[1.12.x] [BG] HabTech2 | Stockalike ISS Parts | 1.0.0 - The Final Update

[benjee10]

Massive thanks to everyone for your support (whether financial or otherwise) - it has really meant a lot, and just receiving all the positive messages has really brightened things up. I have really been overwhelmed and it looks like it should be possible to get a new drive fitted sooner rather than later, which hopefully will give me a working computer at least!

 

24 minutes ago, DaOPCreeper said:

since your not fully done on updates, can we please get some the hardware/nodes to add the irosa's to the solar panel truss? ivas for the modules too if you have the time.

Unfortunately there is no way of physically attaching the iROSA panels to the SAW truss, since attached parts will not track with the sun. The new update will allow you to 'attach' them in flight by placing the iROSA part into a special inventory slot on the SAW part. It is basically B9PartSwitch but with the different states triggered by placement of certain parts in the inventory. So this means you can fly up a cargo ship with the physical iROSA part attached to it, pull it off with EVA construction, and drop it in the SAW inventory. 

As for IVAs, all parts should have IVAs as of the last update. If they don't then you may have an installation problem. 

[Falcon Aerospace]

Will you add the US Habitation Module?

[DeadJohn]

On 6/23/2023 at 4:43 AM, benjee10 said:

On 6/22/2023 at 10:41 PM, Thatguywholikesionengines said:

CBM's not docking. Both are active type II, for looks. Extending the cover petals doesn't help, nor does changing rotation. For a 1.0 release, this feels silly - It's a common berthing mechanism, not a probe-drogue! Make 'em look realistic, but keep gameplay (and dumb players like me ) in mind. It'd be nice to be able to remove the petals/fins in-flight, or have passive/active types being part variants, et cetera. At the very least, document this sort of thing! Haven't seen a single mention of this on the whole forum, or in the github/readme.

So, a couple of things. Firstly you have the cover petals closed - even with the correct combination of ports, you would not be able to dock as the petals are physically blocking the docking interface.

The intention is to pair an active port with a passive port, as in real life - Common Berthing Mechanisms are not androgynous systems. To give players some leeway so you don't have to plan out space station layouts quite so meticulously, the ports are technically compatible with each other in-game (i.e. you can dock an active to active, passive to passive). This is why the guide fins can be retracted (also to allow backwards compatibility with existing craft files, since the old CBM model gets converted to a passive port - if I made the ports correctly gendered it would totally break existing craft).  However, the geometry of the active type II prevents it from docking with itself. This is just a consequence of the way the petals have to deploy when attached on the radial node of a 2.5m part (i.e. their use on the ISS). 

You are the first person to have been caught by this so I haven't really considered it an issue until now. I can put a warning in the part description for the type II port that it cannot self-dock. It would certainly be more elegant if the ports were able to dock with each other, but there are a limited number of ways to do this given the constraints of the game and the intended use case - believe me when I say I looked into a lot of different options and the current one seemed to be the least problematic.

@Thatguywholikesionengines is not the 1st person caught by quirks of the CBM ports. It's happened to a "friend" several times. The active petals not only prevent an active-active connection, but can also foul an active-passive connection if there are other parts nearby to hit the petals.

For ease of gameplay, the passive port is better than the active type II port. Passive ports connect to each other without issues. I can place passive ports knowing that I'll have full flexibility if I ever want to reorder station modules.

For appearance, though, the active port looks so much nicer than the passive when undocked. I wonder if a simple partswitch on the passive port can allow the passive port to share the active port's skin.

[DaOPCreeper]

On 7/3/2023 at 9:36 AM, benjee10 said:

Massive thanks to everyone for your support (whether financial or otherwise) - it has really meant a lot, and just receiving all the positive messages has really brightened things up. I have really been overwhelmed and it looks like it should be possible to get a new drive fitted sooner rather than later, which hopefully will give me a working computer at least!

 

Unfortunately there is no way of physically attaching the iROSA panels to the SAW truss, since attached parts will not track with the sun. The new update will allow you to 'attach' them in flight by placing the iROSA part into a special inventory slot on the SAW part. It is basically B9PartSwitch but with the different states triggered by placement of certain parts in the inventory. So this means you can fly up a cargo ship with the physical iROSA part attached to it, pull it off with EVA construction, and drop it in the SAW inventory. 

As for IVAs, all parts should have IVAs as of the last update. If they don't then you may have an installation problem. 

So they were photoshopedd on in these pics then 

[benjee10]

6 minutes ago, DaOPCreeper said:

So they were photoshopedd on in these pics then 
 

No, there is a B9 part switch to toggle them on/off which can be used in flight. In the next update it will switch to the inventory system described above. 

[DaOPCreeper]

18 minutes ago, benjee10 said:

No, there is a B9 part switch to toggle them on/off which can be used in flight. In the next update it will switch to the inventory system described above. 

i see the toggle but how do you make the extend?

[benjee10]

2 minutes ago, DaOPCreeper said:

i see the toggle but how do you make the extend?

There should be an 'Extend iROSA' action on the part, like a normal solar array. 

