[1.12.X] Kerbal Planetary Base Systems v1.6.15 [28. April 2022]

[Gurki]

Cool !

I don't know if my PR (fix missing colons) motivate you to release. If not, it was just in time

[Jesusthebird]

If anyone is interested as well as having konstruction mod installed. You can add the konstruction welding module to the k&k docking ports. I personally made a copy of the part with an mm patch and changed the part name/title. Seems to work all the same. Ill post my config when i get home if anyone is curious.

Spoiler

+PART[KKAOSS_dock_habitat]:NEEDS[PlanetaryBaseInc,Konstruction]
{
MODEL
    {
        model = PlanetaryBaseInc/BaseSystem/Parts/Structural/DockingPorts/dock_gangway
    }

    // --- general parameters ---
    @name = KKAOSS_dock_habitat_konstruction
    module = Part
    author = Nils277

    // --- asset parameters ---
    rescaleFactor = 1.0

    // --- node definitions ---
    node_stack_top = 0, 0.113, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1
    node_stack_bottom = 0, -0.07, 0, 0, -1, 0, 1
    node_attach = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0

    // --- editor parameters ---
    TechRequired = advMetalworks
    entryCost = 6500
    cost = 300
    category = Coupling
    subcategory = 0
    title = PlanetaryBaseInc Konstruction Port
    manufacturer = #LOC_KPBS.agency
    description = #LOC_KPBS.corridordock.description

    // attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
    attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0

    // --- standard part parameters ---
    mass = 0.06
    dragModelType = default
    maximum_drag = 0.25
    minimum_drag = 0.25
    heatConductivity = 0.06 // half default
    thermalMassModifier = 2 //double 
    angularDrag = 1
    crashTolerance = 20
    maxTemp = 2100
    fuelCrossFeed = True
    bulkheadProfiles = size1
    stagingIcon = DECOUPLER_VERT
    tags = #LOC_KPBS.corridordock.tags
    
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleDockingNode
        referenceAttachNode = top
        nodeType = size1
        stagingEnabled = False
        stagingToggleEnabledEditor = True
    }
    
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleWeldablePort
        portSnap = false
    }
}
 

 

Edited November 15, 2018 by Jesusthebird

[Tonka Crash]

4 hours ago, Jesusthebird said:

If anyone is interested as well as having konstruction mod installed. You can add the konstruction welding module to the k&k docking ports. I personally made a copy of the part with an mm patch and changed the part name/title. Seems to work all the same. Ill post my config when i get home if anyone is curious.

You can also just use the Konstruction ports as they are with the parts in this pack instead of creating new parts. I've done it a lot.

[Jesusthebird]

51 minutes ago, Tonka Crash said:

You can also just use the Konstruction ports as they are with the parts in this pack instead of creating new parts. I've done it a lot.

very true lol. the new part doesn't provide much, I did this for the 'habitat' docking port, I found no reason to do this to the corridor port. and in it of itself doesn't provide much. I was really just happy to find out the welding module works the same with other docking ports, and perhaps got too excited about it 

[Tonka Crash]

@Nils277  I'm travelling today and my computer is packed in the trunk. Has the new functionality of the flexible corridors been tested with Connected Living Spaces? The reason I ask is CLS treats parts that contain the module dockingnode as a special part that must be docked and the hatch opened for the connection to be passable. I ran into problems with another mod that used the module dockingnode on one side of connections. It could not not be made passable until I rewrote that mod's config to function without the dockingnode module.

https://github.com/codepoetpbowden/ConnectedLivingSpace/wiki/2.2.6-IModuleDockingHatch

Edited November 15, 2018 by Tonka Crash

[Vas]

On 11/13/2018 at 9:24 AM, Starwaster said:

Please PLEASE tell me that you are not talking about this:

Can you really not see what is happening there? No, it is NOT squashed. Yes, it IS rotated. The part that is the front in the first image is now on the top due to rotation. The port and starboard sides (with hatch and flag) have changed sides for the same reason.

No, that should never have worked, if it ever did.

