[1.9-1.10] Global Construction

[Terwin]

5 hours ago, ottodeluxe said:

I see, thanks for your comments! Seems I got the numbers mixed up, I thought the cost would be the unpack cost.

Allista, the 106 tons could make sense, since I'm packing some machinery, which brings the total mass to 106 tons. The density I cannot comment on, though.

That is why 106 is the expected value, but Allista was saying, 64.4+64.4=128.8 which is larger than the expected value of 106.

[Skystorm]

@allista  One thing I have noticed is that Kit Res doesn't just appear conspicuously the same as the tonnage, but also that the kits required to build it always seems less than Kit Res suggests.  There have even been times that Kit Res was more material kits than I had on-hand, and I was still able to finish building it with kits left over.

Could it be that it is showing the amount of material kits already packed inside the box rather than the amount needed to build it?  That would explain it being so close to the tonnage and also why the kits required to build it are less than stated.

[allista]

22 hours ago, Skystorm said:

@allista  One thing I have noticed is that Kit Res doesn't just appear conspicuously the same as the tonnage, but also that the kits required to build it always seems less than Kit Res suggests.  There have even been times that Kit Res was more material kits than I had on-hand, and I was still able to finish building it with kits left over.

Could it be that it is showing the amount of material kits already packed inside the box rather than the amount needed to build it?  That would explain it being so close to the tonnage and also why the kits required to build it are less than stated.

I would actually go further and suppose that it just shows Kit Mass instead of required resources. A typo or an unedited copy/paste of code would have similar symptoms. I'll check this as soon as I can, but right now too busy at work

[tonimark]

hey, guys where are the mining operation vehicle p... plz ignore i am an idiot i haven't research that yet because i didn't realise that i was on career modInsert other media

Edited May 1, 2018 by tonimark
BEING A NOOB

[Demon Wolf]

the mobile workshop isn't coming up in the game but when i ck the GC parts folder it's in their  iv looked all over for it but its just not coming up in game the other 2 parts are.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Demon Wolf

[Critter79606]

@allista Wanted to report a minor issue.  I'm can't seem to get the Space Crane Jettison to not stage for some reason.  Was wondering if anyone else has seen this.  No matter if it is set or not, it shows up.

Thanks, and love the mod.  Especially the Space Crane!

[LatiMacciato]

@Critter79606 I seem to have this issue aswell, I always struggle with myself if this is right or not, but basically the functionality is off, if the option is set off in VAB/SPH. Also the Crane's RCS seem upside down (only cosmetic), but i can remember guys before already posted the RCS issue.

Yes I agree the Crane is a H.U.G.E. help!! it combines probe core, reaction wheels, RCS, and is able to hold fuel/ec plus produces some ec! .. I wonder if the decoupole node can be converted into a grapple node so that is is reusable (possibly with a light as an indicator if active or not) .. just my 2 cents after I finally fixed my CPU cooling and back to 30 °C YAY!

Edited May 10, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[allista]

6 hours ago, Critter79606 said:

@allista Wanted to report a minor issue.  I'm can't seem to get the Space Crane Jettison to not stage for some reason.  Was wondering if anyone else has seen this.  No matter if it is set or not, it shows up.

Thanks, and love the mod.  Especially the Space Crane!

Thanks for the report, will check it and fix if possible (or at least will explain what happens). You've also managed to report this in time for the new release for 1.4.3 (which I was about to make yesterday evening... but shamefully fell asleep )

3 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

@Critter79606 I seem to have this issue aswell, I always struggle with myself if this is right or not, but basically the functionality is off, if the option is set off in VAB/SPH. Also the Crane's RCS seem upside down (only cosmetic), but i can remember guys before already posted the RCS issue.

Yes I agree the Crane is a H.U.G.E. help!! it combines probe core, reaction wheels, RCS, and is able to hold fuel/ec plus produces some ec! .. I wonder if the decoupole node can be converted into a grapple node so that is is reusable (possibly with a light as an indicator if active or not) .. just my 2 cents after I finally fixed my CPU cooling and back to 30 °C YAY!

