[1.8.x] Kerbal Foundries -- Continued - Tracks, Wheels, and Gear

[CyanideRabbit]

It might be helpful to mention in the OP that TU is bundled and requires DX11 or OpenGL. Some people are probably downloading and trying to use this mod without realising that they need to activate that or not understanding how and then complaining.

Don't be demotivated by the negative comments. Everything looks great.

[oniontrain]

On 4/18/2019 at 2:01 PM, Shadowmage said:

...  Had I known in advance there was such widespread hate for PBR textures and modern shaders... I never would have started the model rework project.  At this point it would actually be faster to just revert the entire mod to the pre-PBR updates, and deal with the existing model issues -- which is likely what is going to happen for future updates.

I for one like them!

[Daniel Prates]

21 hours ago, CyanideRabbit said:

This mod is great, the shiny textures are amazing. I'm having fun with the tracks.

  Hide contents

https://imgur.com/a/YNc4hcv

 

Wait ... did you get it to work fine with ksp 1.7?

[CyanideRabbit]

1 hour ago, Daniel Prates said:

Wait ... did you get it to work fine with ksp 1.7?

I don't understand what you mean? Is it not supposed to work with 1.7?

It seems to work fine. The latest versions of both dependencies (KSPWheel, TexturesUnlimited) are bundled with the mod as well as the latest version of ModuleManager. Just drop everything into your GameData folder. You also need to enable DX11 or OpenGL for TexturesUnlimited. An easy way to do that if you're using CKAN is right click on Settings and select KSP command-line then add '-force-d3d11' or '-force-glcore'. Mine looks like this 'KSP_x64.exe -single-instance -force-d3d11'.

EDIT: Actually I just took another look at the version files. The latest version of KSPWheel is 15.13.32, the version of KSPWheel bundled with KerbalFoundries is 14.12.31. You can download the latest version here https://github.com/shadowmage45/KSPWheel/releases/tag/15.13.32. Try using that.

Edited April 30, 2019 by CyanideRabbit

[Daniel Prates]

23 hours ago, CyanideRabbit said:

I don't understand what you mean? Is it not supposed to work with 1.7?

 

Well if it was or wasn't, I don't know. I sure am weary of all mods that have fallen behind regarding game version. 

Well, that is good to know! Great, i'll install it. Tks. 

[Stone Blue]

33 minutes ago, Daniel Prates said:

I sure am weary of all mods that have fallen behind regarding game version.

Idk... most everything listed for 1.4.5 and later that hasnt been recently tagged for 1.7.0, seems to work decently in 1.7.0.. Especially part mods...
IMHO, 1.5.1, 1.6.1 and 1.7.0 have been pretty smooth updates for KSP, and havent seemed to break too many mods.

[Daniel Prates]

2 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

Idk... most everything listed for 1.4.5 and later that hasnt been recently tagged for 1.7.0, seems to work decently in 1.7.0.. Especially part mods...
IMHO, 1.5.1, 1.6.1 and 1.7.0 have been pretty smooth updates for KSP, and havent seemed to break too many mods.

Yeah, I think I was being too pessimistic about that. Just installed kerbal foundries and it works like a charm. I was stuck to my 1.4.5 heavily modded game for fear of going foward, because oh man, every time the game was updated it was a pain to get everything else back online again. Decided just the other day to try to resume it with 1.7 and, surprise, not only the community quickly updated most mods, also the ones left 2 or 3 versions without updates (like foundries) did not suffer a bit. 

[MaeharaProjekt]

On 4/18/2019 at 11:46 AM, Shadowmage said:

No worries; its a recent addition for the KSP 1.6+ 'testing' versions of Kerbal Foundries.  Actually still undecided if it will be a permanent dependency -- the reception of the PBR textures has generally been 'disliked', so it might be removed in the near future.

I LOVE the PBR textures. If they were waffles, I'd eat them without drizzling maple syrup over them.

