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

[steedcrugeon]

29 minutes ago, basepart said:

https://spacedock.info/mod/1165/PicoPort

https://github.com/steedcrugeon/REKT

GameData\SHED\Agencies\SHEDAgency.cfg

This is an superb find! well done, its right down in the weeds but there is indeed a discrepancy between the SHED agency configs, turn out neither were actually correct.

for the interim please use this for the body of the SHEDAgency.cfg until I can push out updates:

AGENT 
{ 
   	name = Sphero-Hedron Engineering Dynamics 

	title = #autoLOC_SHED_000 
   	description = #autoLOC_SHED_001 

	logoURL = SHED/Agencies/SHEDLogoC 
   	logoScaledURL = SHED/Agencies/SHEDLogoC_SM 
 
   	mentality = Commercial 0.8 
   	mentality = Economic 0.4 
   	mentality = EasyGoing 0.2 
 	mentality = KerbalMinded 0.9 
} 

 

[cyberKerb]

I downloaded and gave this ago last night... I really like the OTAV!!  She flies like a dream! 

Just a couple of minor observations that didn't have any affect on gameplay:

 - Your bundled copy of KSPwheel (0.9.5.16) is a version behind the current one available (0.9.5.17)
 - For the stability flap thing that goes on top of the OTAV, it's deploy button only shows a #localization tag name, not an actual "Deploy so-and-so" name
 - Not really anything to do with your mod, but I have Collision FX installed and I needed to add an edit to it's MM cfg file so that it doesn't add sparks to KSPWheel parts when I landed the OTAV. I've added this note to the Collision FX forum page too. Nevermind, LinuxGuruGamer already has a comment on that and it's a bug in their mod - It's not going stop me using the OTAV!  

Otherwise - I'm looking forward to using this in my career game I just started. Only modification I'm going to the cfg in my game is to move the OTAV further up the CTT tech tree. Only reason is that it seems slightly 'off' (for my own personal tastes) to have something that sleek and clean looking that actually works when I'm still bumbling around with the Mk1 cockpit and the Lander(tin)can early on.

Great work on the models and mod!  

Edited August 15, 2017 by wile1411

[steedcrugeon]

Glad your enjoying it! Getting the OTAV to behave nicely was thanks a lot of input from @Pak he wised me up on the ways of stock aero. It has evolved over time but I thin the OTAV is pretty much there now.

8 hours ago, wile1411 said:

 - For the stability flap thing that goes on top of the OTAV, it's deploy button only shows a #localization tag name, not an actual "Deploy so-and-so" name

Ah, good spot and thanks for the feed back (I had not seen that error on the release version), I'll get that corrected for the next release, as will the most up to date version of KSPWheel

8 hours ago, wile1411 said:

Only modification I'm going to the cfg in my game is to move the OTAV further up the CTT tech tree. Only reason is that it seems slightly 'off' (for my own personal tastes) to have something that sleek and clean looking that actually works when I'm still bumbling around with the Mk1 cockpit and the Lander(tin)can early on.

I concur with this sentiment and would be happy to receive feedback. I haven't played a proper Career/Science game since I can't remember now. I have never quite been happy with where the OTAV sat in the Stock tech tree but didn't think where it could go into the CTT. Care to share your tech tree thoughts and I'll integrate them into the mod.

[cyberKerb]

On 8/16/2017 at 4:40 PM, steedcrugeon said:

Glad your enjoying it! Getting the OTAV to behave nicely was thanks a lot of input from @Pak he wised me up on the ways of stock aero. It has evolved over time but I thin the OTAV is pretty much there now.

Ah, good spot and thanks for the feed back (I had not seen that error on the release version), I'll get that corrected for the next release, as will the most up to date version of KSPWheel

I concur with this sentiment and would be happy to receive feedback. I haven't played a proper Career/Science game since I can't remember now. I have never quite been happy with where the OTAV sat in the Stock tech tree but didn't think where it could go into the CTT. Care to share your tech tree thoughts and I'll integrate them into the mod.

Oh... never really gave any thought to what each node actually mean other that it has parts I want for the next mission  

Best guess would be Experimental Aerodynamics for the Ring at least and maybe OTVA in specializedCommandModules.
What do you think of those suggestions peoples?
 

