[1.9-1.10] Global Construction

[Brigadier]

4 hours ago, Tonka Crash said:

@Justanotherspacecowboy @Brigadier With imgur just pasting the direct link to the image into the editor window should automatically embed the picture without using Insert Other Media (I didn't realize that button was there).  Youtube and Flickr both have buttons to generate a shareable link that auto embed as well. 

 

 

Cool, I'll give that a try sometime.

[allista]

It's Teaser Time!

 

[linuxgurugamer]

This plus the upcoming DLC is going to make it a whole new game.

[DStaal]

One thing I just had trouble with: I docked a probe to an orbital kit (basically, a small tug) and it immediately lost control.  The probe works fine normally, and operates with the internal antenna of the probe core.  Docked to the orbital kit, it has no connection to Kerbin (from 420km Kerbin orbit), undocked and the probe immediately re-establishes connection.

Edited May 25, 2019 by DStaal

[Tabris]

Just watched the teaser video

 

https://giphy.com/gifs/netflix-jay-explode-l378hQDm0Fd41gb4c

[allista]

13 hours ago, DStaal said:

One thing I just had trouble with: I docked a probe to an orbital kit (basically, a small tug) and it immediately lost control.  The probe works fine normally, and operates with the internal antenna of the probe core.  Docked to the orbital kit, it has no connection to Kerbin (from 420km Kerbin orbit), undocked and the probe immediately re-establishes connection.

Can't think of anything in GC that could have caused this, short of NRE; except that nothing in GC reacts to the docking.

In any case, I'd look at the logs first.

[DStaal]

3 hours ago, allista said:

Can't think of anything in GC that could have caused this, short of NRE; except that nothing in GC reacts to the docking.

In any case, I'd look at the logs first.

You're welcome to take a look: http://magehandbook.com/owncloud/index.php/s/o7dkmHqn2To0CpK

Here's a pic of probe in the same class.  (The pic's old, and of a different probe - but the only design change I've made is to swap to stronger RCS.)

 

[allista]

2 hours ago, DStaal said:

You're welcome to take a look: http://magehandbook.com/owncloud/index.php/s/o7dkmHqn2To0CpK

Here's a pic of probe in the same class.  (The pic's old, and of a different probe - but the only design change I've made is to swap to stronger RCS.)

Oh, there's soooo much exceptions there (~54k), it's a wonder the game runs at all 

I'm not sure which of them are related to your problem, but at least some of them are from TCA, and that just may be it; the good news is that this particular bug was reported recently in TCA thread and the fix will be in the next joint release.

Regardless, your mod list needs a spring cleaning: CommNetConstellation, BeaconCommNet (whatever that is), FlightPlan, IONRCS, ComfortableLanding -- all these couldn't even be loaded.

[DStaal]

The fun thing is that CommNetConstellation, BeaconCommNet (which I think is part of ESLD Jump Beacons) and ComfortableLanding all still *work*, at least last I checked...  (FlightPlan and IONRCS, not so much.)  I should also remove SEP, but I think I'd lose a couple of important rovers...

There's a reason my save-game is called 'Bleeding Edge'.

I'll see if the TCA update helps.

[allista]

Version 2.4.0 for Kerbal Space Program 1.7.0

Released on 2019-05-28

Incremental Station Construction

See the video for details

• Vessels constructed inside Orbital Kit Container can be docked to the main vessel instead of the container when launched.
• Orientation of deployment/spawning can be changed (in 90 degrees steps around Up axis) from the container's part menu and from the workshop UI.
• Added in-editor information window that shows assembly/construction requirements for the current ship, and shows bottom-most attach nodes available for docked construction.
• Deployment hint shows silhouette of the vessel that will be constructed in addition to the size of the deployed container.
• Deployment hint may be shown/hidden per container.
• Added part menu button to add a single part to the container in editor.
• Added warnings that prevent accidental deployment.
• Corrected Vessel/PartKit requirements calculations. Now resources that are not stripped away when a kit is created do not contribute to complexity and construction resource requirements.
• A PartKit costs at least dry-part-cost*0.1.
• Fixed kit resizing on kit creation/deployment in flight.

 Download 

[123nick]

hey, have you thought of adding additional parts? like especially alternatives for the ground assembly line? iirc its the only part with the GroundAssemblyWorkshop or AssemblySpace partmodules, yet its strange shape makes it EXTREMELY unwieldy in putting inline on a space faring vessel. i would not mind if there was alternatives too it. 