That's not so bad an idea, but the thing is: the stock grapple node is not made for sustained operation. It tends to slide, rotate and even detach during long time warps. So I wouldn't want to use it to build a ship. But maybe, just maybe it's possible (well, with stock modules it is usually not) to have both ModuleJettison AND ModuleGrappleNode in the same part on the same node. I'll experiment with that and if it's feasible, will make some additions and animations to Space Crane model (so it starts to resemble the T4 type cpside even more ).

[allista]

6 hours ago, Critter79606 said:

@allista Wanted to report a minor issue.  I'm can't seem to get the Space Crane Jettison to not stage for some reason.  Was wondering if anyone else has seen this.  No matter if it is set or not, it shows up.

Thanks, and love the mod.  Especially the Space Crane!

Hm... without advanced tweakables there's no such option and the crane isn't staged at all:

[Critter79606]

8 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

@Critter79606 I seem to have this issue aswell, I always struggle with myself if this is right or not, but basically the functionality is off, if the option is set off in VAB/SPH. Also the Crane's RCS seem upside down (only cosmetic), but i can remember guys before already posted the RCS issue.

Yes I agree the Crane is a H.U.G.E. help!! it combines probe core, reaction wheels, RCS, and is able to hold fuel/ec plus produces some ec! .. I wonder if the decoupole node can be converted into a grapple node so that is is reusable (possibly with a light as an indicator if active or not) .. just my 2 cents after I finally fixed my CPU cooling and back to 30 °C YAY!

@allista I do use advanced tweakables.  I need it for the WIP Infernal Robotics Next.  The IR Joints don't like being bound to another part.

@LatiMacciato I finally got my space crane in space, and it does have the thruster issue.  I've found that about 1/2 of my mods that have thrusters have had this issue, but most have been fixed.  It is a common issue with 1.4.x mods that have thruster components.

I did a test of all my mods that had thrusters, and this is the result.  I let the mod owners know, but I forgot that the crane had them built in, so I missed it, but it looks like the bright ones.  All the ones jetting up have the same issue as the space crane.  The ones jetting down work properly, and have the right graphics.  They are blinding in space!

 

[Tabris]

9 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

@Critter79606 I seem to have this issue aswell, I always struggle with myself if this is right or not, but basically the functionality is off, if the option is set off in VAB/SPH. Also the Crane's RCS seem upside down (only cosmetic), but i can remember guys before already posted the RCS issue.

Yes I agree the Crane is a H.U.G.E. help!! it combines probe core, reaction wheels, RCS, and is able to hold fuel/ec plus produces some ec! .. I wonder if the decoupole node can be converted into a grapple node so that is is reusable (possibly with a light as an indicator if active or not) .. just my 2 cents after I finally fixed my CPU cooling and back to 30 °C YAY!

what about instead of a grapplenode a docking node

[allista]

43 minutes ago, Tabris said:

what about instead of a grapplenode a docking node

But what would you do with it?

[DStaal]

Honestly, this sounds like it's being over-thought.   A grapple, docking port, or decoupler is one extra part in your ship build - yes, you want to minimize parts, but given how much this already cuts down on parts that one extra part isn't going to be a huge issue.  And being able to choose which part you want is exactly why parts in KSP exist.

[allista]

1 hour ago, Critter79606 said:

@allista I do use advanced tweakables.  I need it for the WIP Infernal Robotics Next.  The IR Joints don't like being bound to another part.

@LatiMacciato I finally got my space crane in space, and it does have the thruster issue.  I've found that about 1/2 of my mods that have thrusters have had this issue, but most have been fixed.  It is a common issue with 1.4.x mods that have thruster components.

I did a test of all my mods that had thrusters, and this is the result.  I let the mod owners know, but I forgot that the crane had them built in, so I missed it, but it looks like the bright ones.  All the ones jetting up have the same issue as the space crane.  The ones jetting down work properly, and have the right graphics.  They are blinding in space!

