Jump to content

[1.3] REKT Escape Pod Mod - v0.4.5.1 (more fixes)

steedcrugeon

By steedcrugeon
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Sandworm

Sandworm

Posted
Posted

Freezer pods don't need power, at least not be default.  Freezing a kerbal could be something that has to be done prior to releasing the pod.  Then give the pod enough of an RTG simply to maintain itself.  Thawing would require docking the pod, which could be done with a tiny docking port rather than a parachute.  I'm seeing a tumbling pod that needs to be grabbed by the rescue ship, rather than the kerbal instantly thaw and EVA over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DStaal

DStaal

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Sandworm said:

Freezer pods don't need power, at least not be default.  Freezing a kerbal could be something that has to be done prior to releasing the pod.  Then give the pod enough of an RTG simply to maintain itself.  Thawing would require docking the pod, which could be done with a tiny docking port rather than a parachute.  I'm seeing a tumbling pod that needs to be grabbed by the rescue ship, rather than the kerbal instantly thaw and EVA over.

I would argue that if you can rely on your parent ship for power, why are you getting into an escape pod?  Though realistically they'd probably have some sort of specialized power solution for this: capacitors come to mind, but I'm thinking more likely is some sort of one-off fuel cell that can supply just enough for the freezing process.  Then yeah, an RTG to maintain power to the freeze systems and to run the beeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steedcrugeon

steedcrugeon

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

@iG. Argon ah, i think i see the problem. Did you download from Spacedock? as having just checked it seems the spaces folder did not go into the zip file. on that site. check the Github site and download just the spaces folder, add it to tjhe SHED folder and this should fix the problem.

Ah it seems that the spaces folder wasn't on the Github either. Thanks for bringing this to my attention so i can fix it.

Edited by steedcrugeon
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sandworm

Sandworm

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, DStaal said:

I would argue that if you can rely on your parent ship for power, why are you getting into an escape pod?  Though realistically they'd probably have some sort of specialized power solution for this: capacitors come to mind, but I'm thinking more likely is some sort of one-off fuel cell that can supply just enough for the freezing process.  Then yeah, an RTG to maintain power to the freeze systems and to run the beeper.

I guess it depends on what we think of as an escape pod.  I'm of the camp that they should be rather austere things.  Getting in one shouldn't be casual.  I'm thinking of something that can keep you alive until rescue but not much else.  There is no room for a space suit.  You aren't getting out until you land or help arrives.  So the freezer pod doesn't thaw until after rescue (a la Aliens).  Another camp would see them as small craft capable of navigation, capable of perhaps getting somewhere safe on their own (a la star trek).

The problem is that KSP has no need of austere escape pods.  KSP ships do not self destruct, nor do orbits decay.  The only time one would every abandon a ship in KSP is if it is about to crash into something.  In that scenario you want a pod with some DeltaV to get you out of the situation, into a survivable orbit/reentry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iG. Argon

iG. Argon

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, steedcrugeon said:

@iG. Argon ah, i think i see the problem. Did you download from Spacedock? as having just checked it seems the spaces folder did not go into the zip file. on that site. check the Github site and download just the spaces folder, add it to tjhe SHED folder and this should fix the problem.

Ah it seems that the spaces folder wasn't on the Github either. Thanks for bringing this to my attention so i can fix it.

Fixed now?

Very awesome mod btw

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DStaal

DStaal

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sandworm said:

I guess it depends on what we think of as an escape pod.  I'm of the camp that they should be rather austere things.  Getting in one shouldn't be casual.  I'm thinking of something that can keep you alive until rescue but not much else.  There is no room for a space suit.  You aren't getting out until you land or help arrives.  So the freezer pod doesn't thaw until after rescue (a la Aliens).  Another camp would see them as small craft capable of navigation, capable of perhaps getting somewhere safe on their own (a la star trek).

The problem is that KSP has no need of austere escape pods.  KSP ships do not self destruct, nor do orbits decay.  The only time one would every abandon a ship in KSP is if it is about to crash into something.  In that scenario you want a pod with some DeltaV to get you out of the situation, into a survivable orbit/reentry.

I'm actually pretty much with you on the austere thing, actually.  My point on the power for the DeepFreeze pod is that if you're getting in this pod it's because you don't expect the ship it's attached to to operate much longer (or even right now...) - and if that's the case, you shouldn't rely on it to make the pod's life-support systems work.  In the DeepFreeze pod's case, the 'life support' comes in the way of cryosleep, so you should be able to enter cryosleep (but not necessarily exit) with just the resources of the pod - because those are the only resources you can count on working at the point where you need the pod.

