at the details for how DMagic awards the science on scans like the RADAR or SAR but since they are both done via MODULE the MM compatibility config should handle it...

[akron]

34 minutes ago, rasta013 said:

@akron

For the parts you're adding where someone may not have SCANsat installed an MM config could be written that adds the SCANsat abilities but removes a baseline science experiment that is part of the default config.  Then, when someone is using that part as part of SCANsat if it's tied into the mapping system you can award science for completion of the scan.  I'd have to look at the details for how DMagic awards the science on scans like the RADAR or SAR but since they are both done via MODULE the MM compatibility config should handle it...

The way it works is that you can submit a scan for science once you've completed at least 30%, I think. The more complete, the better up to 95%. So you'd get 3 per body. I think I'll go with the KerbNet idea for now. Maybe give one of them one of my science experiments like the IR spec, if applicable and MM SCANsat support if installed.

[rasta013]

Oh yeah I know exactly how the SCANsat bit works as far as the 30-90% reward range.  Depending on where you're at in the scan determines how much science you get at that point and still allowing you to complete more of the scan up to 90% until it's completed...that's actually not what I meant...

Since you are creating new parts and people have a tendency to use either your parts, or the part from the original mod depending on the craft and the science is the same.  However, when you step into doing SCANsat parts, if someone doesn't use SCANsat then all they're getting out of your part is the extra KerbNet bit which is already so redundant anyway that making KerbNet special in your part is going to be difficult at best.

Instead, what I was meaning to suggest is that in addition to the KerbNet access the part provides you could further make the part attractive for someone not running SCANsat by adding in a science experiment that gives a textual result and science equivalent to what SCANsat would reward.  This science experiment would be disabled as part of checking for someone having SCANsat so there isn't extra science being awarded to the player just for using SCANsat but would instead just represent the different method of obtaining it.

For example...

Spoiler

If you duplicated the functionality of the SCAN Multispectral Sensor (biome scanner)...

With SCANsat it would function exactly as the Multispectral Sensor does and no differently - this would include the KerbNet access that part provides as well as the SCANsat biome scaning.

Without SCANsat it would give it's biome scanning ability with KerbNet instead but additionally reward one-time science for a Multispectral scan with any kind of description you want to provide.  This offsets for the fact that someone using SCANsat is rewarded with : The Biome Scan itself, science for that scan AND KerbNet access - that's all in the SCANsat part.

This is really just a thought for a way to make these kinds of parts more attractive to players who don't use SCANsat since KerbNet is so easy to cover with even stock parts.

EDIT: Alternatively, if this are going to be restricted parts for people exclusively running SCANsat forget I ever mentioned this...

Edited February 28, 2017 by rasta013

[Virtualgenius]

I too would love to see some smaller Scansat parts I have been using an all in one module from a long time ago called calypso but seeing as I love these parts for small probes and satellites it makes perfect sense to have smaller scansat parts so big thumbs up from me if your going to model some alternatives.

Been Using this for a while 

https://www.behance.net/gallery/13600123/SCANsat-Calypso-Module

Edited February 28, 2017 by Virtualgenius

[akron]

@rasta013 That is possible. I just didn't really want to write new scienceDefs. Also, I'd have to lock the runnable area to either high or low orbit to prevent science spam, but it would still just be a regular old "right-click and done" deal. Let me think on that.

@Virtualgenius There is a guarantee that new SCANsat parts are coming (eventually) because I really want them for my career game as well. *inhale* At least one more laser altimeter, one of the trumpet ones, maybe from MESSENGER. You'll have a radar altimeter in the traditional dish shape and a mini SAR altimeter late in the tree. For biome scans, I'll have a CALIPSO instrument set, A microwave radiometer I was a looking at, and the large SMAP antenna. For the high quality altimeter I've got the MetOp radar scatterometer and a radar that I think is from WindSAT. *phew* I'm trying to pick the biome scanner to do this time around, maybe I can find a really good and compact Lidar.

 

[rasta013]

2 hours ago, akron said:

I just didn't really want to write new scienceDefs.

Tell you what...you get these modeled and configured and I'll write the science defs for any of these parts you create for whichever situations you want them for.  I updated a raft of BDB defs and probably will do some more on that front along the way because I want custom defs for the Galileo Planet Pack for many things so...

You create and I'll creatively write  ...

Edited February 28, 2017 by rasta013

[akron]

5 minutes ago, rasta013 said:

Tell you what...you get these modeled and configured and I'll write the science defs for any of these parts you create for whichever situations you want them for.  I updated a raft of BDB defs and probably will do some more on that front along the way because I want custom defs for the Galileo Planet Pack for many things so...

You create and I'll creatively write  ...

Sweet. You got a deal. Thanks

[CobaltWolf]

47 minutes ago, rasta013 said:

Tell you what...you get these modeled and configured and I'll write the science defs for any of these parts you create for whichever situations you want them for.  I updated a raft of BDB defs and probably will do some more on that front along the way because I want custom defs for the Galileo Planet Pack for many things so...

You create and I'll creatively write  ...

(Psst, BDB needs Sciencedefs for our OSO experiment while you wait for new Coatl experiments)

[MaverickSawyer]

Re: my post over on the REKT thread...

1 hour ago, akron said:

This was planned and anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar.

What planet/moon did you test it at? It may help when it comes time to do the planetary lander version of Surveyor. Shoot me a PM or post on the P+ thread so we don't hijack this one

@steedcrugeon Looking good! OTAV is a cool design

I've taken it to Kerbin and Eve so far. Kerbin terminal velocity under parachute with full instruments and batteries, but WITHOUT the fuel, SRB or liquid engines, is ~2.2 m/s, and Eve is below 1 m/s at over a km up. Haven't tested it on Duna yet or Lathe yet.

That said, due to its design as a vacuum-lander, it's not exactly steady in the atmosphere. Likes to tumble around a LOT. Freefall terminal velocities under the same loads as above test are running ~100 m/s and 60 m/s, respectively.

IT takes a little finesse, but for atmospheric missions, the Landvermeisser fits inside of the MSL aeroshell package. Tests, however, have had mixed results, with some instruments suffering collisions with either the aeroshell or the backshell during separation events. Use it with extreme caution and more than a little testing in Sandbox.

[rasta013]

12 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

(Psst, BDB needs Sciencedefs for our OSO experiment while you wait for new Coatl experiments)

TANGENT POST!  Ok - I'll look at those along the way too...

 

[akron]

13 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

(Psst, BDB needs Sciencedefs for our OSO experiment while you wait for new Coatl experiments)

I had OSO on my to-do, but I really want a proper module for it more than just click-done. Kinda like SCANsat collects date overtime, I would like to see the same for it. Actually I'd like that for orbital atmospheric studies too, otherwise missions like OSO or any orbital observatory/telescope is not given justice.

[MaverickSawyer]

13 hours ago, akron said:

I had OSO on my to-do, but I really want a proper module for it more than just click-done. Kinda like SCANsat collects date overtime, I would like to see the same for it. Actually I'd like that for orbital atmospheric studies too, otherwise missions like OSO or any orbital observatory/telescope is not given justice.

Talk to the team behind Surface Experiment Package and see if the code can be adapted/expanded to cover orbital applications?

[akron]

1 minute ago, MaverickSawyer said:

Talk to the team behind Surface Experiment Package and see if the code can be adapted/expanded to cover orbital applications?

No, I think this more along the lines of DMagic Orbital Science, SCANsat, or one of the telescope mods (Tarsier, Cacteye). SEP is totally a different focus and I think it's better that it stays concentrated on Surface stuff. Not to say that some of its module code could be useful though. Anyway, I'm already on it!