[1.4.3]ALCOR,"Advanced Landing Capsule for Orbital Rendezvous" by ASET (08/02/2017)

[BudgetHedgehog]

Sounds like you're mixing old and new files, delete the alcor folder and re-install fresh.

Thought as much. I'll have to double check a lot of things, because I noticed some Module Manager things weren't being applied (yes, I only have the one - 2.0.3) so it's not just ALCOR. Also, my map view of Gilly didn't match up with what I was landed on. So my tug that was orbiting smashed into the ground, despite the map view saying there was plenty of clearance (I know Gilly's weird like that, but also in the map view, I was apparently 1000 metres or so above the surface (even had an orbit line) despite being landed.. So something's gone very wrong somewhere along the line, so I think a complete reinstall of everything is in order. Damn it :/

[Virtualgenius]

Sometimes its the only way to solve a problem I feel your pain

[alexustas]

ALCOR 0.8 has been downloaded more than 600 times, but only 30 people replied to my poll about performance impact.

I need more data!

Meanwhile, I’m testing the concept of Modular Crew and Cargo Transportation System.

Edited April 25, 2014 by alexustas

[alexustas]

I dont know if its a bug but I feel I need to report it. It happens with the Vessel View screen. Its easily fixed by reseting the screen but just wanted to let you know, it does happen more often than not. http://i.imgur.com/OEP65XY.png

You need to write a complete bug report in detail in VesselView’s thread.

- - - Updated - - -

Hmm, little oddity I noticed: the IVA patch I have refers to ALCOR Pod (A), but the ALCOR.cfg in ALCOR_LanderCapsule refers to ALCOR Pod (. This has the interesting effect of applying the Mk1-2 interior without RPM because the patch is pointing to something that doesn't exist.

Have I somehow mixed up files somewhere or something? I'll check the zip I downloaded, shouldn't be anything wrong in there, because it's worked before (but I haven't changed anything in any of the cfgs since then either). Either way, it's a simple enough fix, it looks like.

I noticed that when you do a DATABASE -> Reload all, ModuleManager patches do not get applied to the newly reloaded content, and you need to restart the game anyway.

The capsule as it is is called â€ÂALCOR Pad (†(B for Basic) and uses PodCockpit stock interior. When you install the IVA patch, it’s name changes to “ALCOR Pad (A)†(A for Advanced) and stock interior is replaced with the ALCOR interior, while stock animation modules are removed, to be replaced with RPM-based modules.

[Sage]

Wow, the idea of the toggable external fuselage is very intriguing! It's a very clever idea

[TerLoki]

That is just beautiful. I can't wait to see the capsule with full textures and IVA. One question though, how exactly will the cargo capsules work?

[K3-Chris]

Very nice stuff alex, I assume the 2m to 1m adapter plate and SDHI parachute/docking port are stand-ins for your own solution? Will yours also use realchutes? Not that I mind using the SDHI port/chute/light, really like it, but I imagine you want to make your own to include in the pack?

I'm torn on the toggle-able shell, it's a neat solution to a bunch of current problems but it's also unrealistic in some ways, like the RCS and seperatrons being able to fire out of it with no visible hole/nozzle, but you can think of that as a limitation of the game not being able to show those holes when needed instead of thinking of it as firing through I guess, does FAR only consider the outer shell? even if it's hidden? Would make more sense I guess if the shell was only possible to hide in the VAB/SPH, not in-flight.

Btw Lack's SXT pack http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/24906-WIP-LLL-Lack-Luster-Labs-LLL-0-10-7-3-18DEC2013-SXT-0-6-13FEB2014 has some nice airbags for impact cushioning/flotation:

Would be nice if those fit between the pod and the heatshield.

Btw not a big fan of that taurus HCV pod, it's the least crappy 3.75m pod currently but it's still pretty wonky, especially the huge wall of glass, yeah it's pretty but it's hugely unrealistic, I know everyone that plays KSP plays with a different level of expected and wanted realism, some play stock, some play RSS, some play with DRE etc but those windows don't work for me.

Edited April 25, 2014 by K3|Chris

[sp1989]

i think I would have to agree its a great idea but without the proper holes or nozzles its pretty unrealistic and would be unappealing to a lot of people. That shouldn't matter but I imagine alot of people download your landing capsule because of how realistic it is. Perhaps a solution could be like what bobcat did for the HOME module? there were four slots to fill and you could pick and choose what universally fit. So the player will have to make decisions about what the priorities are. Do I stick a mechjeb in there or do I want rcs engines and monoprop? Sepratrons or science? It will add some strategy and customization to the capsule. I will probably like it either way, I do appreciate realism but I know a good mod when I see one and I won't not download it because its unrealistic.

