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

[Miguelsgamingch]

6 minutes ago, AlphaMensae said:

One furthur update to the two current Launch Rails: I added a 20° reverse rotation animation deploy limit slider for the rail, since many sounding rocket images show the rocket "hanging" from the rail rather than the "lying" on the rail as I have it.

It's not perfect however, as the rocket will fall away from the rail a little bit when decoupled, rather than riding the rail the whole way.

I might just keep it in for future use when I get around to making actual attachable launch lugs for rockets that will hold them to the rail like real ones do. So as of now it's more of a screenshot feature.  

 

Cant Wait For V2.1, The Rail Will Be Perfect For ICBM!

[A_3]

there's still no explanation as to why the mod just refuses to work, when i try to launch the rocket, instead of you know, doing rocket things, it stays stuck. i don't see anything about required mods? or what! help!

[TranceaddicT]

37 minutes ago, A_3 said:

there's still no explanation as to why the mod just refuses to work, when i try to launch the rocket, instead of you know, doing rocket things, it stays stuck. i don't see anything about required mods? or what! help!

 

 

 

Providing more than just "I did everything right. It won't work" would be a good start.

How to get Support:

Spoiler

Please provide:

• A concise, textual description of the problem
  • Mentioning the KSP version and the Mod version involved
• A screenshot of the problem
• When applicable, the .craft file with a vessel that have the problem
• KSP.log
  • See this article for instructions.
  • Publish the files on DropBox, Google Drive or similar, and post the link so we can inspect it.
    • DO NOT paste the log on Forum, this causes a lot of problems and it's useless, as Forum also truncate the file
      • It's ok to paste small excerpts to pinpoint something, but we still need the full KSP.log and Player.log in order to help you/
    • Do not use pastebin, gist or similars. They have a pretty small cap on the file size, and will truncate the log rendering yet more useless
  • Imgur is a good choice for publishing screenshots when needed.

Using the Issue Tracker is highly encouraged, as GitHub provides services that make everything above easier. You can open an issue there, and call me here pinpointing there to be sure to get my attention.

Thank you.

 

Edited August 19, 2020 by TranceaddicT

[AlphaMensae]

41 minutes ago, A_3 said:

there's still no explanation as to why the mod just refuses to work, when i try to launch the rocket, instead of you know, doing rocket things, it stays stuck. i don't see anything about required mods? or what! help!

Do not have the launch base or stand as the root part, or else they won't work. They are launch clamps, and they can not be the root part.

[JEBEDIAH KERBAL PLAYER]

hello, i have a question and i need help, i use the mod in version 1.10 of the game, but the platforms got bigger than normal after i installed the tweak scale mod, i tried to uninstall the tweak scale and it didn't work, so i reinstalled the modular launch  pads, but this problem continues to occur, can someone help me?

[AlphaMensae]

7 hours ago, JEBEDIAH KERBAL PLAYER said:

hello, i have a question and i need help, i use the mod in version 1.10 of the game, but the platforms got bigger than normal after i installed the tweak scale mod, i tried to uninstall the tweak scale and it didn't work, so i reinstalled the modular launch  pads, but this problem continues to occur, can someone help me?

That is more of a TweakScale problem, so I would ask over in its thread.

I don't support or offer .cfgs for TweakScale, as I don't use it.  Back in the KSP 1.0.4-1.0.5 days, I did, but I don't trust the new versions nor the current maintainer.  

[CAPFlyer]

Quick question that maybe you can answer - I've tried using the launch rails with Procedural SRBs and they always seem to explode shortly after "release".  I suspect it's a collider issue because when they surface attach, the rail is basically inside the rocket, but I'm not sure.  Do I just need to leave the SRB where it attaches or do I need to tweak it more to keep it from "falling" into the rail?