I've just fixed the issue with RCS FX of the Space Crane, thanks.

As for the advanced tweakables and disabling of the staging, I can only say that this is purely stock functionality of the stock ModuleDecouple, so I have no control over this issue. Sorry

Or have you tried it with some other decouplers with different results? If so, there may be something in SpaceCrane's config that could be changed to fix this.

[allista]

48 minutes ago, DStaal said:

Honestly, this sounds like it's being over-thought.   A grapple, docking port, or decoupler is one extra part in your ship build - yes, you want to minimize parts, but given how much this already cuts down on parts that one extra part isn't going to be a huge issue.  And being able to choose which part you want is exactly why parts in KSP exist.

On second thought, I agree. I don't want to remove the decoupler as it's the most useful of the three and was there from the beginning. But adding a grapple node here would require a lot of work, while the main use of the Space Creane is still a one-time delivery, I suppose.

[LatiMacciato]

4 hours ago, Tabris said:

what about instead of a grapplenode a docking node

usually I "abuse" any grapple parts as docking port if I have forgot the right size/part .. of course a docking port that has a grapple node part or a grabbler that can dock everywhere could make sense, but messing with game physics and node definitions gives figuring a +10 difficulty.

@allista I'd vote for a multi-use-decoupler for the Space-Crane (unsure if it is already multi-use using KIS/KAS by manually attaching something to the node)

Edited May 10, 2018 by LatiMacciato

[allista]

2 hours ago, LatiMacciato said:

usually I "abuse" any grapple parts as docking port if I have forgot the right size/part .. of course a docking port that has a grapple node part or a grabbler that can dock everywhere could make sense, but messing with game physics and node definitions gives figuring a +10 difficulty.

@allista I'd vote for a multi-use-decoupler for the Space-Crane (unsure if it is already multi-use using KIS/KAS by manually attaching something to the node)

Dunno, we need to test that. But adding a grapple node requires an animation and populates the part menu with several additional buttons. I concur with @DStaal, it's easy enough to just attach the real grapple device to the bottom node if you're planning on using the Space Crane as a tug. Just don't decouple it accidently 

[allista]

Version 1.3.0 for Kerbal Space Program 1.4.3

Released on 2018-05-10

• Added on-demand rendering of spawn transform's forward direction
• Fix for EL 6.0 by LatiMacciato
• Added DIY kit size constraints. Code greatly improved by llinard
• Fixed KitRes display and Remaining Structure Mass calculation.
• Fixed SpaceCrane RCS effects.

 Download 

Edited May 10, 2018 by allista

[Critter79606]

9 hours ago, allista said:

I've just fixed the issue with RCS FX of the Space Crane, thanks.

As for the advanced tweakables and disabling of the staging, I can only say that this is purely stock functionality of the stock ModuleDecouple, so I have no control over this issue. Sorry

Or have you tried it with some other decouplers with different results? If so, there may be something in SpaceCrane's config that could be changed to fix this.

@allista I have other parts, both stock and not that are working correctly.  I've tried a decoupler, and a docking port.  Both work.  Your port is worded different, so I can't tell for sure which it's trying to emulate.  Yours says Jettison staged/not staged, where the others use <port>:Enable/Disable staging.

Left is with the staging enabled, right is not.

 

And thanks for fixing the RCS issue!

Is there anything I can take out of the cfg file to just remove that jettison from the craft?

If you ever get some time to add some parts, I'd like to see a life support/storage piece that would fit over the top of the space crane, but that has a hollow center so it rides low on the top of the craft.  I use mine for transporting crew rotations up and down.  I would then put a small command pod, like the salamander (USI) on top and still keep it looking good.  If I put a tank and pod on it now, it never stays there, it always pops up the the original connection point on a reload.  I would then not ugly it up by attaching life support boxes everywhere.

Thanks!

