Umbilical Docking Ports

[RonaldRayGun]

OK, so docking ports work fine in space and are fit for purpose but when trying to create ground installations on moons ... i'm thinking POL in this instance they are pretty difficult to align as with most moons or planets the ground is not flat. There seems to be no easy way to adjust the height of anything .. i.e can't use landing legs to adjust height or wheels etc, basically you got to mess around trying to make it work.

What would be useful is a docking port that have a small amount of alignment movement, i''m thinking it could have a flexible connector that could move X / Y / Z  by half a meter. Hence Umbilical Docking Ports

[KerikBalm]

yea... but on the other hand... they seem to have fixed the claw bugs, so you can just use that.

I don't know how you'd make this work without robotics....

For now, I'm just using a standard docking port height, that also allows them to deploy from a standard mk3 bay... a more flexible connection would be great though.

 

It didn't turn out ot be as hard to get the docking ports at all the same height as I thought once i started building for the same cargobay

Now I can deploy that same surface base on laythe

[Wjolcz]

Or we could have KAS fuel hoses.

[RonaldRayGun]

I play stock ... i know i'm old fashioned ..... 

I use the Space Hanger for creating the alignment. However i need docking ports for moving fuel and ore around structures and rovers which you can't do with connecting components using the claw. 

It's do-able even on Pol but it's messy.

[Wjolcz]

1 hour ago, RonaldRayGun said:

I play stock ... i know i'm old fashioned ..... 

I use the Space Hanger for creating the alignment. However i need docking ports for moving fuel and ore around structures and rovers which you can't do with connecting components using the claw. 

It's do-able even on Pol but it's messy.

The problem is the stock game lacks a lot of things that should have been added a long time ago. I recommend you checking the mod section of the forums as the mods there greatly enhance the game and make it look finished.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Veeltch

[KerikBalm]

54 minutes ago, RonaldRayGun said:

However i need docking ports for moving fuel and ore around structures and rovers which you can't do with connecting components using the claw.

Since when? did they change it? I'm pretty sure they didn't

[Ultimate Steve]

The KLAW can still transfer resources. Unless it was changed in 1.1.2. I am still in 1.1.1. I think.

[RonaldRayGun]

My mistake then i guess, when i read the description is says "no fuel cross feed". It still wouldn't have worked well as i have vehicles "docking" although by the sounds of it you can just run into an open claw.... not particular pretty if that's the solution.

[KerikBalm]

Well I think they changed it so that only claws on the active vessel will work... as a way of avoiding one of the bugs... so I think you need to run the claw into a vessel, not a run a vessel into a claw... I'll check later today. They also made the tolerances for a "claw-dock" tighter so its harder to get a claw to stick now. I like to think in the abstract that it also includes a small manipulator and fuel hoses or something... ie, abstracts KAS.

Fuel won't automatically flow across it like docking ports, but you can still transfer fuel from all parts of the vessel via the right click menu... and when you've clawed one vessel to another, it becomes 1 "vessel".

[RonaldRayGun]

Thanks  for clearing that up!

Edited June 20, 2016 by RonaldRayGun

[pandaman]

5 hours ago, KerikBalm said:

yea... but on the other hand... they seem to have fixed the claw bugs, so you can just use that.

I don't know how you'd make this work without robotics....

For now, I'm just using a standard docking port height, that also allows them to deploy from a standard mk3 bay... a more flexible connection would be great though.

 

It didn't turn out ot be as hard to get the docking ports at all the same height as I thought once i started building for the same cargobay

Now I can deploy that same surface base on laythe

That's okay until you are on are on uneven ground, then it can be difficult to line things up.

Also things weigh differently on on different bodies (gravity) so they settle on the suspension at different heights to what they do on Kerbin. 

[KerikBalm]

yea, well I tested them all on kerbin, and mun, so I figure they work for everything inbetween.

Also, they have action grouped landing gear sets to raise and lower one end or another (in the one rovers case, its action grouped drills at the rear),  and it takes a little wiggling to get it to attach in some cases, but the set works.

[RonaldRayGun]

Indeed, it's a problem when you are sending modules which you then assemble on say Pol or where ever, the point is you need an 'adaptable' connector that has some tolerance in. Otherwise it's very tedious, for low gravity (pol again) i just use RCS thrusters to "adjust" the height of a module that then "docks" on to the next one

[KerikBalm]

Well, I'd like the landing legs to have an adjustable deploy slider liek the mk3 cargobay and ramp... the ramp in particular is useful...

If we had similar sliders on other parts... like wheel hydraulics, we wouldn't have such a need for a flexible docking clamp... or "robotics". If we could *surface attach* things to the doors of the cargoramp/mk3 bays/ etc... I'd be ecstatic... just a few parts with a moving part and a slider... and we'd be good to go.

Right now I need to toggle action groups back and forth when the legs/wheels have lifted it at about the right amount

[magnemoe]

Planetary bases has corridors who works like KAS pipes just with larger diameter. looks good for connecting two base modules. 
Unfortunately in 1.12 bases might break up if weight changes a lot because of mining or fuel transfer so I only uses winches and an hotkey to disconnect all. KAS don't work for 1.13 yet. 

[DMagic]

Like this:

It's basically a regular docking port that can be extended to allow for a limited amount of translation and rotation (half of the node size, so 0.625m translation for the 1.25m docking port, and 10^o), it works pretty well in my testing.

If you want to test it out check here:

This release is strictly for testing and only includes the 1.25m port, which pairs with the standard Clampotron (it should also work with the shielded and in-line versions). It uses the stock texture, so you can't move or replace that.

If you're wondering why something like this hasn't been done before (ie, not an oversized KAS strut), it's because it is devilishly complex to get any kind of freely moving component like this to work in Unity. Making a working mock up in a 3D modeling program can be done in 15 min, but Unity doesn't understand some of the modeling constraints, so you are left with much messier options.

[nickrich]

Awesome! 

[NoMrBond]

Is the unlock/pivot functionality of the Claw its own module, or is it tied specifically to the Claw module?

[Grenartia]

I seem to recall someone making a flexible docking tube that was connected via KAS/KIS and could go up to 50m. But I only saw it released for 1.0.5, shortly before 1.1, and haven't seen an update since the first time I saw it.

[Daveroski]

I suggested this one year ago today. I probably wasn't the first.

Lets wish the suggestion a Happy Anniversary.

[KerikBalm]

Well, I confirm that my surface base works on Mun:

It had a bit of problem with wheels exploding upon connection because the connected part would snap a bit upon connection.

You can see its not level and when I have the landing gear extended on all of them, the center part is lifted up

Still, It would be nice to not require actiongrouped landing gear/legs to raise/lower things into position

Last shot of it

http://i.imgur.com/CpZQ8JO.png

 

[THX1138]

On 25/06/2016 at 0:02 PM, Daveroski said:

I suggested this one year ago today. I probably wasn't the first.

Lets wish the suggestion a Happy Anniversary.

Did you miss the post a few above yours? 

 

[Daveroski]

14 minutes ago, THX1138 said:

Did you miss the post a few above yours? 

 

Did you miss the fact that these suggestions are for inclusions into the stock game?

 

[THX1138]

5 minutes ago, Daveroski said:

Did you miss the fact that these suggestions are for inclusions into the stock game?

 

Pft, good luck with that. See you again next year.

[RonaldRayGun]

LOL, i'm hoping!