Otherwise your ship starts coming apart, you jump in the escape pod, and...  Quickly starve to death, because the pod doesn't work.  (Actually, you'd probably run out of air first, I think.)  It's a deep-space pod, so going someplace isn't likely to be helpful (if you're likely to be near habitation, use a mk1A, a mk1N, or a mk1D as appropriate.  Two of those can land, because getting someone out of orbit and to a base/habitable planet is much more likely to keep them alive than hoping there's a rescue ship capable of the run nearby.  The other waits for pickup.), at least not without bolting on another whole ship.  But you should be able to do the primary function of the pod.

Now, again, what I'd expect them to have in real life is some sort of one-off solid state fuel cell - something that's stable for long-term storage, but can provide the power needed to run the freezer.  Once.

And yeah, there's no real need for escape pods in KSP.  I like to mount them anyway.  :wink: (Though there is a mod that brings in orbital decay, if you want it.)  Though actually I can see the DeepFreeze pods being the most useful in some ways: If you're running a life-support mod, and you've miscalculated how much supplies you needed, freezing yourself and waiting for rescue sounds good.  (Actually, it might be worth looking into MKS's wear mechanic as well as it relates to these...  It can cause a ship to fail, if you don't take care of it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nansuchao

Nansuchao

Posted
Posted

No, there is no real need for escape pods in KSP, seen that you can, most of the times, send a rescue ship to save them or you can sacrifice them without issues.

BUT, if you try to play in a most realistic way (role-playing?), your Kerbals are more important than your ships, so having a way to save them in any situation it's priceless. In atmosphere a player can use the Vanguard parachutes to save them from the risks of testing planes, rockets or other strange vehicle, in space those escape pod are really helpful. I will put them on every space station or interplanetary ship.

It all depends on how you choose to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
steedcrugeon

steedcrugeon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8 hours ago, banisher_of_hope said:

first off I love these, they are great! Very well made models, they fit kerbal style very well!

I have a question though, how do you open the solar panel on the mk1D?

Thanks, I'm glad you liked them.

Ah, it seems you've been looking through the development thread. There is a problem present when using multiple ModuleAnnimateGeneric on a single part with Legacy animation meshes that extend from the parent. the game tries to load a halfway house of all the animations present. I'm hoping to add a small plugin in the future that allows me greater control over the animated parts. As such I had to make a choice between the antenna or the solar panel for the time being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ArkaelDren

ArkaelDren

Posted
Posted

Been reading the small debate on the pods having a cryo option.  I'm going to make mine simple, you get into Pod as the only option you  have left.  The pod should have the power and cryo fluid to initiate the freeze. The ONLY reason for unfreezing is you have been rescued, or you have made it to a body safely and you are going to be "rescued" or that body has life support supplies/base.  I for one like the idea that the only way for unfreeze is a complete rescue and can not be self initiated.  Would like one of the pod types to have integrated Mono engine for the purpose of re-entry type of Escape pod choice, but not for any pod to have both.  But the idea of remote operation from the rescue crew sounds like a possible option. Having three different escape pod choices gives us all a really cool and hard choice for what Pod to bring along on the trip.

Would like this to be done soon though, as its the only way I can achieve my "Base is blowing to excrements" scenario.  At least the only way, with using this great mod, that will be replacing all other escape type equipment/scenarios. 

Thx, great work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DStaal

DStaal

Posted
Posted

On the Kontainers - I haven't had a chance to play with them yet (I need to work on my Mun base at the moment), but on a quick look I'm wondering how we're supposed to de-orbit them.  The SRB is good for landing, but you need to put it into a landing trajectory in the first place, and at the moment it looks like the only way is to get your ship into that trajectory before you eject them, which kinda defeats the idea of having them be a 'survival kit' for your Kerbals who used your escape pods.  (Which do have a way to de-orbit.)  Basically, the moment the Kontainers appear to be based on the mk1D, and used like a mk1N/mk1A.  It would be better to base them on the mk1N, so it matches that use-case.

Of course, I'm also wondering how many REKT pods it would take to set up a drop-colony with MKS or Pathfinder at this point...  :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steedcrugeon

steedcrugeon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 hours ago, DStaal said:

On the Kontainers - I haven't had a chance to play with them yet (I need to work on my Mun base at the moment), but on a quick look I'm wondering how we're supposed to de-orbit them.  The SRB is good for landing, but you need to put it into a landing trajectory in the first place, and at the moment it looks like the only way is to get your ship into that trajectory before you eject them, which kinda defeats the idea of having them be a 'survival kit' for your Kerbals who used your escape pods.  (Which do have a way to de-orbit.)  Basically, the moment the Kontainers appear to be based on the mk1D, and used like a mk1N/mk1A.  It would be better to base them on the mk1N, so it matches that use-case.