[zer0Kerbal]

On 4/18/2019 at 6:46 PM, Shadowmage said:

No worries; its a recent addition for the KSP 1.6+ 'testing' versions of Kerbal Foundries.  Actually still undecided if it will be a permanent dependency -- the reception of the PBR textures has generally been 'disliked', so it might be removed in the near future.

once I replace my decade old notebook I might be capable of running visual mods - would love to have it as an optional enhancement to a already great mod.

[MaeharaProjekt]

@Shadowmage - Halloo! I've been perusing your KF and KSPW wiki's on GitHub. I may be completely blind, but I have not been able to find any information about EC use by the standard and surface-mount repulsors. I also looked inside KF-RepulsorStandard,cfg and KF-RepulsorSurface,cfg for values that would indicate how many EC units are used over time, but I did not find anything. I find myself with a few questions.

What are the EC requirements for the repulsors?

Does the rate of EC use depend on the current load on the repulsors?

Does the value for "maxLoadRating" refer to the fully-loaded mass of the vehicle or something else? Does each repulsor part handle a portion of the load, so that 4 repulsors would allow me to float a vehicle of 20 tons or less?

Thank you for your time!

[zer0Kerbal]

6 minutes ago, MaeharaProjekt said:

@Shadowmage - Halloo! I've been perusing your KF and KSPW wiki's on GitHub. I may be completely blind, but I have not been able to find any information about EC use by the standard and surface-mount repulsors. I also looked inside KF-RepulsorStandard,cfg and KF-RepulsorSurface,cfg for values that would indicate how many EC units are used over time, but I did not find anything. I find myself with a few questions.

What are the EC requirements for the repulsors?

Does the rate of EC use depend on the current load on the repulsors?

Does the value for "maxLoadRating" refer to the fully-loaded mass of the vehicle or something else? Does each repulsor part handle a portion of the load, so that 4 repulsors would allow me to float a vehicle of 20 tons or less?

Thank you for your time!

can you poke your nose into the part.cfg and see maybe?

[MaeharaProjekt]

7 minutes ago, zer0Kerbal said:

can you poke your nose into the part.cfg and see maybe?

As stated previously, the only cfg's I could find are KF-RepulsorStandard.cfg and KF-RepulsorSurface.cfg.

Using KF-RepulsorStandard.cfg as the example, there is nothing that seems to resemble EC usage.

Spoiler

PART
{
name = KF-RepulsorStandard
module = Part
author = Lo-Fi + Justin Kerbice & Darren9 (texturing), Gaalidas (TweakScale configs), Shadowmage (updated textures)

MODEL
{
	model = KerbalFoundries/Assets/KF-RepulsorStandard
}
rescaleFactor = 1

node_stack_001 = 1.07125, -0.0475, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1
node_attach = 1.07125, -0.0475, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0

TechRequired = advancedMotors
entryCost = 90000
cost = 10000
category = Ground
subcategory = 0
title = KF Anti Gravity Engine
manufacturer = Kerbal Foundries
description = "Low velocity anti-lithbraking devices". Gene Kerman just calls them repulsors.  Gimbal, steering, propulsion, and brakes not included.

attachRules = 1,1,0,1,1

mass = 0.25
dragModelType = default
maximum_drag = 0.3
minimum_drag = 0.2
angularDrag = 1
maxTemp = 1200 

crashTolerance = 1200
breakingForce = 1200
breakingTorque = 1200

EFFECTS
{
	RepulsorEffect
	{
		AUDIO
		{
			channel = Ship
			clip = KerbalFoundries/Sounds/repulsor2
			volume = 0.0 0.0
			volume = 0.1 0.3
			volume = 1.0 1.0
			pitch = 1.0 1.0
			loop = true
		}
	}
}