Edited August 21, 2017 by wile1411

[cyberKerb]

One last follow up item: 
I've getting this error in the log file: No affect on gameplay or visuals though.

[ERR 22:15:15.629] Texture 'SHED/Parts/REKT/inline12hub/inlineOcto-C_NRM' not found!

[steedcrugeon]

On ‎21‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 1:18 PM, wile1411 said:

One last follow up item: 
I've getting this error in the log file: No affect on gameplay or visuals though.

[ERR 22:15:15.629] Texture 'SHED/Parts/REKT/inline12hub/inlineOcto-C_NRM' not found!

good find, thanks for raising the issue on Github, it will be resolved in the next release.

[Bit Fiddler]

could we get some of the small triangular end cap doo-hickies that are just "Cargo" pods so we can load in extra fuel or life support supplies etc. if they were built to use "Configurable containers" mod then we can just pop them on and configure them to hold what ever we want. and actually if they were to be a bit taller and round off the end of the pod like in a "nose cone" sort of shape that would be cool too.  they could hold a bit more and be aerodynamic if we use them like a drop tank.

 

secondly, what about a docking port rather than just a decoupler.  this way the pods can be reattached.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Bit Fiddler

[drdeath]

I think what this pack could do with is an extended endurance pack for the mk1a. To make the mk1a workable, I almost have to have retro rockets on the bottom and the parachute on top. That leaves nowhere to attach the fuel cell. I ran some trials from higher up, but at anything above 200km, I almost invariably ran into issues with EC depletion before hitting the atmosphere.

Also I've noticed that the pods currently sink in water. I think an integration with Comfortable Landing would be a good way to go here.

Last but not least, there seems to be something wrong with TacLS integration, at least it looks that way from here. Currently the OTAV and the mk1c pod are the only ones that have a full set of TacLS resources. The mk1a has oxygen, the mk1n and mk1d have none of the resources at all.

I'm afraid I can do nothing to help you fix it, except maybe test some stuff for you.

[Bit Fiddler]

well to be fair the only pod that really should have survival gear and supplies is the ....  I forget the number, the "long term" pod.  the others are not meant for long term survival, but rather just a crash landing and immediate pickup.  but I can see where a day or 2 of supplies would be handy in all of them.

 

the extra top parts I was mentioning in my previous post would solve all this however.  as if they were built with configurable containers mod support, you just decide what you want in this container attached to the top of your pod and you have it.  you can add battery power, fuel, life support items, ... basically what ever you wish.

 

I had not seen the sinking in water bit, but ya, that is a huge problem.  I second the request for comfortable landing support.

[drdeath]

 

27 minutes ago, Bit Fiddler said:

well to be fair the only pod that really should have survival gear and supplies is the ....  I forget the number, the "long term" pod.  the others are not meant for long term survival, but rather just a crash landing and immediate pickup.  but I can see where a day or 2 of supplies would be handy in all of them.

Well, storing any waste products for recycling would only make sense in the mk1d, and food and water aren't strictly necessities, but I think at least half an hours worth of oxygen should be available in all of them, if just for show. Maybe we also simply need more variants of pods, because especially away from Kerbin, it may be more than a day or two until I can come and pick a downed Kerbal up, and staying in orbit in the mk1d isn't always an option either, especially if I have to bail because I already AM on a suborbital trajectory.

I'd also like to point out that the one pod that has supplies is the one least likely to make use of them, because in the mk1c, the inhabitant would be shock frozen.

27 minutes ago, Bit Fiddler said:

the extra top parts I was mentioning in my previous post would solve all this however.  as if they were built with configurable containers mod support, you just decide what you want in this container attached to the top of your pod and you have it.  you can add battery power, fuel, life support items, ... basically what ever you wish.

I just saw that post a minute ago.  I think either we need a slightly bigger pod with more supplies, or stackable modules that go e.g. between the pod and the chute. It wouldn't even have to be configurable, you could alter the config with module manager depending on which life support flavor is detected.

27 minutes ago, Bit Fiddler said:

I had not seen the sinking in water bit, but ya, that is a huge problem.  I second the request for comfortable landing support.

