Autostrut Abuse Challenge

[JacobJHC]

The Autostrut Abuse Challenge

Now that KSP Version 1.2 has launched (pun intended) we have access to the autostrut function to help reduce part count. BUT, does this remove the need for struts all together? That is the goal of this challenge.

Simply do something in KSP whether it be a return mission, a giant colony launch, anything really heck it could even be another challenge. The only restriction is that you can only use autostrut and no normal struts.

Winners:

- @JacobJHC: An entire Jool 5 Mission. Video submission.

- @Eidahlil: An entire Jool 5 Mission, direct approach. A true ode to asparagus staging. Post here

Edited November 9, 2016 by JacobJHC

[Superfluous J]

A better challenge would be to find a ship that needed normal struts because the autostruts couldn't do the job.

I'm on my phone right now but when I have time I'll post my 1.2 Eve lifter. Not only does it have no traditional struts, it's an asparagus with no fuel lines.

Edited October 17, 2016 by 5thHorseman

[JAFO]

From what little I've experienced with autostruts so far, I think they're superior to regular struts in every way. Even with large asparagus stages, no struts are necessary now. To say nothing of the fact that if something starts wobbling in flight, you can autostrut it right then and there.

[panzer1b]

6 minutes ago, JAFO said:

From what little I've experienced with autostruts so far, I think they're superior to regular struts in every way. Even with large asparagus stages, no struts are necessary now. To say nothing of the fact that if something starts wobbling in flight, you can autostrut it right then and there.

I have to agree, they have no drag, no mass, and can be applied in the field, the last of which is pretty much impossible to live without for anyone who likes to make massive stations/ground bases/motherships and for whatever reason (performance issues or just against modding) doesnt want to install KIS/KAS for the ability to attach struts out in space.  While i absolutely love the struts, i honestly think its about time for them to add a minor mass penalty per part that has the thing active.  Since its very similar to a normal strut (but somehow internal and impossible to see), would it be too difficult to code it so that every part with autostrut enabled adds the exact same mass to the ship as a standard strut, its a very simple and imo the bare minimum the game should have to make the things fair.

That said, i will have to strongly say that autostruts are NOT a replacement for regular struts at least in the capital ship combat department.  Ofc im probably a minority (i dont even use BDA, just make stock weapons and combat that way), but proper use of conventional struts is way better for ship protection (as you can pick what parts connect to what parts making strong connections between the skeleton while bypassing the sacrificial armor).  Ofc for conventional useage (building a rocket) the autostruts work equally well (except have no drag/mass penalties) since all you need to do is have 2-3 things in a stack autostrutted to root and your previously flimsy noodle is now rock solid strurdy enough to fly relatively straight.

While i would prefer the autostrut feature to remain in game indefenetely (if im correct it was hinted somewhere that its a temp thing to help aleviate unity bug that may or may not get fixed eventually), i think it needs to have some sort of penalties included to not render the normal struts irrelevant outside of combat scenarios.  I would personally have an autostrut add twice the mass of a regular strut (since its dragless and internal and arguably more utility), but id be perfectly happy if each autostrut at the bare minimum added a normal strut's mass.  Yeah itd still be a bit weird that you could alter your ship's mass in flight with autostrutting, but until the stock game comes with struts that can be deployed in space, id rather not loose the ability to use autostrutting once out of the VAB/SPH (id like to limit them to VAB/SPH only eventually, but the game needs a way to strut modular space stations first)...

[JAFO]

I would also like to see autostruts stay a stock feature.

It would also help console players compensate at least a little for the fact they can't add mods that would otherwise enable in-flight strutting.

[Pds314]

Autostruts have been of significant use for me building turboshaft airplanes. Although you could consider it abuse since I end up not using any non-auto struts.

[Kerbonaut257]

On 10/17/2016 at 11:44 AM, 5thHorseman said:

A better challenge would be to find a ship that needed normal struts because the autostruts couldn't do the job.

I'm on my phone right now but when I have time I'll post my 1.2 Eve lifter. Not only does it have no traditional struts, it's an asparagus with no fuel lines.

So can you enlighten me on what exactly autostrut is?

 

Does it work exactly like connecting the COM of the autostrutted part to the COM of the other part with an invisible, massless, dragless, partless strut?

[Avonix]

47 minutes ago, Kerbonaut257 said:

So can you enlighten me on what exactly autostrut is?

 

Does it work exactly like connecting the COM of the autostrutted part to the COM of the other part with an invisible, massless, dragless, partless strut?

Autostrut has a few options. It can connect to the heaviest part, grandparent part, or root part. It basically acts as a normal strut that connects to the middle (from what i can gather its the middle not the CoM) of the selected part, wiht no mass, drag, and doesn't increase part count. I'm not 100% sure of the exact science behind it but it's the superior brand of space-grade duct tape, clearly.

[Kerbinchaser]

This looks super easy. I'll do it. 

[JacobJHC]

On 10/19/2016 at 1:53 AM, Pds314 said:

Autostruts have been of significant use for me building turboshaft airplanes. Although you could consider it abuse since I end up not using any non-auto struts.

