RoverDude Posted February 15, 2017 Author Share Posted February 15, 2017 Yup, I'd just toss back a PR if/when I get around to making it dynamic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DStaal Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DStaal Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 I also added a PR to allow CLS passability to *some* of the Kontainers - basically just the 'solids' and KIS. This would allow me to build bases using the flat-round Kontainers to hold Life Support, (or other things), which currently I can't do, as it breaks the bases into separate pieces. The theory is that the containers holding solids need some way to enter/exit them so that you can get the stuff held inside out. The fluid-holding containers are more likely connected to piping, so you don't actually get inside. (Though the patch adds the module - defaulting to non-passable - to the 'classic' fluids containers, which I figure are big enough that they might be made with access hatches for cleaning or inspection. Having the module in non-passable configuration means you can switch them in the VAB.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnipius Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 6 hours ago, RoverDude said: Building separate pull/push lists would be more code which means more work and more potential bugs. And given how small nuke storage is, if you have a large amount in PS, it's going to be a very very long time before you can use it all. As noted earlier in the thread, Machinery will be allowed to be transferred via PL. Mostly, I had all of that fuel available for new ship construction... PL doesn't provide a means of completely filling a kontainer for shipment or completely emptying it on delivery the way that LL does. Are you planning to add that manual push-pull function to PL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverDude Posted February 15, 2017 Author Share Posted February 15, 2017 I have no plans to change how PL levels. What you're more likely to see is a larger nuclear fuel container, but manual runs are going to remain as that's a concious design choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parmenio Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, Omnipius said: PL doesn't provide a means of completely filling a kontainer for shipment or completely emptying it on delivery the way that LL does. Are you planning to add that manual push-pull function to PL? You can still completely fill a kontainer from PL if the PL module has a smaller kontainer, such as an ISM, connected to it. That's how I fill/empty my cargo ships on Minmus and Mun....use LL to fill my cargo ship from an ISM attached to a Duna Logistics module...the ISM auto-fills from PL and keeps filling the cargo ship kontainer...reverse for emptying a cargo ship into PL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverDude Posted February 15, 2017 Author Share Posted February 15, 2017 Correct, tho that's a bit different than an explicit UI for it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss8913 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 so one thing I've noticed with MKS installed... hiring Kerbals gives me all the new Kerbal types, but very few pilot/engineer/scientist candidates. I have to hire like.. 50 guys that I don't need to get the 1 that I do. Is there a way to fix this so that it doesn't seem to prefer the new types, or a mod that lets me be more selective in hiring that I'm not aware of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverDude Posted February 15, 2017 Author Share Posted February 15, 2017 Look a few posts up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screaming Candle Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Back from being away for a very long time. And hey, I'm done with my Masters degree! I've been looking back through the pages and consulted the wiki but I haven't figured out the use of geology research. Is that TBD or am I missing something? I understand that the geologists are good at using the sifters, but since the malamute has a geology research and my super sweet geology lander/rover has it on board, I wanted to see what I could accomplish. Incidentally, running the current constellation the geology lab can start habitation but the crew cab can't. That seems either backwards or robbing the crew cab. Awesome mod. hard as hell, but awesome. SC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adgriff2 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I was hoping to use KIS to attach stuff to the node underneath the Akita Bed but it doesn't seem to attach. Other nodes seem fine. Anyone else tried this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caithloki Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 1 minute ago, adgriff2 said: I was hoping to use KIS to attach stuff to the node underneath the Akita Bed but it doesn't seem to attach. Other nodes seem fine. Anyone else tried this? I have also had the same issue, had to scrap building it on planet and use EL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adgriff2 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 2 minutes ago, Caithloki said: I have also had the same issue, had to scrap building it on planet and use EL Unfortunately, i was hoping to stow extra KAS magnets and grapples under there where they would be placed and removed often But thanks anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DStaal Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 1 hour ago, adgriff2 said: I was hoping to use KIS to attach stuff to the node underneath the Akita Bed but it doesn't seem to attach. Other nodes seem fine. Anyone else tried this? It is possible - I just built an Akita using KIS from storage. It's not easy. The problem is that the bed itself has a collider - but the the axle with the nodes doesn't. KIS will snap-attach to a node if you hover over the collider for a part near the node. No collider, no attach. The trick is to change the camera angle: You need the node to be in the foreground, and the bed (or front end, depending on which axle you're attaching to) is directly behind it. Then you can hover over both at the same time. At a more normal angle, you'll miss the collider and KIS will try to place it on the nearest collider behind the part. (Or you'll get the collider, but won't be near the node - so it won't snap to the node.