MODULE
{
	name = KSPWheelBase
	wheelColliderName = WC01
	wheelColliderOffset = 0.2
	wheelRadius = 0.40
	wheelMass = 0.1
	suspensionTravel = 3.5
	suspensionTarget = 0.25
	frictionMult = 0
	rollingResistance = 0
	maxSpeed = 1000
	maxLoadRating = 5
	dampRatio = 0.65
	springRating = 1
}
MODULE
{
	name = KSPWheelRepulsor
	//for custom particle effects
	repulsorEffectTransform = Gimbal
	//actual gimbal functionality unused
	gimbalName = Gimbal
	gimbaled = false
	//for repulsor sound effects
	repulsorSoundEffect = RepulsorEffect
}
MODULE
{
	name = KSPWheelDustEffects
}
}

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by MaeharaProjekt

[Shadowmage]

1 hour ago, MaeharaProjekt said:

What are the EC requirements for the repulsors?

https://github.com/shadowmage45/KSPWheel/blob/master/VSProject/KSPWheel/PartModules/KSPWheelRepulsor.cs#L30

That is the value that is multiplied by the supported mass (or actually the instantaneous output value of the combined spring+damper calculations).  It -is- a config value, though I might not have specified it in the current part configs.

The actual calculations using that field/value are done here:

https://github.com/shadowmage45/KSPWheel/blob/master/VSProject/KSPWheel/PartModules/KSPWheelRepulsor.cs#L272-L284

 

1 hour ago, MaeharaProjekt said:

Does the rate of EC use depend on the current load on the repulsors?

Yes.

1 hour ago, MaeharaProjekt said:

Does the value for "maxLoadRating" refer to the fully-loaded mass of the vehicle or something else?

That value is not used for repulsors, as they do not have any 'damage' module in the part config.

 

1 hour ago, MaeharaProjekt said:

Does each repulsor part handle a portion of the load, so that 4 repulsors would allow me to float a vehicle of 20 tons or less?

See the previous answer.  Additionally, the way KSPWheel functions regarding automatic suspension 'spring' value calculation, each repulsor should be able to support the full craft weight at roughly 50% compression.  More replulsors will reduce the compression amount; extreme numbers of wheels/repulsors will mandate that the 'spring' value is reduced on each one so that there is at least some compression / reduce jitter.

[MaeharaProjekt]

13 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

https://github.com/shadowmage45/KSPWheel/blob/master/VSProject/KSPWheel/PartModules/KSPWheelRepulsor.cs#L30

That is the value that is multiplied by the supported mass (or actually the instantaneous output value of the combined spring+damper calculations).  It -is- a config value, though I might not have specified it in the current part configs.

The actual calculations using that field/value are done here:

https://github.com/shadowmage45/KSPWheel/blob/master/VSProject/KSPWheel/PartModules/KSPWheelRepulsor.cs#L272-L284

 

Yes.

That value is not used for repulsors, as they do not have any 'damage' module in the part config.

 

See the previous answer.  Additionally, the way KSPWheel functions regarding automatic suspension 'spring' value calculation, each repulsor should be able to support the full craft weight at roughly 50% compression.  More replulsors will reduce the compression amount; extreme numbers of wheels/repulsors will mandate that the 'spring' value is reduced on each one so that there is at least some compression / reduce jitter.

Thank you very much. This is very helpful!

[kcs123]

When some parts have missing missing BulkheadProfiles info in part config files it can create issues with part filter in SPH/VAB.
I have used this MM patch, to fix issue and detect parts with missing info:

// Gambiarra para sobreviver ao bug do VAB/SPH no CategoryFilter.
// https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/181078-vab-category-fail/#comment-3517556
@PART[*]:HAS[~bulkheadProfiles[]]
{
	bulkheadProfiles = srf, missingBulkheadProfiles
}

This fix issue with missing info and at the same time allow easier search trough MM cache to find culprit parts with keyword "missingBulkheadProfiles".
On my KSP install, I have found few parts from USI/MKS mod and several others from Kerbal Foundries mod. I think that all parts from Kerbal Foundries miss info about bulkheadProfiles.

