Kerbal Attachment System (KAS) 0.4.7 - Pipes as fuel lines and even fewer explosions!

[sanoj688]

Any word on when this will be added to the R&D tree?

Went browsing through this thread because I too can't find the parts in the R&D tree in my career save. Does this currently only work in sandbox mode then? (Or are we just overlooking it)

I really need to refuel my Mun lander It's got a heap of science and in this save I'll only return science, never transmit. Full science points xD

[Bel_Riose]

I can't download this mod from spaceport, the archive is aways broken!

Edited October 20, 2013 by Bel_Riose

[Munchkin9]

Went browsing through this thread because I too can't find the parts in the R&D tree in my career save. Does this currently only work in sandbox mode then? (Or are we just overlooking it)

I really need to refuel my Mun lander It's got a heap of science and in this save I'll only return science, never transmit. Full science points xD

At the moment this is only available in Sandbox mod but if you really want it in career mode it isn't hard to fix at all. Just go into the .cfg files of every part and add:

TechRequired = start

entryCost = 0

Above cost = ???

This will give you every KAS part from the beginning in career mode. If you want them to be unlocked more logically, then change the 'start' part to whatever research node you want. Only work you have to do is find the correct name for that node (hint: its not exactly the in-game one). There are plenty of threads on that subject.

Currently I have them in:

TechRequired = fieldScience

Which makes the most sense to me.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Munchkin9

[TomatoSoup]

At the moment this is only available in Sandbox mod but if you really want it in career mode it isn't hard to fix at all. Just go into the .cfg files of every part and add:

Oh, I've done that for other mods. It's just that really "fun" stuff seems to happen when you unlock it in a category and then switch the category later. So I'd readily go add them myself if I knew where the author intended to add them to the tech tree.

[Imca]

How "fun" are we talking here?

[Tassyr]

How do I KASify a part? Make it grabable and atachable?

I made a small .625 meter probe core with the intention of making it something you could plug into a rocket with no control and make it work agian, but I dont know how the grab modual works.

I figured out how to do it but it's a pain in the ass, as it assumes the part is 'radial' attach- no cores fit this description- so the model clips hideously into the parts. If that doesn't bug you, all you have to do is add

///////// Name to help you ID what part this is: Ex "Linear RCS" or "Thermometer" or something. ///////

GRAB

{

stockPartName = // name of the part from the .cfg file

evaPartPos = (0.0, 0.00, -0.21) // where it's positioned on the Kerbal (x, y, z)

evaPartDir = (0,0,-1) //Unknown

dropAtGroundPos = false // I THINK this is 'Can you drop it and have it function.' Still testing.

dropPartPos = (0.0, -0.1, -0.65) //where it lands when you drop it, Relative to the Kerbal. (x, y, z) (I think.)

dropPartRot = (0.0, 90.0, 0.0) //where it's rotated when you drop it, relative to a kerbal. (x, y, z)

addPartMass = true //Used when calculating mass.

storable = true //can you stick it in a storage container.

storedSize = 4 //storage size in container

attachOnPart = True //can you attach it to a part

attachOnEva = False //No freaking clue

attachOnStatic = False //Again, no freaking clue.

attachSendMsgOnly = False //No freaking clue. I sense a pattern here.

}

to the addModule.cfg file in the KAS folder.

For anyone not a coder: Stuff after // won't be read by the game, it's just a comment by me. I had it formatted but this place eats formatting for breakfast apparently.

This is my commented example from the linear RCS port in said .cfg file. Also, if anyone can fill in any of the unknown fields, please tell me! XD

Edited October 21, 2013 by Tassyr

[Tassyr]

Hey, here's a question. I'm considering adding a bit of storage space to the command pods- a lot in the lander cans, a little in the simple pods and crew cabin, almost none in the Cupola. If I get this working happily- would other people want it?

[Imca]

Wow, thanks for the help.

It actualy bothers me none that there is no radial attached cores, I made my own. So thank you very very much.

Edit : I would.

[Tassyr]

Wait, what's your radially attached core look like? I've been looking for one for a while! ... I can't model though, so making one kinda wasn't an option for me.

[Imca]

I copied one of the B9 sensors, the one with the little camera in it, since like you, I cant model.

[HoY]

it only takes 2 .cfg line edits to make them radially attachable.. or you could do this crazy workaround

[Tassyr]

The command pods with storage bit might be delayed a little. I can get storage into all but the three man pod with module manager. For some reason it just IGNORES that pod. Testing. >.<

it only takes 2 .cfg line edits to make them radially attachable.. or you could do this crazy workaround

As for this- yeah, the catch is none of the existing command pods actually lend to being used radially. I know the .cfg edit, but the models would be wonky. Hence the lack of making my own.

Got it working! Here's the current values- and no, they haven't been balanced worth a damn. I'll still need to do that bit. But!