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoverDude Posted February 16, 2017 Author Share Posted February 16, 2017 If someone logs a github issue on the konstruction repo I'll look into adding a secondary collider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyzard Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 4 hours ago, RoverDude said: If someone logs a github issue on the konstruction repo I'll look into adding a secondary collider Done: #43 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perringo Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Hello friends! I have a problem: I have a base with a reactor which needed more power, so I build a new reactor with EL and brought a ship with enriched uranium and attached it to the base with kAS pipes. Now when I perform maintenance with an engineer it transfers the enriched uranium from one reactor to the other, it doesn´t take it from the containers I brought. I wonder if I there was a way to make enriched uranium normally transfereable. Any other possible solution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caithloki Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, Perringo said: Hello friends! I have a problem: I have a base with a reactor which needed more power, so I build a new reactor with EL and brought a ship with enriched uranium and attached it to the base with kAS pipes. Now when I perform maintenance with an engineer it transfers the enriched uranium from one reactor to the other, it doesn´t take it from the containers I brought. I wonder if I there was a way to make enriched uranium normally transfereable. Any other possible solution? Roverdude made it like that so a engineer is required to refuel so there would be a way to remove that requirement, I don't know how to. Can you supply pictures of the setup to help figure out whats going on? You might not need to make them transferable, might just be a build issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perringo Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 I managed to solve it unlinking some tubes and isolating the reactor I wanted to refuel, so there were only the reactor and the container in the ship. The moment there are two reactors, one empty and one filled, it will take the enriched uranium from one to the other and not from the container. Thank you for your interest! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilph Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Hi, been doing some sandbox testing on some new manufacturing bases on a version of MKS before the GC integration (14 I think?). Will get a save and Github issue after I finished. In summary, scavenging/PL transfers seem to slow down manufacturing output when it is in the background/catch up mode. In trying to balance inputs and outputs, I found I am negative in some resources when it is in background, but positive if it's the active vessel. With a 3.75 Tundra refinery and 2.5m storage tanks, I tested these scenarios: 3 bays configured as Chemicals, 4200 Minerals in a tank and empty Chemicals tank, both with warehouse disabled. After 6 hours as active, produced 670 Chemicals, which is correct based on 508% load Same scenario as 1, in background, also produced 670 Chemicals Same scenario, but changed Mineral tank to warehouse enabled with 100,000 Minerals in PL, active vessel: 670 Same scenario as 3, in background: 450 Did the same with Silicon/Silicates, same result. Did Chemicals and Silicon at the same time, same results. The reason why I looked at this is this base has three big refineries and a big assembly. I got to the point of making Refined Exotics, which need a lot of Chemicals. When it is active, I produce RE at full speed and had a +180/day surplus of Chemicals. When it does background/catch up, I lose 220/day of Chemicals. Instead of seeing a nice surplus of Chemicals after a few days, I go to zero. If anyone has similar experiences, please let me know? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
voicey99 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 (edited) Just a thought: will the new TRPalike hiring system break the policies from Strategia that affect Kerbal hiring (namely increased hiring costs in exchange for Kerbals coming pre-XPd and a monthly payment in exchange for reduced hiring costs)? Edited February 16, 2017 by voicey99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnipius Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 11 hours ago, Parmenio said: You can still completely fill a kontainer from PL if the PL module has a smaller kontainer, such as an ISM, connected to it. That's how I fill/empty my cargo ships on Minmus and Mun....use LL to fill my cargo ship from an ISM attached to a Duna Logistics module...the ISM auto-fills from PL and keeps filling the cargo ship kontainer...reverse for emptying a cargo ship into PL. Exactly. I do the same thing. However, with Machinery blacklisted from LL, you have to hard-dock your Machinery kontainer to something with PL and a small warehouse in order to fill it up instead of just landing (or parking) within logistics range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TauPhraim Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 3 hours ago, Gilph said: If anyone has similar experiences, please let me know? Thanks I had similar experiences but with supplies, so I put them on recycler bugs (and they seem more or less solved now). From what you describe, it seems to me the cause is PL being too slow to keep up during catchup. Looking at the code, ModulePlanetaryLogistics has a CheckFrequency of 12 seconds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
voicey99 Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 12 minutes ago, TauPhraim said: Looking at the code, ModulePlanetaryLogistics has a CheckFrequency of 12 seconds. Out of interest, which DLL is that in? I can't find that in KolonyTools which is where PL is handled(?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TauPhraim Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 48 minutes ago, voicey99 said: Out of interest, which DLL is that in? I can't find that in KolonyTools which is where PL is handled(?). I checked a bit quickly, in the MKS repo you have 2 copies of the file: Quote Source/KolonyTools/KolonyTools/PlanetaryLogistics/ModulePlanetaryLogistics.cs Source/KolonyTools/PlanetaryLogistics/ModulePlanetaryLogistics.cs Only the second has the delay used, but the first seems to have changed more recently, so I don't know Actually it reminds me a bit of what happened with recyclers, where it was KSP not calling every module callback immediately, during catchup. Could be something similar here (PL's FixedUpdate not called soon enough). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.