[kcs123]

I created false bug reports about landing legs in IR Next thread. Those legs are actualy from this mod:

Just to let you know, about this, take your time to fix this when you work on mod next time.

[Shadowmage]

3 hours ago, kcs123 said:

I created false bug reports about landing legs in IR Next thread. Those legs are actualy from this mod:

Just to let you know, about this, take your time to fix this when you work on mod next time.

Are you using the latest version of the mod (the one with TU bundled and new PBR textures)?  (doesn't look like it from your screenshots)

Likely the issue is already fixed, as I know that I cleaned up the animation issue that you mention in the updated models.

On 5/28/2019 at 10:28 AM, kcs123 said:

When some parts have missing missing BulkheadProfiles info in part config files it can create issues with part filter in SPH/VAB.
I have used this MM patch, to fix issue and detect parts with missing info:

// Gambiarra para sobreviver ao bug do VAB/SPH no CategoryFilter.
// https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/181078-vab-category-fail/#comment-3517556
@PART[*]:HAS[~bulkheadProfiles[]]
{
	bulkheadProfiles = srf, missingBulkheadProfiles
}

This fix issue with missing info and at the same time allow easier search trough MM cache to find culprit parts with keyword "missingBulkheadProfiles".
On my KSP install, I have found few parts from USI/MKS mod and several others from Kerbal Foundries mod. I think that all parts from Kerbal Foundries miss info about bulkheadProfiles.

I personally don't use the bulkead profiles or in-game search features (likely because I predate both of them; they didn't exist when I learned to play, so I learned how to play without them), so have little motivation to make any changes.

However, for the sake of completeness, I have no issue if they were to be added to the parts.  Feel free to open up either an issue ticket or PR on the subject (whichever is more appropriate to your Git understanding), and I will certainly investigate for the next update (which will likely be this weekend, or at least in the next week or 2).

[kcs123]

28 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Are you using the latest version of the mod (the one with TU bundled and new PBR textures)?  (doesn't look like it from your screenshots)

Likely the issue is already fixed, as I know that I cleaned up the animation issue that you mention in the updated models.

Installed it trough CKAN, it say that installed version is 2.2.6.16. I missed info that newer version is aleready available. It issue that I have to report on CKAN staff. Sorry for bothering you with that. I'm still in progress in collection of my favorite mods and pursuing encountered issues and fixes for it.

34 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

I personally don't use the bulkead profiles or in-game search features (likely because I predate both of them; they didn't exist when I learned to play, so I learned how to play without them), so have little motivation to make any changes.

I'm one of the oldtimers too, didn't have too much issues with it, but I was have encountered bug with not having visible parts in SPH/VAB that I know that I have unlocked trough career mode. I have probably clicked on one of new icons, just to see what is new in latest KSP release. Then tried to figure out what is going on and found this MM patch to solve issues. Just yesterday I was searching trough log files and found what mod have missing info for bulkhead profiles.

Don't have github account, so sorry for not being able to create issue or PR. Already have plenty of accounts on various sites that I have keep track for them, for both personal and regular job usage. If you can recall about issue when you are going to work on mod, good, if you forgot, no big deal, workaround MM patch is available and does job well enough for now.

Thanks for clarification.

[Daniel Prates]

This mod for sure has the best landing gears all around.

[linuxgurugamer]

@Starwaster

I just became aware of your stock patches here :https://github.com/shadowmage45/KerbalFoundries2/tree/master/KerbalFoundries-Patches/Stock

from a comment made in another thread.  If you like, I could write up a PatchManager config to make these accessible without requiring the user to do an external download/install.

Let me know, I can do it and submit a PR when done, if you like

[Shadowmage]

19 hours ago, kcs123 said:

Installed it trough CKAN, it say that installed version is 2.2.6.16. I missed info that newer version is aleready available. It issue that I have to report on CKAN staff. Sorry for bothering you with that. I'm still in progress in collection of my favorite mods and pursuing encountered issues and fixes for it.

