[0.90] Magic Smoke Industries Infernal Robotics - 0.19.3

[Galane]

You guys looking for the detachable struts, what you are looking for is Quantum struts. Works amazingly. I have them around my docking ports and my claws. They will also strut to asteroids. Super useful.

http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/quantum-strut/

Just don't mount them on or aim them at non-physics or massless parts like the small girder "struts" - unless you want a device that rigidly locks your ship's rotation in all axes. Hmmm, I may have to try that with an action group to turn it on and off to see if it makes docking with the current dev version of MechJeb work better. ;-)

[phoenix_ca]

Just don't mount them on or aim them at non-physics or massless parts like the small girder "struts" - unless you want a device that rigidly locks your ship's rotation in all axes. Hmmm, I may have to try that with an action group to turn it on and off to see if it makes docking with the current dev version of MechJeb work better. ;-)

Has MJ's docking ever been passable?

The only downside of Q-Struts (THAT'S RIGHT I SAID Q-STRUT...and I have no idea why that should be a big deal...it probably shouldn't) is that they drain some power. Granted, if you have oodles of power it's not a big deal. They also require a fair amount of forethought, lest you end-up with a pile of them that are unnecessary and do nothing but add to your part count.

[Albert VDS]

Wow, thank you! I wasn't expecting it to be that straight forward. Any tips on how to model one, or change the texture at least?

Oh, and I think they need to come with the disclaimer "Do Not Move Robotics Parts When Struts Are Attached", either that or reduce the strength (which I'm trying now)

https://www.cubby.com/pl/StrutDecoupler01.jpg/_b4605bb0247245508ea34bdf6a9f601e

https://www.cubby.com/pl/StrutDecoupler02.jpg/_7d74c7a6df7543d2bc4b7fb11514797c

https://www.cubby.com/pl/StrutDecoupler03.jpg/_dc7a0c742de242afb872840f3f3e7088

Edit: Reducing linear and angular stength doesn't appear to do anything. May need to look into some code on the MSI side that disables motor control if a child part has a strut attached to it (either connecting to or connecting from).

You could convert the strutConnector model000.mbm to .PNG, edit it to your liking and then convert it to .MBM using a dummy model and Unity 3D.

I have no idea how to create a custom strutConnector, but the Blender .MU importer might be able to tell you more.

[Galane]

Has MJ's docking ever been passable?

Yes, in some of the dev builds it's been very good. But the latest thing is to try to make it able to find its way to the docking port from just about anywhere, like the opposite side of a big station. I'd just as soon have a toggle to shut that off and use an earlier version of the docking AP that required the player to get the ports aimed at each other then lock down one ship with kill rotation. It *worked* almost all the time.

I've built landers with q-struts mounted on disposable parts so that once the engines and fuel tanks are jettisoned, the q-struts aren't hanging around being useless and adding to the part count in the scene.

One other gotcha with q-struts and strut guns is if you use them to bridge a docking port pair assembled in VAB or SPH, they won't let go on a decouple node event on that port. You have to manually shut them off then decouple the ports. Then you can turn them back on and they'll automatically engage and disengage from whatever docks with the port.

[phoenix_ca]

Weird. I've never seen MJ's docking do too well. It gets there sure, but expends waaaaaayyyy too much monopropellant.

[KeithStone]

So, i finally ran in to something that might actually pose as a suggestion! I'm not one to suggest part configs often because I understand the amount of work involved, but I feel this one might have some merit.

I was working with the telescoping pistons and hydrolic pistons when I realized that I wanted my parts to "pull" instead of push. Is there a way to either A.) Make the pistons and hinges tweakable (thereby removing the need for separate open, closed, and 90 degree hinges by adding that as a tweakable option) or B.) Include an optional set of pistons and hydraulics that are fully extended when they are placed as parts?

As always, this is by and far one of the greatest mods to KSP. Thanks so much for your work!

[Sokar408]

For some reason, the toolbar icon doesn't work in flight. Anyone else had this problem?

[BudgetHedgehog]

For some reason, the toolbar icon doesn't work in flight. Anyone else had this problem?

It's a known bug. From the OP:

The toolbar in flight sometimes doesn't want to hide the Servo controls. I'll be working on these in the next update.

[Darren9]

Wow, thank you! I wasn't expecting it to be that straight forward. Any tips on how to model one, or change the texture at least?