Mk1 Command Pod - 40

Mk1-2 Command Pod - 60

Mk1 Lander Can - 60

Mk2 Lander Can - 100

Coupola - 20

My logic was that the landers would have considerable space allotted for deployable stuff when you actually land. If you don't like these values I'd be happy to modify them for you, or you can simply modify them yourself.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hrv13rx99q92g2s/Storagepods.cfg Just slap that in your KAS folder.

Edited October 21, 2013 by Tassyr

[Gnaar_Mok]

I can't seem to get the GUI to come up in the editor to add parts to containers. Any pointers?

[Tassyr]

Any containers or are you using my little kludge?

[Imca]

The thing is, its not just a radialy attachable probe core I want, but one I can dismount and re-attach to dead rockets, to control them agian.

Thats why the crazy edit, instead of just 2 lines.

[melak47]

This is fun!

Unfortunately the panels weren't charging the battery, so the big dish ran out of power before transmitting the report

This works perfectly though!

[Imca]

How did you get multiple parts on your back like that?

[Tassyr]

One; found out why they won't charge. You need to save and reload for it to work. F5 followed by F9 works like a charm.

Also, how the heck did you get all that on one Kerbal?! O.o

[melak47]

You grab a part so it's on the Kerbal's back, then you right click -> attach other parts - and you can place them on the part on your Kerbal's back (if this is a bug, please don't fix it! )

Guess what also works:

Unfortunately the Kerbal in the seat will fall off when you move.

Edited October 21, 2013 by melak47

[Imca]

I hate to ask, but any chance you could turn the b9 cockpits into containers too?

Also that is awsome and fun to know.

[Tassyr]

I hate to ask, but any chance you could turn the b9 cockpits into containers too?

Also that is awsome and fun to know.

Sure, I guess- catch is I don't know anything about these pods, so... what the heck should I put the values at? Or should I just toss you a template to edit to taste?

[automcdonough]

I like the idea of the pods having some storage, but I feel like those numbers are a little on the high side. Like it should just be a few spare parts like backup solar panels or connector ports or whatever. Just looking at the size of things.. the Mk1 pod should be lucky to have space for an extra parachute. Most parts like that can be stored on the outside and peeled off if needed if avoiding bin parts though.

Any sort of planned operation where you bring stuff to deploy should have to use the bins. Because, well that's what they are for. And they look awesome.

So that's my $0.02. Less storage on the pods. Or leave it alone but make the bins store more.

Have you considered making an inline stack part as a bin? this way the added weight would be centered. It could also store quite a bit but wouldn't be removable.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Seconding the inline container idea, both a small and a large one if possible.

I like the capsules having some storage, but the capsules really shouldn't have a lot of stuff in them. Landers could have more space, but not that much. Here's the numbers I'd propose:

Mk1 Command Pod - 10 <- Absolutely barebones, at most a solar panel or some connectors. It's a tiny thing with just enough space for the kerbal.

Mk1-2 Command Pod - 30 <- Bigger, but not lavishly so. Three crewmembers and life support occupy most of it, and cargo space is scarce.

Mk1 Lander Can - 20 <- A roomier pod, but for only one kerbal. Has space to bring some extras.

Mk2 Lander Can - 50 <- Large pod, only two kerbals inside of it. Plenty of extra room and compartments.

Cupola - 30 <- No matter how useless it may otherwise seem, it's still a two-meter pod for one kerbal. Plenty of space for parts.

And forgot one more pod, even if it's not a pod: Hitchhiker Module - 80 <- Even with 4 kerbals inside of it, the sheer size of the thing allows for plenty of storage room.

It'd be quite nice to have these actually added into the mod proper.

Also. Is there any chance at all to make an option for a compact container GUI? I'm playing 1280x720, and I have to move the window to see the button at the bottom.

I'd be fine to see less of what's inside the container or a smaller part selection window, but it's way too large for me as it is.

[automcdonough]

Ah yeah I agree with Sean. Cupola having less than the Mk2 lander can though? maybe give them both 40.. and the mk2 pod only 20.

Good call on the hitchhiker can.

Maybe some of the larger unmanned probes could have space too. As useless as that sounds, there ought to be some unused space in those bigger 2. You never know what sort of repair missions might be done though.

Also I've had GUI issues too, especially if you pile a large variety of things into the bin. A scroll window may be better than an expanding one. It also took me a while to realize how to close the window! Accidentally clicking the bins in VAB was annoying until I had that figured out. An x in the corner or a close button would be cool tho.

Edited October 21, 2013 by automcdonough

[Sean Mirrsen]

The Cupola has less space than the Mk2 Can because it's a cupola. It has all that space devoted to being a huge dome-shaped window, and its internal structure is mostly empty space to look through. It still has more space than the Mk1 Lander Can, but the Mk2 Lander is literally nothing but two seats and a tiny window, the rest is storage space.