I'm one of the oldtimers too, didn't have too much issues with it, but I was have encountered bug with not having visible parts in SPH/VAB that I know that I have unlocked trough career mode. I have probably clicked on one of new icons, just to see what is new in latest KSP release. Then tried to figure out what is going on and found this MM patch to solve issues. Just yesterday I was searching trough log files and found what mod have missing info for bulkhead profiles.

Don't have github account, so sorry for not being able to create issue or PR. Already have plenty of accounts on various sites that I have keep track for them, for both personal and regular job usage. If you can recall about issue when you are going to work on mod, good, if you forgot, no big deal, workaround MM patch is available and does job well enough for now.

Thanks for clarification.

No worries, fully understand.  I've opened an issue ticket myself on the subject so that it doesn't get forgotten about (really, that is why I use GitHub issues -- only way to keep it all sorted) -- https://github.com/shadowmage45/KerbalFoundries2/issues/44

 

 

4 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

@Starwaster

I just became aware of your stock patches here :https://github.com/shadowmage45/KerbalFoundries2/tree/master/KerbalFoundries-Patches/Stock

from a comment made in another thread.  If you like, I could write up a PatchManager config to make these accessible without requiring the user to do an external download/install.

Let me know, I can do it and submit a PR when done, if you like

Before I would feel comfortable with publishing those patches -- they would first have to be supported.  I bashed those configs together as a personal 'test' mostly to make sure the plugin would work for stock parts.  They have received no balance updates or any sort of maintenance since they were initially put together.  Which is why I've left them just hanging out in the repo, with no official releases or packages, and the only way to get them is by manual download.

I may take you up on the offer in the future though -- there have been multiple requests for fixes for the stock wheels, and I feel kind of bad for having that fix just laying around but going unused.  Would need some time to sit down and thoroughly review the configs though, make sure the balance is all where it needs to be and that it all actually works.

[linuxgurugamer]

22 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Before I would feel comfortable with publishing those patches -- they would first have to be supported.  I bashed those configs together as a personal 'test' mostly to make sure the plugin would work for stock parts.  They have received no balance updates or any sort of maintenance since they were initially put together.  Which is why I've left them just hanging out in the repo, with no official releases or packages, and the only way to get them is by manual download.

I may take you up on the offer in the future though -- there have been multiple requests for fixes for the stock wheels, and I feel kind of bad for having that fix just laying around but going unused.  Would need some time to sit down and thoroughly review the configs though, make sure the balance is all where it needs to be and that it all actually works.

Ok.  Would be nice to have them, but I do understand about support.

Let me know when you are ready

[kcs123]

21 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Likely the issue is already fixed, as I know that I cleaned up the animation issue that you mention in the updated models.

Checked it again with latest available pre-release (CKAN does not pick up pre-releases, so that is one of reasons why I have missed it).
Indeed, animation is fixed and works nice. However, legs clipping into ground on runway and mirror symmetry bug in SPH are still present.
Also, by default, spring and dumper values might be set higher. Very light craft compress springs a bit too much for (by visal mesh apeal of legs) strong landing legs like those.

[qwertyza]

Hey, folks is there any way to remove the dark icons in VAB/SPH, tweak a config for instance? I already found that it's the textures mod causing the problem. The mod is cool, and I appreciate the work, but that dependency messes with other parts of the game, and this particular one is especially annoying (I have a dark screen)

[Shadowmage]

6 minutes ago, qwertyza said:

Hey, folks is there any way to remove the dark icons in VAB/SPH, tweak a config for instance? I already found that it's the textures mod causing the problem. The mod is cool, and I appreciate the work, but that dependency messes with other parts of the game, and this particular one is especially annoying (I have a dark screen)

Uninstall the mod.  No more dark icons!

(or roll back to a previous version).

(yes, I'm sick of people complaining about all of the hard-work I put into it; which is why I'm likely moving on from KSP in the very near future)