[1.12] Extraplanetary Launchpads v6.99.3

[taniwha]

Harrekin: the location makes no difference. It's all about having RocketParts on hand and productive kerbals in a workshop. I found

the other day.

[Harrekin]

Harrekin: the location makes no difference. It's all about having RocketParts on hand and productive kerbals in a workshop. I found

the other day.

So why does the workshop/launch pad module I built work when it's on the ground but when I launch it and attach it to my orbital station it won't work?

I'll use crew manifest to edit my Kerbals and see to be extra sure, thanks for your help.

[taniwha]

At least one of three things: no RocketParts, no kerbals, the average productivity of your kerbals is negative (right click on a workshop and check Vessel Productivity).

[Harrekin]

At least one of three things: no RocketParts, no kerbals, the average productivity of your kerbals is negative (right click on a workshop and check Vessel Productivity).

Is it entirely based on Kerbals in the workshop, the launchpad or the entire vessel overall?

Cos that would explain why it'd build undocked from the station but when I dock it won't work.

I Googled a lot for the answers, when I get a bit more in-depth with it I might do a Wiki, there's a strong lack of non-YouTube instructions.

[Tex_NL]

Productivity is based on the stupidity of all Kerbals in places that are set to be a workshop. Obviously the EPL workshop serves as workshop but so do the stock Lab and Hitchiker modules. Even command pods and cockpits contribute to the overall production al be it to a lesser degree.

For optimum efficiency place your Kerbals with the lowest stupidity in the workshop, lab and hitchhiker and keep the idiots locked up in cockpit. Or even better; leave them at KSC.

Personally I have stupid Kerbals serve as miners on the Minmus surface and the bright ones in the orbital shipyard.

Edited September 21, 2014 by Tex_NL

[ESteve]

This post is a response to the issue of the probe core exploding when a vehicle is released.

I made a brand new moon-base with 3 launchpads and they all work flawlessly.

[AlonzoTG]

I just had a major mission fail of a 600 ton ship that was supposed to be attached to a 5,000 ton aft section. mode of failure was joint failure at BOTH ends of the workshop. -- this is a common failure mode as the joints on the workshop are utterly pathetic for the workshop's mass. Please configure reasonable joint strengths. =|

[taniwha]

600t? 5000t? Just what sort of behemoth are you launching? More importantly, why!?!

I strongly suggest you reevaluate your mission planning. EL does both landed and orbital operations for a reason. Docking ports help keep things sane, too.

While the workshop is only 15t-19t: less massive than a full Jumbo-64, it does seem the default joint strength may be a tad low.

[dbmorpher]

I love EL, it's a great mod

However I was wondering if you could add tweakscale integration?

EL tanks seem to clutter up my part menu, if you added tweakscale then you would only need one part.

If you don't like doing tweakscale then maybe you could make certain parts procedural?

Just a suggestion,

dbmorpher

[BigD145]

Doing what B9 does would also be great. Changing between Ore/Scrap/Rocket would reduce clutter.

[eevenson]

Can progressive builds be turned on in an existing save file?

[taniwha]

eevenson: Yes. You need to edit your save file, though: search for ExSettings and change TimeedBuilds from False to True.

[eevenson]

Thanks taniwha!

[Deadpangod3]

Does it take forever to build anything like a miner?

[undercoveryankee]

Does it take forever to build anything like a miner?

Build time is based purely on mass and productivity. A certain number of kilograms of parts used per kerbal-hour. If builds are unreasonably slow or not progressing, you most likely have a shortage of productivity (not enough kerbals or kerbals not producing effectively due to poor facilities or stupidity).

[Deadpangod3]

Build time is based purely on mass and productivity. A certain number of kilograms of parts used per kerbal-hour. If builds are unreasonably slow or not progressing, you most likely have a shortage of productivity (not enough kerbals or kerbals not producing effectively due to poor facilities or stupidity).

I know, but I'm afraid it'll take forever to build anything even when I have a workshop full of smart Kerbals.

[BigD145]

I usually turn build time off as it just makes me timewarp until completed. Because of the mods I use and the relative instability of ksp/unity, bad things can happen in timewarp through no fault of my own. It's just less of a headache and the delay does not help me play the game. It's only really impactful if you use a air/water/food/waste mod with your crew.