Oh, now I think I see what you guys mean..  It must have been because the part didn't default to the proper rotation when I pulled out a new one.  For some reason when I pulled out a new one it was rotated like that.  If only there were editor visual aids that tell you which side is considered "up".

Though honestly, I think that part should have a glass roof too for viewing above.  I couldn't tell what was wrong because of the part coming out like that "squashed" version each time for unknown reasons after I attached the first part correctly only rotating it on the one axis to flip it and connect it.

[Starwaster]

2 hours ago, Vas said:

Oh, now I think I see what you guys mean..  It must have been because the part didn't default to the proper rotation when I pulled out a new one.  For some reason when I pulled out a new one it was rotated like that.  If only there were editor visual aids that tell you which side is considered "up".

Though honestly, I think that part should have a glass roof too for viewing above.  I couldn't tell what was wrong because of the part coming out like that "squashed" version each time for unknown reasons after I attached the first part correctly only rotating it on the one axis to flip it and connect it.

Which way it's oriented depends on which editor you're using. In the VAB it always starts out with the windows pointing up because that's the Y axis which is always roof to ground. However, in the hangar, the Y axis is hangar door to wall. So the windows point towards the hangar doors. Same with spaceplane parts. The cockpit points out the door because it's a plane and you want it oriented horizontally but in the VAB you're launching it on a rocket so the cockpit points up. Basically it always aligns the Y axis of the craft root to the Y axis of the editor space.

[Tonka Crash]

@Nils277 @IgorZ & @Papa_Joe I confirmed my worries with CLS compatibility and the new Flexible corridor. I cannot get the new Flexible Corridor to function as a passable connection.

I built a test rig and sent it to the launchpad with Bill to do some testing. I have two separate base components with crewable spaces. With the flexible corridor in DOCKED mode (as shown) CLS identifies it as 2 spaces. To me this should be seen as one connected space.

The docking port target for the flexible corridor is shown highlighted brown by CLS. This indicates that CLS sees the docking port as Undocked with the Hatch Closed separating the base into two separate CLS spaces. There is no way to open the hatch to connect the spaces.

My suggestion would be to use a new part (maybe recycling the legacy flexible gangway model & texture) as the target and avoid docking ports targets as docking ports are "special" in CLS.

Or, there needs to be a way for a KAS connection to make the target docking port think it's docked with the hatch open to satisfy CLS.

[IgorZ]

On 11/15/2018 at 5:05 AM, Nils277 said:

To be compatible with @IgorZs update to KAS 1.0 the flexible corridor now consists of two separate parts. The active part is called "K&K Flexible Corridor" it can now be connected by a Kerbal to any "K&K Docking-Port" or "K&K Corridor Docking-Port". It is not possible anymore to connect two "K&K Flexible Corridor" parts with each other like it used to be before.

I think you chose to go this way due to the same part refused to work when it has both a source and a target on it. I've found this bug after the release and had it fixed in the dev branch. After that it will be possible implement the exact legacy behavior when two parts connect to each other without a need to have a special "target" part. I was working on a prototype for Pathfinder corridor, I think it will work for K&K as well.

17 minutes ago, Tonka Crash said:

Or, there needs to be a way for a KAS connection to make the target docking port think it's docked with the hatch open to satisfy CLS.

The docking ports are very complicated parts in terms of the logic. Mangling with the state would be a big mistake. A better solution would be removing the docking port from the equation (see above).

[MikeO89]

On 11/10/2018 at 8:25 AM, Rafael acevedo said:

Nils

Thanks for your hard work.. I know you been working on this.

Vas

Here is how I have been able to build a square shaped base 

Corner part created with two ports at 90 degrees and the last at 135 from both 90 degree ports

 

Completed corner with one docking port and 2 kpbs expandable tunnels 

 

Completed Base

 

OBTW the excellent lander at left corner was my interpretation of Space 1999 eagle transporter built with Nils Excellent Feline utility rover parts

 

 

Completed base close up, used Konstruction docking ports to join t section toghether

Man that's one bad ass looking base dude! I have to try to re-create it (or try to come close to it anyway) in the SPH. I like it and I want it.