Excellent questions, I have only played with them a little whilst performing deliberate de-orbiting of the entire vessel. Have you considered maybe using the stock seperatrons to perform the de-orbit burn, or perhaps (like I did something like this in early testing) attach a second mini-SRB to the other end and have the engine activation set to an action group (thus using one mini-SRB to de-orbit and the other for landing? An alternative could be to have two or three Inline Triple Adapters (fully stocked with pods) attached to a flea. use the flea to de-orbit the hole stack and then jettison the pods at a suitable height to try and keep them in the physics range as they de-orbit. if you jettison to high and they stray out of physics range then the pod is lost.

7 hours ago, DStaal said:

Of course, I'm also wondering how many REKT pods it would take to set up a drop-colony with MKS or Pathfinder at this point...  :wink:

that's an excellent question, although it's probably limited to how many pods a computer could handle 'landertron'ing at the same time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DStaal

DStaal

Posted
Posted

It just seems odd to me that since SHED produces two pods that use RCS for de-orbit, to have their other two pods that are intended to work with them not have equivalent RCS.  :wink:

4 hours ago, steedcrugeon said:

that's an excellent question, although it's probably limited to how many pods a computer could handle 'landertron'ing at the same time!

Not really - with appropriate planning and skill, you could send them down in waves or one at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steedcrugeon

steedcrugeon

Posted
  • Author
Posted
56 minutes ago, DStaal said:

It just seems odd to me that since SHED produces two pods that use RCS for de-orbit, to have their other two pods that are intended to work with them not have equivalent RCS.  :wink:

I have a plan in place for the next release which will offer a solution to this current issue. It definitely won't be a ramshackle, cobbled together thing from bits found in the SHED parts bin, no, definitely not...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steedcrugeon

steedcrugeon

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 12/1/2016 at 3:49 AM, JeffreyCor said:

Any possibility of RealChute utilization for the parachute at some point? Would be great going along with Landertron support that is in there now :)

Can you put the code below into a .cfg file in the SHED patches folder and test it for me? (i haven't used RealChute so have no experience of it). 

@PART[ramp]:FOR[RealChute]
{

	maximum_drag = 0.32
	!sound_parachute_open
	!sound_parachute_single

	!MODULE[ModuleParachute]{}

	MODULE
	{
		name = RealChuteModule
		caseMass = 0.04
		timer = 0
		mustGoDown = false
		cutSpeed = 0.5
		spareChutes = 3

		PARACHUTE
		{
			material = Nylon
			preDeployedDiameter = 1
			deployedDiameter = 25
			minIsPressure = true
			minPressure = 0.01
			deploymentAlt = 700
			cutAlt = -1
			preDeploymentSpeed = 2
			deploymentSpeed = 6
			preDeploymentAnimation = semiDeployRAMP
			deploymentAnimation = fullyDeployRAMP
			parachuteName = Sheet
			capName = cap
		}
	}

	MODULE
    {
        name = ProceduralChute
        textureLibrary = StockReplacement
        currentCanopies = Main chute
    }    
	EFFECTS
	{
		rcpredeploy
		{
			AUDIO
			{
				channel = Ship
				clip = sound_parachute_open
				volume = 1
			}
		}

		rcdeploy
		{
			AUDIO
			{
				channel = Ship
				clip = sound_parachute_single
				volume = 1
			}
		}

		rccut
		{
			AUDIO
			{
				channel = Ship
				clip = RealChute/Sounds/sound_parachute_cut
				volume = 1
			}
		}

		rcrepack
		{
			AUDIO
			{
				channel = Ship
				clip = RealChute/Sounds/sound_parachute_repack
				volume = 1
			}
		}
	}
}

Let me know how you get on. If successful i'll implement it fully into the next release.

EDIT the code above has been amended post @JeffreyCor testing. It should now grant compatibility with RealChute. please use this until the next release if RealChute compatibility is required.

Edited by steedcrugeon
updated MM patch code
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JeffreyCor

JeffreyCor

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm sorry to say it didn't. While it shows up is detecting RealChute in the part description, there is no configuration screen for setting up chute parameters. I took screenshots of what is supposed to come up, and the result of selecting the part from this mod with that MM cfg file present.

EDIT: I found the problem. In the code provided you missed a required section. Before the EFFECTS add the following:

MODULE
    {
        name = ProceduralChute
        textureLibrary = StockReplacement
        currentCanopies = Main chute
    }    


Retesting with the above added seems to work perfectly. :)

Edited by JeffreyCor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wasml

wasml

Posted
Posted (edited)

Enjoying playing with these - thanks!

One thing I did notice is that the A and the N sink.

I added a "buoyancy = " to the cfg file and was able to get them to float low in the water.

 

Edited by wasml
Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...