[allista]

8 hours ago, 123nick said:

hey, have you thought of adding additional parts? like especially alternatives for the ground assembly line? iirc its the only part with the GroundAssemblyWorkshop or AssemblySpace partmodules, yet its strange shape makes it EXTREMELY unwieldy in putting inline on a space faring vessel. i would not mind if there was alternatives too it. 

Well, it's made as a building and is obviously meant not to be shipped in a rocket, but to be build on-site.

If you're looking to assemble kits in space, there are orbital variants of everything: OrbitalAssemblyLine, OrbitalWorkshop and OrbitalAssemblySpace.

*if you haven't seen it already, there's an explanatory video on orbital construction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpYY00kO2hg

 

Edited June 3, 2019 by allista

[magnevv]

I'm having an issue where after deploying the orbital kit (meaning the phase where it expands, before it's built) it wants to wobble out of control. It kinda looks like it may be trying to rotate 180 degrees. Some details;
I'm using the orbital kit, and my vessel has an orbital workshop on it. The kit is docked to a modded docking port (Nerta's station parts), basically a sr docking port. I have it docked so that the construction part is facing the station. I've checked that the deployment hint does not clip to any part of my ship. I then press deploy in the workshop window, and yes on the warning that comes up. I timewarp and the box expands to max size. I drop out of timewarp and the box starts flipping and makes the base wobble like crazy (but I have unbreakable joins & no crash damage on).

Am I using it wrong somehow?

[allista]

3 hours ago, magnevv said:

I'm having an issue where after deploying the orbital kit (meaning the phase where it expands, before it's built) it wants to wobble out of control. It kinda looks like it may be trying to rotate 180 degrees. Some details;
I'm using the orbital kit, and my vessel has an orbital workshop on it. The kit is docked to a modded docking port (Nerta's station parts), basically a sr docking port. I have it docked so that the construction part is facing the station. I've checked that the deployment hint does not clip to any part of my ship. I then press deploy in the workshop window, and yes on the warning that comes up. I timewarp and the box expands to max size. I drop out of timewarp and the box starts flipping and makes the base wobble like crazy (but I have unbreakable joins & no crash damage on).

Am I using it wrong somehow?

Do you have the Kerbal Joint Reinforcement installed or autostruts on?

[4x4cheesecake]

@allista I've just noticed that the bundled version of AT_Utils contains a "UnityEngine.dll" and "UnityEngine.UI.dll", that doesn't seem to be correct. Also, if you download AT_Utils directly from the repository, it contains an additional "SubmodelReziser.dll" which is not included in the bundled version of Global Construction. Regarding the .version file, both AT_Utils are version 1.8.0.0.

[allista]

16 hours ago, 4x4cheesecake said:

@allista I've just noticed that the bundled version of AT_Utils contains a "UnityEngine.dll" and "UnityEngine.UI.dll", that doesn't seem to be correct. Also, if you download AT_Utils directly from the repository, it contains an additional "SubmodelReziser.dll" which is not included in the bundled version of Global Construction. Regarding the .version file, both AT_Utils are version 1.8.0.0.

Yep, my fault, UnityEngine dlls were accidentally included due to the "Local Copy" flag that is on by default for referenced assemblies. I've already removed them from the archive on github (and thus from CKAN installations), but it still exists in bundled versions on spacedock. You may remove it safely.

SubmodelResizer.dll is part of full AT_Utils, but it's not included in bundles since it's not used by my mods, but is made by request for another mod.

UPD: to clarify; AT_Utils consists of several mostly independent assemblies, which only get bundled in a mod if required. So you may also notice the absence of other dlls compared to the full version.

Edited June 9, 2019 by allista

[4x4cheesecake]

8 minutes ago, allista said:

SubmodelResizer.dll is part of full AT_Utils, but it's not included in bundles since it's not used by my mods, but is made by request for another mod.

UPD: to clarify; AT_Utils consists of several mostly independent assemblies, which only get bundled in a mod if required. So you may also notice the absence of other dlls compared to the full version.

Ok, so that's nothing to worry about in this case.