[DaOPCreeper]

2 hours ago, benjee10 said:

There should be an 'Extend iROSA' action on the part, like a normal solar array. 

hum, i don't see that option https://imgur.com/a/SrzNGnU, https://imgur.com/a/abI709j
maybe i have something set up wrong but i don't think so 
(copy of player log file) https://www.dropbox.com/s/y2wewv4uhhvv7zi/KSP.log?dl=0

also, in the system will they still show up like in the pics once i put them in the inventory?

Edited July 4, 2023 by DaOPCreeper

[MashAndBangers]

42 minutes ago, DaOPCreeper said:

hum, i don't see that option https://imgur.com/a/SrzNGnU
maybe i have something set up wrong but i don't think so 
(copy of player log file) https://www.dropbox.com/s/y2wewv4uhhvv7zi/KSP.log?dl=0

also, in the system will they still show up like in the pics once i put them in the inventory?

The keywords you are missing are "IN FLIGHT"

[RKunze]

First off, my heartfelt commiseration to Benjee10 for the data loss. Been there once myself, back in university, lost the final version of an assignment to a flaky floppy disk (yes, I am that old),  had to cram 48 hours straight to recreate it from a heap of notes (because, of course, I lost it just before it was due) and went into the exam that went with it without having slept for two days. That's how I learned that backups are important 

 

On 7/2/2023 at 3:48 AM, softweir said:

Regardless, it really hurts when critical automated systems silently cease to operate and dump you in the deep-smelly-brown.

That is exactly why the (fully automated as well) backup system I'm responsible for today is set up so that it sends a daily summary of what it did, even if everything went flawlessly. So that if I don't see an email about the daily incrementals when I start working in the morning, I can (and most definitely will) go investigate what exactly went wrong.

And, of course, why I do regular checks that I can actually restore files from backup (not automated, because that doubles as training for the procedure when something actually is needed urgently).

[DaOPCreeper]

27 minutes ago, MashAndBangers said:

The keywords you are missing are "IN FLIGHT"

the "like in the pics" kind of implies that lol

[Cheesecake]

17 minutes ago, DaOPCreeper said:

the "like in the pics" kind of implies that lol

It should work in VAB too but in your pic you have iROSA A and B "off". You should switch to "on", then there should be the option to extend.

[DaOPCreeper]

14 minutes ago, Cheesecake said:

It should work in VAB too but in your pic you have iROSA A and B "off". You should switch to "on", then there should be the option to extend.

still no https://imgur.com/a/abI709j

 

[benjee10]

23 minutes ago, DaOPCreeper said:

still no https://imgur.com/a/abI709j

 

Best bet would be 1) try a clean reinstall, deleting the HabTech folder and grabbing a fresh download. This wipes out any old files that could be interfering. And 2) create a fresh craft file, sometimes existing craft files do not update properly.

[DaOPCreeper]

i'll try that and let you know

 

[DaOPCreeper]

1 hour ago, benjee10 said:

Best bet would be 1) try a clean reinstall, deleting the HabTech folder and grabbing a fresh download. This wipes out any old files that could be interfering. And 2) create a fresh craft file, sometimes existing craft files do not update properly.

ok fresh install worked thanks

[Sampa]

hey, one question real quick... How are we expected to attach the struts for the S0 Truss to the Destiny module?  the provided struts are too big to fit in the inventory.

[BLUAV8R]

16 hours ago, Sampa said:

hey, one question real quick... How are we expected to attach the struts for the S0 Truss to the Destiny module?  the provided struts are too big to fit in the inventory.

Had the same conundrum, turns out I completely missed the addition of EVA construction to the game and knew nothing about it. If your kerbal is an engineer, there'll be a wrench icon on the stock toolbar that puts you into "proper" EVA construction mode. Once activated you can manipulate a lot of parts just as you would in the editor (placing struts included), as well as access inventories that are in proximity to your kerbal directly.

So what I did was put a cargo container with 10+ struts in the payload bay of my shuttle that brought the S0 truss, and attached them using that mode afterwards. 

[Sampa]

oh, thanks!  that seems to have helped!

[idiot]

damn rip about the data loss but man these are the greatest news for me rn

[idiot]

just did a test of the new update and damn the idea of IROSA panels being like an item/cargo that you can launch and install is just pure genius . great job man

[DeadJohn]

Does anyone know of a shielded docking port compatible with the C-100 APAS port?

I want to be able to build custom shuttles that can dock in a manner other than SOCK's cargo bay interior port. Use cases include mk3 cockpit for nose docking without burning up the port during reentry, or mk2 crew ferry with an aerodynamic top-mounted port so no cargo bay is needed.

Sure, I could put 1.25m ports on my ISS then use the 1.25m shielded port on vehicles, but the C-100 looks much prettier on the station.

I tried a compromise by editing the existing C-100 node to be directly compatible with the 1.25m shielded port: keep C-100 on ISS yet have flexibility to use both C-100 and 1.25m ports on vehicles. It caused too many glitches. Maybe my cfg edit was wrong or maybe the C-100 docking vanes prevent that from working.

[MashAndBangers]

2 shuttles are better than 1! 

[alberro+]

[Stolas]

Edited August 14, 2023 by Stolas