[allista]

6 hours ago, Critter79606 said:

@allista I have other parts, both stock and not that are working correctly.  I've tried a decoupler, and a docking port.  Both work.  Your port is worded different, so I can't tell for sure which it's trying to emulate.  Yours says Jettison staged/not staged, where the others use <port>:Enable/Disable staging.

Left is with the staging enabled, right is not.

And thanks for fixing the RCS issue!

Is there anything I can take out of the cfg file to just remove that jettison from the craft?

If you ever get some time to add some parts, I'd like to see a life support/storage piece that would fit over the top of the space crane, but that has a hollow center so it rides low on the top of the craft.  I use mine for transporting crew rotations up and down.  I would then put a small command pod, like the salamander (USI) on top and still keep it looking good.  If I put a tank and pod on it now, it never stays there, it always pops up the the original connection point on a reload.  I would then not ugly it up by attaching life support boxes everywhere.

Thanks!

Ok, got it, will investigate the matter more thoroughly. Meanwhile you can remove the MODULE { name=ModuleDecoupler  ... } from the SpaceCrane.cfg to get rid of the button.

As for the tank, I would recommend to use the Toroidal and Spherical Tanks by TAL with Configurable Containers and, say, Tweak Scale; this combination will allow you just the thing you want -- a hollow tank with configurable contents that could be placed atop of the SpaceCrane core without elevating the node much.

The thing is, despite my liking for making parts, I'm much better at programming than at 3D modelling (and especially texturing ); and GC needs a loooot of programming to bring about the next killer feature -- the production of DIY Kits on site + in-orbit construction. And I don't have much time on my hands, so priorities are obvious.

The other reason is that KSP is already bursting with parts and part mods. Adding yet-another-tank-for-something to satisfy mostly aesthetic needs seems a little redundant 

[Critter79606]

11 hours ago, allista said:

Ok, got it, will investigate the matter more thoroughly. Meanwhile you can remove the MODULE { name=ModuleDecoupler  ... } from the SpaceCrane.cfg to get rid of the button.

As for the tank, I would recommend to use the Toroidal and Spherical Tanks by TAL with Configurable Containers and, say, Tweak Scale; this combination will allow you just the thing you want -- a hollow tank with configurable contents that could be placed atop of the SpaceCrane core without elevating the node much.

The thing is, despite my liking for making parts, I'm much better at programming than at 3D modelling (and especially texturing ); and GC needs a loooot of programming to bring about the next killer feature -- the production of DIY Kits on site + in-orbit construction. And I don't have much time on my hands, so priorities are obvious.

The other reason is that KSP is already bursting with parts and part mods. Adding yet-another-tank-for-something to satisfy mostly aesthetic needs seems a little redundant 

I  understand not wanting to create more parts.  I don't even consider making mods because I can't draw a decent stick man!

Thanks for the cfg note.  I'll create a cfg to remove that module tonight so I don't damage yours and I'll check out the TAL mod for the tanks.  They look interesting.

Thanks again!

 

[Critter79606]

@allista Just an FYI, your DIY kit is working properly.  You can enable and disable staging and the icon shows up and disappears.

 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Critter79606

[allista]

6 hours ago, Critter79606 said:

@allista Just an FYI, your DIY kit is working properly.  You can enable and disable staging and the icon shows up and disappears.

Yea... but if you look at their .cfg files you'll see that the ModuleDecouple configs are identical, except for names. So I'm really out of ideas here...

[Critter79606]

5 hours ago, allista said:

Yea... but if you look at their .cfg files you'll see that the ModuleDecouple configs are identical, except for names. So I'm really out of ideas here...

I just added the following, and it fixed it for me.  I can't accidentally eject my stuff as I use a port connection.

@PART[SpaceCrane]:AFTER[GroundConstruction]
{
    -MODULE[ModuleDecouple]{}
}

Edited May 12, 2018 by Critter79606

[allista]

!!! VOTE !!!

Considering the previous discussion, I would like to ask you to answer a single question:

https://goo.gl/forms/sz3SURFK9WUAkVxf2