[Korb Biakustra]

I just discovered ALCOR so I cannot reply to the poll, but I have issues with the textures:

I have a fresh install of RPM, ALCOR with IVA patch (everything seems to be in the right place in \ASET\, four folders in there for IVA patch, lander capsule, props and external camera), and MFD (Hyomoto directory in GameData). All are newly installed, so no overwriting issue I guess. I'm using Modulemanager 2.0.3.

Does anyone know what is happening? I have tried without MFD but same results. I rebuilt another ship with ALCOR and surprisingly the navball became blue instead of white in the screenshot, but still very fuzzy, like half of the buttons.

[BudgetHedgehog]

<snip>

Do you also have Active Texture Management installed? Because that can mess with the interior. You need to override the compression and stop ATM from touching the interior. Green Skull has put out a set of configs for various mods that helps with this (available in the ATM thread).

[Sage]

I just discovered ALCOR so I cannot reply to the poll, but I have issues with the textures:

http://i.imgur.com/HdCkqIn.jpg

I have a fresh install of RPM, ALCOR with IVA patch (everything seems to be in the right place in \ASET\, four folders in there for IVA patch, lander capsule, props and external camera), and MFD (Hyomoto directory in GameData). All are newly installed, so no overwriting issue I guess. I'm using Modulemanager 2.0.3.

Does anyone know what is happening? I have tried without MFD but same results. I rebuilt another ship with ALCOR and surprisingly the navball became blue instead of white in the screenshot, but still very fuzzy, like half of the buttons.

Do you have Active texture management installed? If yes, you need to blacklist ASET's folder (I think you actually need to blacklist just the props one and specify to not resize them, but I haven't tried that yet) and the textures should get clearer.

Make a cfg file with this in BoulderCo/ActiveTexturemanagement/

ACTIVE_TEXTURE_MANAGER_CONFIG
{
	folder = ASET
	enabled = false
}

EDIT: ninjas are too fast

[Proot]

I just discovered ALCOR so I cannot reply to the poll, but I have issues with the textures:

http://i.imgur.com/HdCkqIn.jpg

I have a fresh install of RPM, ALCOR with IVA patch (everything seems to be in the right place in \ASET\, four folders in there for IVA patch, lander capsule, props and external camera), and MFD (Hyomoto directory in GameData). All are newly installed, so no overwriting issue I guess. I'm using Modulemanager 2.0.3.

Does anyone know what is happening? I have tried without MFD but same results. I rebuilt another ship with ALCOR and surprisingly the navball became blue instead of white in the screenshot, but still very fuzzy, like half of the buttons.

You seem to play with my compilation (despite the errors that navballs are very similar to the KSPRC ones), where the savings for ALCOR internals are outdated. That will be resolved in the incomping update.

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

REcently cracked the black art of IVA creation and I have to say your range of displays is fantastic and ideal for my larger.. projects, I run the basic texture management and have had no issues at all with your products, great work much appreciated.

Cheeers

SM

[Korb Biakustra]

I do use ATM, thanks for the answers! I suspected it to be the cause but when removing it, I couldn't launch the game anymore due to RAM usage.

That will be resolved in the incomping update.

I do use RC! When would be that incoming update? :> I'm eagerly looking forward to playing with ALCOR.

[Proot]

I do use ATM, thanks for the answers! I suspected it to be the cause but when removing it, I couldn't launch the game anymore due to RAM usage.

I do use RC! When would be that incoming update? :> I'm eagerly looking forward to playing with ALCOR.

I'm very glad. I'm doing the lately tests with ALCOR and... well, I think the game have a new kind of dimension.

I'm a huge Alex's work fan. And I think my work want to fit with him in some way.

Well... immo, landing in my new Eve atmosphere (thanks to Rbray89) with this capsule is a completely new experience in the game.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Proot

[Green Skull]

I've tried all ways to solve the RPM / ATM problem. I concur that the only way for an ATM config to not mess with the displays is by blacklisting the folder :/ However the latest config I have works fine for me. I will include this an option to try but the default config will be a black list from now on. If in a later version I find a way I will make a config but lets be honest - do you really want to mess with the best IVA currently in game?

Thanks go to Einarr for help in solving this issue.

So to fix the ATM / ASET RPM issue use this config - Download here: ASET Blacklist Config

*EDIT* I'm so impressed with this pod. I didn't know about it till the ATM config issue. Have some well deserved REP Alex!

