[1.8.1-1.12.x] Modular Launch Pads v2.7.0: Launch clamps evolved: Real-style launch bases and towers [04 July 2024]

[AlphaMensae]

Some odds'n'ends posted to the AlphaDev branch:

Separate versions of the Centaur Umbilical Arms, titled Short and Tall:

They can both surface attach and node attach to the top plates of the general towers, or....whatever   The short one still has the angled umbilicals, so if the two are used together, it will be to moved to the side.

Another Launch Plate, this one for the new N1 coming in TantaresLV (still a WIP, but is available now on the TantaresLV GitHub repo):

Yes, the remade N1 is BIG, as it's now proper scale.  

The N1 tower will come much later, after the Saturn and Shuttle pad remake.  The plate I could do now rather quickly, and may keep it for the N1 set, though it may get a color change.

I'm now working on a simple launch plate for the TantaresLV Energia, as an interim base until I can get around to the full Energia-Buran pad set. It's also laying the groundwork for the unique exhaust holes needed for Energia.  

[OrbitalManeuvers]

The Mercury-Redstone elevator ... is it easy to explain why an EVA kerbal can make it go up but not down? I seem to remember this is a KSP limitation?

[AlphaMensae]

1 hour ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

The Mercury-Redstone elevator ... is it easy to explain why an EVA kerbal can make it go up but not down? I seem to remember this is a KSP limitation?

Yes, it's a KSP limitation.  You only get one activation on EVA.

[AlphaMensae]

The interim Eneriga Launch Plate is done and now on the AlphaDev branch of the GitHub.

I had thought that the Zenits were symmetrical about the core along both the X and Z axes, but it turns out they actually are offset a bit on the X-axis.

I made the openings big enough to accomodate both arrangements, for Energia-style rockets.

I have no idea how the Energia was held down, so I'll leave hold-down placement to the users.  

 

[Starseeker]

...huh, well, I made a new install, and ended up copying all my mods over to it - and haven't had the broken-dV-readout issue yet. I think perhaps something may have been broken elsewhere in the install; in that case, I'll copy my saves folder elsewhere, then overwrite my main install with this one.
No idea what actually happened, but hopefully that fixes it.

EDIT: Well, the bug's back. Time to go hunting again.

Edited August 4, 2020 by Alex33212

[OrbitalManeuvers]

23 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:

You only get one activation on EVA.

Is it possible to make the elevator just a toggle that moves it to the other position? Or does it require to have two distinct states?

[AlphaMensae]

1 hour ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

Is it possible to make the elevator just a toggle that moves it to the other position? Or does it require to have two distinct states?

There is a single-button Toggle function in the PAW.

17 hours ago, Alex33212 said:

...huh, well, I made a new install, and ended up copying all my mods over to it - and haven't had the broken-dV-readout issue yet. I think perhaps something may have been broken elsewhere in the install; in that case, I'll copy my saves folder elsewhere, then overwrite my main install with this one.
No idea what actually happened, but hopefully that fixes it.

EDIT: Well, the bug's back. Time to go hunting again.

I suggest removing all mods except Modular Launch Pads. If everything is fine, then the problem is with some other mod or combination of mods. Even something like an improperly written MM patch or patches can create havoc.

[Starseeker]

20 minutes ago, AlphaMensae said:

I suggest removing all mods except Modular Launch Pads. If everything is fine, then the problem is with some other mod or combination of mods. Even something like an improperly written MM patch or patches can create havoc.

I'd started with that, and was adding in mods in small batches at a time, and hadn't encountered the problem. After adding around half my mods (and almost all of them that could conceivably be affecting the deltaV calculation code), I decided to add them all and work backwards, removing mods instead of adding them.

Regardless, I found that the Basic Delta V mod by DMagic completely negates the issue, and since it's not a problem with this mod specifically, I think I'd call things good there.
(Also, quite strange how the issue didn't occur until after a while of playing with all my mods, rather than right away)

[pTrevTrevs]

Reached a point in my current career game where I plan to start flying Shuttle hardware and capsules/ELVs concurrently, so I'm working on getting that STS/Saturn hodgepodge vibe for rockets launching from LC-39.

[CAPFlyer]

Alpha, any interest in maybe at some point doing Sounding Rocket-type launch stands?

https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/425308758533751466/

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/wallops/news/EVE.html

https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/questions-and-answers/10-ton-sounding-rocket-center-gravity-shown-c-g1-mounted-launcher-whose-weight-50-tons-cen-q19250636

Having the ability to rotate and angle the launcher in-game would be awesome, but just having it where you can set the angles in the VAB would be just fine either via the "deploy" slider like you've done, or manual rotation.