[AlphaMensae]

3 hours ago, CAPFlyer said:

Quick question that maybe you can answer - I've tried using the launch rails with Procedural SRBs and they always seem to explode shortly after "release".  I suspect it's a collider issue because when they surface attach, the rail is basically inside the rocket, but I'm not sure.  Do I just need to leave the SRB where it attaches or do I need to tweak it more to keep it from "falling" into the rail?

Most likely a collider issue. Best to have a slight gap between the rail and the SRB, gravity will pull the rocket down into the rail after decoupling.

If you don't have it, install Collide-O-Scope so you can see the actual colliders in game.

https://github.com/DefiantZombie/Collide-o-Scope

[CAPFlyer]

Installed.  I did have a gap, but it seems like they "dive" into the rail and that's what causes it.  I'll play with it some more with Collide-o-Scope and see if that gives me any insight.

[AlphaMensae]

Ok, after a lot of distractions (re: watching MSFS 2020 streams  ), the Medium Launch Rail is done!

 

That's the BDB Redstone missile doing a.....science flight...yep, that's right, nothing to worry about here!

[TranceaddicT]

uh, @AlphaMensae Something is getting left behind when rotating the General Ground Launch Stand ...

The launchstand's "pads" are looking kind of lonely.

[AlphaMensae]

8 hours ago, TranceaddicT said:

uh, @AlphaMensae Something is getting left behind when rotating the General Ground Launch Stand ...

The launchstand's "pads" are looking kind of lonely.

Oops, that was a result of me making a slight change to the Unity hierarchy for the new launch stands. I moved the Column transform out of the Cap transform, but it looks like it has to be the child of the Cap one or it will rotate when the column beams are not supposed to.

I'll fix the affected stands and will have them on the AlphaDev branch later today.

[TranceaddicT]

Point of Inquiry:  What attachRules are require on the parts?  I'm trying to use the USI/SR rockets but they don't slide down (up?) the rail.

I followed a YT demo video (can't find it anymore) demonstrating a build and got it to work ... that one time.  Since then nothing; don't even have the node_stack at the plate-spike either.

Clearly, I'm doing something wrong. 

[AlphaMensae]

3 hours ago, TranceaddicT said:

Point of Inquiry:  What attachRules are require on the parts?  I'm trying to use the USI/SR rockets but they don't slide down (up?) the rail.

I followed a YT demo video (can't find it anymore) demonstrating a build and got it to work ... that one time.  Since then nothing; don't even have the node_stack at the plate-spike either.

Clearly, I'm doing something wrong. 

Check to see if those parts can or allow surface attach.

The attachRules for x, x, x, x, x are as follows: Node attach, surface attach, allow node attach (for something else), allow surface; the last value isn't important, it's something about collider interaction.

I removed the upper attach node from the Mini launch rail, as AA doesn't work with node-attached parts.

[TranceaddicT]

Yep, that's what I thought. The relevant ones are attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0.

So, what do I do?  Threaten my game to record the problem ... LOL, problem solved.

(Actually, I was probably me doing something different, but I'll take it.)

[AlphaMensae]

Corrected the .mu files for all the affected launch stands, and they are all now on the AlphaDev branch.

The launch clamp transforms (for the footings, columns and caps) don't actually rotate with the rest of the part (when properly done  ), they are fixed in place. The column beams were rotating like that since I had them placed wrong in the Unity hierarchy, and KSP got confused.

Also numbered the Launch Rails' titles so they would appear in order in the part window, and changed the title of the Jupiter Petal Cover to the Redstone Launch Stand Petal Cover, since it was made for that stand and wanted to have it appear after it.

[AlphaMensae]

After more MSFS2020 streams distractions, the Large Launch Rail is done!

That's actually another, um, ah, science flight....using the...ehh, um, Minotaur solids from BDB.....   

[MARL_Mk1]

Hello! Thanks for creating this mod, it's beautiful.
 

I'm experiencing a weird issue playing RSS/RO. Apparently, launch towers that are placed to the side of my rockets count towards the total height limit in the VAB.