I hear you, once I get Kerbal Engineer Redux working for 1.2 I have a Jool 5 mission with no struts, oddly enough it is actually more stable that the version with struts...

[EliteGuy3]

Wait, what? What are auto-struts?

[JacobJHC]

Just now, EliteGuy3 said:

Wait, what? What are auto-struts?

A new feature, it lets you link to parts together by right clicking on a part, say a fuel tank and then you will be given the option to connect it to the heaviest part, the root part or the grandparent part. It doesn't add mass or parts or drag. Kinda odd and may be patched soon so abuse it while you still can.

[EliteGuy3]

8 minutes ago, JacobJHC said:

A new feature, it lets you link to parts together by right clicking on a part, say a fuel tank and then you will be given the option to connect it to the heaviest part, the root part or the grandparent part.

Ok, Thanks! I did a little experiment and here's the results:This is with auto strutThis is without auto strut.

 

This will be very helpful of those SSTOs!

[JacobJHC]

9 minutes ago, EliteGuy3 said:

Ok, Thanks! I did a little experiment and here's the results:This is with auto strutThis is without auto strut.

 

This will be very helpful of those SSTOs!

Indeed it will be helpful for SSTOs.

[Superfluous J]

52 minutes ago, JacobJHC said:

Kinda odd and may be patched soon so abuse it while you still can.

While this is true of any feature (that it may change) I'm not so sure you can expect this. Here's a quote from this feedback I put in during PreRelease:

"this is actually by design so I'll change this to feedback, we can of course not use autostruts, but maybe they should just become the default?"

(emphasis mine)

[sdj64]

Yeah it's pretty easy to create massive vehicles with no struts now.  My Jool 5 carrier has no regular struts in it.

 

1 hour ago, 5thHorseman said:

maybe they should just become the default?"

I think that rigid attachment should be default probably, it's a good compromise between the complete rigidity of autostruts and the wobbliness of no struts at all.  If autostruts are default it might be too CPU-intensive on a large ship with 500 parts and 500 more effectively because of the autostruts.  Also want the ability to turn them off on landing gear, in case flexible suspension is the goal.

 

[Azimech]

I like them and dislike them. I dislike the fact wheels and landing gear are autostrutted by default without the option to disable it. I've made custom suspensions on several extremely large aeroplanes to cope with landing on rough terrain to take the stress of the wings and fuselage, basically useless now. Same with my custom car & truck suspensions.

Besides that, autostruts have a negative impact on FPS when using lots of them. And I've noticed turboprops slowing down their max RPM when using them on the shaft, but this was during a 1.2. pre. Haven't tested them recently.

And they can invoke kraken attacks.

[JacobJHC]

8 hours ago, Azimech said:

And they can invoke kraken attacks

Could this make a giant kraken drive? Probably not.

[Azimech]

1 minute ago, JacobJHC said:

Could this make a giant kraken drive? Probably not.

I've seen some pretty weird things ... try it! :-)

[JacobJHC]

Just now, Azimech said:

I've seen some pretty weird things ... try it! :-)

I've tried before to no avail.  D: 

[JacobJHC]

Boom. My entry is complete, an entire Jool 5 mission without the use of struts.

 

Edited November 7, 2016 by JacobJHC
I accidentally posted the link for someone else's video and not mine :P

[Firemetal]

34 minutes ago, JacobJHC said:

Boom. My entry is complete, an entire Jool 5 mission without the use of struts.

 

Woah. Wrong video I think. But I've already watched it thanks to being subscribed. I see you used the craft you used for my Eeloo 50> tons challenge.  If not the same, similar. Pretty awesome, Jacob!

As for this challenge, I use autostruts for just about everything now. And it works like actual struts. However sometimes I use struts for aesthetical purposes such as my old DCTS cruiser. (You can find that if you go back a few weeks on the "What did you do in KSP today thread") I also use it sometimes just so I know I'm not abusing it.  

Fire

[JacobJHC]

11 minutes ago, Firemetal said:

Woah. Wrong video I think. But I've already watched it thanks to being subscribed. I see you used the craft you used for my Eeloo 50> tons challenge.  If not the same, similar. Pretty awesome, Jacob!

As for this challenge, I use autostruts for just about everything now. And it works like actual struts. However sometimes I use struts for aesthetical purposes such as my old DCTS cruiser. (You can find that if you go back a few weeks on the "What did you do in KSP today thread") I also use it sometimes just so I know I'm not abusing it.  

Fire

Wait crap this is the wrong link this is evermore alpacas. Well I feel stupid for not noticing this when I posted it. I quoted his video in another thread and must of not cleared my clipboard before coming here.

 

Edited November 7, 2016 by JacobJHC

[Eidahlil]

Ooh, I'd like to sumbit my Jool 5 as well. I don't have any real struts either, it's all held together by yellow plastic pipes. Well, yeah, and autostruts on maybe 70% of the parts.

 

[Jarin]

Oh god, I found one of my old screenshots and... wow.

Spoiler

Yes, that is every single component individually strutted to the one next to it, and a web of struts to the central core.

Talk about strut abuse...

I should remake the design with autostruts and see how it handles.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Jarin