Thank you  

 

[ZEROX]

hey there quick question how can i create ablator for the heat shields? none of the isru can do it

 

[allista]

32 minutes ago, ZEROX said:

hey there quick question how can i create ablator for the heat shields? none of the isru can do it

Well, Ablator is kept in a kit if the kit is assembled at Kerbin. But when you assemble a kit elsewhere, all the resources are stripped indiscriminately. And indeed there's no converter that can produce it. But even if there was one, you won't be able to transfer it because of its config (made by Squad).

So as it is now, some things you can only produce on and bring from Kerbin. Ablative shields, counterintuitively, are among them.

What I can do is to add some exceptions to stripping resources in the latter case; judging that these are not resources per se. I would need help in identifying such cases, though.

Everyone: what non-producible non-transferable resources should be produced from SpecializedParts during assembly?

[DStaal]

Ablator is the only one I can think of for sure off the top of my head.  The Orion mod has a couple that are hard to transport as well, that would be nice to be able to build in place - but they really shoudn't be created from SpecializedParts.  (Though AblativeOil could be.)

Is this something that could be read from a config?  Then a mod could support GC by adding a config if a specific resource needed to be built in-place.  Another thought would be to allow non-transferable resources to be transferred at buildout or kit creation, which could allow other mods to allow you to build something with non-transferable resources.  (Though your build station could get big.)

[allista]

1 minute ago, DStaal said:

Ablator is the only one I can think of for sure off the top of my head.  The Orion mod has a couple that are hard to transport as well, that would be nice to be able to build in place - but they really shoudn't be created from SpecializedParts.  (Though AblativeOil could be.)

Is this something that could be read from a config?  Then a mod could support GC by adding a config if a specific resource needed to be built in-place.  Another thought would be to allow non-transferable resources to be transferred at buildout or kit creation, which could allow other mods to allow you to build something with non-transferable resources.  (Though your build station could get big.)

We'll never know what's actually hidden in a container with SpecializedParts 

Yep, like with resources that are kept in a kit on Kerbin, this would be a proper .cfg file that is subject to MM patches as any other.

I can transfer non-transferable resources using my transfer window; but there would still be a problem of producing them. In other words, I like the patchable config better.

[DStaal]

15 minutes ago, allista said:

We'll never know what's actually hidden in a container with SpecializedParts 

Yep, like with resources that are kept in a kit on Kerbin, this would be a proper .cfg file that is subject to MM patches as any other.

I can transfer non-transferable resources using my transfer window; but there would still be a problem of producing them. In other words, I like the patchable config better.

The question is how do you build the SpecializedParts?   The one I'm thinking of in the Orion mod is the pulse units - which should be made using EnrichedUranium.  If you can just build SpecializedParts and then use them to build anything, some oddball resources which will need to be installed become either blockers or exploits.  Of course, they'll be very oddball and it wouldn't be much of an exploit...

(Why I had the thought on transferring non-transferable resources: It means you could have a part in a mod that's a specialized facility which produces these resources, and GC could transfer them.)

[allista]

2 hours ago, DStaal said:

The question is how do you build the SpecializedParts?   The one I'm thinking of in the Orion mod is the pulse units - which should be made using EnrichedUranium.  If you can just build SpecializedParts and then use them to build anything, some oddball resources which will need to be installed become either blockers or exploits.  Of course, they'll be very oddball and it wouldn't be much of an exploit...

(Why I had the thought on transferring non-transferable resources: It means you could have a part in a mod that's a specialized facility which produces these resources, and GC could transfer them.)

Maybe implement both then? I don't actually want to make dedicated ablator synthesiser, even if by patching isru.

As for the exploits, GC as it is already provides ample possibilities. Fair game is a choice.

[DStaal]

Point.  I wasn't really thinking ablator needed a synthesizer - but PulseUnits and AblativeOil it might be a good idea.  Of course, then I'd have to talk RoverDude into adding them into the mod...  (But I could patch something in.)

Both do make sense to me, in different contexts.

[allista]

36 minutes ago, DStaal said:

Point.  I wasn't really thinking ablator needed a synthesizer - but PulseUnits and AblativeOil it might be a good idea.  Of course, then I'd have to talk RoverDude into adding them into the mod...  (But I could patch something in.)

Both do make sense to me, in different contexts.

Looking at the code right now...

It seems that it never respected nontransferability in the first place, so it should be able to transfer anything that is present in the constructing vessel and for which there's space in the construct.

Yay!