Oh, and I think they need to come with the disclaimer "Do Not Move Robotics Parts When Struts Are Attached", either that or reduce the strength (which I'm trying now)

https://www.cubby.com/pl/StrutDecoupler01.jpg/_b4605bb0247245508ea34bdf6a9f601e

https://www.cubby.com/pl/StrutDecoupler02.jpg/_7d74c7a6df7543d2bc4b7fb11514797c

https://www.cubby.com/pl/StrutDecoupler03.jpg/_dc7a0c742de242afb872840f3f3e7088

Edit: Reducing linear and angular stength doesn't appear to do anything. May need to look into some code on the MSI side that disables motor control if a child part has a strut attached to it (either connecting to or connecting from).

There's been several times I've needed struts between what I'm guessing are child parts of IR joints, if they rotate/extend together cross-bracing can massively increase rigidity. If you look at code could you allow child/child struts for mirrored joints please?

[sirkut]

For some reason, the toolbar icon doesn't work in flight. Anyone else had this problem?

Next update will fix this issue including some other bugs. I _might_ break saves but I need to test to confirm.

[Sokar408]

Next update will fix this issue including some other bugs. I _might_ break saves but I need to test to confirm.

I hope not

[sirkut]

I hope not

I'm going to test it tonight to be sure

but the rewrite is necessary. The code is cleaner and easier to maintain.

[Sokar408]

I'm going to test it tonight to be sure

but the rewrite is necessary. The code is cleaner and easier to maintain.

Could saves be "saved" (heee heee) with some cfg editing?

[sirkut]

Could saves be "saved" (heee heee) with some cfg editing?

Well the changes are Within the CFG itself. It's no longer a MuMechServo it's now a Part. All the IR stuff is now wrapped in

MODULE

{

name = MuMechToggle

Etc

Etc

}

[Sokar408]

Well the changes are Within the CFG itself. It's no longer a MuMechServo it's now a Part. All the IR stuff is now wrapped in

MODULE

{

name = MuMechToggle

Etc

Etc

}

I feel like an idiot for saying this, but I don't know what that means

[phoenix_ca]

I feel like an idiot for saying this, but I don't know what that means

He's updating it so it's madeofmorebetter and will be easiermoregood to update in future.

[Sokar408]

He's updating it so it's madeofmorebetter and will be easiermoregood to update in future.

That part I got. But whether rescuing saves would be possible however I am still ignorant about.

[phoenix_ca]

That part I got. But whether rescuing saves would be possible however I am still ignorant about.

Well, technically, since the persistence file is saved in an open format (i.e. plain text), it's possible to recover a save from just about anything a mod can do to wreak it. Whether or not you want to spend the time fixing it is the issue. I get the sense that sirkut's being very cautious and just saying the next update may, possibly, break things. If it does...who knows, you might be able to finagle it back into working again by adjusting every IR part in your persistence file. Whether or not you want to do that is up to you.

[taniwha]

When I wrote the PartModule code, I went to an effort to rescue save files. However, that was last October and things may have changed enough that something gets missed (actually, some things are because there was no way to get the information). My recommendation is to ensure all parts are in their home positions before updating.

Sokar408: the maiin meaning is that you will be able to hand-edit IR settings. The current form has IR's state saved in an inscrutable block of mime-encoding (look for cData in your save file), the new lays it alll out nicely.

I did this because I needed to edit my servo groups I had the problem of the tower cranes in the shot below becoming unusable when I docked the second crane to my base. They were both built from the same craft file and thus had matching group names. After my IR hacking, I was able to rename the groups.

[phoenix_ca]

In-game editing of servo groups would be a holy grail of IR...or something. Like Action Groups Extended.

[sirkut]

In-game editing of servo groups would be a holy grail of IR...or something. Like Action Groups Extended.

Hrm that gives me an idea for a future enhancement.

But yes the encoded cdata was a pain to deal with.

[Brendzillion]

Sorry guys, I'll talk to Sirkut and see if he has figured anything out, I've had a few people contact me via email and ask for a fixed version, and if I had one I'd give it to you. Like all updates we have to go through a small adjustment stage when there is no preview from Squad or information on what they are going to change with the system - so everytime an update comes out, you cross your fingers, legs, gonads and anything else and hope they didn't change something that will break your mod or plugin, but majority of the time it does and that's just the downside of developing things for something that is still in development itself

Hopefully we will all have our servo's swinging again soon!

I heard it was bad luck if you cross your gonads. This could be the problem... Maybe the servo's aren't the only thing that needs to get swangin.

[Josh Hawley]

http://taniwha.org/~bill/ksp/screenshot1421.jpg

What is the black/yellow part in the background of your pic?

[taniwha]

Hooligan Labs launch pad. TBH, I can't stand the pads in EL (ok, I like the orbital dock, but I'm biased )

[Galane]

Would it be possible to have parts that are single use? Move them then have them lock in place and the servo control vanish. That would be useful for things intended to be unfolded then left that way, such as an aircraft or rover that will not be retrieved from the planet it's been landed on.