stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 So we can't set an explicit location for it to explode from? Just the basic attach node locations? That's unfortunate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUAV8R Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 So we can't set an explicit location for it to explode from? Just the basic attach node locations? That's unfortunate. A wild idea appears!What if the attach node for the fairings and the RD-58m base were actually up in the air similar to KW Rocketry fairings? Then, you could set the attach node as the explosion point and it will explode from the top as you wanted right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackheart612 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) So we can't set an explicit location for it to explode from? Just the basic attach node locations? That's unfortunate. Well, you certainly CAN'T set an explicit location for it to explode from but you CAN set an explicit location for the node_stack_bottom/top and just add node_stack_attach to the other, that way you can add the explosive node anywhere the node_stack_bottom/top is.Cheers.Edit: I think we had the same idea. lol 3 minutes late! Edited March 3, 2014 by blackheart612 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUAV8R Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Edit: I think we had the same idea. lol 3 minutes late!Hahaha lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Yeah I don't know, I guess I'm just stupid or something, heh. I can't get this working at all.Here's the config:PART{// GENERAL PARAMETERS name = HA3SLPayloadFairingmodule = Partauthor = stubbles// ASSET PARAMETERS mesh = model.mu// NODE DEFINITIONS node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0node_stack_top = 1.22, 3.9, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0// FX DEFINITIONSfx_gasBurst_white = 1.22, 3.9, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, activatesound_vent_small = activate// EDITOR PARAMETERScost = 75category = Aerosubcategory = 0title = 2m Payload Fairingmanufacturer = Horizon Aeronauticsdescription = Pop the top and let it rock. Attaches to 3SL stage 3 fuel tank// ATTACHMENT RULES: STACK, SrfATTACH, ALLOW STACK, ALLOW SrfATTACH, ALLOW COLLISIONattachRules = 1,0,1,1,0stackSymmetry = 1// PART PARAMETERSmass = 0.25dragModelType = defaultmaximum_drag = 0.05minimum_drag = 0.05angularDrag = 0.25crashTolerance = 30maxTemp = 3200stageOffset = 1childStageOffset = 1stagingIcon = DECOUPLER_HORMODULE{ name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler anchorName = ejectionForce = 250 explosiveNodeID = top}}This is what it looks like in the VAB:When I try to stage it, the smoke puff goes off and it does absolutely nothing. It just sits there on top of the damn stage. >_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMrBond Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 The "anchorName = " argument is blank in the [ModuleAnchoredDecoupler], shouldn't that have something in it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Yes, because you're decoupling the top node, but it's attached by the bottom one. You also need to move your payload base nodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUAV8R Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Yes, because you're decoupling the top node, but it's attached by the bottom one. You also need to move your payload base nodes.Yeah, if you move the RD-58m's nodes up to the towards the top of the fairings and get the fairings to connect to those then it should work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Yeah, no idea, still doesn't work. Screw it, I'm livid and I'm done with it. I'm just going to make it generic BS and fall right off the sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMrBond Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I think you might need to use ModuleDecouple instead of ModuleAnchoredDecouplerI think ModuleAnchoredDecoupler is looking for a model part (the anchor) which remains behind when the decoupler is fired, and since the fairing model doesn't have this, the whole thing is remaining attachedI'm going to bash out a couple of rapid test parts and see if I can confirm though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Module decoupler DOES work now, at least. But the fairings fire upwards and then out - how can I get them to fire to the side? Since these are based on an attach now, can I not orient the blast direction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyHook Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I may have discovered something. Look at the config file for the KW rocketry fairing:MODULE{ name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler anchorName = anchor ejectionForce = -300 explosiveNodeID = bottom}Notice two values in particular: Ejection force (which is negative) and explosive nodeID. Ejection force seems to be a way for you to determine both force AND direction.explosive nodeID may be a way to determine ejection force origin. Try that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMrBond Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) ok, so I think I might have it (although, gird your eyes, ugly proto-parts)Javascript is disabled. View full albumMODULE{ name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler ejectionForce = 45 explosiveNodeID = bottom}just dropping the "anchorName =" out made it work (ModuleDecoupler just shot them straight up, couldn't work out how to change that). No transforms in Unity or anything like that, it works solely off the node_stack_xxx arguments in the .cfg, so the [ explosiveNodeID = bottom] points explicitly to the [node_stack_bottom] Edited March 3, 2014 by NoMrBond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 That works well enough, Bond. Thanks soo much for helping out (and everyone else as well)! Was a long, frustrating day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boamere Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Phew glad you got that one sorted out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Phew glad you got that one sorted out Likewise! Hah. I got feedback yesterday, made tons of changes and sent out new builds to the testers. Waiting on the next round of feedback now. Hopefully it's just small stuff that I can fix quickly and get an initial release out today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boamere Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Today? I guess it's earlier for you then, almost 10 O' clock now (normally would stay up late, but got school tomorrow such is the way of life )Well good luck with your initial release, it looks awesome, probably get it tomorrow when I get back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) I guess it's earlier for you thenYeah I'm west coast, USA. It's only 2:45pm (14:45 to you) right now. Still waiting on some more feedback, doing some final testing and config tuning!On another note, does anyone know WHY on earth a saved ship does not update when you update a config or mesh? Like I have a 3SL vehicle saved out for loading, but if I change say, a fuel level in a tank, it doesn't update the saved ship. That's ludicrous. I have to rebuild the entire vessel every time I change something :| Edited March 3, 2014 by stubbles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 Getting ready to release here in about 30min. I want to thank NoMrBond, SkyHook and SippyFrog for donating their time help playtest the parts before release. With their help, we identified a number of issues and mod compatibility problems. Here's a shot in the meantime. Ignore the crappy looking payload, it was a test for top-heavy/uneven loads, to see if FAR misbehaved (it didn't ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackheart612 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 *drum roll for 30 mins* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boamere Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Wooooooow That looks awesome! I can't wait to get home now! Also very glad FAR didn't mess up! You and daemora are making what seems to be the best looking rocket add-ons I've seen in a long while! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 Thanks Boamere, glad you like the visuals so far I've hit a last minute snafu with electric charge consumption being vamped by something. Hopefully won't take much longer to fix here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proot Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Best flames, ever.You're an artist plus than a modder.And you are an amazing modder. So please, extend your hands... I have a nice-pink-happy chainshaw over here for ppl like you... Btw... that emissive glow... so sexy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 Thank you, Proot! : )I just solved the power problem btw. I'm packaging the parts up for release right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stubbles Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 OP has been updated with the download link. Please let me know if you guys have issues! Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now