Edited November 17, 2018 by MikeO89

[Rafael acevedo]

11 hours ago, MikeO89 said:

Man that's one bad ass looking base dude! I have to try to re-create it (or try to come close to it anyway) in the SPH. I like it and I want it.

Thanks

[Catatau_27]

I have a suggestion: Could there be a way to attach the base parts to the ground?  Like the parts of the mod Surface Experiment Pack? However, I still see a problem about this, whenever I try to pick something up on the floor after returning to KSP, SPH or VAB, if I go back where my pieces were stuck to the floor, the structures disappear.

Note 2: If it were possible to screw the base parts to the floor (without using folding feet) so that they would not be moved, it would be possible through the mod: Surface Experiment Pack to create whole networks of energy, or maybe to expand to other things like water and sewage, antenna signal, would revolutionize KAS because it would have a lot more parts, and would make it easier to create more complex bases and modular blocks, without the need for super installation and joining everything later through these ground connections. Not only in Kerbin (for people like me who like commercial and military aviation), how to use on other planets and moons.

Naturally, it would be necessary to correct the question of the disappearance of the parts attached to the floor and the resistance of the cables and plugs for connection in the Surface Experiment Pack standard. (Some break or stay partially connected)  

Edited November 19, 2018 by Catatau_27

[MaximumThrust]

On 2/19/2018 at 5:55 AM, tsaven said:

Hey guys, I'd posted about this before a few months ago and I finally got around to double-checking all of my calculations to make sure it all made sense.

I've submitted Pull Requests to re-balance the KPBS parts for USI-LS.  As it currently stands they are very over-powered (and over-heavy) when compared to everything else in the USInivers, my tweaks will bring them into line with RoverDude's balance guidelines (which are available here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZI_0InZjd1tfrNDj8RWq45W6cg1UDm6BAkn2jB18Tsk/edit?usp=sharing)

I'm very open to suggestions, I made decisions on trade-offs based partially on what made sense to me, but also from discussions that I read in the KPBS/MKS thread.  Some things (Such as balancing Kerbal Months Vs Mulitplier vs Supplies storage) are kinda fuzzy on intentions so I made my best guess, and I'm very open to debate on them.

You're welcome to check out my Pull requests, or look at my spreadsheet of notes here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vQYEpfq3YMRCbIYQUJdH_hyT2GsjzMR_nPrIBD7Seb0/edit?usp=sharing

*Edit* @DStaal, if you're active these days this might impact you. 

Sorry to raise up this question now (that the mod already has been changed), but the Planetary Greenhouse needs 2 Kerbals to produce at it's maximum capacity, while other greenhouses in the USI-LS don't, it should produce more, no? And the Container Greenhouse and Recyclers also seem to be very unbalanced.

[Tonka Crash]

3 hours ago, Catatau_27 said:

I have a suggestion: Could there be a way to attach the base parts to the ground?  Like the parts of the mod Surface Experiment Pack? However, I still see a problem about this, whenever I try to pick something up on the floor after returning to KSP, SPH or VAB, if I go back where my pieces were stuck to the floor, the structures disappear.

Note 2: If it were possible to screw the base parts to the floor (without using folding feet) so that they would not be moved, it would be possible through the mod: Surface Experiment Pack to create whole networks of energy, or maybe to expand to other things like water and sewage, antenna signal, would revolutionize KAS because it would have a lot more parts, and would make it easier to create more complex bases and modular blocks, without the need for super installation and joining everything later through these ground connections. Not only in Kerbin (for people like me who like commercial and military aviation), how to use on other planets and moons.

Naturally, it would be necessary to correct the question of the disappearance of the parts attached to the floor and the resistance of the cables and plugs for connection in the Surface Experiment Pack standard. (Some break or stay partially connected)  

I use the ground tether function in the USI Tools Mod with a patch to add it to all command pods. I've found this is more successful at keeping a base from moving around the ground than any attempt to anchor them to parts attached to the ground. If you have any USI mod you probably have the Tools installed as a dependency.

For your parts that disappear, what is your Max Persistent Debris setting? The game could just be clearing them out if you have a lot of debris or your setting is very low. Anything without a probe core or command pod is considered debris.