This rockets is 55-56m in height, but adding a tower increases it to +200. What could be the issue?

I'm using the RO config included in the .zip under "Extras" if that's of any help.

[AlphaMensae]

21 minutes ago, Lijazos said:

Hello! Thanks for creating this mod, it's beautiful.
 

I'm experiencing a weird issue playing RSS/RO. Apparently, launch towers that are placed to the side of my rockets count towards the total height limit in the VAB.

This rockets is 55-56m in height, but adding a tower increases it to +200. What could be the issue?

I'm using the RO config included in the .zip under "Extras" if that's of any help.

Disabled meshes in a part's .mu file count towards the size limits in the Engineer's Report. For quite a long time I was very conservative with how I did height variants for the towers, making each variant a complete tower, as well as combining all the size variants for the launch bases into one part.  The goal was to reduce the number of parts, but a big downside was all the disabled variants made the towers and bases much taller or larger than what was actually shown.

For v2.1 and onwards, the major size types (small, medium, etc) for towers and bases are now their own part. With the height variants for each size tower, I'm also using more B9PS features to make each variant actually be as high as seen visually. Instead of each height being a single piece, the variants are made up of multiple sections which are turned on and moved into position as needed.  Some of the newer towers in v2.1 are using this method, and I will expand the use of it to all the older towers.

Also, RO now has direct Modular Launch Pad suuport configs (maybe for RP-1?), so that patch isn't needed. I'm going to remove it in the v2.1 official release to avoid confusion.

[AlphaMensae]

Ok, I've wrapped up the whole v2.1 Launch Stands dev work and put a big update on the AlphaDev branch.

Changes:

• The remaining color options in the Launch Stands texture series have been added at last, and all relevant parts updated to include them.
• The first three Mini Modular Towers have gotten 2 extra height variants, using the B9PS transform move feature, so what you see is indeed the actual height of the tower.
• The Pole-type mini modular tower's core section was reduced to 3m, with 6 and 9m being the other heights. The tower details were also reworked, now there is a choice between large and small widths, and 3 detail variants for each width.
• The Atlas Mini Modular Tower received two extra height variants.
• The two main sections of the Titan II Modular Tower have been reworked into the new system I'll be putting in place for the General Towers. There's now a plain Core section with 6m, 12m, 18m and 24m heights, but no platforms or other details. The old 3m Short section is now the Detail Section, and has three toggleable platforms (at different heights) that can be moved down 6m with their deploy limit sliders, and the structural detail pole that can be moved up 6m with its slider.  The tower base and top sections remain unchanged.
• Other .cfg work, mainly some edting of the tags.

With that done, this is the road map for the remaining v2.1 dev work:

• Add the Titan III Mast, which is not the same as the Atlas V version
• Split the existing Small Static Test Stand into separate Cradle and Tower versions, and add a specialized Engine Test version. Rework the other two types
• Rework the General Towers, mainly adding additional height variants to the Core Sections, and adding some structural detail options to the Detail Section.
• Rework the General Strongback Towers to add more height variants using the B9PS transform move feature and other optimization.

 

[TranceaddicT]

11 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:

Split the existing Small Static Test Stand into separate Cradle and Tower versions, and add a specialized Engine Test version. Rework the other two types

Please give consideration to small parts, such as sounding rocket engines, to include a "micro" size.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-prepares-new-sounding-rocket-motor-for-first-test-firing

Edited September 1, 2020 by TranceaddicT

[infinite_monkey]

Can anyone tell me how to get the launch rail to work? I want to launch USI's sounding rockets from it. I tried this:

• start with the mini milk stool
• attach the small launch rail on top
• attach a SRB on the side, build the rocket from there

But now the problems start: When keeping the milk stool as the root part, the rocket doesn't detach on launch. When re-rooting, both the rotation angle setting and the deploy limit don't work, that is, the angle of the rail changes, but the rocket is still pointing straight up. If I try to change the angle before re-rooting, the rocket is again pointing straight up at re-rooting, but the rail and the milk stool is now angled. After rotating the whole thing, I'm able to launch as intended.