 

[AlphaMensae]

I actually am now working on some simple-type launch rails. These will work like a regular launch clamp, i.e. will be able to angle a rocket and the rail will rotatte properly.  The rail part will be mostly cosmetic, but I will see if giving it a collider causes any problems with a launch.

In the future, I will experiment with fancier launch rails, ones that use actual launch lugs (jettisonable) attached to a rocket that fit into the launch rail.

[CAPFlyer]

Sweet!  I understand the rail part being mostly cosmetic and that's really all I hope for honestly.  If it's more than that, it's all cake.  I just feel weird angling a launch clamp at the bottom of the rocket or a massively oversized stock "clamp" to hang the rocket off of for launch so it'll be cool, especially with the number of Sounding Rockets used for like the Historic Rocketry contract pack that we finally get "proper" launcher rails/clamps for them.

[TranceaddicT]

3 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:

I actually am now working on some simple-type launch rails. These will work like a regular launch clamp, i.e. will be able to angle a rocket and the rail will rotatte properly.  The rail part will be mostly cosmetic, but I will see if giving it a collider causes any problems with a launch.

In the future, I will experiment with fancier launch rails, ones that use actual launch lugs (jettisonable) attached to a rocket that fit into the launch rail.

These would be a dream for sounding rockets.

[bjornadri]

hi i cant get the alignment right for the BDB saturn V. attachment point doesnt seem to be at the right place and the offset tool doesnt work properly to get the launchpad in the right place. any idea what is going wrong?

Edited August 7, 2020 by bjornadri

[AlphaMensae]

1 hour ago, bjornadri said:

hi i cant get the alignment right for the BDB saturn V. attachment point doesnt seem to be at the right place and the offset tool doesnt work properly to get the launchpad in the right place. any idea what is going wrong?

Hold left shift when using the offset gizmo to get 20m of free offset range.

The extra node that I patch into the BDB Saturn engine mount is just a general node. It could use some fine tuning, I'll see what I can do.

[alberro+]

Been having a bit of an issue with the Soyuz launch base. Whenever I launch, the two big arms that wrap around the vehicle stay connected to the Soyuz. I’m guessing I put it b the wrong node, but there is no other node. 

[AlphaMensae]

43 minutes ago, alberro+ said:

Been having a bit of an issue with the Soyuz launch base. Whenever I launch, the two big arms that wrap around the vehicle stay connected to the Soyuz. I’m guessing I put it b the wrong node, but there is no other node. 

Make sure it's not attaching to one of the Soyuz engine bottom nodes. The gantry attaches to a lower node in the center of the base.

[Starseeker]

Is there a way to adjust the speed of elevators on crew access towers? I tried using the Gemini crew access tower, but Jeb kept falling over in the elevator and quickly phased through it onto the ground.

[AlphaMensae]

2 hours ago, Alex33212 said:

Is there a way to adjust the speed of elevators on crew access towers? I tried using the Gemini crew access tower, but Jeb kept falling over in the elevator and quickly phased through it onto the ground.

No, there isn't any in KSP itself, I would have to adjust the animation length in Unity.  I can't make them too slow, or going up would take way too long, so you have to accept a rough ride going down, except for the shortest elevators like the one with the Saturn Launcher Base.

All the elevator heights reach the bottom at the same time, so the higher the setting, the faster it will go. Though I haven't had any problem with the Gemini one, which one are you using, v2.0 or v2.1 dev?

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by AlphaMensae

[Starseeker]

6 minutes ago, AlphaMensae said:

No, there isn't any in KSP itself, I would have to adjust the animation length in Unity.  I can't make them too slow, or going up would take way too long, so you have to accept a rough ride going down, except for the shortest elevators like the one with the Saturn Launcher Base.

All the elevator heights reach the bottom at the same time, so the higher the setting, the faster it will go. Though I haven't had any problem with the Gemini one, which one are you using, v2.0 or v2.1 dev?

 

v2.1; and that's strange, your kerbals seem a lot more well-behaved in that video than mine was.
Though I *am* using the extended-height version of the crew access tower; that might have something to do with it.

[alberro+]

5 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:

Make sure it's not attaching to one of the Soyuz engine bottom nodes. The gantry attaches to a lower node in the center of the base.

That was it, thanks!