//
// Add USI-Tools Ground Tether option to command modules
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand],!MODULE[USI_InertialDampener]]:FINAL
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = USI_InertialDampener
    }
}

 

[Catatau_27]

2 minutes ago, Tonka Crash said:

I use the ground tether function in the USI Tools Mod with a patch to add it to all command pods. I've found this is more successful at keeping a base from moving around the ground than any attempt to anchor them to parts attached to the ground. If you have any USI mod you probably have the Tools installed as a dependency.

For your parts that disappear, what is your Max Persistent Debris setting? The game could just be clearing them out if you have a lot of debris or your setting is very low. Anything without a probe core or command pod is considered debris.

//
// Add USI-Tools Ground Tether option to command modules
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCommand],!MODULE[USI_InertialDampener]]:FINAL
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = USI_InertialDampener
    }
}

 

Ok, now I need to know how to proceed and add the lyrics you have written there in my game, I am VERY novice in this and I do not know exactly what to do, I will need help to learn if you are willing to teach of course.

[Starwaster]

4 minutes ago, Catatau_27 said:

Ok, now I need to know how to proceed and add the lyrics you have written there in my game, I am VERY novice in this and I do not know exactly what to do, I will need help to learn if you are willing to teach of course.

Create a file in your GameData folder or one of its subfolders (I have a permanent ZZZMyTweaks folder where all of my personal tweaks and patches live - the prefix of ZZZ is to try to ensure that my patches really are the final ones)

Let the file have an extension of cfg (e.g. AddGroundTether.cfg)

Edit the file and paste @Tonka Crash's patch into the file.

You will also need the USI-Tools that he mentioned. (you can get it by installing any USI mod, as mentioned)

Save the file and run Kerbal Space Program.

[Tonka Crash]

@Catatau_27 You just need to stick the code I had in a text file that ends with .cfg somewhere under the Kerbal Space Program\GameData directory.

On my computer I created the file: C:\Games\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\ZZZ_PersonalPatches\patches.cfg 

Most of my game customizations are in this file.

 

[tsaven]

11 hours ago, MaximumThrust said:

Sorry to raise up this question now (that the mod already has been changed), but the Planetary Greenhouse needs 2 Kerbals to produce at it's maximum capacity, while other greenhouses in the USI-LS don't, it should produce more, no? And the Container Greenhouse and Recyclers also seem to be very unbalanced.

I'd have to dig through everything again, but all of the parts were balanced against the spreadsheet that RoverDude put out. 

The big thing that limits the KPBS parts in terms of capacity and production is their physical size; if you compare then to the USI parts, the KBPS parts are far smaller in dimensions and RD's balance spreadsheet accounts for this.

[MaximumThrust]

1 hour ago, tsaven said:

I'd have to dig through everything again, but all of the parts were balanced against the spreadsheet that RoverDude put out. 

The big thing that limits the KPBS parts in terms of capacity and production is their physical size; if you compare then to the USI parts, the KBPS parts are far smaller in dimensions and RD's balance spreadsheet accounts for this.

But the point is: the KPBS greenhouse needs 2 Kerbals to produce at full capacity, while all the other greenhouses don't need any Kerbal.

[Nils277]

On 11/17/2018 at 12:36 AM, IgorZ said:

I think you chose to go this way due to the same part refused to work when it has both a source and a target on it. I've found this bug after the release and had it fixed in the dev branch. After that it will be possible implement the exact legacy behavior when two parts connect to each other without a need to have a special "target" part. I was working on a prototype for Pathfinder corridor, I think it will work for K&K as well.

The docking ports are very complicated parts in terms of the logic. Mangling with the state would be a big mistake. A better solution would be removing the docking port from the equation (see above).

Hmm, i should have asked you before making the release if this was a bug or intended. I will change that with the next update of KPBS when KAS has the fix out 

17 hours ago, Catatau_27 said:

I have a suggestion: Could there be a way to attach the base parts to the ground?  Like the parts of the mod Surface Experiment Pack? However, I still see a problem about this, whenever I try to pick something up on the floor after returning to KSP, SPH or VAB, if I go back where my pieces were stuck to the floor, the structures disappear.