Is there an easier way to do this?

Also, it would be nice to be able to rotate the rail around the vertical axis.

[AlphaMensae]

1 hour ago, infinite_monkey said:

Can anyone tell me how to get the launch rail to work? I want to launch USI's sounding rockets from it. I tried this:

• start with the mini milk stool
• attach the small launch rail on top
• attach a SRB on the side, build the rocket from there

But now the problems start: When keeping the milk stool as the root part, the rocket doesn't detach on launch. When re-rooting, both the rotation angle setting and the deploy limit don't work, that is, the angle of the rail changes, but the rocket is still pointing straight up. If I try to change the angle before re-rooting, the rocket is again pointing straight up at re-rooting, but the rail and the milk stool is now angled. After rotating the whole thing, I'm able to launch as intended.

Is there an easier way to do this?

Also, it would be nice to be able to rotate the rail around the vertical axis.

I've went oveer this earlier, so here is a recap:  

If using Animated Attachment, then you have to reroot (or keep it the root) to to the launch stand or base in order for AA to work.

But, you then have to reroot to something on the rocket for it to decouple. Blame KSP and surface decoupling wonkiness for that, though normally the root part is on something you're keeping and not getting rid of.   The rails also use the standard ModuleDecouple for the srf node, rather than the ModuleAnchoredDecouple that the stock radial decouplers use

After rerooting to the rocket for the first time, KSP will rotate it back to vertical. Just rotate it back by the the same amount; I use the A and D keys while still having the probe core or such on the rocket selected.

I could add an attach node for the rocket, but AA does not work with node-attached things, so you'll have to manually rortate and reposition the rocket as if AA wasn't installed.

For ease of animating and probably to ensure it rotates properly, the rails' hinges are located at X=0, Y=0, Z=0, i.e the origin. Also, all but the Miny size have asymmetrical cross-sections in the rails, so trying to make them rotatable around the vertical axis would be problematic.

[AlphaMensae]

6 hours ago, TranceaddicT said:

Please give consideration to small parts, such as sounding rocket engines, to include a "micro" size.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-prepares-new-sounding-rocket-motor-for-first-test-firing

I'm not making multiple sizes of the test stands, just one each.  But the engine test stand will have a plate for mounting engines, and a built-in fuel supply to power it (no tank needed). The plate will have multiple size options.

The cradle and tower types will be reworked from the existing Horizontal and Vertical ones.

[infinite_monkey]

1 hour ago, AlphaMensae said:

I've went oveer this earlier, so here is a recap:  

If using Animated Attachment, then you have to reroot (or keep it the root) to to the launch stand or base in order for AA to work.

But, you then have to reroot to something on the rocket for it to decouple. Blame KSP and surface decoupling wonkiness for that, though normally the root part is on something you're keeping and not getting rid of.   The rails also use the standard ModuleDecouple for the srf node, rather than the ModuleAnchoredDecouple that the stock radial decouplers use

After rerooting to the rocket for the first time, KSP will rotate it back to vertical. Just rotate it back by the the same amount; I use the A and D keys while still having the probe core or such on the rocket selected.

I could add an attach node for the rocket, but AA does not work with node-attached things, so you'll have to manually rortate and reposition the rocket as if AA wasn't installed.

For ease of animating and probably to ensure it rotates properly, the rails' hinges are located at X=0, Y=0, Z=0, i.e the origin. Also, all but the Miny size have asymmetrical cross-sections in the rails, so trying to make them rotatable around the vertical axis would be problematic.

Thanks for the explanation!  

So the rail is purely cosmetic, and the way decoupling works is actually by a standard decoupler? So a longer rail just increases the chance of crashing into it, rather than providing stability?