[eevenson]

Turning off progressive builds requires you to have enough rocket parts in stock to build whatever you are building though.

[Superfluous J]

Turning off progressive builds requires you to have enough rocket parts in stock to build whatever you are building though.

I solved this by building more storage bins on-site and just hooking them up. Eventually you'll have enough storage to build anything you'll ever want.

[undercoveryankee]

I usually turn build time off as it just makes me timewarp until completed. Because of the mods I use and the relative instability of ksp/unity, bad things can happen in timewarp through no fault of my own. It's just less of a headache and the delay does not help me play the game. It's only really impactful if you use a air/water/food/waste mod with your crew.

What I'd like to put in a word for is on-rails building so the shipyard can keep making progress while I run the supply missions.

[eevenson]

I just wish I could solve the issue I have with Kerbals going into the workshop and never coming out. I cannot get Kerbals to exit the workshop -- they simply disappear. I know they are in there as the workshop works, but they don't appear on the vessel crew display nor can I click on any Crew Hatch menu.

[taniwha]

What I'd like to put in a word for is on-rails building so the shipyard can keep making progress while I run the supply missions.

Actually, this is something even I want, but I also want construction to use electric charge, and using electric charge when unfocused is non-trivial (I have some ideas, however).

BTW, your vessel is on rails as soon as you start warping (just a correction in terms).

I just wish I could solve the issue I have with Kerbals going into the workshop and never coming out. I cannot get Kerbals to exit the workshop -- they simply disappear. I know they are in there as the workshop works, but they don't appear on the vessel crew display nor can I click on any Crew Hatch menu.

The crew hatch works just fine, so long as you can get it to appear (wave the mouse in the general vicinity of the hatch). I use it all the time.

[undercoveryankee]

Actually, this is something even I want, but I also want construction to use electric charge, and using electric charge when unfocused is non-trivial (I have some ideas, however).

I was thinking of doing it the way TAC/MKS do: keep track of a last-updated time and fast-forward on reload.

The fast-forward method doesn't really let you consume EC as you're fast-forwarding, because most of your supply comes from modules that don't fast-forward.

What I would try do to enforce EC requirements is to keep track of whether EC supply is stable or discharging. If the battery level is stable or increasing with all EPL systems active, assume that it will stay that way and calculate progress while unloaded. If the battery level is decreasing, don't calculate unloaded progress.

BTW, your vessel is on rails as soon as you start warping (just a correction in terms).

I know. But people up to and including RoverDude refer to this problem as processing on rails, so being strictly correct strikes me as not only a losing battle, but a lost one.

[taniwha]

I was thinking of doing it the way TAC/MKS do: keep track of a last-updated time and fast-forward on reload.

The fast-forward method doesn't really let you consume EC as you're fast-forwarding, because most of your supply comes from modules that don't fast-forward.

What I would try do to enforce EC requirements is to keep track of whether EC supply is stable or discharging. If the battery level is stable or increasing with all EPL systems active, assume that it will stay that way and calculate progress while unloaded. If the battery level is decreasing, don't calculate unloaded progress.

Eclipse.

I know. But people up to and including RoverDude refer to this problem as processing on rails, so being strictly correct strikes me as not only a losing battle, but a lost one.

No, there isn't even a battle because it's difficult to take such people seriously when they can't communicate properly.

[RoverDude]

Eclipse.

No, there isn't even a battle because it's difficult to take such people seriously when they can't communicate properly.

I thought I heard my ears burning.

Two points.

Is there some preferred shorthand for differentiating between non-physics warp and the delta time that passes while we're focused on a different ship outside of physics range. Second - I use the shorthand because a lot of the EC weirdness manifests at very high warp in similar ways to what I see when I switch scenes after being away from a ship for a while. I would sad if I was not taken seriously because of my inability to communicate properly.

Also, per KSP wiki, 'On Rails' is the term used when a ship is out of the 2.5km physics range of the currently active vessel - which is how I generally use the term.

Edited September 30, 2014 by RoverDude