Edited April 26, 2014 by Green Skull

[Einarr]

Alex, noted that the screen above the keyboard still says ALCOR 0.7.5 when in standby mode. Yes, I did completely delete the ASET folder when I updated. Not a huge or gamebreaking issue, but I thought I'd let you know.

[alexustas]

Alex, noted that the screen above the keyboard still says ALCOR 0.7.5 when in standby mode. Yes, I did completely delete the ASET folder when I updated. Not a huge or gamebreaking issue, but I thought I'd let you know.

Oh yeah, I did not touch this MFD since last update of ALCOR and forgot to change version number in it ... Do not worry. The main thing to have mark ALCOR v0.8 on the other monitors

[alexustas]

So to fix the ATM / ASET RPM issue use this config - Download here: ASET Blacklist Config

Many thanks, i'll place this link to OP

[alexustas]

...

I'm torn on the toggle-able shell, it's a neat solution to a bunch of current problems but it's also unrealistic in some ways, like the RCS and seperatrons being able to fire out of it with no visible hole/nozzle, but you can think of that as a limitation of the game not being able to show those holes when needed instead of thinking of it as firing through I guess, does FAR only consider the outer shell? even if it's hidden? Would make more sense I guess if the shell was only possible to hide in the VAB/SPH, not in-flight.

...

...

i think I would have to agree its a great idea but without the proper holes or nozzles its pretty unrealistic and would be unappealing to a lot of people.

...

Yes. The idea is still quite raw and needs to be discussed and finalization.

In fact, I'm just waiting when I accumulate enough statistics about ALáOR's new internals , for understanding in which direction I must moving on. I have stopped work for a while, and began to experiment with my other projects :

- Modular Crew and Cargo Transportation System (MCCTS)

- Components for bases construction (big module you have already saw)

- Lander 2.5m ( like ALáOR , but much bigger )

- Interplanetary command module

- rover's cabin

Edited May 4, 2014 by alexustas

[Einarr]

Oh yeah, I did not touch this MFD since last update of ALCOR and forgot to change version number in it ... Do not worry. The main thing to have mark ALCOR v0.8 on the other monitors

The other monitors do indeed display ALCOR v0.8 as they are supposed to, at least for me.

[K3-Chris]

I've voted on the poll, no real difference here as far as I know, but I haven't done any kind of benchmarks etc, just my subjective observation on my pretty beefy gaming PC.

Not sure about the shell, it's a non-perfect solution to a problem with no perfect solutions, different mods/mod authors use different solutions, some just bundle all possible feature's you'd want like RCS thrusters, RCS fuel, LOX+LF, liquid engines and decouplers/shrounds/fairings etc right into the part or into other parts in the kit meant to be added on, might not even look/work right without those parts put on the pod, one solution might be a couple of SKUs, some recent mods use tweakables to switch between different models/textures somehow, could have a version with RCS ports, one without etc, one with the shell for customization. Though that's obviously added work.

[Voculus]

Great googly moogly! I only just now discovered this mod! A mod so unbelievably spectacular, and one that tugs on my flight sim heart strings, I can't even put it into words! Thank you!

[TheClassiestMedic]

I'm just posting here because I really love the GPWS feature (the altitude callouts and ground warnings), and the idea of klaxons going off as your craft plummets to the ground really appeals to me.

However, I'd really prefer if the ALCOR capsule included a version of the GPWS sound effects that haven't been distorted to sound like kerbals (because we aren't kerbals, after all!)

Also, I'd personally like some more altitude warnings when your craft gets lower, because as of now, it skips from 50m to 20m, then 10m. There seems to be a sound clip for 40m, but it appears to really be a slightly quieter copy of the 20m warning. Check it out in "GameData\ASET\ASET_Props\Sounds\gpws"! And the "too low - gear" alarm seems kind of muffled.

I found a set of alternative GPWS warnings for those who are likeminded, but they don't extend as far as 2500m, and some of the lower altitudes won't work because the craft doesn't check for them. Here's the link for those who are interested:

http://free.flyawaysimulation.com/altitude_callout.zip

To the developer:

Could you consider making a more complete and realistic GPWS system available to us? That classic WHOOP-WHOOP sound would be really exciting to hear!

Thanks for making one of the best KSP mods ever, in my opinion, and for reading my nit-picking blather

[Harusee]

This is a fantastic apollo style lander can. The internals are even better! Thanks for such excellent work!