Oh, it's not a HUGE problem, just pop EVA and float to the surface. I still think life pods should be floaty in general. And floatiness on other planets is another question entirely anyways.

[cyberKerb]

Am I missing an update or have I borked my game somehow? KSP-AVC is telling me the REKT is out of version 0.4.5 and wants me to update to 0.4.6.

Only issue is that both spacebock and github both don't have a version of that number available.

[steedcrugeon]

On ‎14‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 7:30 AM, wile1411 said:

Am I missing an update or have I borked my game somehow? KSP-AVC is telling me the REKT is out of version 0.4.5 and wants me to update to 0.4.6.

Only issue is that both spacebock and github both don't have a version of that number available.

This is my error, and will only be temporary. I had setup the 0.4.6 release but then had to immediately pull it as I had the previous 1.3 release of RetractableLiftingSurface (which has since been updated) and also a couple of the parts had corrupted on export from unity (it was a normal texture issue) but I had not spotted it until after I had updated the KSP-AVC thing.

I plan to fix all this evening (next opportunity to get onto my Unity machine).

[Jivaii]

Current version working in 1.3.1? Or is there an update that hasn't pushed yet?

[Madmax]

3 minutes ago, Jivaii said:

Current version working in 1.3.1? Or is there an update that hasn't pushed yet?

I'm using version 0.4.5.1 on KSP 1.3.1 and it's working just fine for me.

In general if a mod does not have .dll files the chances are high that it works...

[MatrixVirus]

Any tips on flying the OTAV? Everything I try it just nose dives or wants to spins like a top.

[steedcrugeon]

@Jivaii the mods does work but (until I finish the release) you might want to download the more up to date version of RetractableLifitngSurface (version 0.1.5 is for KSP 1.3.1) for the OTAV parts directly from LinuxGuruGamer's thread here:

9 hours ago, MatrixVirus said:

Any tips on flying the OTAV? Everything I try it just nose dives or wants to spins like a top.

The RetractableLiftingSurface parts are probably not functioning correctly, grab the latest form the thread linked above.

[Jivaii]

I always grab the most up to date version of that module. No offense to you.

[steedcrugeon]

6 hours ago, Jivaii said:

I always grab the most up to date version of that module. No offense to you.

None taken, I never pretended that I could keep up with the dependencies, I just try to at each release.

[MatrixVirus]

It seems when I assemble the OTAV with its winglets deployed and then retract them on the launch pad, it flies like a champ, but when I hit the launch pad with everything retracted or in "launch configuration" when I deploy it spins and nose dives.  I will look into this and experiment some more, make sure I'm not doing something wrong.

[agrock]

I landed a pod in the ocean (much fun with this mod!) and noticed that it... doesnt float... literally, a pod is heavy as rock, goes straight down like a sunken submarine. 

I would like to request a new part: parachute part sized float/buoy like those for Umbra Otter submersible.

 

[steedcrugeon]

5 hours ago, agrock said:

I landed a pod in the ocean (much fun with this mod!) and noticed that it... doesnt float... literally, a pod is heavy as rock, goes straight down like a sunken submarine. 

I would like to request a new part: parachute part sized float/buoy like those for Umbra Otter submersible.

 

Glad you're enjoying the Mod, can you tell me which pod you landed in the ocean and where you obtained the mod from?

[agrock]

15 hours ago, steedcrugeon said:

Glad you're enjoying the Mod, can you tell me which pod you landed in the ocean and where you obtained the mod from?

It was the pod with airbrakes (mk1A). Downloaded version 0.4.5 from SpaceDock. I see there was an update (AVC not reporting?). Will update.

[steedcrugeon]

11 hours ago, agrock said:

It was the pod with airbrakes (mk1A). Downloaded version 0.4.5 from SpaceDock. I see there was an update (AVC not reporting?). Will update.

Hopefully this resolves your issue but if it does not please let me know then I can poke around in the configs.

[k9wolflord]

the game crashes before it finishes loading

[grungar3x7]

 

I am having the same issue as k9wolflord.

Here is the log.

 

In addition, is it necessary for the RetractableLiftingSurface folder to be both on its own in the GameData folder, and embedded in the SHED folder as well?

Edited December 3, 2017 by grungar3x7
Asking a tangential question.