[0.90] Magic Smoke Industries Infernal Robotics - 0.19.3

[Neverender]

Well, I feel very silly now. I guess I overlooked it since both folders had different names. I just kept overwriting the correct folder while the old, differently named one just sat in there. Even when I removed ever other mod later on. I feel stupid, very very stupid.

Thanks a million and keep up the awesome work. I'm gonna go learn how to read my log now.

[ZodiusInfuser]

For anyone not keeping an eye on the IR Model Rework thread, there's a few new parts I could use people's feedback on: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65365-WIP-MSI-s-Infernal-Robotics-Model-Rework-(Structural-Pre-Release)?p=1138752&viewfull=1#post1138752

Thanks

[CaptainKipard]

Sirkut. If you want you could program tweakables for starting positions of these parts. This would allow ZodiusInfuser to remove some of the redunant parts.

[sirkut]

Sirkut. If you want you could program tweakables for starting positions of these parts. This would allow ZodiusInfuser to remove some of the redunant parts.

It's on the todo list but until then we'll have to deal with redundant parts.

[marce]

Just built a nice recovery vessel with an IR+KAS robotic arm, this mod is the coolest thing of KSP imho

Sirkut,

I don't know if it has been asked before but could you activate the 'remove group' button for empty groups too? I often end up with an empty group at the top and have to add a part, move it all the way up and then delete just to get rid of the group (I know that empty groups won't show up in flight, but it clutters the editor).

And I'd like to give +1 for tweakables! Beside of positioning it would be great if you could make the length of a gantry rail tweakable so that it can be as long as necessary (I'd like to move parts from one end of my station to the other that's about 20m).

[B787_300]

Hey i am having an issue where the parts wont lock from the right click menu. any help?

[sirkut]

Hey i am having an issue where the parts wont lock from the right click menu. any help?

Currently a bug, new release will fix it. Until then you will just have to bear while I work on the rewrite. I have the min/max and the invert checkboxes to add to the update.

[B787_300]

Currently a bug, new release will fix it. Until then you will just have to bear while I work on the rewrite. I have the min/max and the invert checkboxes to add to the update.

take your time then, just wanted to report it and see if there was a workaround or if it was a loacalized issue

[sirkut]

take your time then, just wanted to report it and see if there was a workaround or if it was a loacalized issue

No worries. I'm getting close to releasing it. Hopefully this weekend I'll have it ready.

[sirkut]

Ok. Quick little update. I have tweakables working for the range of motion and it is adjustable while in flight. I'm going to be removing it from the GUI. I'm also seeing about removing the "INV" from the GUI but got a small hitch I need to work out with parts in symmetry mode.

[DeepOdyssey]

Really usefull mod. I have a question though. Is this normal that IR hinges or rotatrons wobble when used with medium to heavy cargo? I tried to make a replica of SS-27 sickle with TEL launcher. The pistons were fine, but the hinge was wobbling when i tried to lift the missile. If my question is silly, i am sorry, i'm not a mechanical engineer.

[sirkut]

Really usefull mod. I have a question though. Is this normal that IR hinges or rotatrons wobble when used with medium to heavy cargo? I tried to make a replica of SS-27 sickle with TEL launcher. The pistons were fine, but the hinge was wobbling when i tried to lift the missile. If my question is silly, i am sorry, i'm not a mechanical engineer.

Neither am I. I think it's wobbling due to the strength of the joints. I need to figure out what can be done but it may be due to the node sizes vs surface attachment.

[ZodiusInfuser]

Ok. Quick little update. I have tweakables working for the range of motion and it is adjustable while in flight. I'm going to be removing it from the GUI. I'm also seeing about removing the "INV" from the GUI but got a small hitch I need to work out with parts in symmetry mode.

Can I suggest you make the INV setting be independent of the symmetry of the part. For example if you look at the stock lights the Light On tweak doesn't apply across 3x symmetry for example, yet the Colour does. This would overcome the issue people have with 2x symmetry not behaving as intended. Or have two flags, one that shared across symmetry and one that is not.

[sirkut]

Can I suggest you make the INV setting be independent of the symmetry of the part. For example if you look at the stock lights the Light On tweak doesn't apply across 3x symmetry for example, yet the Colour does. This would overcome the issue people have with 2x symmetry not behaving as intended. Or have two flags, one that shared across symmetry and one that is not.

That's what i'm working on. Currently it toggles it for all of them when using a tweakable and I have to find a way for it to not do that.

[ybhard]

Hello, I have a problem with this mod:

I've made a small mobile crane to move some module around. but when I dock my crane to a module, all the mechanical parts became bugged: impossible to move piston, hinges clip through the structure and explode, ect.. I tried to change/replace parts to both my movable modules and crane, removed every other mod, and nothing. every time I dock my rover-crane, the robotic parts totally bug.

any idea? maybe another way to attach them instead of using docking ports?

thanks in advance

[sirkut]

Hello, I have a problem with this mod:

I've made a small mobile crane to move some module around. but when I dock my crane to a module, all the mechanical parts became bugged: impossible to move piston, hinges clip through the structure and explode, ect.. I tried to change/replace parts to both my movable modules and crane, removed every other mod, and nothing. every time I dock my rover-crane, the robotic parts totally bug.

any idea? maybe another way to attach them instead of using docking ports?

thanks in advance

Docking is a bit bugged at the moment. One way to try fixing it is save and restore the game. Sometimes that helps. The next release will make it less buggy unless you Dock two crafts that have pistons on docking ports.