[AlphaMensae]

3 hours ago, Alex33212 said:

v2.1; and that's strange, your kerbals seem a lot more well-behaved in that video than mine was.
Though I *am* using the extended-height version of the crew access tower; that might have something to do with it.

Yep, the speed was set for the default Titan II GLV height; the other heights will move faster, as they travel a greater distance in the same amount of time.

I tried giving different speeds to the different height variants, but then you had to wait for all the elevator variants to reach bottom before you could regain control of the one you had enabled. Quite annoying.  

[AlphaMensae]

Well, I have been hitting roadblocks in trying to make the launch rails.

Turns out I had a hidden flaw in my node-attached launch clamp bases and stands: I did not have the pivoting action actually working when I tried to make a regular surface-attached launch clamp.  Despite studying the stock clamp, I still could not get it to work right, so I abandoned the idea of launch rails as launch clamps. The launch clamp module might have been to limiting for my purposes anyway.

Then I tried using Animated Attachment for rotating the rails with a deploy limit slider. That worked...but only for one specific case, that being a surface-attached rocket that did not have the root part in it.  If I made the rocket first, with the probe core on top as the root, then attached the launch rail, the rocket would not move as the rail was rotated. If I then re-rooted to the launch rail, then attached the rocket to the rail, then the rocket would move with the rail... but not if it was attached to the rail's node.  The trouble comes from a surface-attached rocket needing the radial decoupler module, which brings more problems. And having the root part not being in the rocket is not desirable either.

But I found a solution: Use B9PartSwitch to rotate the launch rail in 5° increments, and then rotate the rocket the same amount, which is easy using left-shift with the rotate gizmo. I also made the launch rail a separate part. I originally was going to use the Mini Milkstool stands as the base for the rails, which would allow surface attachment (no decouple module needed), but the Animated Attachment limitations made me separate the rails from the clamp bases (can't have them be the root part). Of course, with the B9PS method,  I could make the rails a launch clamp stand again, but having them be separate parts allows them to be used with the other launch bases and stands. It also avoids duplicating the Mini Milkstools.  

So, here is a test demo of the Mini Launch Rail; it's very early WIP, haven't even properly textured most of the rail yet. It's mounted on the Mini Milkstool Stand 1, and the rocket is three of the BDB Staara-20 "Aquilae" SRMs:

 

The rail (or rod in this case) does have a full-length capsule collider, and it caused no problems with the rocket angled like that...provided it's not clipped into the rocket.  

Edited August 10, 2020 by AlphaMensae

[Beetlecat]

Nice!  It's like USI Sounding Rockets all grown up!

[Miguelsgamingch]

5 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:

Well, I have been hitting roadblocks in trying to make the launch rails.

Turns out I had a hidden flaw in my node-attached launch clamp bases and stands: I did not have the pivoting action actually working when I tried to make a regular surface-attached launch clamp.  Despite studying the stock clamp, I still could not get it to work right, so I abandoned the idea of launch rails as launch clamps. The launch clamp module might have been to limiting for my purposes anyway.

Then I tried using Animated Attachment for rotating the rails with a deploy limit slider. That worked...but only for one specific case, that being a surface-attached rocket that did not have the root part in it.  If I made the rocket first, with the probe core on top as the root, then attached the launch rail, the rocket would not move as the rail was rotated. If I then re-rooted to the launch rail, then attached the rocket to the rail, then the rocket would move with the rail... but not if it was attached to the rail's node.  The trouble comes from a surface-attached rocket needing the radial decoupler module, which brings more problems. And having the root part not being in the rocket is not desirable either.

But I found a solution: Use B9PartSwitch to rotate the launch rail in 5° increments, and then rotate the rocket the same amount, which is easy using left-shift with the rotate gizmo. I also made the launch rail a separate part. I originally was going to use the Mini Milkstool stands as the base for the rails, which would allow surface attachment (no decouple module needed), but the Animated Attachment limitations made me separate the rails from the clamp bases (can't have them be the root part). Of course, with the B9PS method,  I could make the rails a launch clamp stand again, but having them be separate parts allows them to be used with the other launch bases and stands. It also avoids duplicating the Mini Milkstools.  

So, here is a test demo of the Mini Launch Rail; it's very early WIP, haven't even properly textured most of the rail yet. It's mounted on the Mini Milkstool Stand 1, and the rocket is three of the BDB Staara-20 "Aquilae" SRMs:

 

The rail (or rod in this case) does have a full-length capsule collider, and it caused no problems with the rocket angled like that...provided it's not clipped into the rocket.  

Well well well, im gonna get ready and build a small missile then