Note 2: If it were possible to screw the base parts to the floor (without using folding feet) so that they would not be moved, it would be possible through the mod: Surface Experiment Pack to create whole networks of energy, or maybe to expand to other things like water and sewage, antenna signal, would revolutionize KAS because it would have a lot more parts, and would make it easier to create more complex bases and modular blocks, without the need for super installation and joining everything later through these ground connections. Not only in Kerbin (for people like me who like commercial and military aviation), how to use on other planets and moons.

Naturally, it would be necessary to correct the question of the disappearance of the parts attached to the floor and the resistance of the cables and plugs for connection in the Surface Experiment Pack standard. (Some break or stay partially connected)  

You can also use a part from KIS that adds a ground plate that is attached to the ground. On that ground plat you can then attach the base. I haven't tried this out though. Maybe there are bugs i don't know of.

[Catatau_27]

On 11/20/2018 at 5:39 AM, Nils277 said:

You can also use a part from KIS that adds a ground plate that is attached to the ground. On that ground plat you can then attach the base. I haven't tried this out though. Maybe there are bugs i don't know of.

So, i tried use this but i have the same problem, well i realy need one way to hold my pieces and things on the ground, this is the best solution, Until now what I want to do I can not do.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Catatau_27

[Stevie_D]

On 11/20/2018 at 7:39 AM, Nils277 said:

You can also use a part from KIS that adds a ground plate that is attached to the ground. On that ground plat you can then attach the base. I haven't tried this out though. Maybe there are bugs i don't know of.

I've tried that myself (with only the current version of KAS, not the dev build igor mentioned). Currently it either rips the ground plate out of the ground or makes the entire base jump up and explode. But that might also be down to other mods. I only tested it on my current playthough, though, not specifically to root out what was at fault.

It's great to hear igor has a fix for the corridors though, it's one of KPBS' and USIs best features. The work all three of you guys do on these mods is great.

Edited November 21, 2018 by Stevie_D

[Catatau_27]

32 minutes ago, Stevie_D said:

I've tried that myself (with only the current version of KAS, not the dev build igor mentioned). Currently it either rips the ground plate out of the ground or makes the entire base jump up and explode. But that might also be down to other mods. I only tested it on my current playthough, not specifically to root out what was at fault.

It's great to hear igor has a fix for the corridors though, it's one of KPBS' and USIs best features. The work all three of you guys do on these mods is great.

The best way to accomplish large base constructions is to hold the pieces on the floor, but with either KIS or KAS either release or explode, I did not try to use pure KIS or KAS without any other mod, but if it were possible to attach something to the planet it would be very good and would have many possibilities.

[DStaal]

KSP has always had issues with things not holding their place on the ground - it's floating-point errors in the code, and not something that can really be dealt with without a massive overhaul in how the game universe is modeled.  (And would limit the universe quite severely in other ways.)

Mostly: Don't try to tie things to the ground to tightly, or depend on millimetric precision on their placement.  Assume your ground based bases will wiggle a bit when you load them.

[Tonka Crash]

The USI Ground Tether I mentioned above is the only thing I've found that seems to work well for keep a base from moving much. It's not actually attaching to the ground, it just keeps the base from drifting. It also works well to damp bouncing landing gear. I've never had any luck keeping large base components attached to the ground. On physics load they will always break loose and usually break some connections between parts made with old KAS pipes. The World Stabilizer mod just seemed to rip everything out of the ground, rarely reattached anything,  and it didn't keep the base from moving afterwards. I gave up my first career game as I had my main base slowly sliding downhill and I would have to reattach pipes on every load.

As the base gets larger it seems to get easier to yank out anchors. Rigid connections between components seem to make problems worse (old KAS) and will yank out anchors if you try multiple anchors due to the floating point precision errors. The new KAS parts that allow flexible connections work much better as the physics from one part don't push on others. I've been able to keep small parts on individual ground pylons attached to the ground through multiple loads if they only connect to larger structures with a flexible connection.