[ybhard]

Docking is a bit bugged at the moment. One way to try fixing it is save and restore the game. Sometimes that helps. The next release will make it less buggy unless you Dock two crafts that have pistons on docking ports.

I just tried a quick save/load on a bugged crane and it worked. glad to see the problem doesn't come from me and will be fixed. thanks !

[K3-Chris]

Idea for 2 new parts I think the community would enjoy:

Stack mounted part that folds out 2 engine mounts from near center to far enough out to make the rocket exhaust clear the stack, would allow slim mounting of radial engines for those of us using FAR

Center part would have a node top and bottom to connect to the rest of the ship, engine mounts would also be nodes, 1.25m version could hold 0.65m engines, 2.5m version could hold 1.25m engines, perhaps even a 3.75m version holding 2x 2.5m engines?

Would be crucial though that the entire part would be rigid, would probably need bracing in more than one place unlike pictures bellow, main problem I have with trying to replicate this design with current IR parts, I can make the action work, but the resulting construction is too floppy without quantum struts.

Best example I can come up with:

Partially deployed:

Fully or near fully deployed:

Next part has a similar purpose, but instead of allowing engines to pop out it would allow you to attach components in a radial fashion without having to use radial docking ports.

How to describe it? Imagine a cylinder, it's sliced up into several discs that interlock into a solid enough cylinder, on the outside of the cylinder are symmetric vertical protruding lines, same number of lines as there are discs, say 4, each disc has a rotating pivot in one of the lines, from the top/bottom the action of the part deploying would look like one circle turning into 5, one in the middle and 4 around it.

Obviously the discs wouldn't be completely solid, there would have to be come curves missing to allow for internal structure of the main cylinder without blocking the pivoting action if that makes sense.

The 4 discs that fold out could either be docking ports or allow for mounting docking ports on a node, dock fuel tanks and engines to each circle to make an engine cluster in space.

The nature of the mechanism would stagger each ring on the vertical axis a bit, not sure how big of an issue that would be.

A 1.25, 2.5 and 3.75 version would make sense I think, question is how many radial circles per part? could perhaps make it only 2 and have people use several to get the number they want, I think using 3 each one turned 120 degrees to get 6 total would work nicely etc.

[phoenix_ca]

I suppose one could avoid the bug for the moment by using KAS's undocked attach mode. Though that does require a Kerbal.

Edit: You can already do that sort of engine mounting with IR, with all of three parts. Two hinges, one truss or I-beam in between.

For the second idea...

...

Yeah I've got no idea what you're getting at. Maybe Sirkut can tell but you might be better off at least drawing a picture, even if it's crappy.

Edited May 8, 2014 by phoenix_ca

[sirkut]

Idea for 2 new parts I think the community would enjoy:

Stack mounted part that folds out 2 engine mounts from near center to far enough out to make the rocket exhaust clear the stack, would allow slim mounting of radial engines for those of us using FAR

Center part would have a node top and bottom to connect to the rest of the ship, engine mounts would also be nodes, 1.25m version could hold 0.65m engines, 2.5m version could hold 1.25m engines, perhaps even a 3.75m version holding 2x 2.5m engines?

Would be crucial though that the entire part would be rigid, would probably need bracing in more than one place unlike pictures bellow, main problem I have with trying to replicate this design with current IR parts, I can make the action work, but the resulting construction is too floppy without quantum struts.

Best example I can come up with:

Partially deployed:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--L8vV_lik0Q/TZp1xC2C-bI/AAAAAAAAGQM/IAS0mppGSB8/s1600/320x240.jpg

Fully or near fully deployed:

http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100605052029/memoryalpha/en/images/thumb/9/99/Phoenix_space.jpg/640px-Phoenix_space.jpg

I highly suggest you keep an eye on my awesome team member on the model replacements he will be doing for Infernal Robotics:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65365-WIP-MSI-s-Infernal-Robotics-Model-Rework-(Structural-Pre-Release)

more specifically:

AND for the coincidence link:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65365-WIP-MSI-s-Infernal-Robotics-Model-Rework-%28Structural-Pre-Release%29?p=1072803&viewfull=1#post1072803

[sirkut]

Small update:

• Range of motion for rotatrons are now tweakables within the VAB/SPH and during flight.
  
• Invert Axis is now a tweakable available in VAB/SPH and during flight. Symmetry is not bound to all items. Toggle whichever one you need.
  
• Debating how to set the tweakable for speed control.
  

Question. How useful is it to have the speed control in the Servo control? Would it be better to adjust the speed within the tweakable during building and within flight?

[GamersInStinCt]

Hey. I need some help with an aircraft. I am trying to re-build the Harrier used in this video----

----but I cannot get the VTOL hinge to work the way it does here. I do not have a clue how to get a hinge to work like that and keep a compact design like in this video.

[sirkut]

Hey. I need some help with an aircraft. I am trying to re-build the Harrier used in this video----

----but I cannot get the VTOL hinge to work the way it does here. I do not have a clue how to get a hinge to work like that and keep a compact design like in this video.

He's not using the VTOL hinge that is in the infernal robotics parts pack to do this. I would use a closed hinge to do this. Give one of those a try.

[Biotronic]

Question. How useful is it to have the speed control in the Servo control? Would it be better to adjust the speed within the tweakable during building and within flight?

I think the latter is the better choice.

[sirkut]

I think the latter is the better choice.

Let me be more clear. When I say during flight I meant via the tweakable and completely removing it from the Servo control window so it's just < 0 >